The What Works Clearinghouse Single-Case Design Pilot Standards: Who Will Guard the Guards?

John H. Hitchcock; Robert H. Horner; Thomas R. Kratochwill; Joel R. Levin; Samuel L. Odom; David M. Rindskopf; William R. Shadish

doi:10.1177/0741932513518979

The What Works Clearinghouse Single-Case Design Pilot Standards: Who Will Guard the Guards?

John H. Hitchcock
, Robert H. Horner
, Thomas R. Kratochwill
, Joel R. Levin
, Samuel L. Odom
, David M. Rindskopf
, William R. Shadish

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

45 Scopus citations

Abstract

In this article, we respond to Wolery's critique of the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) pilot Standards, which were developed by the current authors. We do so to provide additional information and clarify some points previously summarized in this journal. We also respond to several concerns raised by Maggin, Briesch, and Chafouleas after they applied the Standards to a single-case design synthesis published in this journal. The overall purpose of this response is to clarify what the Standards are designed to accomplish and to offer our views about future revisions.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	145-152
Number of pages	8
Journal	Remedial and Special Education
Volume	35
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513518979
State	Published - 2014
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

critique of WWC single-case design standards
design standards
evidence criteria
single-case research design

Publisher link

10.1177/0741932513518979

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{dafca6877de34c85b06ffad5ac9dde55,

title = "The What Works Clearinghouse Single-Case Design Pilot Standards: Who Will Guard the Guards?",

abstract = "In this article, we respond to Wolery's critique of the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) pilot Standards, which were developed by the current authors. We do so to provide additional information and clarify some points previously summarized in this journal. We also respond to several concerns raised by Maggin, Briesch, and Chafouleas after they applied the Standards to a single-case design synthesis published in this journal. The overall purpose of this response is to clarify what the Standards are designed to accomplish and to offer our views about future revisions.",

keywords = "critique of WWC single-case design standards, design standards, evidence criteria, single-case research design",

author = "Hitchcock, \{John H.\} and Horner, \{Robert H.\} and Kratochwill, \{Thomas R.\} and Levin, \{Joel R.\} and Odom, \{Samuel L.\} and Rindskopf, \{David M.\} and Shadish, \{William R.\}",

year = "2014",

doi = "10.1177/0741932513518979",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "35",

pages = "145--152",

journal = "Remedial and Special Education",

issn = "0741-9325",

publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The What Works Clearinghouse Single-Case Design Pilot Standards

T2 - Who Will Guard the Guards?

AU - Hitchcock, John H.

AU - Horner, Robert H.

AU - Kratochwill, Thomas R.

AU - Levin, Joel R.

AU - Odom, Samuel L.

AU - Rindskopf, David M.

AU - Shadish, William R.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - In this article, we respond to Wolery's critique of the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) pilot Standards, which were developed by the current authors. We do so to provide additional information and clarify some points previously summarized in this journal. We also respond to several concerns raised by Maggin, Briesch, and Chafouleas after they applied the Standards to a single-case design synthesis published in this journal. The overall purpose of this response is to clarify what the Standards are designed to accomplish and to offer our views about future revisions.

AB - In this article, we respond to Wolery's critique of the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) pilot Standards, which were developed by the current authors. We do so to provide additional information and clarify some points previously summarized in this journal. We also respond to several concerns raised by Maggin, Briesch, and Chafouleas after they applied the Standards to a single-case design synthesis published in this journal. The overall purpose of this response is to clarify what the Standards are designed to accomplish and to offer our views about future revisions.

KW - critique of WWC single-case design standards

KW - design standards

KW - evidence criteria

KW - single-case research design

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84897599389

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84897599389#tab=citedBy

U2 - 10.1177/0741932513518979

DO - 10.1177/0741932513518979

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84897599389

SN - 0741-9325

VL - 35

SP - 145

EP - 152

JO - Remedial and Special Education

JF - Remedial and Special Education

IS - 3

ER -

The What Works Clearinghouse Single-Case Design Pilot Standards: Who Will Guard the Guards?

Abstract

Keywords

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this