DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparison of the Orton-Gillingham and a Web-Based Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Research Article iMedPub Journals Journal of Childhood & Developmental Disorders 2017 http://www.imedpub.com ISSN 2472-1786 Vol. 3 No. 3: 12 DOI: 10.4172/2472-1786.100050 Comparison of the Orton-Gillingham Tzipi Horowitz-Kraus1,2, 2 and a Web-based Program in Catherine Buck , Resmi Gutpa3 and Children with Reading Difficulties Rhonda Brown4 1 Educational Neuroimaging Center, Faculty of Education in Science and Abstract Technology, Technion, Haifa, Israel The Orton-Gillingham reading-intervention program (OG) is widely used for 2 Reading and Literacy Discovery Center, children with Reading Difficulties (RD). However, few studies have been performed Division of General and Community to evaluate the effectiveness of the OG. Here, we examined the effects of the OG Pediatrics on oral and silent reading in children with RD. Children with RD who participated in 3 Department of Biostatistics, Cincinnati the OG showed similar improvements in speed and accuracy of oral reading after Children's Hospital Medical Center, training as did children with RD who participated in the control program. Both Cincinnati, Ohio, United States groups showed improvement in oral reading speed. Children in the OG group did 4 Faculty of Education, University of show greater accuracy in oral reading compared to silent reading. These results Cincinnati, Ohio, USA suggest that the gain from the OG was not different from participation in another intervention program in improving oral and silent reading speed. Keywords: Reading Difficulties (RD); Orton-Gillingham reading; Anecdotal Corresponding author: Tzipi Horowitz-Kraus [email protected] Received: June 19, 2017; Accepted: June 21, 2017; Published: June 30, 2017 Alon fellow and Career Advanced Chair of the Educational Neuroimaging Center, Introduction Faculty of Education in Sciences and Technology, Technion- Israel Institute of The Orton-Gillingham reading intervention program (OG) was Technology, Israel. designed in the 1930s by Samuel Orton and Anna Gillingham to develop oral and silent reading skills in children with Reading Tel: +972-4-829-2165 Difficulties (RD) [1]. This program and programs based on its principles approach intervention as a “systematic, sequential, multisensory, synthetic and phonics-based approach to teaching Citation: Horowitz-Kraus T, Buck C, Gutpa R, reading” [2]. At the most basic level, the OG approach utilizes et al. Comparison of the Orton-Gillingham the language triangle - visual, auditory, and kinesthetic/tactile and a Web-based Program in Children with pathways [2]. Phonology, as well as phonological awareness, Reading Difficulties. J Child Dev Disord. is taught to children with RD using a ladder of reading skills; 2017, 3:3. starting with groups of letters and moving on to how sounds correspond to each other and blend to form words. Students learn to read and spell both actual and nonsense words, first with based on it are predominately used in schools [3]. However, tiles and then on paper. Children progress to reading and writing despite half a century of widespread use in schools, very little phrases. Reading fluency and accuracy is then targeted using empirical evidence exists supporting the use of the OG [4]. Less program texts. The instructor dictates a word, which the child scientifically-based information is available for the OG compared then repeats, spells with blocks while saying it, taps out vowel to other programs. sounds, says the word slowly emphasizing phonological parts of the word, blends the sounds present in the word, says it with the Evidence of the effects of the OG in children correct speed, and then uses finger spelling [2]. This multisensory The main body of evidence supporting the OG method has been approach has been shown to be particularly useful for children anecdotal [3]. Success stories from parents and teachers, as well with RD [3]. Due to its initial success at a time when few programs as widespread support of the program from schools has instilled were available in schools, as well as based on anecdotal evidence confidence in educators and legislators regarding continued of the results of this program, the OG method and programs implementation of the OG [3]. However, there is little empirical © Under License of Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License | Find this article in: http://childhood-developmental-disorders.imedpub.com/archive.php 1 Journal of Childhood & DevelopmentalARCHIVOS DE Disorders MEDICINA 2017 ISSNISSN 2472-1786 1698-9465 Vol. 3 No. 3 : 12 evidence supporting the superiority of this program over other personnel devoted toward this method, as well as the significant reading-intervention programs. The studies that do exist have portion of students who struggle with RD, the goal of the current inconsistent findings regarding the effects of the OG on reading study was to determine the effects of OG training in children skills in children with RD [2]. Among the studies showing slight with RD compared to an age-matched group of children with RD improvements using the OG method, Geiss et al. demonstrated who participated in a web-based reading intervention program greater improvement in reading rate in 13-18 year-old children for the same time and intensity on both oral and silent reading in juvenile detention facilities who underwent the OG for 90 skills. We hypothesized that children who participated in the OG min a day, five days a week, and were tested before and after and children who participated in the web-based intervention in intervention [2]. However, including children in juvenile detention school would demonstrate reading improvement (i.e., reading facilities resulted in incomplete post-testing data. Another speed, accuracy and comprehension). We also hypothesized that study showed that an OG-based program (“The Wilson Reading no differences in gains in reading skills would be found between System”) was more effective in teaching reading, spelling, and the two groups. We speculated that greater gains in oral reading phonological awareness skills than was a non-phonetic program would occur in both groups due to the intensive oral-reading for the comparison group [5]. However, other researchers have practice involved in both interventions. found conflicting results. A study comparing another OG-based program (“Alphabet Phonics”) and a non-OG approach focusing Methods on comprehension skills, reading efficiency skills, study skills, and test-taking strategies showed that students who were normal Participants readers enrolled in a community college had better performance Ninety-seven elementary and middle school students in 1st on post-training measures after the non-OG approach than through 7th grades (6-12 years of age) from a private school in an students in the OG-based group [6]. The authors concluded that urban Midwestern state participated in the study (n=58 females; OG-based programs must be evaluated more completely and n=39 males). Sixty-three students (n=40 females; n=23 males) empirically to determine efficacy. participated in the OG (“OG group”) and 34 students (n=18 females; n=16 males) participated in the web-based program Another challenge of using the OG is that it indiscriminately (“WB group”), which was the ongoing intervention program in covers all domains in reading [7]. Morris and colleagues identified the school. “subtypes” of children with reading difficulties (RD), such that some children experience difficulties with fluency, reading Students participated in either program for three months and comprehension, or phonological processing [7]. Thus, differential completed accuracy and speed reading measures for both oral attention may need to be given to each of these reading domains and silent reading before (Test 1; in the fall) and after (Test 2; [7]. Spending precious time on all domains of reading for all in the winter) intervention. The children were classified as children instead of targeting specific skills for individual children experiencing RD by the school by scoring at or below the 25th may cause additional delays in reading improvement. percentile on tests for oral and silent reading speed (i.e., fluency), reading comprehension, and oral and silent reading accuracy OG-based programs are used widely in schools across the United (i.e., decoding and orthographical skills, respectively) using States and internationally [8]. Such programs are intensive and the AimsWeb reading-assessment program (https://aimsweb. costly interventions, requiring both the financial and personnel pearson.com/) [9]. resources to provide one-on-one training daily for children with RD. Parents often request OG-based programs for their children Reading measures and have won lawsuits against school districts for the right to To assess the effects of both interventions implemented have this method available under the Individuals with Disabilities in this study, we used the AimsWeb Reading Curriculum- Education Act or IDEA [3]. However, there is a distinct lack of Based Measurement (R-CBM), which is a brief, individually empirical evidence supporting the efficacy of the OG method, administered, standardized test of speed and accuracy of oral particularly in comparison to the myriad of daily intervention reading for grades 1 through 12 [10]. More specifically, the programs available. Most supporters of the OG, including many R-CBM uses 1-min probes that require students to read aloud parents of children with RD, base their opinions on word-of-mouth to a test administrator. The number of Words Read Correctly
Recommended publications
  • What Is Fluency? Adapted From: Elish-Piper, L

    What Is Fluency? Adapted From: Elish-Piper, L

    NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY | JERRY L. JOHNS LITERACY CLINIC Raising Readers: Tips for Parents What is Fluency? Adapted from: Elish-Piper, L. (2010). Information and ideas for parents about fluency and vocabulary.Illinois Reading Council Journal, 38(2), 48-49. Reading fluency is the ability to read a text easily. Reading mean that children should read as fast as they possibly can. fluency actually has four parts: accuracy, speed, expression and Rate needs to be combined with accuracy, expression and comprehension. Each part is important, but no single part is comprehension to produce fluent reading. Some schools enough on its own. A fluent reader is able to coordinate all four provide a target rate for students in each grade level, usually as aspects of fluency. the number of correct words read per minute. You may wish to ask your child’s teacher if there is a rate goal used for your Accuracy: Reading words correctly is a key to developing fluency. Children need to be able to read words easily without child’s grade level. Those rate targets are important, but they having to stop and decode them by sounding them out or are not the only goal for fluency. For example, if a child reads breaking them into chunks. When children can accurately and very quickly but does not read with expression or understand easily read the words in a text, they are able to think about what what is read, that child is not reading fluently. they are reading rather than putting all of their effort toward Expression: Expression in fluency refers to the ability to read figuring out the words.
  • LEDA LUBIN 8458 Mallard's Way Naples, Florida 34114 PHONE: 239

    LEDA LUBIN 8458 Mallard's Way Naples, Florida 34114 PHONE: 239

    LEDA LUBIN 8458 Mallard’s Way Naples, Florida 34114 PHONE: 239-970-0422 EMAIL: [email protected] EDUCATION Multisensory Reading Training Program (Orton Gillingham Method) 2003 Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ Learning Disabilities Teacher Consultant, 1980, Montclair State University, Upper Montclair, NJ Master of Education (Reading and Language Arts), 1974, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT Bachelor of Arts (Sociology), 1972, Rutgers University (Livingston College) New Brunswick, NJ 1968- 1970 (Sociology), The American University, Washington, DC PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Learning Consultant Tenafly Public Schools - Tenafly, NJ September 1991 – Retired December 2005 As a member of the Child Study Team, conducted educational assessments of students with disabilities and interpreted findings for parents and teachers. Prepared IEPs, selected educational programs, and recommended instructional goals, objectives, and strategies for students with disabilities. Served as consultant to teachers, guidance counselors and administrators. Served as a member of the Intervention and Referral Strategies Committee and the Crisis Response Team. Nutley Public Schools – Nutley, NJ October 1980 – February 1984 As a member of the Child Study Team, conducted educational assessments of students with disabilities and interpreted findings for parents and teachers. Prepared IEPs, selected educational programs, and recommended instructional goals, objectives, and strategies for students with disabilities. Served as consultant to teachers,
  • Fluency, Vocabulary and Comprehension Instruction

    Fluency, Vocabulary and Comprehension Instruction

    Fluency, Vocabulary and Comprehension Instruction Augustine Literacy Project - Charlotte Marion Idol, Site Coordinator Five Essential Components of Reading Instruction: 1.phonemic awareness 2.phonics 3.fluency 4.vocabulary 5.comprehension http://athome.readinghorizons.com/ Importance of Decoding skills: In many schools, 1st and 2nd grade instruction focuses on FVC instead of PA and P.(decoding) For our students, the holes in the foundation tend to be in PA and P. Please prioritize setting a firm foundation! For 1st month of tutoring, don’t worry about weaving in FVC instruction. Fluency/Vocabulary/Comprehension Instruction: What does it look like for 1st/2nd graders? How do I weave this instruction into each lesson? What are fun supplemental activities for “TAKE a BREAK” sessions? Fluency: ALP Manual: Tab 5, pp. 174-178 The ability to read text accurately and quickly. Scored as words read correctly per minute. ONLY DECODABLE TEXT! Easy independent reading level (95% success) Requires repeated ORAL reading practice with a partner providing modeling, feedback, and assistance Includes PROSODY: appropriate expression, inflection, pacing Activities to Promote Fluency Each session: You will already be doing repeated oral reading practice in lesson parts 3-5, 9 To add fun and prosody practice, when student rereads sentences in part 5, play “Roll Punctuation” or “Roll a Face.” Parts 3-5, 9. Handout B. Fluency “Take a Break” session activities: Paired Reading: Reading aloud along with your student to promote correct pacing, inflection, expression https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5RJyUnAkWM Punctuation Punch: Periods, commas, question marks, exclamation point. Fun AVK stimulation! Use book Yo! Yes! to teach this technique.
  • Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) in Plain Language

    Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) in Plain Language

    Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) in Plain Language Academic Areas of Concern Students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) have severe trouble learning or demonstrating skills in one or more of these academic areas: oral expression reading fluency listening comprehension reading comprehension written expression mathematics calculation and basic reading skill mathematics problem solving Students with SLD often do well in some school subjects but have extreme difficulty with skills like decoding (sounding out) words, calculating math facts, or writing down their thoughts. Even with adequate instruction and intensive intervention, a student with SLD has low classroom achievement when compared to students without disabilities in the same grade. Specific information about how the student has responded to instruction and intensive intervention is used to decide if a student is SLD or if the student is not achieving for other reasons. Referral for Special Education When someone thinks a student might have any disability and needs special education, a referral for a special education evaluation is made to the school. The referral must be in writing and say why the person making the referral thinks the student has a disability. A group of people, called an IEP team, which includes the student’s parents, does an evaluation and decides if the student meets state and federal criteria. Three Criteria to Meet The three criteria (requirements) below must be considered by the IEP team and all 3 of them must be met in order to decide the student has SLD. 1. Inadequate Classroom Achievement - This means a student's academic skills in one or more academic areas of concern are well outside the expected range for students without disabilities of the same age.
  • Can Learning Disabilities Explain Low Literacy Performance?

    Can Learning Disabilities Explain Low Literacy Performance?

    Now and Tomorrow Excellence in Everything We Do Can Learning Disabilities Explain Low Literacy Performance? By Gregory S. McKenna September, 2010 Learning Policy Directorate Strategic Policy and Research Human Resources and Skills Development Canada SP-959-07-10E Can Learning Disabilities Explain Low Literacy Performance? By Gregory S. McKenna July, 2010 Learning Policy Directorate Strategic Policy and Research Human Resources and Skills Development Canada The views expressed in papers published by the Learning Policy Directorate are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Human Resources and Skills Development Canada or of the federal government. Note: the departmental catalogue number is placed on the front cover, bottom left hand side. You can order this publication by contacting: Publications Services Human Resources and Skills Development Canada 140, promenade du Portage Phase IV, 12th Floor Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0J9 Fax: 819-953-7260 Online: http://www12.hrsdc.gc.ca This document is available on demand in alternate formats (Large Print, Braille, Audio Cassette, Audio CD, e-Text Diskette, e-Text CD, or DAISY), by contacting 1 800 O-Canada (1-800-622-6232). If you have a hearing or speech impairment and use a teletypewriter (TTY), call 1-800-926-9105. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2010 Paper Cat. No.: HS38-22/2010E ISBN: 978-1-100-16366-6 PDF Cat. No.: HS38-22/2010E-PDF ISBN: 978-1-100-16367-3 Acknowledgements The author is grateful to Mr. Mathieu Audet, Dr. Bagala Biswal, Dr. Urvashi Dhawan-Biswal and Dr. Satya Brink for their assistance and support in developing this line of research.
  • Whole Language Instruction Vs. Phonics Instruction: Effect on Reading Fluency and Spelling Accuracy of First Grade Students

    Whole Language Instruction Vs. Phonics Instruction: Effect on Reading Fluency and Spelling Accuracy of First Grade Students

    Whole Language Instruction vs. Phonics Instruction: Effect on Reading Fluency and Spelling Accuracy of First Grade Students Krissy Maddox Jay Feng Presentation at Georgia Educational Research Association Annual Conference, October 18, 2013. Savannah, Georgia 1 Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of whole language instruction versus phonics instruction for improving reading fluency and spelling accuracy. The participants were the first grade students in the researcher’s general education classroom of a non-Title I school. Stratified sampling was used to randomly divide twenty-two participants into two instructional groups. One group was instructed using whole language principles, where the children only read words in the context of a story, without any phonics instruction. The other group was instructed using explicit phonics instruction, without a story or any contextual influence. After four weeks of treatment, results indicate that there were no statistical differences between the two literacy approaches in the effect on students’ reading fluency or spelling accuracy; however, there were notable changes in the post test results that are worth further investigation. In reading fluency, both groups improved, but the phonics group made greater gains. In spelling accuracy, the phonics group showed slight growth, while the whole language scores decreased. Overall, the phonics group demonstrated greater growth in both reading fluency and spelling accuracy. It is recommended that a literacy approach should combine phonics and whole language into one curriculum, but place greater emphasis on phonics development. 2 Introduction Literacy is the fundamental cornerstone of a student’s academic success. Without the skill of reading, children will almost certainly have limited academic, economic, social, and even emotional success in school and in later life (Pikulski, 2002).
  • Reading Corps Research Base – K-3 Model

    Reading Corps Research Base – K-3 Model

    Reading Corps Research Base – K-3 Model This document provides the evidence-base for the Reading Corps K-3 model. Specifically, research supporting the assessment tools and strategies, reading interventions, and the importance of coaching, are presented within a Response to Intervention (RtI) framework. Response to Intervention: Response to Intervention (RtI) is an instructional framework that systematically utilizes assessment data to make instructional decisions, as well as decisions regarding resource allocation (Burns & Gibbons, 2008; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Fuchs, Fuchs, & Compton, 2012). As such, RtI is placed within the general education context because it requires quality core instruction for all students (Tier 1), and calls for universal screening for all students. The assessment data collected in Tier 1 allows educators to determine whether students require additional support to reach proficiency in a particular academic skill area (i.e., reading and math). The Reading Corps model aligns well with the RtI framework because students who are served by Reading Corps members are essentially receiving Tier 2 support; students are eligible for the program based on screening data. Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of this approach at reducing special education referral rates (Marston, et al., 2003; Bollman, Silberglitt, & Gibbons, 2007; Burns & Gibbons, 2008; VanDerHeyden, Witt, & Gilbertson, 2007), and improving reading outcomes (Callender, 2007; Gettinger & Stoiber, 2007; O’Connor, Harty, & Fulmer, 2005; Vellutino, et al.,
  • Vocabulary Key Learning(S): Topic: Fluency Unit Essential Question(S

    Vocabulary Key Learning(S): Topic: Fluency Unit Essential Question(S

    Topic: Fluency Grade: K Optional Key Learning(s): Unit Essential Question(s): Instructional Tools: Odyssey Fluency is essential for How does fluency impact Reading PALS automaticity of a skill. learning to read? FCRR Internet Resources Concept: Concept: Concept: Concept: Awareness Phonics Vocabulary Comprehension Phonemic I Lesson Essential Questions: Lesson Essential Questions: Lesson Essential Question Lesson Essential Questions: 1. How do you differentiate 1. How do you map letters 1. How does activating prior 1. How do we incorporate story a sound as the same or to sounds fluently? knowledge to make elements to gain a deeper level different fluently? 2. How does analyzing the connections to text affect of understanding text and 2. How do you identify structure of words affect fluency? fluency of reading? beginning, middle and fluency? ending sounds in words fluently? Vocabulary: Vocabulary: Vocabulary: Vocabulary: Segmentation Onset/Rime Closed Syllables Blends Text to Self Synonyms Fiction Main Idea Blending Rhyming Capital Letters Diagraphs Text to World Antonyms Non-Fiction Compare/Contrast Phoneme Identification Lowercase Letters Vowels Text to Text Sequence Categorize Phoneme Isolation Consonants Shared Reading Character Retell Shared Reading Phoneme Deletion Syllables Fry Sight Words Setting Read Aloud Substitution Addition Other Information: Concert: Concept: Concept: Concept: I Writing L Lesson Essential Questions Lesson Essential Questions Lesson Essential Questions Lesson Essential Questions 1. How do you transfer sounds to symbols, words, and express meaning in writing fluently? Vocabulary Vocabulary Vocabulary Vocabulary Fry Sight Words Capital Letters Lowercase Letters Topic: Introduction to Reading Fluency Grade: K Optional Key Learning(s): Unit Essential Question(s): Instructional Tools -Sound Wall Developing fluent skills leads to How do I become a fluent reader? -Alphabet Cards -Sight Words comprehension.
  • Impact of Literacy Intervention on Achievement Outcomes of Children with Developmental Language Disorders: a Systematic Review

    Impact of Literacy Intervention on Achievement Outcomes of Children with Developmental Language Disorders: a Systematic Review

    Impact of Literacy Intervention on Achievement Outcomes of Children With Developmental Language Disorders: A Systematic Review Jaumeiko J. Coleman and Rebecca A. Venediktov National Center for Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Rockville, MD Gary A. Troia Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI Beverly P. Wang National Center for Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Rockville, MD ASHA’s National Center for Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders • July 2013 ABSTRACT The American Speech-Language-Hearing Purpose: In this systematic review, the Association’s National Center for Evidence- authors examined the impact of literacy Based Practice (N-CEP) was charged with intervention on achievement outcomes of developing an evidence-based systematic school-age children with developmental review (EBSR) of studies reporting on the language disorders. impact of written language (i.e., reading and writing) interventions on achievement Method: Databases containing peer- outcomes of school-aged children with reviewed academic studies were searched developmental language disorder (DLD). for randomized and nonrandomized The relatively recent adoption of the controlled trials that reported efficacy and Common Core State Standards by the bulk comparative efficacy findings in English. of the United States and its territories Methodological quality and strength of underscores the importance of this topic evidence were also evaluated. (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2012). The standards were created to Results: Nine reading intervention studies promote quality and consistency in were accepted; no writing intervention education for all students so as to adequately studies were identified that met the inclusion prepare them for college and the workforce.
  • Concerning the Folly of Teaching the Dolch Basic Sight Vocabulary

    Concerning the Folly of Teaching the Dolch Basic Sight Vocabulary

    A Study Concerning the Folly of Teaching the Dolch Basic Sight Vocabulary In which we will prove that it is unnecessary and undesirable to teach any sight-words with whole-word memorization techniques to beginning reading students Using Samuel L. Blumenfeld’s Alpha-Phonics (2005) Program as Our Intensive Phonics Standard of Comparison Copyright © 2010 by Donald L. Potter www.donpotter.net Recommendations Concerning Teaching Sight-Words I suggest that all teachers in America immediately quit teaching the Dolch Basic Sight Vocabulary with whole word memorization for the following reasons: 1. It creates a blockage against seeing words phonetically. Once the sight-word habit is established, it becomes difficult to develop a good phonics reflex for accurate and fluent reading and spelling. 2. It is totally unnecessary since the vast majority of the words will be learned naturally in their spelling-family as the students learn to read and spell with Blumenfeld’s Alpha-Phonics. This is the focus of this study. 3. Student who read by sight-words and context guessing are severely limited when it comes to building vocabulary independently from general reading because they cannot get to the sounds of the words without the teacher telling them the pronunciation of the words. 4. There is no need to waste valuable instructional time to teach 220 Dolch Basic Sight Vocabulary when we could be teaching 3,033 separate words in Blumenfeld’s Alpha-Phonics words in even less time. 5. The reading ability of students taught to read with Blumenfeld’s Alpha-Phonics is significantly higher than students trained in Dolch sight-vocabulary memorization.
  • The Relationship Between Fluency and Comprehension

    The Relationship Between Fluency and Comprehension

    The Relationship between Fluency and Comprehension By Tania Myers Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education July 2015 Graduate Programs in Education Goucher College Table of Contents List of Tables i Abstract ii I. Introduction 1 Statement of Problem 2 Hypothesis 2 Operational Definitions 2 II. Review of the Literature 4 Defining Fluency and Comprehension 5 Relationship between Fluency and Comprehension 8 Boosting Reading Fluency and Comprehension in the Classroom 9 Progress Monitoring Fluency and Comprehension 14 Summary 18 III. Methods 19 Design 19 Participants 19 Instruments 20 Procedure 20 IV. Results 22 V. Discussion 24 Implications of Results 25 Threats to Validity and Reliability 26 Connections to Previous Studies 28 Recommendations for Future Research 29 References 32 List of Tables 1. Means and Standard Deviations of DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency and MAP Reading 22 Scores 2. Pearson Correlation between DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency and MAP Reading 22 Scores During Each Test Interval (Fall, Winter, and Spring) i Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between reading fluency and comprehension and whether a student’s fluency rate impacted his or her ability to comprehend information. The study looked closely at the performance of 23 students enrolled in a second grade class. The measurement tools used were the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, Sixth Edition (DIBELS), Oral Reading Fluency Assessment, and the Measures of Academic Progress Reading Assessment. The study involved the use of data collected during fall, spring, and winter testing intervals from the 2014-2015 school year.
  • Dyslexia Or Ld in Reading: What Is the Difference?

    Dyslexia Or Ld in Reading: What Is the Difference?

    DYSLEXIA OR LD IN READING: WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? Anise Flowers & Donna Black, Pearson Dyslexia or LD in Reading? TCASE 2017 Image by Photographer’s Name (Credit in black type) or Image by Photographer’s Name (Credit in white type) International Dyslexia Association Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurological in origin. It is characterized by Dyslexia or LD in Reading: What difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word is the Difference? recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of Presented by effective classroom instruction. Secondary Anise Flowers, Ph.D. Donna Black, LSSP consequences may include problems in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience TCASE that can impede growth of vocabulary and January 2017 background knowledge. Presentation Title Arial Bold 7 pt 1 2 Dyslexia Identification and Services in Texas Dyslexia Definition (in Texas) Texas Education Code (TEC)§38.003 defines Texas Education Code (TEC)§38.003 definition: dyslexia and mandates testing and the provision of 1. “Dyslexia” means a disorder of constitutional instruction origin manifested by a difficulty in learning to State Board of Education (SBOE) adopts rules and read, write, or spell, despite conventional standards for administering testing and instruction instruction, adequate intelligence, and TEC §7.028(b) relegates responsibility for school sociocultural opportunity. compliance to the local school board 2. “Related disorders” include disorders similar to or 19 (TAC)§74.28 outlines responsibilities of districts related to dyslexia such as developmental auditory and charter schools in the delivery of services to imperceptions, dysphasia, specific developmental students with dyslexia dyslexia, developmental dysgraphia, and The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, §504, establishes developmental spelling disability.