Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 2022, 57(4), 430–445

© Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

Training Peers to Teach Reading Comprehension to Students

with Extensive Support Needs
Robert C. Pennington, Shawnee Wakeman, Alicia F. Saunders, and
Brett M. Cerrato
University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Abstract : In the current study, we taught three middle school peers without disabilities to implement a commer-
cially available literacy program with students with extensive support needs (ESN). Our teaching package
included behavior skills training, ongoing feedback, and visual supports. We employed a multiple probe across
participants design to evaluate the efficacy of the training package. Data indicated it was effective in improv-
ing the peers’ performance. Further, the majority of participants reported favorable perceptions of the peer imple-
mented package.

The expectations for high quality educational
programs for students with extensive supports
needs (ESN) have been steadily increasing
over the last several decades (Spooner &
Browder, 2015). Students with ESN receive
special education services under the eligibility
categories of intellectual disability, autism,
and multiple disabilities and, due to their per-
vasive and significant support needs, are often
eligible to take their state’s alternate assessment
(Taub et al., 2017). Legislative mandates and
legal actions have repeatedly nudged the pro-
verbial bar higher for teachers of students with
ESN, first calling for increased access to and
ultimately, requiring that all students make pro-
gress within the general education curriculum
(Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017;
Every Student Succeeds Act, 2015). Further, a
flourishing body of research has emerged dem-
onstrating the efficacy of systematic interven-
tion techniques in teaching students with ESN
to acquire increasingly complex academic skills
(e.g., Knight et al., 2013; Spooner et al., 2012:
Walker et al., 2020). This extension of educa-
tional expectations reflects a potentially power-
ful turning point in the lives of students with
ESN, if it can be realized within the actual
Robert Pennington, Cato College of Education,
Department of Special Education and Child Deve-
lopment, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
9201 University City Blvd., Charlotte, NC. 28223-0001.
E-mail: Robert.pennington@uncc.edu
delivery of programs by educators in typical
school settings.
Unfortunately, the research literature indi-
cates that teachers may struggle with the
implementation of high-quality academic
instruction for students with ESN. Data indi-
cate these students are provided few opportu-
nities to respond and often are passively
engaged during academic instruction (Kurth
et al., 2016; Pennington & Courtade, 2015).
One potential barrier to effective instruc-
tional delivery may be challenges associated
with teacher to student ratios. The majority of
the research literature on teaching academic
content to students with ESN reflects instruc-
tion delivered in 1:1 or small group instruc-
tional arrangements (e.g., Spooner et al.,
2019). These arrangements are often neces-
sary for the delivery of frequent opportunities
to respond, response prompts, and feedback,
but may be difficult to implement when
instructional staff resources are low. As teach-
ers deliver 1:1 or small group academic
instruction, other students may be required
to work independently. This shuffling of
teaching staff and students may result in peri-
ods of weaker instructional opportunities,
especially when students have fewer inde-
pendent working skills or exhibit problem
behavior.
One potential solution involves recruiting
peers to support students with ESN during
instruction (Jimenez et al., 2012). Researchers
have suggested that when receiving instruction

430 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities

alongside peers without disabilities, students
with ESN may be more likely to have richer aca-
demic experiences (Carter et al., 2005; Ruppar
et al., 2018). In a recent review of 11 studies,
Brock and Huber (2017) focused on the use of
peer support arrangements and found promis-
ing evidence that these arrangements may facil-
itate academic engagement. Further, they
determined peer support arrangements to be
an evidence-based practice for promoting inter-
actions between students with and without
ESN in general education settings. Overall,
they reported peer supports facilitated in-
creases in social interaction across 82 middle
and high school students with ESN.
Researchers have employed behavior skills
training (BST; Parsons & Reed, 1995) to train
peers to provide instruction and supports to
students with ESN. BST procedures include
providing directions, modeling, and opportu-
nities for rehearsal and feedback. It has been
used to teach peers to implement abduction
prevention training (Tarasenko et al., 2010),
teach soccer skills (Chambers & Radley,
2020), and engage in interactive play (Covey
et al., 2021). Further, researchers have used
it to train peers to provide academic supports
to students with ESN (e.g., Kamps et al.,
1989).
The use of peer-supported academic in-
struction for students with ESN is not new.
Researchers have taught peers to support
academic instruction for students with ESN
across a range of academic skills. For exam-
ple, Collins et al. (2001) taught peers to use
the system of least prompts to support three
students with ESN in writing letters in a sec-
ondary composition class. All three students
increased their use of letter components follow-
ing the peer-supported intervention. Similarly,
Fetko and colleagues (2013) taught peers to
teach science facts to three middle school stu-
dents with ESN by delivering nontargeted infor-
mation during instruction on a leisure skill. All
three students improved performance on the
leisure skill and two acquired grade-level sci-
ence concepts. Researchers have demonstrated
the efficacy of peer supports in improving out-
comes in other academic areas including read-
ing comprehension (Hudson & Browder, 2014;
Hudson et al., 2014), spelling (McDonnell et
al., 2000), science vocabulary (Jimenez et al.,
2012) and mathematics (Heinrich et al., 2016).
Further, peers have been used to support in-
struction in both special education and general
education environments (Fetko et al., 2013;
McCurdy & Cole, 2014).
To date, a large portion of the research lit-
erature on peer delivered academic instruc-
tion for students with ESN primarily has
involved training peers to deliver simple
prompting and feedback procedures (e.g.,
instructive feedback and simultaneous prompt-
ing [Fetko et al., 2013], system of least prompts
[Collins et al., 2001; Hudson et al., 2014]).
These evidence-based procedures are powerful
but require a small number of steps for imple-
mentation (i.e., notice or present a target stimu-
lus, wait during a response interval, deliver a
prompt and/or feedback; Collins et al., 2018).
The limited number of teaching behaviors
required during response prompting and the
repeated practice of these behaviors during ev-
ery instructional trial may facilitate high levels
of procedural fidelity.
Over the last few decades, researchers have
embedded response prompting strategies into
more complex, scripted curricula designed to
teach grade-aligned skills to students with ESN
resulting in increased student outcomes. For
example, Browder and colleagues (2008) de-
signed and demonstrated the effectiveness of
an instructional package for teaching early lit-
eracy skills to students with ESN. The package
consisted of scripted lessons, adapted literacy
materials, and response prompting strategies
to teach phonemic awareness, phonological
awareness, comprehension, and writing. Since
then, numerous instructional packages have
emerged across content areas including sec-
ondary literacy (e.g., Browder et al., 2015),
early numeracy skills (e.g., Jimenez et al.,
2013), and science (e.g., Knight et al., 2013).
These instructional packages afford students
with ESN new opportunities to access grade-
aligned academic curricula, while providing
teachers with prepared adapted materials and
scripted guidance for supporting their stu-
dents. The effectiveness of these instructional
packages may be enhanced by delivery in 1:1 or
small group arrangements in which teachers
may be able to provide more opportunities for
individual students to practice skills and receive
feedback.
In the current study, we used a comprehensive
grade-aligned curriculum, Teaching to Standards
Training Peers / 431
 ELA, which was previously evaluated with 15 mid-
dle school students with moderate to severe
disabilities across five teachers in self-contained
settings (Mims et al., 2012). The curriculum
used systematic instruction, specifically the
response prompting strategies of constant time
delay and a modified system of least prompts,
and direct instruction to teach acquisition of lit-
eracy skills, including: (a) vocabulary and their
definitions; (b) comprehension of narrative,
informational texts, and poetry; (c) writing skills;
and (d) research skills. Other student materials
included vocabulary cards, graphic organizers
(e.g., story map and T-chart), individualized
response options, a writing journal, and adapted
grade level content with visual supports. Teach-
ers were provided with a thematic unit on
“change” with eight scripted lessons (five related
to fiction, one related to an informational text,
one related to a poem or play, and one related
to research). Using a one-group, nonrandom-
ized, pre-posttest design, results showed signifi-
cant gains in vocabulary and comprehension of
familiar texts.
Unfortunately, the feasibility of these small
group or 1:1 instructional arrangements is again
impacted by high student to teacher ratios. In
light of this potential obstacle and a body of
peer support research focusing on a limited
number of strategies for supporting students
with ESN, there is a need to evaluate whether
peers can effectively implement scripted aca-
demic curricula including multiple evidence-
based instructional components (e.g., constant
time delay; system of least prompts). Two studies
have evaluated the effects of peer-delivered sys-
tem of least prompts and adapted grade-level
read alouds (Hudson & Browder, 2014; Hudson
et al., 2014). In both studies, students with mod-
erate intellectual disability made gains in listen-
ing comprehension outcomes. Although not a
primary dependent variable, procedural fidelity
was measured and peers delivered the system of
least prompts for answering comprehension
questions with 95% fidelity or more. Both stud-
ies noted the extensive amount of time it took
to develop the materials, which were researcher-
created, as a limitation and recommended using
novels that had already been adapted. In the
current investigation, we used BST to train peers
to implement a comprehensive ELA scripted
curriculum (Teaching to Standards ELA; Mims
et al., 2013), using more than one teaching
432 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2022
strategy (e.g., constant time delay for vocabulary
instruction, direction instruction for teaching
story elements, and the system of least prompts
for listening comprehension), with students
with ESN. This study served to pilot our peer
training methods, which would serve as a part
of a federally funded multi-year model demon-
stration project. We addressed the following
research question: Is there a functional relation
between the use of a peer training package (i.e.,
behavior skill training, ongoing feedback, visual
supports) and the percent of accurate instruc-
tional steps implemented by peers without
disabilities? Though not a primary research
question, we also collected data on students’
with ESN responding to comprehension
questions before and following the introduc-
tion of peer training.
Method
Participants
Three 8th grade female students without dis-
abilities (Maggie, Diane, Casey), referred to
as peers, delivered reading instruction to stu-
dents with ESN. All three peers had applied
and competed to participate in the school’s
peer buddy program and received a course
grade for their participation. The peers had
worked with the students with ESN since the
school year started, either implementing 1:1
instruction in the self-contained classroom or
supporting them in inclusive electives (e.g.,
art, chorus, physical education). As a part of
the program, peers were provided with gen-
eral information on disabilities (e.g., defining
a disability, general supports) and given tasks
to work on with their peer mentees, but they
did not receive formalized training on effec-
tive teaching strategies. Peers spent the 90
min block with a student with ESN in one or
both settings depending on the daily schedule
(i.e., A day/B day rotation).
Three middle school students, ages 14 and
with ESN also participated in the study. All
three students were identified as students who
had reading comprehension goals on their
IEPs. Charlie was a White male, in the sixth
grade and met educational eligibility for intel-
lectual disability. Charlie was a non-reader
and used picture supported text for all sight
words and key words within the adapted text.
He used speech as his primary mode of com-
munication. Charlie’s peer was Diane. Fay was
a White female, in the seventh grade and also
met educational eligibility for intellectual dis-
ability. Fay’s peer was Casey. Micki was a White
female, in the Eighth grade and also met edu-
cational eligibility for intellectual disability.
Micki’s peer was Maggie. Both Fay and Micki
were emergent readers who could recognize
sight words and read simple sentences. They
both also used speech as their primary mode of
communication. All three students participated
in the state’s alternate assessment.
Setting
We conducted the study in a middle school in
a suburban school district in the southeastern
United States. The school comprised nearly
1,500 students of which 12% were enrolled
in free or reduced lunch programs. All peer
training sessions were conducted in a school
library or a self-contained classroom in a one-
one arrangement. We trained peers over two
consecutive days in 45 min sessions. Peer
mediated instruction sessions were conducted
in either the special education classroom or
in the school library at a small table (due to
noise or disruptive behaviors), and in a 1:1
arrangement with the peer sitting directly across
from the student with ESN. Sessions lasted
approximately 20 to 30 min and occurred three
to four times a week.
Materials
We taught peers to implement an adaptation
of a scripted instructional package (i.e., Teach-
ing to the Standards: ELA; Mims et al., 2013).
The commercial materials included a teacher’s
guide, a student response book, and a reader
that included the adapted novel (The Outsiders),
graphic organizers (T-chart, story map), vocab-
ulary cards, and teaching activity cards. Each
lesson began with the presentation of vocabu-
lary words and definitions which were taught
using constant time delay. Scripted lessons with
the curriculum included a read aloud of the
chapter with a repeated story line and specified
questions from the text with three picture and
text response options provided if needed. The
scripted lesson from the teacher’s guide was
adapted with visual supports (e.g., a stop sign)
to signal to the peer when to embed the ques-
tion within reading the chapter. Each chapter
consisted of eight questions: two literal recall,
one inferential, one story element (i.e., charac-
ter, setting, problem, or solution), one predic-
tion, one sequencing, and two vocabulary
questions. Cards for the story elements and
sequencing were placed on graphic organizers
(i.e., a T-chart, a story map) by students during
each lesson. In addition to the commercially
available materials, we created three visual
prompt cards with steps for teaching vocabu-
lary and literal and inferential comprehension
(See Figure 1) as supports for use during
instruction if needed. A procedural fidelity
checklist was used to collect implementation
data (see Figure 2).
Dependent Variables and Data Collection
During baseline and peer training conditions,
we collected data on the percent of correct
steps implemented by peers using a procedural
fidelity checklist (see Figure 2). A member of
the research team collected data during obser-
vations in vivo or via a video recording. During
each session, we scored the accurate implemen-
tation of (a) vocabulary instruction using
constant time delay (CTD; 16 steps); (b) pre-
sentation of attentional cues, questions, and
feedback in the correct sequence as indicated
by the script questions (9 steps); (c) pointing
to the text or promoting the peer to point to
the text (9 steps); and (d) the system of least
prompts (SLP) following comprehension ques-
tions (1-6 steps per question). The total num-
ber of steps varied contingent on the student’s
responding. For example, if a student emitted
multiple errors in response to a comprehen-
sion question, the peer would have more
opportunities to emit prompts. A step was
considered correct if it was implemented accu-
rately and in the correct sequence. We deter-
mined percent correct by dividing the number
of instructional steps implemented correctly,
including prompting, by the total number of
steps possible, and then multiplied by 100.
Though not a focus of the investigation, we
also collected data on students’ with ESN cor-
rect responses to comprehension questions
Training Peers / 433
 Figure 1. Sample CTD and SLP Cards for Peer Instructors.

during the reading instruction. Following each
lesson, the participants were asked to complete
an eight-question comprehension assessment
presented on a printed worksheet. Each ques-
tion was presented along with three response
options. A correct response was defined as
marking the correct response option on the
worksheet.
A second observer collected dependent vari-
able reliability data across baseline and train-
ing conditions. We calculated interobserver
agreement (IOA) using a total count method,
dividing the smaller number of peer behaviors
by the larger and then multiplying by 100. For
Maggie who was paired with Micki, we collected
IOA data for 40% of baseline and 50% of inter-
ventions sessions. Mean IOA for baseline and
intervention sessions was 93% (86-100%) and
95% (90-98%), respectively. For Diane who was
paired with Charlie, we collected IOA data for
40% of baseline and 60% of interventions ses-
sions. Mean IOA for baseline and intervention

434 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2022

 Figure 2. Fidelity Checklist for Peer-Implemented Vocabulary and Comprehension Instruction.

sessions was 91% (88–93%) and 89% (86– Experimental Design

93%), respectively. For Casey who was paired
with Fay, we collected IOA data for 60% of base-
line and 50% of interventions sessions. IOA for
baseline and intervention sessions was 89%
(77–100%) and 92% (91–93%), respectively.
We used a concurrent multiple probe across
participants (Horner & Baer, 1978) to evalu-
ate the efficacy of our training package. Prior
to introducing training to the first peer, we

Training Peers / 435

 conducted at least three baseline probes
across all three peers. Subsequently, we intro-
duced training to each peer, one at a time,
following increased accuracy by the previous
peer. We set a criterion of at least a 20%
increase in participant responding over base-
line levels prior to introducing intervention
to the next participant. Further, since we
implemented the intervention pilot study at
the end of the school year, we had a limited
number of days to complete the investigation.
As a result, we permitted participants to enter
intervention after only one or two sessions of
the previous participant meeting the 20%
increase criterion.
Procedure
Baseline Sessions. Prior to the first baseline
session, we provided peers with a copy of the
modified script to review prior to implemen-
tation and provided them with an opportunity
to ask questions. During baseline sessions, we
provided peers with materials and a directive
to follow the scripted lesson. The peers deliv-
ered instruction without interruption or feed-
back from the researcher. At the completion
of the session, the researcher provided gen-
eral praise to the peer (e.g., “Nice job”).
Peer Training (BST). Following baseline ses-
sions, we trained peers to implement the
scripted lessons. On the first day, we intro-
duced the materials, trained peers on using
the SLP to teach comprehension, modeled
how to implement the scripted lesson, and pro-
vided time for the peer to practice with feed-
back. On the second day, we trained peers to
implement CTD to teach vocabulary, practiced
again with feedback, and then conducted a fi-
delity check. During these initial training days,
we used behavioral skills training (BST; Par-
sons & Reed, 1995) which involved a member
of the research team providing a rationale and
directions for using the scripted curriculum,
modeling the use of the lesson materials, pro-
viding an opportunity for peer instructors to
rehearse each component, and providing feed-
back. In addition, at the completion of each
session, a researcher provided at least one
praise statement related to the peer’s teaching
436 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2022
and specific feedback related to observed
errors. Once the peer instructors implemented
steps with 90% accuracy or higher, they deliv-
ered instruction to students with ESN. Peer
training was completed in two 45 min sessions.
Post Training with Feedback. After each instru-
ctional session, a researcher met to provide
feedback to the peer regarding implementa-
tion of the lesson as well as an opportunity to
answer any questions the peer had. Initial
feedback provided to peers was often related
to the organization of materials and the
results of the fidelity with corrective feedback
(with modeling and rehearsal if needed).
Feedback evolved over time to include how to
increase student engagement and provide
specific positive feedback to the student.
Description of Peer-mediated Instruction. During
peer-mediated instruction, peers implemented
a complete Teaching to the Standards lesson.
Peers used CTD to pre-teach lesson vocabulary
and then delivered a read aloud of an adapted
chapter. During the read aloud, they pre-
sented embedded comprehension questions
and used the SLP procedure to facilitate stu-
dent responding.
During the pre-teaching of vocabulary, the
peer presented vocabulary in a single round in
which they showed the student the word paired
with the picture and immediately read the word
and its definition. The peer then presented an
opportunity for the student to identify vocabulary
words from a field of three words. The peer first
presented 0 s delay trials, in which immediately
following the request to identify the word, they
pointed to the correct picture and provided feed-
back following the students’ prompted response.
The peer directed the student to touch a target
vocabulary word and waited 4 s for the student to
respond. If the student responded correctly
before the prompt, the peer delivered behavior
specific praise and read the definition (e.g., “Yes,
that is ____! ___ means ____.”). If the student did
not respond or made an error, the peer pointed
to the target word, stated the word and its defini-
tion, and praised the student’s prompted
response. Between each trial, the peer rotated
the position of the words. Finally, students were
presented opportunities to identify vocabulary in
response to a spoken definition. Again, the peer
presented the target antecedent (i.e., definition)
and waited 4 s for the student to respond. If the
student responded correctly before the prompt,
the peer delivered behavior specific praise. If the
student did not respond or made an error, the
peer pointed to the target word, stated the word,
and praised the student’s prompted response.
After vocabulary instruction, peers deliv-
ered the read aloud of the chapter using the
modified teacher script, pausing at a visual
stop sign prompt to ask one comprehension
question. Initially, the peer presented a ques-
tion to the student and waited for a response.
If the student did not respond within 4 s, the
peer presented a response board with three pic-
tured options. If the student responded by stat-
ing or touching the correct response, the peer
provided behavior specific praise, and when
possible, pointed to the text from where the
response came. If the student made an error or
did not respond, the peer presented the next
prompt in a prompt hierarchy. The prompt
levels for literal comprehension questions were
as follows (a) present a response board; (b)
direct student to look back at the section of text
containing the answer; (c) read a 1-3 sentence
excerpt of text containing the answer; (d) point
to the answer in the text; (e) physically prompt
student to point to the answer in the text; and
(f) physically prompt student to touch the an-
swer on the response board. For inferential
questions, the prompt levels were as follows:
(a) present response board; (b) direct stu-
dent to look back at the section of text con-
taining a clue; (c) reread an area(s) of text
that contains clues for responding; (d) emit a
think aloud statement connecting the text
and the response option; (e) model the think
aloud of the answer; and (f) physically
prompt students to touch the answer on the
response board. If the student responded cor-
rectly following any prompt, the peer pro-
vided behavior specific praise and moved on
to the next question.
Comprehension instruction related to iden-
tifying a character/setting/problem and solu-
tion, peers presented a T-chart and asked
students to place picture cards in the appro-
priate column. For example, a peer would
present a character depicted on a card and
ask a student to place the card in the “charac-
ter” or “not a character” column. For this activ-
ity, the prompt levels were (a) refer the student
back to a page in the story, (b) read the sen-
tence containing the answer, (c) model the
correct response by reading the sentence
and pointing to the correct column, and (d)
prompting the student to place the picture
in the correct column. Finally, peers pre-
sented a story map and three event cards and
asked students to sequence the events. For
this activity, the prompt levels were the same as
for the T-Chart activity. Again, if the student
responded correctly following any prompt, the
peer provided positive feedback.
Social Validity
We collected social validity data from the
peers and students with ESN. For the peers,
we administered a survey with six items to
which they could respond with a yes, no, or
maybe. The items were (a) I learned new ways
to teach students with learning differences,
(b) I can now do a better job supporting stu-
dents with learning differences, (c) I like the
new strategies I learned, (d) I like to work
with _______, (e) I hope to continue teaching
students with learning differences next year,
and (f) I think I could use these new strat-
egies with other students in special education
class. For the students with ESN, the class-
room teacher read to them five yes/no ques-
tions presented on a questionnaire: (a) Do
you like working with (peer instructor), (b)
Does (peer instructor) help you with your
work, (c) Do you help (peer instructor) with
her work, (e) Do you want to keep working
with (peer instructor), and (f) Do you like
learning in (classroom teacher’s) class? The
students responded by pointing to word “yes”
or “no” under each question or by vocally stat-
ing the answer.
Data Analytic Procedures
We relied on visual analysis to determine if a
functional relation existed and the magnitude
of the effect, using six criteria: (a) level, (b)
trend, (c) variability, (d) immediacy of effect,
(e) overlap, and (f) consistency (Kratochwill
et al., 2010). To corroborate the visual analy-
sis findings, we used a single-case effect size
index, the between-case standardized effect
size (BC-SMD; Pustejovsky et al., 2014) to
Training Peers / 437
 calculate a between-subjects effect size esti-
mate. We selected the BC-SMD analysis
because it is comparable to group design met-
rics (e.g., Cohen’s d) and accounts for magni-
tude of change from baseline to intervention;
whereas, other single case nonoverlap techni-
ques do not (e.g., percent of non-overlapping
data, Tau-U; Valentine et al., 2016). We used
the BC-SMD calculator, which uses restricted
maximum likelihood (REML) estimation (Pus-
tejovsky et al., 2021). Our visual analysis find-
ings led our decisions. For baseline, we
specified fixed effect and random effect for
baseline level because this allows baseline
phases to be different from zero and to vary
across cases, respectively. For intervention, we
specified fixed effect and random effect for
treatment level because there was a level
change from baseline to intervention, and this
was different across cases (Valentine et al.,
2016).
Results
The data were illustrated two ways. Figure 3
shows the percent accuracy for fidelity of imple-
mentation across peer instructors. Because the
number of steps varied each session depending
on student responding, the data also were
graphed to show a side-by-side comparison
between the number of steps performed cor-
rectly to the total number of steps possible
across sessions (see Figure 4).
Maggie
During baseline sessions, Maggie implemented
instructional procedures with between 34.7
and 63.4% accuracy. Data indicated a stable
and gradually increasing trend across the con-
dition. Following training, there was an imme-
diate increase in her accuracy (immediacy of
effect) which was sustained across the post-
training condition (87.2–100%). Finally, data
related to the instructional components within
the overall package (See Table 1) indicated
that her accuracy increased the most in the
area of using CTD for vocabulary instruction
(77%).
438 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2022
Diane
During baseline sessions, Diane implemented
instructional procedures with between 37.9
and 49.1% accuracy. Data indicated a relatively
stable and flat trend across the condition.
Following training, there was an immediate
increase in her accuracy (immediacy of effect)
which was sustained across the first four ses-
sions (75–95.5%). During the last session (dur-
ing the last week of school) there was a sharp
decrease in accuracy to 61.8%. Finally, her ac-
curacy increased the most in the area of text
pointing (84%).
Casey
During baseline sessions, Casey implemented
instructional procedures with between 19.7
and 41.7% accuracy. Data indicated a relatively
stable and flat trend across the condition.
Following training, there was an immediate
increase in her accuracy (immediacy of
effect) which was sustained across three ses-
sions (82.8–100%). Again, there was a
decrease during the final session conducted
during the last week of school (73.5%).
Finally, her accuracy increased the most in
the area of vocabulary instruction, again
involving CTD (70%).
Between-case Standardized Effect Size Analysis
Using the Pustejovsky et al. (2021) online BC-
SMD calculator, the estimated effect size was
3.62 (95% CI [1.1, 6.2]). This can be inter-
preted as a medium effect (Gierut et al.,
2015), providing evidence the behavior skills
training with ongoing coaching produced a
meaningful change in peer instructors’ imple-
mentation of the curriculum.
Student Outcomes
During baseline sessions, Micki answered com-
prehension questions with an average of 80.2%
accuracy (63 -100%). Following peer training,
she answered questions with an average of
93.5% accuracy (75–100%). During baseline
sessions for Charlie, data indicated he answered
comprehension questions with an average
of 45% accuracy (13–75%). Following peer
 Figure 3. Peer Instructors’ Percentage of Accurate Implementation.

training, he answered questions with an average accuracy (88–100%). Following peer training,
of 72% accuracy (50–88%). During baseline ses- she answered questions with an average of 94%
sions for Fay, data indicated she answered com- accuracy (88–100%). This was a difference of
prehension questions with an average of 98% one question.

Training Peers / 439

 Figure 4. Peer Instructors’ Number of Steps Performed Correctly Compared to the Total Number of Oppor-
tunities per Session.

Social Validity Discussion

All peers responded “Yes” to most items.
One responded “maybe” to the item I hope to
continue teaching students with learning differ-
ences next year. Micki responded “Yes” to ev-
ery item. Fay responded “Yes” to every item
with one exception. She responded “no” to
Do you help (peer instructor) with her work? Charlie
responded “Yes” to all items with two excep-
tions. He responded “no’ to the items: Does (peer
instructor) help you with your work and Do you like
learning in (classroom teacher’s) class?
In the current study, we investigated the effects
of training peer instructors to implement a
commercially available ELA instructional pro-
gram with students with ESN. These scripted
packages are increasingly available and may
help educators as they can reduce time in ma-
terial preparation, and when carefully de-
signed, may support the implementation of
effective practices by offering scripts for instruc-
tional delivery for students with diverse learn-
ing needs. Further, their prescriptive format

440 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2022

TABLE 1
Mean Accuracy During Pre-and Post-Training Conditions Across Instructional Components
Vocabulary Following Script
Instruction
Pre- Post- Pre- Post-
Maggie 17 94 29 98
Diane 21 91 24 86
Casey 68 77 76 82
may facilitate implementation by a range of
instructional change agents including peers
without disabilities.
Overall, our findings suggest that BST with
the ongoing delivery of performance feedback
was effective in improving the three peers’ per-
formance. Prior to BST and coaching, peers
implemented procedures with low to moderate
levels of accuracy. Following the introduction of
training and coaching, all three immediately
increased their accuracy of implementation.
In addition to visual analysis, the BC-SMD was cal-
culated and a medium effect size was found (Pus-
tejovsky et al., 2021; Valentine et al., 2016).
Further, it was noted that baseline performance
across participants did not change following the
introduction of the package to other participants,
thus, a functional relation was demonstrated.
Prior to training, the peers’ implementation of
the script varied across package components. For
example, Maggie and Diane scored lowest when
asked to use CTD to teach vocabulary, but Casey
implemented CTD with 63.3% accuracy. Simi-
larly, Maggie implemented the SLP with 50% ac-
curacy, whereas Casey and Diane implemented
the SLP with 35.5% and 34.5% accuracy, respec-
tively. These differences may reflect the peers’
unique previous experiences in working with the
students in other contexts or a lack of attendance
to or comprehension of the instructional pro-
gram directions or script. Regardless, this finding
highlights the importance of training peers and
other instructional change agents on all essential
elements of new instructional packages and pro-
viding ongoing coaching and support.
These findings are consistent with those of
previous investigations in that peers can be
trained to implement effective instructional
strategies with students with ESN. Prior stud-
ies have targeted one type of instructional
Text Pointing System of Least
Prompts
Pre- Post- Pre- Post-
100 100 67 86
67 95 31 77
11 95 43 73
strategy, such as the system of least prompts
(e.g., Hudson & Browder, 2014; Hudson et
al., 2014), and peers implemented with 95%
or higher fidelity. This study expanded those
findings by using peers to deliver an entire
commercially available scripted curriculum
which encompassed multiple instructional
strategies (i.e., CTD, system of least prompts,
and direct instruction). The overall average
level of fidelity was not as high as prior stud-
ies. There are two contributing factors to
this. First, the fidelity checklist was far more
complex than in the prior studies using peers
(see Figure 2), and coders were more strin-
gent. Second, the intervention was more
complex, requiring the delivery of multiple
instructional strategies. Peers did receive ongoing
coaching on their implementation and improved
across all instructional strategies from baseline to
intervention. It is important to note that peers
had the scripts to use during baseline, and the
change from baseline to intervention shows the
importance of needing training to implement
these intervention programs effectively.
All three peers indicated they enjoyed
working with their peers with ESN and using
the package to teach reading. This may have
contributed to the ease of the package imple-
mentation as students with ESN appeared
generally attentive and did not engage behav-
iors that would be disruptive to instruction.
These findings are consistent with previous
investigations involving the use of peers to
support academic instruction for students
with ESN (Hudson et al., 2014; Jimenez et al.,
2012). Further, these peers volunteered to
participate in the study suggesting a proclivity
to engage in activities to support those in
their school community with ESN. In addi-
tion, students with ESN reported they enjoyed
Training Peers / 441
 working with their peers, but one participant
reported that they did not prefer their learn-
ing environment and did not perceive their
peer to help them. It is possible that students’
responses were influenced by a range of varia-
bles (e.g., understanding the question asked,
researcher or peer status) that may have
impacted the accuracy of their responses.
Researchers have established potentially more
effective methods for assessing intervention
preferences that involve providing individuals
with choices between intervention compo-
nents throughout the study (Hanley et al.,
1997; Hardy et al., 2020). In the current study,
we might have provided students with inter-
mittent opportunities to choose whether to
work with a peer or their teacher. Unfortu-
nately, we had a limited number of sessions
and could not provide these “choice” sessions,
but we recommend their application in future
investigations.
Interestingly, we also collected data on the
accuracy of students with ESN responses to
comprehension questions. Two of the stu-
dents demonstrated overall improved per-
formance following peer training, and one, a
minor decrease in accuracy (98%-94% accu-
racy). The latter student experienced a ceil-
ing effect in baseline, performing at high
levels of accuracy. Though these findings
should be viewed with caution and in the con-
text of a limited number of instructional ses-
sions, they may reflect peers’ increased use of
critical instruction components during each
lesson (e.g., vocabulary instruction, SLP to
teach comprehension, feedback).
Limitations
Despite our generally positive findings, several
limitations should be noted. Our research
design was constrained by several variables that
were a result of the implementation of the
study immediately prior to the end of the
school year. Our attempt was to pilot proce-
dures prior to their use at the beginning of the
subsequent school year. As a result, there is
only one overlapping data point between the
second participant’s training condition and the
third participant’s baseline condition, resulting
in a weakened capacity to detect covariation. As
a result of our limited time to complete the
442 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2022
study, we entered Maggie into our intervention
condition despite having an increasing trend
in baseline. Though we observed an immediate
change in level, it is possible that Maggie might
have increased her fidelity over time with the
script alone. Both Diane’s and Casey’s fidelity
decreased during the last session, as they were
focused on going to an eighth-grade celebra-
tion, but there were no additional days of
school left to see if their fidelity would improve.
We also only provided one peer with four
instructional sessions which is less than the
recommended five per condition (Kratochwill
et al., 2010), weakening our demonstration of
sustained impact. Due to students with ESN
overall limited time in intervention condi-
tions, it is difficult to determine the extent to
and mechanisms by which comprehension
skills improved. Additionally, we were unable
to collect maintenance data to determine the
extent to which peer’s would sustain perform-
ance after the package was terminated.
Finally, as mentioned above, the number of
opportunities for peers to implement proce-
dural steps varied in response to student
responding. Therefore, graphed percentages
reflect varied numbers of opportunities. To
increase transparency, we also reported data
on the number of correct responses in rela-
tion to opportunities (see Figure 4).
Implications for Practice and Future Research
The findings of this pilot investigation have sev-
eral implications for practice. First, we demon-
strated that middle school students could
accurately implement a scripted instructional
package focused on teaching reading compre-
hension to students with ESN. We suggest that
teachers capitalize on peer supports during
literacy instruction to maximize positive out-
comes for students with and without ESN,
especially, in light of our findings suggesting
students with ESN enjoyed engaging in read-
ing instruction with their peers. Second, our
findings suggest that some students may bene-
fit from scripted literacy instruction provided
by peers. In the current study, some students
appeared to benefit from training their peer
instructors. We suggest that if teachers
employ peers to provide similar instruction,
they carefully monitor its effectiveness
through continuous data collection.
Our findings also have implications for future
research. We implemented procedures in a
controlled special education setting. We suggest
that the package or at least essential features of
the package (e.g., text pointing, SLP for answer-
ing comprehension questions) can be imple-
mented in the general education settings. This
holds promise in general education settings
where peers may have more opportunities to
embed instruction than the general or special
education teacher (Carter et al., 2016; Jimenez
et al., 2012).
Conclusion
In conclusion, teachers of students with ESN
may require additional instructional change
agents to facilitate high quality educational pro-
gramming for their students. This may involve
the enlistment of peers with and without dis-
abilities in supporting a range of instructional
activities. In this investigation, we demonstrated
that peers can implement complex instruc-
tional packages requiring the application of
multiple teaching practices. Further, our find-
ings suggest that our peer training may have
produced improved outcomes for students
with ESN.
References
Brock, M. E., & Carter, E. W. (2017). A meta-analy-
sis of educator training to improve implementa-
tion of interventions for students with disabilities.
Remedial and Special Education, 38(3), 131–144.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917698008
Browder, D. M., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., & Wood, L.
(2015). Early reading skills builder. Attainment
Company.
Browder, D. M., Mims, P. J., Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-
Delzell, L., & Lee, A. (2008). Teaching elementary
students with multiple disabilities to participate in
shared stories. Research and Practice for Persons with
Severe Disabilities, 33(1-2), 3–12. https://doi.org/10
.2511/rpsd.33.1-2.3
Carter, E. W., Cushing, L. S., Clark, N. M., &
Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Effects of peer support
interventions on students’ access to the general
curriculum and social interactions. Research and
Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30(1), 15–
25. https://doi:10.2511/rpsd.30.1.15
Chambers, C., & Radley, K. C. (2020). Training soccer
skills to adolescents with autism spectrum disorder
via peer-mediated behavioral skills training. Behav-
ior Analysis in Practice, 13(2), 454–461. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s40617-019-00381-2
Collins, B. C., Branson, T. A., Hall, M., & Rankin,
S. W. (2001). Teaching secondary students with
moderate disabilities in an inclusive academic class-
room setting. Journal of Developmental and Physical
Disabilities, 13(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1023/
A:1026557316417
Collins, B. C., Lo, Y. Y., Park, G., & Haughney, K.
(2018). Response prompting as an ABA-based
instructional approach for teaching students with
disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 50(6), 343–
355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059918774920
Covey, A., Li, T., & Alber-Morgan, S. R. (2021). Using
behavioral skills training to teach peer models:
Effects on interactive play for students with moder-
ate to severe disabilities. Education and Treatment of
Children, 44(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s43494-020-00034-y
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 137 S.
Ct. 988 (2017).
Every Student Succeeds Act, Pub.L. No. 114-95, §
1177 Stat . (2015).
Fetko, E. E., Collins, B. C., Hager, K. D., & Spriggs,
A. D. (2013). Embedding science facts in leisure
skill instruction conducted by peer tutors. Educa-
tion and Training in Autism and Developmental Dis-
abilities, 48(3), 400–411. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/23880996
Gierut, J. A., Morrisette, M. L., & Dickinson, S. L.
(2015). Effect size for single-subject design in
phonological treatment. Journal of Speech, Lan-
guage, and Hearing Research, 58(5), 1464–1481.
https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_JSLHR-S-14-0299
Hanley, G. P., Piazza, C. C., Fisher, W. W., Contrucci,
S. A., & Maglieri, K. A. (1997). Evaluation of client
preference for function-based treatment packages.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30(3), 459–473.
https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1997.30-459
Hardy, J. K., Pennington, R. C., Jacobi-Vessels, J., &
Griffin, R. (2020). Comparing the effects of cul-
tural variables on preschoolers’ engagement in
book reading. Early Childhood Education Journal,
48(6), 781–791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-
020-01043-7
Heinrich, S., Collins, B. C., Knight, V., & Spriggs,
A. D. (2016). Embedded simultaneous prompting
procedure to teach STEM content to high school
students with moderate disabilities in an inclusive
setting. Education and Training in Autism and Devel-
opmental Disabilities, 51(1), 41–54. https://www.
jstor.org/stable/26420363
Horner, R. D., & Baer, D. M. (1978). Multiple-
probe technique: A variation of the multiple base-
line. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11(1), 189–
196. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1978.11-189
Training Peers / 443
 Hudson, M. E., & Browder, D.M. (2014). Improving
listening comprehension responses for students
with moderate intellectual disability during literacy
class. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe
Disabilities, 39(1), 11–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1540796914534634
Hudson, M. E., Browder, D. M., & Jimenez, B. A.
(2014). Effects of a peer-delivered system of least
prompts intervention with adapted science read-
alouds on listening comprehension for students with
moderate intellectual disability. Education and Train-
ing in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 49(1), 60–
77. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23880655
Jimenez, B., Browder, D. M., & Saunders, A. (2013).
Early numeracy. Attainment Company.
Jimenez, B., Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., & DiBiase,
W. (2012). Inclusive inquiry science using peer-
mediated embedded instruction for students
with moderate intellectual disability. Exceptional
Children, 78(3), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/
001440291207800303
Kamps, D., Locke, P., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V.
(1989). Increasing academic skills of students
with autism using fifth grade peers as tutors. Edu-
cation and Treatment of Children, 12(1), 38–51.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/42899092
Knight, V. F., Spooner, F., Browder, D. M., Smith,
B. R., & Wood, C. L. (2013). Using systematic
instruction and graphic organizers to teach science
concepts to students with autism spectrum disor-
ders and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and
Other Developmental Disabilities, 28(2), 115–126.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357612475301
Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H.,
Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., &
Shadish, W. R. (2010). Single-case designs technical
documentation. What Works Clearinghouse web-
site: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_scd.
pdf
Kurth, J. A., Born, K., & Love, H. (2016). Ecobeha-
vioral characteristics of self-contained high
school classrooms for students with severe cogni-
tive disability. Research and Practice for Persons with
Severe Disabilities, 41(4), 227–243. https://doi:
10.1177/1540796916661492
McCurdy, E. E., & Cole, C. L. (2014). Use of a peer
support intervention for promoting academic
engagement of students with autism in general
education settings. Journal of Autism and Develop-
mental Disorders, 44(4), 883–893. https://doi: 10
.1007/s10803-013-1941-5.
Mims, P. J., Lee, A., Browder, D. M., Zakas, T. L., &
Flynn, S. (2012). Effects of a treatment package
to facilitate English/language arts learning for
middle school students with moderate to severe
disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and De-
velopmental Disabilities, 47(4), 414–425. https://
www.jstor.org/stable/23879635
444 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2022
Mims, P. J., Lee, A., Zakas, T. L., & Browder, D. M.
(2013). Teaching to Standards: ELA. Attainment
Company.
McDonnell, J., Thorson, N., Allen, C., & Mathot-
Buckner, C. (2000). The effects of partner learning
during spelling for students with severe disabilities
and their peers. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10(2),
107–121. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016684029389
Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1995). Training resi-
dential supervisors to provide feedback for main-
taining staff teaching skills with people who have
severe disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Anal-
ysis, 28(3), 317–322. https://doi.org/10.1901/
jaba.1995.28-317
Pennington, R. C., & Courtade, G. R. (2015). An ex-
amination of teacher and student behaviors in
classrooms for students with moderate and severe
intellectual disability. Preventing School Failure: Alter-
native Education for Children and Youth, 59(1), 40–47.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2014.919141
Pustejovsky, J. E, Chen, M., & Swan, D. M. (2021).
Single-case effect size calculator (Version 0.5.2) [Web
application]. Retrieved from https://jepusto.
shinyapps.io/SCD-effect-sizes/
Pustejovsky, J. E., Hedges, L. V., & Shadish, W. R.
(2014). Design-comparable effect sizes in multiple
baseline designs: A general modeling framework. Jour-
nal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 39(5), 368–
393. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998614547577
Ruppar, A., Fisher, K. W., Olson, A. J., & Orlando,
A. M. (2018). Exposure to literacy for students eligi-
ble for the alternate assessment. Education and Train-
ing in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 53(2),
192–208. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26495269
Spooner, F., & Browder, D. M. (2015). Raising the
bar: Significant advances and future needs for
promoting learning for students with severe dis-
abilities. Remedial and Special Education, 36(1), 28–
32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514555022
Spooner, F., Knight, V. F., Browder, D. M., & Smith,
B. R. (2012). Evidence-based practice for teach-
ing academics to students with severe develop-
mental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education,
33(6), 374–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419
32511421634
Spooner, F., Root, J. R., Browder, D. M., & Saunders,
A. F. (2019). An updated evidence-based practice
review on teaching mathematics to students with
moderate and severe disabilities. Remedial and Spe-
cial Education, 40(3), 150–165. https://doi.org/
10/1177/07419325177551055
Taub, D. A., McCord, J. A., & Ryndak, D. L. (2017).
Opportunities to learn for students with extensive
support needs: A context of research-supported
practices for all in general education classes. The
Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 127–137.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466917696263
Tarasenko, M. A., Miltenberger, R. G., Brower-
Breitwieser, C., & Bosch, A. (2010). Evaluation of
peer training for teaching abduction prevention
skills. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 32(3), 219–230.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07317107.2010.500518
Valentine, J. C., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Pustejovsky,
J. E. (2016). Between-case standardized mean differ-
ence effect sizes for single-case designs: A primer and
tutorial using the scdhlm web application. The Camp-
bell Collaboration. https://doi.org/10.4073/
cmdp.2016.1
Walker, V. L., Douglas, S. N., Douglas, K. H., &
D'Agostino, S. R. (2020). Paraprofessional-imple-
mented systematic instruction for students
with disabilities: A systematic literature review.
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental
Disabilities, 55(3), 303–317. https://eric.ed.gov/?
id=EJ1264298
Received: 11 October 2021
Initial Acceptance: 9 December 2021
Final Acceptance: 14 January 2022
Training Peers / 445
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.