School & Classroom

Enhancing the spelling performance of learning disabled students. Task variation does not increase the efficacy of directed rehearsal.

Singh et al. (1991) · Behavior modification 1991
★ The Verdict

Stick to straight repetition when teaching spelling to students with learning disabilities—task variation adds no value.

✓ Read this if BCBAs writing spelling interventions in elementary special-ed classrooms.
✗ Skip if Clinicians targeting reading comprehension or math skills.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Researchers worked with four students who had learning disabilities. The kids were in fourth and fifth grade and struggled with spelling.

The team compared two ways to practice spelling words. One way repeated the same word list. The other mixed old and new words each day. Both used directed rehearsal: look, cover, write, check.

02

What they found

Both practice styles beat doing nothing. Kids learned about six new words each week.

Mixing old and new words gave zero extra boost. Simple repetition worked just as well as the fancy mix.

03

How this fits with other research

Drivas et al. (2019) ran a near-copy of this design. They added a 'sound-it-out' step to cover-copy-compare. Like N et al., they found the add-on did nothing.

Neef et al. (1986) looks like a contradiction. Their overcorrection plus praise shot four kids with moderate ID to perfect spelling that lasted six months. The difference: overcorrection is far more intense than directed rehearsal.

Capio et al. (2013) backs the same theme. Their small-group math lessons helped low-working-memory kindergarteners without any extra tricks. Core direct instruction was enough.

04

Why it matters

Stop spending time shuffling word lists. For students with learning disabilities, steady repetition is enough. Pick a set of unknown words, drill daily with look-cover-write-check, and move on when mastery hits. Save the creative mixing for another goal.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Pick this week’s new spelling words and run directed rehearsal daily without cycling in old words.

02At a glance

Intervention
direct instruction
Design
alternating treatments
Sample size
4
Population
other
Finding
null
Magnitude
negligible

03Original abstract

We investigated whether the efficacy of directed rehearsal could be enhanced by increasing a student's motivation through task variation. The efficacy of three conditions (directed rehearsal, directed rehearsal combined with task variation, and no-training control) on the spelling performance of four students with learning disabilities was compared in an alternating treatments design. Following each spelling error during the directed rehearsal condition, the teacher pronounced the word, the student pronounced the word, the teacher said aloud each letter of the word, and the student said aloud each letter of the word as he wrote the word correctly. This sequence was repeated five times. The same procedure was used during directed rehearsal plus task variation, except that previously learned words were alternately presented with new words. Results showed that although the two training conditions were more effective than no training, there was no difference between the two training procedures in terms of the cumulative number of words learned to criterion. This study showed that the addition of task variation to directed rehearsal does not increase the spelling proficiency of learning disabled students.

Behavior modification, 1991 · doi:10.1177/01454455910152010