Brief and Extended Experimental Analysis of Spelling Deficits

Brief Experimental Analyses (BEA) have been primarily used to evaluate the effects of instructional variables on reading deficits with regular education students. The broader utility of BEA’s has been limited in academic scope and population. The current study aimed to expand upon previous research by determining the efficacy of a BEA in identifying effective spelling interventions for students with established spelling deficits. Four different spelling strategies, drawn from the BEA and broader spelling intervention literatures were integrated into the BEA assessment technology and were compared and experimentally analyzed. For all students, effective interventions were identified with clear distinctions between the best and worst performing spelling interventions. The best interventions were then applied in an extended treatment analysis (EXT) and compared to a Treatment-as-Usual (TAU) condition. During the extended analysis, effective interventions identified during the BEA continued to produce positive spelling outcomes over time, which were above and distinguishable from TAU. The current study provides implications for the use of BEA’s in identifying effective spelling interventions that continue to be effective over time for students who demonstrate established spelling deficits