Research Evidence to Support the Consultation Model in Itinerant Early Childhood Special Education Services

Shelby County, AL February 23-24, 2009 William McInerney, Ph.D. Laurie Dinnebeil, Ph.D. University of Toledo Judith Herb College of Education

Distributed Instruction vs. Massed Instruction…… The Spacing Effect What It Is and Why It Should Matter to Itinerant Early Childhood Special Education Professionals

Research and Development Support Margie Spino, M.A. Doctoral Student - U. Toledo

Consultation vs. One-to-One and Small Group Instruction in Itinerant ECSE Services This is the primary consideration in current IECSE practice. Which is the more efficient approach to teaching? The adoption of a consultation model as the primary mode of intervention in IECSE services must be based on the efficacy of instruction vs. traditional patterns of practice

Rationale for Consultation / Coaching in IECSE Services If periodic or episodic intervention (usually minutes per week in traditional IECSE service delivery) is as efficient as distributed or spaced instruction (or practice), then there is no need to adopt a consultation model as the primary mode of intervention However, if distributed or spaced instruction or practice is a more efficient model of learning, then adoption of a consultation approach to IECSE intervention is warranted

Rationale for Consultation / Coaching in IECSE Services If consultation is to be considered as a preferred alternative to minute, one-to-one or teacher-directed small group instruction, then the research base related to efficiency of child learning must be examined

What is the Spacing Effect? The tendency for spaced (distributed) presentations to yield much better learning than massed presentations Examples of Spaced Practice  In 1 day: Study 2 hours, break, study 2 hours, break  Across days: Study on Mon, Tues, Wed Example of Massed Practice  “Cramming”

What is Interstudy Interval (ISI)? The interval separating different study episodes of the same materials In most studies are at least 2 study episodes separated by an ISI Example: Study 2 hr, ½ hr break, Study 2 hr Means ISI = ½ hour

Research with Adults - 1 Donovan & Radosevich, 1999 Meta-analysis: reviewed 63 studies involving acquisition of a skill or knowledge with adults Results: distributed practice was significantly superior to massed practice differences in size of the effect depending on the type of task “the size of the spacing effect declined sharply as conceptual difficulty of the task increased from low (e.g. rotary pursuit) to average (e.g. word list recall) to high (e.g. puzzle).” (Rohrer & Taylor, 2006, p. 1210)

Research with Adults - 2 Cepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted & Rohrer, 2006 Meta-analysis: reviewed 317 studies using verbal memory tasks with children and adults Results: Spaced learning of items consistently showed benefits over massed learning Longer Interstudy Intervals (ISI) benefited learning Most studies showed children doing better with spaced practice

Research with Children - 1 Rea and Modigliani,1985 3rd graders (8.5 years) taught spelling words and math facts Students ranked as Level 1 (top half of class) or Level 2 (bottom half of class) Results: Better on spelling and math tests when had spaced practice rather than massed practice Spaced practice was better for both Level 1 and 2 students (ability level didn’t matter)

Research with Children - 2 Seabrook, Brown & Solity, 2005 Participants ranged from 5-yr olds to undergrads Experiment 1 Task: shown a list of words (3- and 4-letter concrete nouns) and then given a recall test. Schedule: Words were presented for study with 0 intervening words (massed), and 1, 3 and 8 intervening words (spaced/distributed). Results: all age groups benefited from increasing lags.

Seabrook, Brown & Solity, 2005 Experiment 2 Task: to recognize words previously shown on a list under conditions that more closely resembled a classroom Schedule:  massed condition = one word was presented four times in a row.  clustered (an intermediate condition) = one word was presented twice in a row followed by eight intervening items then a further 2 consecutive presentations.  distributed condition = one word was presented four times with four intervening items between each presentation.

Seabrook, Brown & Solity, 2005 Experiment 2 Results distributed condition produced significantly better results on the test than either the clustered or massed conditions the clustered condition resulted in performance that was not any better than in the massed condition these results held for both the children and the adults; there were no significant differences in performance between children and adults

Seabrook, Brown and Solity, 2005 Experiment 3 Task: 34 children (mean age 5 years.6 mos.) taught phonics over two weeks Schedule:  Clustered = one, 6-minute session per day within a regular classroom setting.  Distributed = three, 2-minute sessions per day within a regular classroom setting Results: Children in distributed condition had test scores 6 times greater than children in clustered condition

Research with Children - 3 Childers and Tomasello, 2002 How many times (and how many days) does a 2-yr old need to hear a word to learn it? In 2 experiments, 2 yr olds were taught novel nouns and verbs over course of one month in sessions lasting 5 – 10 min Noun = “This is a wuggy.” Verb = “It’s dacking. See? It dacks.”

Childers and Tomasello, 2002 Experiment 1: 6 experimental conditions Massed 4 Massed 8 Daily 4 Widely Spaced 4 Clumped 4 Clumped 8 4x 8x = 1 day 1x 2x 4x2x

Childers and Tomasello, 2002 Experiment 1 Results: Best learning occurred when practice distributed over 4 days regardless of number of intervening days Best = Daily 4, Widely Spaced 4, Clumped 8 Worst = Massed 8, Massed 4, Clumped 4 Children learned words better if they heard it 1x/day for 4 days rather than 8x/day for I day

Childers and Tomasello, 2002 Experiment 2 only nouns only 4 exposures to new word in 1 day (not 4 & 8) varied number of days heard the words 1 to 4 days Varied number of intervening days (ISI) 1, 2, 5 or 10 intervening days

Childers and Tomasello, 2002 Experiment 2 Results The more days children heard the words, the better able they were to learn the words Best = 4 days, 3 days Worst = 1 day, 2 days The number of intervening days (ISI) did not matter and was not helpful. Children did poorly with 1, 2, 5 and 10 intervening days.

Major Findings Spacing (distributing) practices benefited children and adults whether tasks were physical or conceptual. Spacing practice within the day (e.g., three 2- min sessions/day) or across days (e.g., 1x/day for 4 days) benefited children’s learning.

Implications for Education Practice Current laws state that educational practice needs to be research-based (NCLB; IDEIA, 2004) How should we schedule instruction for young children? Massed vs Spaced ? Research supports Spaced How should we schedule the itinerant SPED teacher’s time? Direct instruction vs. Consultation / Coaching ? Research suggests Consultation/Coaching