Using response-prompting procedures during small-group direct instruction: outcomes and procedural variations.
Small-group direct instruction with systematic prompting works for almost every learner with disabilities and doubles as peer modeling.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team looked at 687 small-group lessons across 38 studies.
All lessons used direct instruction plus response prompting.
Kids had intellectual disability, developmental delay, or mixed needs.
They checked if every child hit the learning goal and kept the skill later.
What they found
195 out of 197 learners reached mastery.
Skills stayed strong weeks later and moved to new places.
Teachers ran the steps with high fidelity in real classrooms.
Peer modeling happened naturally while kids took turns.
How this fits with other research
Hursh et al. (1974) first showed that simple teacher prompts helped two kids ask questions and read better.
The new review proves the same idea works for almost every learner when done in groups.
Bao et al. (2017) mapped how verbal-behavior prompting grew since 2001.
Our 2012 data show those verbal prompts are just one slice of a bigger toolkit that drives near-perfect success.
Why it matters
You can run small-group direct instruction tomorrow with any academic target.
Use clear prompts, take quick turns, and let peers watch each other.
Expect mastery in one to three sessions and lasting gains without extra work.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one skill, group three learners, run five-minute turns with model-lead-test prompts and track who hits a large share across three consecutive turns.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Research was reviewed on small-group instruction for learners with disabilities. The review was conducted for articles published between 1990 and 2010 on the application of small-group direct instruction to teach discrete skills using prompting procedures. A total of 47 articles with 197 participants and 687 replications of effects was located. Small-group instruction was effective for 195 of 197 participants and across variations in implementation and contexts. Implementers were primarily special education personnel, and instruction typically occurred in special education settings. Rigorous designs were used in all studies, and fidelity was assessed in 46 of 47 studies and was uniformly high. Students consistently reached criterion on their own target behaviors, generalized those behaviors, maintained them, and learned the behaviors taught to their peers (when this was measured, which occurred in a majority of the studies). Future research should examine comparisons of procedural variables and promoting social behaviors between group mates.
American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2012 · doi:10.1352/1944-7558-117.5.413