Single Subject Action Inquiry
IMPROVING READING PERFORMANCE
Significance of Single Subject Research
(SSR) for Teachers/SPED Practitioners
 “(SSR) is experimental rather than correlational or descriptive, and
its purpose is to document causal, or functional, relationships
between independent and dependent variables” (Horner, et al.,
2005, p. 165).
 Focuses on individual learner or single group (e.g. a class) “whose
performance generates a single score per measurement period”
(ibid., p. 166).
 As such, benefits practitioners developing Individualized Education
Programs (IEPs) and Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs) .
 Used to establish “evidence-based practices” because of rigorous
documentation of experimental control.
Significance, cont.
 Multidisciplinary use of SSR (more than 45
professional journals report single subject
research) (APA, 2002; Anderson 2001, cited in
ibid., p.166)
 “Interventions derived from social learning
theory, medicine, social psychology, social work,
and communication disorders are but a sample
of procedures that have been analyzed by single
subject designs and methods” (ibid., p. 166)
Problem Statement

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7nCfRDCcT4

1 in 7 American adults are unable to read (National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) (http://nces.ed.gov/naal/estimates/overview.aspx, cited in G. Toppo, USA
Today,2009).

42 million adult Americans can't read. 50 million can recognize so few printed words
they are limited to a 4th or 5th grade reading level
(National Adult Literacy
Survey, cited by Robert Sweet Jr. of the National Right to Read
Foundation[http://www.nrrf.org/]).

One out of every four teenagers (approx. 1 million per year) drops out of high school,
and of those, over 75% say that difficulty reading was a major factor in their decision.
(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/dst2011/2012455.pdf)

Social, economic, and medical consequences of illiteracy are well documented (e.g.,
see Weiss et al., 2001; Marcus, 2006; Martinez & Fernandez, 2010, among others).
Research Question
 What can I do within 4 to 8 weeks of student
teaching to improve the fluency (rate, accuracy and
prosody) and/or comprehension of 4-6 struggling
readers?
 Specifically,
If I administer x, y, and z interventions , x number of
times a week for x length of time per session for x
number of weeks, will participating students show
gains in reading fluency and/or comprehension as
measured by pre-post assessments?
Methodology
 Individual Participant (or Group ) as Unit of
Analysis
 Precise Participant and Setting Description
 Operational description of participants, setting,
and the process by which participants were
selected
 For example, specific disability & determination
instrument/process (e.g., ASD & Autism
Diagnostic Interview – Revised, respectively)
Description, cont.




Standardized Tests
KTEA 2 (Reading Fluency subscale)
WJ-III (Reading Fluency subtest)
Gray Oral Reading Test IV (Rate +
Accuracy)
 Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency
 Criterion-Referenced Measures
 Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI)
 DIBELS
Dependent Variables
 Operationally Defined, allowing
1. valid & consistent assessment of variable,
2. replication of assessment process
3. (i.e., direct observation and empirical
summary; e.g., silent/oral words per minute,
instances of correct phrasing, expressing
and intonation, number of uncorrected
miscues, etc.)
Dependent Variables
 Measured Repeatedly, allowing
1. identification of performance patterns prior
to intervention as baseline for comparison
M TTT M TTT M
2. comparison of performance patterns across
conditions, phases, levels, environments,
etc.
Dependent Variables
“Dependent variable recording is assessed for
consistency throughout the experiment by
frequent monitoring of inter-observer
agreement (e.g., the percentage of
observational units in which independent
observers agree) or an equivalent, (allowing)
assessment for each variable across each
participant in each condition of the study”
(ibid., p.167).
Dependent Variables
 Selected for their social significance
A dependent variable is chosen ….
“because it is perceived as important for the
individual participant, those who come into
contact with that individual, or for society”
(ibid., p.167).
Independent Variables
 Operationally defined, allowing “valid interpretation
of results and accurate replication of procedures”
(ibid., 167).
 Specific descriptions of procedures typically include
A)
B)
documentation of materials (e.g.,
7.5 cm x 12.5 cm card)
documentation of actions (e.g., peer
tutors implemented the reading
curriculum 1:1, 30 min/day, 3 days/wk
for 6 weeks)
 Avoid general descriptions of procedures.
Independent Variables
 “To document experimental control, …the
independent variable is actively, rather than
passively, manipulated” (ibid., p.167).
 Fidelity of implementation – important b/c
independent variable is applied over time.
Looks like…”continuous direct measurement
of independent variable…” (Gresham, Gansel, & Kurtz,
1993, cited in ibid., p.168).
Time Series Research Design
C
_____________________________________________________________________
T O X X X O XXX O XXX O XXX O
Baseline/Comparison Condition
 “Treatment as usual” condition
 Precise description
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Student 1
Student 2
Student 3
Student 4
Experimental Controls
Internal validity requires three things:
Repeated and reliable measurement - valid and
reliable measuring instruments or techniques)
Baseline stability
Single variable rule - manipulate only one variable at
a time
Threats to Reliability
 Interobserver reliability (sometimes referred to as
interrater reliability or interobserver agreement) is
important to establish confidence in the measurement of
the dependent variable.
Interobserver Reliability
 Identify and define the target behavior in such a
way that at least two people can observe the
individual and agree whether or not the behavior
has occurred, or to what extent, or for how long,
and so on.
 Identifies at least two people to serve as observers
(one can be the researcher :). Then the observers
are trained and practice observing the individual
and scoring the dependent variable.
 Following practice sessions, the observers should
compare results for each and every occurrence or
measurement of the target behavior (dependent
variable).
Control Designs
Reversal Design
 https://encryptedtbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSm5
ffbcV3OzaKB4gWP_hxVHnHP3RErClNox7Kr
9EbhXmDZsAb7
Control Designs
Multiple Baseline Design
 https://encryptedtbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHi
RqDFRpxxNzyaGTBu5vp3WMRDjimt1b3cP7jIhwaKIAg5Ub
Control Designs
Changing Criterion
 https://encryptedtbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSD
mqKxbhgo3hOeSezKa3tC2BvrWuxWbwt_DP
3XhglZSNPLx_FqTQ
Control Designs
Alternating Treatments
 http://winginstitute.org/uploadedImages/Gra
phs/Mindmap/SSD3e.png
Threats to Internal Validity
 Do the research conditions warrant the conclusions?
 Un-controlled extraneous variables that might account for the results of
a study, e.g.:







History – events that occur b/t 1st & 2nd measurement
Testing – potential increases as time between pre & post is
shortened.
Instrumentation - changes in the way a test or other measuring
instrument is calibrated that could account for results of a research
study (unreliability of measuring instrument)
Selection – different interventions for different individuals
Maturation
Statistical regression - individuals are selected for an intervention or
treatment on the basis of extreme scores on a pretest.
Research mortality - volunteers drop out of study
Threats to Internal Validity
Multiple treatment interference –
May occur when more than one independent variable is
used.
EX: Because I’m planning to use a variety of
interventions, it may be difficult if not impossible for
me to accurately determine which of the
components of the independent variable or
variables actually accounted for changes in the
dependent variable.
Threats to External Validity
Can the results be generalized beyond the
study itself?



Population validity (when the sample does not
adequately represent the population).
Personological validity (when personal/ psychological
characteristics interact with the treatment).
Ecological validity (when the situational characteristics
of the study are not representative of the population).
Results
Graph it!
Citations

Horner, et al. (2005) The use of single subject research to identify evidence-based
practice in special education. Council for Exceptional Children, 71:2. pp. 165-179.

Marcus, E. N. (2006). The silent epidemic: the health effects of illiteracy. New England
Journal of Medicine, July, 2006. 355:339-341.

Martinez, R., Fernandez, A. (2010). The social and economic impact of illiteracy:
analytical model and pilot study. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO), Dec. 2010. Downloaded 10/20/11 from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001905/190571e.pdf.

Weiss, B. D., Hart, G., Pust, R. E. (1991). The relationship between literacy and health.
Journal of Healthcare for the Poor and Underserved. 1 (4), 351-363.