To SAFMEDS or not to SAFMEDS? A student comapres two methods to learn vocabulary terms in an undergraduate course in applied behavior analysis
Loading...
If you need an accessible version of this item, please email your request to iusw@iu.edu so that they may create one and provide it to you.
Date
2013-10-09
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Indiana University South Bend
Permanent Link
Abstract
Key aspects of learning are acquisition and retention. Speed and accuracy, or together, fluency - the term used in Precision Teaching, can be measured as evidence of learning. (Stockwell& Eshleman, 2010). Say All Fast a Minute Every Day Shuffling (SAFMEDS) is a Precision Teaching tool especially used for behavioral fluency, in use since the 1970s when it was developed by Ogden Lindsley (Stockwell& Eshelman, 2010). SAFMEDS is used similarly to traditional flashcards. However, with SAFMEDS, unlike traditional flashcards, speed and accuracy are taken into account with a singular daily one-minute timing period rather than packing hours of study within varied intervals before test taking. These timings allow us to view the data in a methodical way. Precision Teaching is present in some of the empirical literature but there is not a large amount specifically on the effects of SAFMEDS (Fodrocy, Frieder, & Quigley 2013). Research shows there is a difference between groups using SAFMEDS cards and groups that are taught in a control, or “treatment-as-usual” category (Beverly, Hughes, & Hastings, 2009; Hughes, Beverly, & Whitehead, 2007). Other research shows general but significant trends in the positive effects of precision teaching techniques (Casey, McLaughlin, & Weber, 2003; Stump, Lovitt, & Fister, 1992). Some research considered the effects of different stimuli on the effectiveness of SAFMEDS, including but not limited to altering the look or style of the writing on SAFMEDS cards. Fodrocy (2013) studied the difference in fluency during the tests with the SAFMEDS cards between handwritten and pre-printed cards. Results demonstrated that changing the type of stimulus (handwritten vs. printed) initially decreased fluency, but fluent responding recovered and the decreasing effects lessened after multiple changes took place.
Description
Keywords
Citation
DOI
Link(s) to data and video for this item
Relation
Rights
Type
Presentation