The Effects of Time Delay Procedures on the Acquisition, Maintenance, and Generalization of Spelling Sight Words for Elementary Students with High-incidence Disabilities Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jenna Ott, B.A. Graduate Program in Educational Studies The Ohio State University 2019 Thesis Committee: Dr. Moira Konrad, Advisor Dr. Sheila Morgan Copyright by Jenna Ott 2019 Abstract Reading is a skill in which many students with disabilities perform at a lower level than their peers without disabilities. While previous studies have shown that learning how to read does not automatically help students learn how to spell, learning how to spell does help children learn how to read. Immediate feedback, immediate self-correction, and repetition have been found to be effective components of effective spelling instruction intervention packages. The current study examined the effects of adding technology to the Time Delay strategy on student’s acquisition, maintenance, and generalization of spelling sight words, and also the student’s ability to read those sight words in isolation and fluently in text. This study examined the effects of the Time Delay procedure on sight word spelling for kindergarten and first grade elementary students with high-incidence disabilities in an urban school setting. A multiple baseline single-subject design was used to determine the effectiveness of the Time Delay strategy to teach 15 unknown Dolch Sight Words. These sight words were selected based on an assessment given to determine which words students could not read, and also could not spell. Unknown sight words were put into 3 sets of 5 words each. The Time Delay intervention was used to help students practice spelling these words and a probe for all 15 words was conducted after each session. This allowed maintenance measures to be recorded every trial after set 1 was complete. Generalization was measured as well. The student practiced spelling the word on a tablet but was probed with the materials of paper and pencil. The student was also generalizing what was practiced during the probe because he or she was asked to then read the word both in isolation and in a sentence. Results show that the Time Delay intervention was effective in the acquisition, maintenance, and generalization of sight words for all participants. In i addition, results from student and teacher questionnaires indicate that Time Delay was a socially valid intervention. ii Dedication This study is dedicated to my family, whose continuous love, reassurance, and encouragement have made my continuing education possible. This study is also dedicated to my students, past and future, who inspire me each and every day. iii Acknowledgements I wish to thank my advisor, Dr. Moira Konrad, for her continued willingness to help and attention to detail throughout the entirety of this project. I thank Meghan O’Neil for her time commitment and support with data collection in this study. I thank Alana Telesman for her help with the revision of this thesis. I am so grateful for your contribution to this work. I also wish to thank the wonderful students and staff who made the development and completion of this study possible. iv Vita April 30, 1988………………………………... Born, Dallas, Texas June 8, 20010………………………………… B.S. Elementary Education, Berea College, Kentucky June 30, 2014 …………………………………. 4 Year Resident Early Childhood (P-3) License State Department of Education, Ohio June 30, 2017 …………………………………. 1 Year Supplemental Early Childhood Intervention Specialist (P-3) License State Department of Education, Ohio June 30, 2018 …………………………………. 5 Year Professional Early Childhood Intervention Specialist (P-3) License State Department of Education, Ohio June 30, 2018…………………………………... 5 Year Provisional Early Childhood (P-3) License State Department of Education, Ohio Fields of Study Major Field: Educational Studies v Table of Contents Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………..i Dedication …………………………………………..……………………………………iii Acknowledgements ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------iv Vita ……………………………………………………………………………………….v List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………….x List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………xi Chapter 1: Introduction……………………………………………………………………1 Chapter 2: Method…………………………………………………………………………6 Institutional Review Board Approval……………………………………………...6 Setting ……………………………………………………………………………..6 Participants ………………………………………………………………………..7 Zeke………………………………………………………………………………..7 Kelly ………………………………………………………………………7 Shaniya ……………………………………………………………………7 Geoffrey …………………………………………………….……………..8 Definition of Measurement of Dependent Variables ……………………………………...8. Number of words spelled correctly ………………………………………………..8 Number of words read correctly in isolation ………………………………………8 Number of words read correctly in sentences …………………………….……….8 Data Collection Procedures ………………………………………………………………..9 Materials ……………………………………………………………………………………9 Experimental Design ……………………………………………………………………….9 vi Treatment Integrity and Interobserver Agreement………….………………………………10 Procedures …………………………………………………………………………………..11 Baseline……………………………………………………………………………...11 Intervention ………………………………………………………………………....11 Maintenance…………………………………………………………………………12 Generalization…………………………………………………………………….…12 Social Validity……………………………………………………………………….12 Data Analysis Plan ………………………………………………………………………….13 Chapter 3: Results …………………………………………………………………………..14 Interobserver Agreement (IOA) …………………………………………………….14 Treatment ……………………………………………………………………………14 What is the Effect of the Time Delay Strategy on Students’ Numbers of Words Spelled Correctly? ……………………………………………………………………………15 Zeke…………………………………………………………………………..15 Kelly ………………………………………………………………………….15 Shaniya ……………………………………………………………………….16 Geoffrey ………………………………………………………………………17 What is the Effect of the Time Delay Strategy on Students’ Numbers of Words Read Correctly in Isolation? ……………………………………………………………….18 Zeke…………………………………………………………………………...18 Kelly ………………………………………………………………………….18 Shaniya ……………………………………………………………………….19 Geoffrey ………………………………………………………………………19. vii What is the Effect of the Time Delay Strategy on Students’ Numbers of Words Read Correctly in sentences? ……………………………………………………………..20 Zeke………………………………………………………………………….20 Kelly ……………………………………………………..………………….20 Shaniya ………………………………………………………………………21 Geoffrey ……………………………………………………………………...21 Social Validity ……………………………………………………………………….22 What are the students’ opinions about the Time Delay strategy and its effects? ……………………………………………………………………………….22 What are the teachers’ opinions about the Time Delay strategy and its effects? ……………………………………………………………………………….23 Chapter 4: Discussion ……………………………………………………………………….38 What is the Effect of the Time Delay Strategy on Students’ Numbers of Words Spelled Correctly? …………………………………………………….………………………39 What is the Effect of the Time Delay Strategy on Students’ Numbers of Words Read Correctly in Isolation and in Sentences. …...………………………………………….40 Will Students maintain the Spelling of Sight Words ………………………………… 40 Will Students Who Use the Time Delay Procedure Generalize the Correct Spelling of Sight Words, as Measured by Reading those Words in Sentences.................................41 Social validity ………………………………………………………………………….41 Implication For Practice………………………………………………………….…….43 Limitations and Future Research……...……………………………………..…………43 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………..46 viii References…………………………………………………………………………..47 Appendixes A: Post Instructional Probe Data Sheet (WSC)……………………….49 B: Post Instructional Probe Data Sheet (WRC)……………………….51 C: Post Instructional Probe Data Sheet (WRCS………………………53 D: Time Delay Strategy Data Sheet…………………………………...55 E: Intervention Script………………………………………………….58 F: Treatment Integrity Checklist………………………………………62 G: Probe Script………………………………………………………...65 H: Interobserver Agreement for Post Session Probe Data Form………67 I: Social Validity Survey for Student. ………………………………...69 J: Social Validity Survey for Teachers…………………………………72 ix List of Tables Table 2.1. Participant information. ……………………………………………………………...14 Table 3.1: The students’ opinions about the Time Delay strategy and its effects……………….36 Table 3.2: The teachers’ opinions about the Time Delay strategy and its effects……………….37 x List of Figures Figure 3.1 Figure 3.1 The total number of words spelled correctly for Zeke………………….24 Figure 3.2 The total number of words spelled correctly for Kelly……………………………...25 Figure 3.3 The total number of words spelled correctly for Shaniya…………………………..26 Figure 3.4 The total number of words spelled correctly for Geoffrey………………………….27 Figure 3.5 The total amount of words read correctly in isolation for Zeke……………………..28 Figure 3.7 The total amount of words read correctly in isolation for Shaniya………………….29 Figure 3.8 The total amount of words read correctly in isolation for Geoffrey ………………...30 Figure 3.9 The total amount of words read correctly within a sentence by Zeke ………………31 Figure 3.10 The total amount of words read correctly within a sentence by Kelly…………..…32 Figure 3.11 The total amount of words read correctly within a sentence by Shaniya………a..33 Figure 3.12 The total amount of words read correctly within a sentence by Geoffrey………….34 xi Chapter 1: Literature Review Reading proficiency is a strong contributing factor in predicting future outcomes for children. Children who do not read well are more likely to be retained