Considering student choice when selecting instructional strategies: a comparison of three prompting systems.

Taber-Doughty (2005) tested three ways to prompt high-school students with intellectual disability during daily living tasks. The choices were: system of least prompts, self-operated picture cards, or self-operated audio cues.

Each student tried all three methods in an alternating-treatments design. Before teaching started, the kids picked the prompt style they liked best.

All three systems worked, but the student-chosen method won. Preferred prompts produced faster learning and quicker task completion every time.

In plain words, when the learner picked the cue, they mastered the skill sooner and finished the job faster.

Cihon et al. (2020) ran a larger RCT comparing three prompts for kids with ASD and saw no difference. The clash looks real, but Teresa let students choose while Cihon assigned prompts randomly. Choice may be the active ingredient.

Bloom et al. (2020) later echoed the choice effect in self-management: kids who picked song-lyric or prose self-talk learned motor tasks quicker, mirroring Teresa's speed boost.

Sanford et al. (1980) seems to disagree, showing extra color-coded prompts hurt shoe-tying transfer in autistic children. The key difference is prompt type: salient colored laces distracted learners, while Teresa's self-operated audio or pictures kept attention on the task.

You already have prompt menus in your toolbox. Add a five-second choice step: show the learner the picture stack, the audio player, and your usual least-to-most script, then ask, "Which one do you want?" Honor the pick and teach. This tiny act can cut acquisition time without extra materials or training.