Comparing the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Response Repetition to Simultaneous Prompting on Acquisition and Maintenance of Multiplication Facts
This study compared the effectiveness and efficiency of an error-correction procedure, response repetition, to a prompting procedure, simultaneous prompting, on the acquisition and maintenance of multiplication facts for three typically developing 3rd grade students. This study employed an adapted alternating treatments design nested in a multiple probe design across three sets of multiplication facts. Results indicated that correct responding increased upon intervention implementation for all participants. For two participants, response repetition was a more effective teaching procedure. For one participant, while both teaching procedures were effective, response repetition was more efficient in terms of sessions to mastery while simultaneous prompting was more efficient in terms of errors and seconds to mastery. Maintenance data were variable. Discussion focuses on conceptual differences between response repetition and simultaneous prompting that might have accounted for results.
KeywordsAcquisition Error-correction Errorless learning Intervention Multiplication
The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Denise Cai, Nicole Dailey, and Brienne Riebe with intervention implementation and data collection.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Human and Animals Rights
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from parents of all individual participants included in the study.
- Akmanoglu, N., & Batu, S. (2004). Teaching pointing to numerals to individuals with autism using simultaneous prompting. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 39, 326–336. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23880212.
- Barbetta, P. M., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (1993). Effects of active student response during error correction on the acquisition, maintenance, and generalization of sight words by students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1993.26-111.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Barbetta, P. M., Heward, W. L., Bradley, D. M., & Miller, A. D. (1994). Effects of immediate and delayed error correction on the acquisition and maintenance of sight words by students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 177–178. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-177.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Burns, M. K., VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Jiban, C. L. (2006). Assessing the instructional level for mathematics: A comparison of methods. School Psychology Review, 35, 401–418. Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/publications/periodicals/spr/volume-35/volume-35-issue-3/assessing-the-instructional-level-for-mathematics-a-comparison-of-methods.
- Haring, N. G., & Eaton, M. D. (1978). Systematic instructional technology: An instructional hierarchy. In N. G. Harting, T. C. Lovitt, M. D. Eaton, & C. L. Hansen (Eds.), The fourth R: Research in the classroom (pp. 23–40). Columbus, OH: Merrill.Google Scholar
- Johnson, P., Schuster, J., & Bell, J. K. (1996). Comparison of simultaneous prompting with and without error correction in teaching science vocabulary words to high school students with mild disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6, 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02110516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Leaf, J. B., Leaf, J. A., Alcalay, A., Dale, S., Kassardjian, A., Tsuji, K., et al. (2014a). Comparison of most-to-least to error correction to teach tacting to two children diagnosed with autism. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 7, 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2014.884988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Leaf, J. B., Leaf, R., Taubman, M., McEachin, J., & Delmolino, L. (2014b). Comparison of flexible prompt fading to error correction for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 26, 203–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-013-9354-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Leaf, J. B., Sheldon, J. B., & Sherman, J. A. (2010). Comparison of simultaneous prompting and no-no prompting in two-choice discrimination learning with children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2010.43-215.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Lovaas, O. I. (2003). Teaching individuals with developmental delays: Basic intervention techniques. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
- Morse, T. E., & Schuster, J. W. (2004). Simultaneous prompting: A review of the literature. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 39, 153–168. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23880063.
- Parker, M. A., & Schuster, J. W. (2002). Effectiveness of simultaneous prompting on the acquisition of observational and instructive feedback stimuli when teaching a heterogeneous group of high school students. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 89–104. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23879585.
- Rao, S., & Mallow, L. (2009). Using simultaneous prompting procedure to promote recall of multiplication facts by middle school students with cognitive impairment. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44, 80–90. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/24233465.
- Reynolds, J. L., Drevon, D. D., Schafer, B., & Schwartz, K. (2016). Response repetition as an error-correction strategy for teaching subtraction facts. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 10, 349–358. Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/periodicals/spf-volume-10-issue-4-(winter-2016)/response-repetition-as-an-error-correction-strategy-for-teaching-subtraction-facts.
- Singleton, K. C., Schuster, J. W., & Ault, M. J. (1995). Simultaneous prompting in a small group arrangement. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30, 218–230. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23889173.
- Worsdell, A. S., Iwata, B. A., Dozier, C. L., Johnson, A. D., Neidert, P. L., & Thomason, J. L. (2005). Analysis of response repetition as an error-correction strategy during sight-word reading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 511–527. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2005.115-04.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar