Teaching generatively: Learning about disorders and disabilities.
Equivalence lectures give a fast lift, but schedule a later review or the facts fade.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Perez et al. (2015) used stimulus equivalence lectures to teach college students 12 disability labels. The class learned A-B relations (picture to name) and B-C relations (name to definition).
They tested the students right after the unit and again on the final exam weeks later.
What they found
Quiz scores jumped right after the lectures. Scores fell back on the final exam. The quick gains did not stick without review.
How this fits with other research
Tullis et al. (2021) got better results by adding instructive feedback during equivalence lessons with autistic children. The extra feedback kept new intraverbal answers strong.
Arntzen et al. (2018) showed that a short delay-based warm-up before equivalence training helps adults form classes faster. That warm-up might have helped M's students keep the facts longer.
McPheters et al. (2021) found that using familiar pictures as nodes beats re-using old stimuli. Choosing pictures that already make sense could boost maintenance in college lessons.
Why it matters
You can still use equivalence lectures to pack lots of facts into one lesson. Just plan a booster review before the final. Add a quick identity-matching warm-up or a few instructive feedback statements to help the class keep the new labels.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add one 5-minute identity-matching warm-up before your equivalence lecture and set a calendar reminder for a two-week booster quiz.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Stimulus equivalence procedures have been used to teach course material in higher education in the laboratory and in the classroom. The current study was a systematic replication of Walker, Rehfeldt, and Ninness (2010), who used a stimulus equivalence procedure to train information pertaining to 12 disorders. Specifically, we conducted (a) a written posttest immediately after each training unit and (b) booster training sessions for poor performers. Results showed immediate improvement from pretest to posttest scores after training, but problems with maintenance were noted in the final examination. Implications of poor maintenance are discussed in the context of the current study and stimulus equivalence research in higher education generally.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2015 · doi:10.1002/jaba.211