Comparing Error Correction Procedures: Incorporating Effective and Efficient Teaching with Learner Preference

Abstract

Previous research has evaluated error correction procedures to assess their effectiveness, yet few studies have evaluated preferences for these procedures. An alternating treatments design was used to compare the effects of four error correction procedures: model, single response repetition (SRR), multiple response repetition (MRR), and single response repetition with an embedded distracter trial (SRR-D), on the acquisition of sight words for three adolescent males. Preference for the procedures was assessed by using a concurrent chains procedure consisting of forced choice and free choice presentations. Results demonstrated that all participants performed best with a specific error correction procedure. Participant 1 showed a moderate preference for his most effective error correction procedure. Participant 2 demonstrated a slight preference for the SRR procedure which did not correlate with his most effective error correction procedure, SRR-D, and participant 3 did not demonstrate preference for any of the procedures. These findings suggest that error correction procedures should be evaluated and individualized for each learner. Although a moderate preference for a procedure was demonstrated with only one participant, future research should continue to use and refine these procedures to incorporate learner preference in all teaching strategies.