Reading Instruction for Students With Learning Disabilities

Abstract

Observation studies have been used for decades to examine behaviors of interest and uncover imbedded problems in natural settings across a myriad of disciplines ranging from child socialization (e.g., Lytton, 1971) to nursing (e.g., Atwal & Caldwell, 2005). In special education, observation studies have generated evidence regarding the quality of and extent to which empirically validated practices, legislation, and reform align with prevailing practice. Legislative change and policy reform have purported to influence the quality of education for students with disabilities (SWDs) since the establishment of specialized education through the enactment of Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 and the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA; 2004). Over time, increasing numbers of SWDs were provided access to appropriate educational support, including greater access to the general education classroom. The U.S. Department of Education reported that only half of SWDs spent 80% or more of their day in general education classrooms in 2002 (U.

The impact of books on social inclusion and development and well‐being among children and young people with severe and profound learning disabilities: Recognising the unrecognised cohort

“…The second is that effective practices to enable pleasurable reading are universal to all with no need to consider a special pedagogy specific to learning disabilities. Where this is true, it is only in the case of pleasurable reading and engagement with books since research into the impact of impairment‐specific approaches to reading instruction is very prevalent (McKenna, Shin, & Ciullo, ; Walker & Stevens, ). Most studies focus on functional skills (such as word recognition and phonic decoding) and how programmes of reading instruction can be designed to support skill acquisition among people with specific impairments such as Down syndrome (Lemons et al, ; Morgan, Moni, & Jobling, ) and autism (Doyle & Debelak, ).…”

Reading Instruction for Students With Learning Disabilities in Grades 4 and 5: An Observation Study

“…Systematic reviews of observation studies for students with LD have revealed important findings related to typical practice as well as gaps in the literature that justify additional research (McKenna, Shin, & Ciullo, 2015;E. A. Swanson, 2008;Walker & Stevens, 2017). Walker and Stevens (2017) found that researchers generally conduct observation studies to examine instructional quality and the implementation of education initiatives.…”

“…A. Swanson, 2008;Walker & Stevens, 2017). Walker and Stevens (2017) found that researchers generally conduct observation studies to examine instructional quality and the implementation of education initiatives. Each synthesis (McKenna et al, 2016;E.…”

“…Each synthesis (McKenna et al, 2016;E. A. Swanson, 2008;Walker & Stevens, 2017) concluded that research-topractice gaps persist and that targeted professional development could benefit teachers. The authors of the aforementioned syntheses also recommended new observation research to explore whether or not teachers implement evidence-based practices.…”

“…During focus group discussions, teachers expressed barriers to changing instruction, noting a shortage of professional development trainings that meet their needs. The dearth of strategy instruction and need for targeted professional development (Walker & Stevens, 2017) suggest that professional development providers should offer training of reading comprehension strategies with ongoing support (Dole, 2003).…”