DOCSLIB.ORG

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

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
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. criteria for this systematic review. Findings The standards stem from the domains of were grouped by reading intervention mathematics and English language arts and category (e.g., synthetic phonics) and literacy in history/social studies, science, outcome (e.g., spelling). Efficacy was noted and technical subjects. A primary for all reading intervention categories for a consideration in the development of the variety of outcomes, with synthetic phonics English language arts standards was the efficacy findings being the most prevalent, need to prepare students to (a) independently followed by analytic phonics and the whole- and proficiently use listening and speaking word method. Comparative efficacy findings to obtain, assess, and present increasingly were limited and mixed. Strength of complex information evidence ratings were strongest for synthetic (www.corestandards.org); (b) read and phonics, followed by analytic phonics. comprehend texts that increase in Conclusions: Consistent with previous complexity; and (c) write logical arguments, research, synthetic phonics interventions informational/explanatory texts, and resulted in improvements across narratives as students progress through achievement outcome categories. In future school (Common Core State Standards studies, researchers should provide both Initiative, 2012). School-aged children with statistical and clinical significance data to difficulty in any of these language domains facilitate comprehensive interpretation of are at risk for poor performance in many study findings via meta-analysis. Also, the areas of life—school, the workforce, and efficacy and comparative efficacy of writing independent functioning in aspects of intervention should be researched in this everyday living, such as engaging in self- population. care activities and managing finances (e.g., Conti-Ramsden & Durkin, 2008, 2012; Keywords: school age, developmental Graham & Hebert, 2010; Johnson, language disorder, literacy intervention, Beitchman, & Brownlie, 2010; Maughan, achievement outcomes 1995). Given the complexity surrounding the acquisition of written language skills and ASHA’s National Center for Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders • July 2013 1 the accompanying profound importance of conclusion is that these children struggle these skills, the impact of various with words at the phoneme level (van interventions to habilitate DLD must be Kleeck, Gillam, & Hoffman, 2006). Given examined. that conclusion, phonics instruction—which emphasizes the acquisition of letter–sound At the inception of this EBSR, a search correspondence as well as how those letter- of the current literature base was conducted sound combinations are used in spelling and for systematic research syntheses and reading (NICHD, 2000)—appears to be a guidelines that focus on achievement natural selection for improving reading, outcomes associated with written language especially for struggling readers. Within the interventions that have been used with realm of phonics, practitioners can select school-age participants who have DLD. between several types of phonics methods. Several systematic reviews, meta-analyses, For example, synthetic phonics, which and guidelines have been published on the focuses on word decoding at the phonemic efficacy of certain therapy protocols level, and analytic phonics, which addresses designed to address deficits in reading reading at the onset–rime level, may be and/or writing (see, e.g., Duff & Clarke, selected on the basis of a clinician’s beliefs 2010; Gersten et al., 2008; Graham & Perin, about the client’s method as well as current 2007; National Institute of Child Health and skill level. As an alternative, some Human Development [NICHD], 2000; U.S. researches have suggested using a whole- Department of Education, 2010; Wanzek, word method. Although children with Wexler, Vaughn, & Ciullo, 2010). Reading language-based disorders who have reading interventions tended to be based on phonics difficulty may present with phonological and/or whole-word methods, whereas and orthographical processing impairments, writing interventions typically addressed the the former tends to be the core deficit, and, development of skills associated with as such, some researchers have suggested improving the writing process and/or that the relatively unimpaired route (i.e., use product. of a whole-word method) should be used for A variety of reading interventions have reading instruction (Foorman, Breier, & been implemented across disorder Fletcher, 2003). In fact, rapid word categories; many of these interventions are recognition is thought to be a function of based on different theories of reading skilled readers’ ability to recognize a whole development progression (see, e.g., Chall, word as quickly as they can name a single 1983) and the reading process (see, e.g., letter (Ehri & Snowling, 2004). It has been Adams, 1990). These theories have led to surmised that because whole words the implementation of phonics, the whole- correspond more consistently with spoken word method, or a hybrid of the two, all of words, they are easier to access than single which form the basis for the bulk of reading letters or entire sentences (Ehri & Snowling, interventions previously researched. 2004). Findings from a systematic review on Phonological processing deficits—such as the impact of phonics in teaching reading impaired phonological awareness, and spelling revealed a positive effect of phonological memory, or phonological systematic synthetic or analytic phonics learning; nonword repetition; and rapid instruction on reading accuracy when automatic naming—are thought to be the compared with a whole-language or whole- primary causes of specific reading disability word method (Torgerson, Brooks, & Hall, (Lyon, 1995; Lyon, Shaywitz, & Shaywitz, 2006). Nonstatistically significant findings 2003). As such, a logical and substantiated ASHA’s National Center for Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders • July 2013 2 corresponding with negligible effect sizes better understand the effect of written (in favor of systematic phonics instruction) language interventions on the academic were noted for all other outcomes (e.g., achievement of school-aged children with reading comprehension, spelling). No DLD and to determine whether particular significant differences were noted between written language interventions may be more the outcomes of synthetic phonics or less advantageous for children with DLD. instruction versus analytic phonics Prior to initiating this EBSR, we considered instruction. the following two issues pertaining to DLD that affect the characterization of the A substantial amount of writing participant population for this EBSR: intervention efficacy research has been completed on other populations of school- 1. Several definitional concerns exist that aged children—in particular, children with complicate attempts to identify, from learning disabilities, a population that study to study, those participants who includes children with language-based might fall into the DLD category. learning difficulties. For example, 2. These definitional issues result in considerable improvements in writing different implications for researchers, achievement have been noted across studies who focus on etiology and disorder of children with learning disabilities (LD). classification, and clinicians, who Emphasis on handwriting and writing concentrate on language intervention mechanics (e.g., spelling, capitalization, and needs in order to achieve targeted
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Orton-Gillingham Or Multisensory Structured Language Approaches
    JUST THE FACTS... Information provided by The International Dyslexia Association® ORTON-GILLINGHAM-BASED AND/OR MULTISENSORY STRUCTURED LANGUAGE APPROACHES The principles of instruction and content of a Syntax: Syntax is the set of principles that dictate the multisensory structured language program are essential sequence and function of words in a sentence in order for effective teaching methodologies. The International to convey meaning. This includes grammar, sentence Dyslexia Association (IDA) actively promotes effective variation, and the mechanics of language. teaching approaches and related clinical educational Semantics: Semantics is that aspect of language intervention strategies for dyslexics. concerned with meaning. The curriculum (from the beginning) must include instruction in the CONTENT: What Is Taught comprehension of written language. Phonology and Phonological Awareness: Phonology is the study of sounds and how they work within their environment. A phoneme is the smallest unit of sound PRINCIPLES OF INSTRUCTION: How It Is Taught in a given language that can be recognized as being Simultaneous, Multisensory (VAKT): Teaching is distinct from other sounds in the language. done using all learning pathways in the brain Phonological awareness is the understanding of the (visual/auditory, kinesthetic-tactile) simultaneously in internal linguistic structure of words. An important order to enhance memory and learning. aspect of phonological awareness is phonemic awareness or the ability to segment words into their Systematic and Cumulative: Multisensory language component sounds. instruction requires that the organization of material follows the logical order of the language. The Sound-Symbol Association: This is the knowledge of sequence must begin with the easiest and most basic the various sounds in the English language and their elements and progress methodically to more difficult correspondence to the letters and combinations of material.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.,
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • A Dissertation Entitled the Effects of an Orton-Gillingham-Based
    A Dissertation entitled The Effects of an Orton-Gillingham-based Reading Intervention on Students with Emotional/Behavior Disorders by James Breckinridge Davis, M.Ed. Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Special Education. Richard Welsch, Ph.D., Committee Chair Laurie Dinnebeil, Ph.D., Committee Member Edward Cancio, Ph.D., Committee Member Lynne Hamer, Ph.D., Committee Member Dr. Patricia R. Komuniecki, Ph.D., Dean College of Graduate Studies The University of Toledo December 2011 Copyright. 2011, James Breckinridge Davis This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author. An Abstract of The Effects of an Orton-Gillingham-based Reading Intervention on Students with Emotional/Behavior Disorders by James Breckinridge Davis, M.Ed. Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Special Education. The University of Toledo December 2011 This study was performed with 4 male students enrolled in a specialized public school for students with emotional/behavior disorders (E/BD). All of the students participated in a 16-week, one-to-one, multisensory reading intervention. The study was a single subject, multiple baseline design. The independent variable was an Orton- Gillingham-based reading intervention for 45 minute sessions. The dependent variable was the students‘ performance on daily probes of words read correctly and the use of pre- and post-test measures on the Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). The intervention consisted of 6 different parts: (a) visual, (b) auditory, (c) blending, (d) introduction of a new skill, (e) oral reading, and (f) 10-point probe.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel I
    Developing Early Literacy REPORT OF THE NATIONAL EARLY LITERACY PANEL A Scientific Synthesis of Early Literacy Development and Implications for Intervention Developing Early Literacy REPORT OF THE NATIONAL EARLY LITERACY PANEL A Scientific Synthesis of Early Literacy Development and Implications for Intervention 2008 This publication was developed by the National Center for Family Literacy under a grant funded by Inter-agency agreement IAD-01-1701 and IAD-02-1790 between the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institute for Literacy. It was peer reviewed and copy edited under a contract with RAND Corporation and designed under a contract with Graves Fowler Creative. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the policies of the National Institute for Literacy. No official endorsement by the National Institute for Literacy of any product, commodity, or enterprise in this publication is intended or should be inferred. The National Institute for Literacy, an agency in the Federal government, is authorized to help strengthen literacy across the lifespan. The Institute provides national leadership on literacy issues, including the improvement of reading instruction for children, youth, and adults by dissemination of information on scientifically based research and the application of those findings to instructional practice. Sandra Baxter, Director Lynn Reddy, Deputy Director The Partnership for Reading, a project administered by the National Institute for Literacy, is a collaborative effort of the National Institute for Literacy, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the U.S. Department of Education, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to make scientifically based reading research available to educators, parents, policy makers, and others with an interest in helping all people learn to read well.
    [Show full text]
  • Effective Literacy Instruction for Students with Disabilities
    Effective Literacy Instruction for Students with Disabilities Nari Carter, PhD Instructional Designer Effective Literacy Instruction for Students with Disabilities | 1 Background Before the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) was enacted in 1975, millions of children and adolescents with disabilities were receiving inappropriate education or were completely excluded from public schools. Legislators passed EAHCA to end discriminatory practices and to ensure students with disabilities were afforded public education. Central to the EACHA was the principle of free and appropriate public education (FAPE) for students with disabilities. This act was later renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 2004. Appropriate education has been defined in case law as instruction that enables students to benefit academically. Specifically, courts have ruled that appropriate instruction for students with disabilities is individualized instruction that permits students to achieve educational goals. To meet the instructional needs of students with disabilities, individualized education programs (IEPs) are crafted for each qualifying student. Although all students with disabilities are unique and students’ IEPs address their specific instructional needs, most students with mild to moderate disabilities experience significant difficulty learning to read. In fact, more than 60 percent of students with specific learning disabilities struggle learning to read (Strickland, Boon, & Spencer, 2013). Consequently, reading achievement
    [Show full text]
  • Learning Disabilities-United States
    LEARNING The Learning Disabilit Controversy and Composition Studies LEARNING RE-AILED LEARNING RE-AILED The Learning Disability Controversy and Composition Studies Patricia A. Dunn Utica College of Syracuse University Boynton/Cook Publishers HEINEMANN Portsmouth, NH Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc. A subsidiary of Reed Elsevier Inc. 361 Hanover Street Portsmouth, NH 03801-3912 Offices and agents throughout the world © 1995 by Patricia A. Dunn. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer, who may quote brief passages in a review. Every effort has been made to contact the copyright holders and students for permission to reprint borrowed material. We regret any oversights that may have occurred and would be happy to rectify them in future printings of this work. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dunn, Patricia A. Learning re-abled : the learning disability controversy and composition studies / Patricia A. Dunn. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-86709-360-9 (alk. paper) 1. Learning disabled-Education (Higher)-United States. 2. Learning disabilities-United States. 3. Dyslexics-Education teaching-United States. I. Title. LC4818.5.D85 1995 371.91-dc20 95-19316 CIP Editor: Peter R. Stillman Production Editor: Renee M. Nicholls Cover Designer: T. Watson Bogaard Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper. 99
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Implementing the Orton-Gillingham Approach to Reading
    The Effect of Implementing the Orton-Gillingham Approach to Reading on the Decoding Abilities of Struggling Eighth and Tenth Grade Readers by Caroline E. Taylor Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education May 2019 Goucher College Graduate Programs in Education Table of Contents List of Tables i Abstract ii I. Introduction 1 Statement of the Problem 3 Statement of Research Hypothesis 3 Operational Definitions 3 II. Literature Review 5 Dyslexia 5 Multi-Sensory Reading Programs 8 Current Student Performance in Reading and Writing 11 Addressing Reading Disabilities in High School 11 III. Methods 14 Design 14 Participants 14 Instrument 15 Procedure 16 IV. Results 19 V. Discussion 22 References 27 Appendix A 29 List of Tables 1. Hypotheses for testing the sample gains from pre-to-post. 19 2. Descriptive statistics for mean gains. 20 3. t-Test for significance of the sample mean gains. 20 4. Cohen’s Delta effect size for sample mean gains. 20 i Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of the Orton-Gillingham approach to reading on eighth and tenth grade decoding abilities. This was a two-group quasi-experimental study that used students who were not randomly selected. Each class contained three students. The study used the results of the Woodcock Johnson Test of Achievement IV: Letter-Word Identification subtest measurement tool. Results of the statistical analysis indicated that the null hypothesis that intervention would have no effect on the students’ reading levels could not be rejected at the customary level of statistical significance.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductions Supplied by EDRS Are the Best That Can Be Made from the Original Document
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 468 018 EC 309 152 TITLE Mississippi Dyslexia Handbook: Guidelines and Procedures Concerning Dyslexia and Related Disorders. Revised. INSTITUTION Mississippi State Dept. of Education, Jackson. SPONS AGENCY Department of Education, Washington, DC. PUB DATE 2002-00-00 NOTE 90p.; Revised by the Office of Reading, Early Childhood & Language Arts. CONTRACT ES276A000024 AVAILABLE FROM Office of Reading, Early Childhood & Language Arts, Mississippi State Department of Education, 359 North West Street, P.O. Box 771, Jackson, MS 39205-0771. Tel: 601 -359- 3778; Web site: http://www.mde.k12.ms.us/ACAD/ID/Curriculum/ LAER/index.html. PUB TYPE Guides Non-Classroom (055) Tests/Questionnaires (160) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC04 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Accommodations (Disabilities); *Classroom Techniques; Disability Identification; *Dyslexia; Elementary Secondary Education; Inclusive Schools; Intervention; *Multisensory Learning; *Prereferral Intervention; Reading Strategies; State Regulation; Student Characteristics; Study Skills; Symptoms (Individual Disorders); Writing Strategies IDENTIFIERS *Mississippi ABSTRACT This handbook of procedures related to dyslexia is designed to provide guidelines for Mississippi school districts, teachers, and parents in the identification and instruction of students with dyslexia, to assist regular educators in gaining current information concerning dyslexia, accommodations and modifications, and to provide information on instructional programs designed to meet the unique needs of students
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of a Multi-Sensory Reading Program on Students with Disabilities
    Georgia College Knowledge Box Department of Professional Learning and Specialist in Education Degree (Ed.S.) Theses Innovation Spring 4-3-2017 The Effects of a Multi-Sensory Reading Program on Students with Disabilities Lisa P. Myers [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://kb.gcsu.edu/eds Part of the Special Education and Teaching Commons Recommended Citation Myers, Lisa P., "The Effects of a Multi-Sensory Reading Program on Students with Disabilities" (2017). Specialist in Education Degree (Ed.S.) Theses. 12. https://kb.gcsu.edu/eds/12 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Professional Learning and Innovation at Knowledge Box. It has been accepted for inclusion in Specialist in Education Degree (Ed.S.) Theses by an authorized administrator of Knowledge Box. Running head: THE EFFECTS OF A MULTI-SENSORY READING PROGRAM The Effects of a Multi-Sensory Reading Program on Students with Disabilities Lisa Myers Georgia College THE EFFECTS OF A MULTI-SENSORY READING PROGRAM 2 Children with varying exceptionalities are most likely paired with having a reading disability. According to Weiser (2012), “Approximately, 80% to 85% of students with learning disabilities have been described as having reading disabilities. (p. 161). This profoundly affects students in all areas of their academic life since every other subject is, at its most basic level, dependent on a student’s ability to read, comprehend, and act on the information they acquire in a course. Not being able to read means the student is defeated before attempting the task. An example of this was noted in 2013 with a report from the National Assessment of Educational press that revealed 69% of fourth graders and 60% of eighth graders with disabilities scored below the basic level on the expectations on the reading test whereas only 27% of fourth graders and 18% of eighth graders without disabilities scored below basic (Solis, Miciak, Vaughn, & Fletcher, 2014).
    [Show full text]