An Evaluation of Single-Case Reading Intervention Study Quality for Students With and At Risk for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders.
Most reading studies for students with EBD are too weak to trust - use cognitive mapping or listening while reading, but only after running a rock-solid single-case design.
01Research in Context
What this study did
McKenna et al. (2017) looked at 30 single-case reading studies for students with emotional or behavioral disorders.
They checked each study against the What Works Clearinghouse design rules.
The goal was to see which studies were strong enough to trust.
What they found
Only a large share of the studies passed the quality test.
Two practices stood out as promising: cognitive mapping and listening while reading.
Most studies missed key parts like clear baseline data or proper measurement.
How this fits with other research
Spriggs et al. (2015) found a medium effect for reading interventions with older students with EBD. This seems to clash with William's finding of weak methods. The difference is that D counted any study while William only trusted the well-designed ones.
Zhou et al. (2018) also found most disability intervention studies use weak designs. This matches William's point that the problem isn't just in reading or EBD - it's across special education research.
Kostulski et al. (2021) showed strong results using text choice with students with autism. This proves that solid single-case designs can work when done right.
Why it matters
When you pick reading interventions for students with EBD, start with cognitive mapping or listening while reading. But more importantly, use these exact quality checks in your own studies. Track baseline for at least three sessions. Measure the same way every time. If we don't raise the bar, we'll keep building programs on shaky ground.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a simple quality checklist to your next reading intervention plan: three stable baseline sessions, daily measurement, and clear visual analysis rules.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Researchers have noted the lack of research to guide reading practice for students with and at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). Although comprehensive syntheses have identified promising practices and areas for future research, none have evaluated the rigor of studies according to quality indicators. The current study evaluated the extant single-case reading intervention research for this student population according to the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards. Thirty studies met article selection criteria, 20 (66.6%) of which had at least one dependent variable that did not meet design standards. Study findings suggest a need for researchers to employ stronger designs and place a greater emphasis on investigating the effects of reading instructional practices in inclusive settings. Overall, two reading interventions were identified as potentially promising: cognitive mapping and a listening while reading accommodation. Furthermore, findings suggest that it may be advantageous to embed behavioral strategies within reading interventions. Study limitations include the exclusive use of single-case design studies and a reliance on visual analysis to determine intervention effectiveness.
Behavior modification, 2017 · doi:10.1177/0145445517701896