Descriptor
Source
| Exceptional Children | 5 |
Author
| Brandstetter, Glenda | 1 |
| Deno, Stanley L. | 1 |
| Guralnick, Michael J. | 1 |
| Koorland, Mark A. | 1 |
| Marston, Douglas | 1 |
| Merz, Carol | 1 |
| Nelson, C. Michael | 1 |
| White, Owen Roberts | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 3 |
| Opinion Papers | 2 |
| Guides - Non-Classroom | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
| Practitioners | 2 |
| Researchers | 2 |
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedWhite, Owen Roberts – Exceptional Children, 1986
Guiding principles of precision teaching are reviewed, the use of the Standard 'celeration chart illustrated, and implementation aspects involved in pinpointing, counting, charting, and evaluating are described. The article concludes with a brief summary of effectiveness research. (CL)
Descriptors: Elementary Secondary Education, Evaluation Methods, Precision Teaching, Program Effectiveness
Peer reviewedBrandstetter, Glenda; Merz, Carol – Exceptional Children, 1978
To examine the practice of charting scores in precision teaching for skill acquisition, two separate studies (involving a fourth grade class of 14 reading disabled students) were conducted. (Author/SBH)
Descriptors: Charts, Elementary Education, Exceptional Child Research, Learning Disabilities
Peer reviewedGuralnick, Michael J. – Exceptional Children, 1973
Descriptors: Exceptional Child Services, Handicapped Children, Individual Characteristics, Models
Peer reviewedKoorland, Mark A.; Nelson, C. Michael – Exceptional Children, 1990
This critique discusses conceptual and practical issues raised in a paper by D. Marston (EC 210 837) on choosing the most technically adequate graph for measuring progress on individual education plans. The critique argues that the Standard Behavior Chart is a technically adequate and useful measurement tool. (JDD)
Descriptors: Disabilities, Elementary Secondary Education, Evaluation Methods, Graphs
Peer reviewedMarston, Douglas; Deno, Stanley L. – Exceptional Children, 1990
This article responds to a criticism (EC 231 964) of a paper that discusses graphs for measuring progress on individual education plans (EC 210 837). It notes that the type of chart used is not a major issue; the important point is that teachers repeatedly gather data on educationally relevant tasks and evaluate intervention effectiveness. (JDD)
Descriptors: Disabilities, Elementary Secondary Education, Evaluation Methods, Graphs


