This article is the second part of a two-part article focusing on research that has been conducted on Content Enhancement Routines, instructional routines developed to be used during inclusive subject-area instruction. Part I of this article (Schumaker and Fisher, 2021) reviews the original validation studies that were conducted on four Content Enhancement Routines. This second part of the article reviews 10 empirical studies that have been conducted comparing the effects of two professional development methods (i.e., a computerized workshop and a live workshop) for instructing teachers to use the same four teaching routines. In every study, teacher knowledge of the routine and teacher preparation for using the routine were measured. In four of the studies, teacher implementation of the routine within inclusive classes as well as student performance were also measured. Results were reported for the whole group of students in all four studies, and for students with LD in three of the studies. In all of the studies, teachers made large and significant gains in performance on all measures after both workshop conditions, representing large effect sizes. All in-service teachers performed the routine at a high level of quality in their classes after 3 hours of instruction. In two studies, the teachers who participated in the computerized instruction earned significantly higher implementation scores than the teachers who participated in the live instruction. Regarding student performance across the studies, the whole group of students and the students with LD earned significantly higher scores on the posttests than on the pretests for both groups of teachers, again representing large effect sizes. Additionally, in two studies, the whole groups of students whose teachers used the software earned significantly higher scores on posttests than the whole groups of students whose teachers participated in live sessions. These studies replicate and extend the studies reviewed in Part I of this article; they show that quality teacher use of four Content Enhancement Routines results in increases in performance for all students, and for students with LD in inclusive classes.

中文翻译：

---

从研究到实践的 35 年：对包容性学科领域课程的四个内容增强程序的研究回顾，第二部分

本文是两部分文章的第二部分，该文章侧重于对内容增强例程进行的研究，内容增强例程是为在包容性学科领域教学中使用而开发的教学例程。本文的第一部分（Schumaker 和 Fisher，2021 年）回顾了对四个内容增强例程进行的原始验证研究。本文的第二部分回顾了 10 项实证研究，这些研究比较了两种专业发展方法（即计算机化研讨会和现场研讨会）在指导教师使用相同的四种教学程序方面的效果。在每项研究中，都测量了教师对常规的了解以及教师为使用常规所做的准备。在其中四项研究中，还测量了教师在全纳班级中的常规实施情况以及学生的表现。在所有四项研究中报告了整个学生组的结果，在三项研究中报告了 LD 学生的结果。在所有研究中，教师在两种研讨会条件后在所有措施上的表现都取得了巨大而显着的提高，这代表了很大的影响大小。经过 3 个小时的教学后，所有在职教师在课堂上都以高水平的质量进行了例行活动。在两项研究中，参与计算机化教学的教师获得的实施分数明显高于参与现场教学的教师。关于学生在整个研究中的表现，整组学生和 LD 学生在后测中的得分明显高于两组教师在前测中的分数，这再次代表了较大的效应量。此外，在两项研究中，教师使用该软件的整组学生在后测中的得分明显高于教师参加现场课程的整组学生。这些研究复制并扩展了本文第一部分中回顾的研究；他们表明，优质教师使用四种内容增强程序可以提高所有学生的表现，以及全纳班级 LD 学生的表现。教师使用该软件的整组学生在后测中的得分明显高于教师参加现场课程的整组学生。这些研究复制并扩展了本文第一部分中回顾的研究；他们表明，优质教师使用四种内容增强程序可以提高所有学生的表现，以及全纳班级 LD 学生的表现。教师使用该软件的整组学生在后测中的得分明显高于教师参加现场课程的整组学生。这些研究复制并扩展了本文第一部分中回顾的研究；他们表明，优质教师使用四项内容增强程序可以提高所有学生的表现，以及包容性课程中患有 LD 的学生的表现。