Douglas Fuchs, Devin Kearns, and Laura Magnuson. Vanderbilt University, Boston University, and American . Institutes for . Research. April 11, 2014. This document was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves a.... ID: 618778
DownloadNote - The PPT/PDF document "Addressing the Needs of Students With Pe..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Presentations text content in Addressing the Needs of Students With Persistent Reading Di
Slide1
Addressing the Needs of Students With Persistent Reading Difficulties Through Intensive Intervention
Douglas Fuchs, Devin Kearns, and Laura MagnusonVanderbilt University, Boston University, and American Institutes for ResearchApril 11, 2014
This document was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this document is intended or should be inferred.
Slide2
The intensive intervention framework (5 min.)Overview of Data-Based Individualization (DBI) in reading (10 min.)Critical elements of DBI in reading (25 min.)Important considerations for making DBI work (5 min.)Group discussion (15 min.)
Session Overview
2
Slide3
The Intensive Intervention Framework
3
Slide4
Intensive intervention addresses severe and persistent learning or behavior difficulties. Intensive intervention should be: Driven by data Characterized by increased intensity (e.g., smaller group, expanded time) and individualization of academic instruction and/or behavioral supports
What Is Intensive intervention?
4
Slide5
Secondary intervention program, delivered with greater intensityProgress monitoringInformal diagnostic assessmentAdaptationContinued progress monitoring, with adaptations occurring whenever needed to ensure adequate progress
Five DBI Steps
5
Slide6
A Bird’s Eye View of DBI
6
Slide7
Overview of DBI in Reading: Why Do We Do DBI?
7
Slide8
Why? Many Students With Disabilities Are Struggling in School
8
U.S. elementary-age children with learning disabilities (LD) below 20th percentile on comprehension
64%
High school students with LD years below grade level in reading
3.4 years
Fraction of high school students with LD who drop out
¼
Percentage of students with LD with paid employment, two years postsecondary
46%
Slide9
“Virtually all children and youth with disabilities, including those with very serious learning problems, are helped sufficiently by the core curriculum with co-teaching, modifications to the core instructional program, or other such supports.”
Why? Unfounded and Naïve Beliefs About Teaching Kids with LD
9
Fuchs, Fuchs, & Vaughn, 2014, p. 14
Unfounded and naïve belief
Slide10
Why? Primary and Secondary Prevention Often Are Not Enough
10
Primary prevention
Low-salt diet Stress reduction
Secondary prevention
Intensive intervention
Inexpensive
diuretics
Beta-blockers
ACE inhibitors
Other novel, patient-specific treatments
The Medical Analogy:
High Blood Pressure Treatment
Slide11
A Case Study: Kelsey
11
In fourth grade
Reads at a second-grade level
Participated in a secondary intervention using a research-validated program
Group of six 30 minutes, 4 times a week, for 7 weeksExplicit instruction Led by knowledgeable paraprofessional
Slide12
Kelsey’s Secondary Intervention Progress
12
Progress monitored on a measure of passage reading fluency
Her aim/goal line
(where we want her weekly scores to be)
Her progress
(her actual scores)
Slide13
Kelsey is exactly the type of child who needs intensive intervention.Kelsey received good instruction.Kelsey needs a more intensive instructional program.
Kelsey Is Not Responding to Secondary Prevention
13
Many children in intensive intervention participated in good programs.
Their problems are not anyone’s “fault.”
Some children just need
more
time structure practice clarity teacher attention
different
methods of explanation content
Slide14
14
After Secondary Prevention:
What Do We Do for Kelsey Now?
Slide15
Data-Based Individualization
Improving Skills for Students With Intensive Needs
15
Slide16
Secondary prevention with greater intensityProgress monitoringDiagnostic assessmentAdaptation of the interventionIterations5A. Progress monitoring5B. Analysis5C. Adaptation
Secondary prevention programNot an approach or a loosely structured set of activitiesResearch-validated program (tested by researchers)Clear sequence of lessonsExplicit instruction (I do, we do, you do) approach (Archer & Hughes, 2011)Fidelity of implementationGreater intensity (quantitative changes)Greater frequency, length of sessions, or durationSmaller group sizeLess heterogeneity in the group (students more similar in level)
Secondary Prevention With Greater Intensity
18
Slide19
Kelsey’s Secondary Prevention Program
19
Explicit
Systematic
Research-Based
(Fuchs, Kearns et al., 2012)
Focused on Foundational Skills
Sight words
Sound-symbol correspondence
Decoding
Spelling
Reading level-appropriate texts
Slide20
Kelsey’s Progress After Secondary Prevention
20
Oral reading fluency (accuracy; %)
Oral reading fluency (rate)
MAZE
Slight
improvement in oral reading fluency rate, and accuracy
Reliable and valid measure (evaluated by researchers)Use “Academic Progress Monitoring Tools Chart” available at intensiveintervention.org Easy-to-administer measureTakes little teacher and student timeEasy to scoreMeasure can be given weeklyEnough parallel formsDesigned for regular administration
Choose a Progress Monitoring (PM) Measure
23
Slide24
Determine the correct levelStudent’s instructional level Not student’s grade levelDetermine student’s aim and plot it
Collect Initial Data and Create an Aimline
24
Kelsey is doing second-grade oral reading fluency Using second-grade benchmark (85) or Using second-grade expected rate of improvement (to 72)
Slide25
Collect data weeklyAfter seven weeks (8 data points), evaluate progressIs student tracking the aimline?Yes—stay on targetAbove—increase the goal or stay on targetBelow—diagnose and adapt instruction
Collect Data Through Initial DBI
25
Slide26
Diagnostic Assessment
26
Slide27
Informal Diagnostic Assessment
27
Error analysis of PM data
Classroom assessments and work samples
Standardized assessments (if possible)
Slide28
Review the diagnostic assessmentsCome up with a theory about what might be causing the student’s academic difficultyStart considering adaptations
Using the Assessment Results
28
bunny vu… IDK
knife twin
Spellings include all sounds
Replaces nonwords with real words
Good sight word knowledge
PM errors are mainly for polysyllabic words
spin … IDK count?
Kelsey
tends to guess
and needs strategies to
decode polysyllabic
words.
Slide29
Adaptation
29
Slide30
20 minutes with teacher in small group, rather than 15 minutes5 minutes of one-to-one time with teacher15 minutes of partner practice, rather than whole-group reading activities in general education
Adaptation for Kelsey:Quantitative Changes
30
Slide31
Adaptation for Kelsey:Qualitative Changes
Skip ahead in the scope and sequence to the polysyllabic lessons
Supplement with polysyllabic
strategies …
Slide32
Polysyllabic Strategy Options
32
32
Peeling off
Overt strategy
Lovett, Lacarenza, &
Borden, 2000
Archer, Gleason, & Vachon, 2002
“I peel off (affix) at the beginning (or end) of the word. The root is ____. The word is ____.”
(p. 468)
“First, I will try /
first pronunciation/, then I will try /second pronunciation/, and see which gives me a real word.” (p. 469)
Vowel alert
Covert strategy
Slide33
Polysyllabic Strategy Options
DISSECT Lenz & Hughes, 1990
Discover the contextIsolate the word’s prefixSeparate the word’s suffixSay the word’s stem or base wordExamine the word’s stemCheck with another personTry to find the word in the dictionary
Break the word apartExamine each part Say each partTry the whole thing in context
Mnemonic strategies
Slide34
Polysyllabic Strategy Options
34
Wilson, 2002
Lindamood &
Lindamood, 1998
Syllable marking
Tracking with syllables
Slide35
How to decide:Think about the principles for intensive interventionWhich strategies have small steps?Which strategies have precise language (3Cs language: clear, concise, consistent)?Which strategies lend themselves to modeling real reading behavior?ChoicesPeeling offVowel alertOvert and covert strategies
Polysyllabic Strategy Chosen
35
Slide36
Results of Adaptation
36
Slide37
Iterations
37
Slide38
Check Progress Weekly: Are the Adaptations Still Working?
38
Slide39
What should we do now?Diagnose: What is the source of the problem?Adapt: How can we change the program again to produce greater growth?
After Four Points Below the Line, Diagnose and Adapt Again
39
Slide40
Important Considerations for Making DBI Work
Tips From Our Work in Schools
40
Slide41
Make Sure You Choose a Valid and Reliable PM System
41
Running records
Program-specific mastery measures
X
X
Slide42
The Instructional Platform Is a PROGRAM
42
X
An adequate resource but not an instructional platform: Not systematic and explicit
Slide43
The Instructional Platform Is a PROGRAM
43
X
An adequate website with actual lesson plans, but it is not a program that is tightly and carefully designed
Slide44
The Adaptations Make Sense
44
Balance training
Kearns & Fuchs (2013)
Brain workouts
Working memory treatment
Neurofeedback training
X
To date, few scientific studies suggest these “cognitive” approaches work: Stick to academics
Slide45
Every other week is not enough during DBI.Weekly monitoring is needed to show small changes.
Monitor Progress Enough
45
Slide46
Do not forget to loop them in early in the process.Make sure the entire staff knows about DBI and basically what will happen.Include other service providers, such as speech pathologists, who may have insight and ideas.
Make Sure All Key Individuals Come to DBI Meetings
DBI Training Series http://www.intensiveintervention.org/content/dbi-training-series Webinars http://www.intensiveintervention.org/resources/webinarsRegister now for our April 29th webinar: “So What do I do Now? Strategies for Intensifying Intervention when Standard Approaches Don’t Work”
NCII Resources
48
Slide49
Group Discussion
49
Slide50
Archer, A. L., Gleason, M.,,& Vachon, V. (2002). REWARDS (Reading Excellence: Word Attack & Rate Development Strategies). Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford. Danielson, L., & Rosenquist, C. (2014). Introduction to the TEC special issue on data-based individualization. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46, 6–12.Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Vaughn, S. (2014). What is intensive instruction and why is it important?. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46, 14.Lemons, C. J., Kearns, D. M., & Davidson, K. A. (2014). Data-based individualization in reading: Intensifying interventions for students with significant reading disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46, 20–29. Lenz, B. K., & Hughes, C. A. (1990). A word identification strategy for adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 149–158, 163.Lindamood, P., & Lindamood, P. (l998). The Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing program for reading, spelling, and speech, Austin, TX: PRO-ED, Inc.Lovett, M. W., Lacerenza, L., & Borden, S. L. (2000). Putting struggling readers on the PHAST track: A program to integrate phonological and strategy-based remedial reading instruction and maximize outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 458–476.O’Connor, R. E., Bell, K. M., Harty, K. R., Larkin, L. K., Sackor, S., & Zigmond, N. (2002). Teaching reading to poor readers in the intermediate grades: A comparison of text difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 474–485.O’Connor, R. E., & Bell, K. M. (2004). Teaching students with reading disability to read words. In A. Stone, E. Silliman, B. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 479–496). New York, NY: Guilford Press.O’Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K., & Bell, K. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and child outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440–455.Wilson, B. (2002). The Wilson Reading System. Millbury, MA: Wilson Language Training.
References
50
Slide51
This module was produced under the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service, or enterprise mentioned in this website is intended or should be inferred.
Disclaimer
51
Slide52
National Center on Intensive Intervention1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NWWashington, DC 20007-3835866-577-5787www.intensiveintervention.orgEmail: ncii@air.org
Download this presentation
DownloadNote - The PPT/PDF document "Addressing the Needs of Students With Pe..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Presentations text content in Addressing the Needs of Students With Persistent Reading Di
Addressing the Needs of Students With Persistent Reading Difficulties Through Intensive Intervention
Douglas Fuchs, Devin Kearns, and Laura MagnusonVanderbilt University, Boston University, and American Institutes for ResearchApril 11, 2014
This document was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this document is intended or should be inferred.
Slide2The intensive intervention framework (5 min.)Overview of Data-Based Individualization (DBI) in reading (10 min.)Critical elements of DBI in reading (25 min.)Important considerations for making DBI work (5 min.)Group discussion (15 min.)
Session Overview
2
Slide3The Intensive Intervention Framework
3
Slide4Intensive intervention addresses severe and persistent learning or behavior difficulties. Intensive intervention should be: Driven by data Characterized by increased intensity (e.g., smaller group, expanded time) and individualization of academic instruction and/or behavioral supports
What Is Intensive intervention?
4
Slide5Secondary intervention program, delivered with greater intensityProgress monitoringInformal diagnostic assessmentAdaptationContinued progress monitoring, with adaptations occurring whenever needed to ensure adequate progress
Five DBI Steps
5
Slide6A Bird’s Eye View of DBI
6
Slide7Overview of DBI in Reading: Why Do We Do DBI?
7
Slide8Why? Many Students With Disabilities Are Struggling in School
8
U.S. elementary-age children with learning disabilities (LD) below 20th percentile on comprehension
64%
High school students with LD years below grade level in reading
3.4 years
Fraction of high school students with LD who drop out
¼
Percentage of students with LD with paid employment, two years postsecondary
46%
Slide9“Virtually all children and youth with disabilities, including those with very serious learning problems, are helped sufficiently by the core curriculum with co-teaching, modifications to the core instructional program, or other such supports.”
Why? Unfounded and Naïve Beliefs About Teaching Kids with LD
9
Fuchs, Fuchs, & Vaughn, 2014, p. 14
Unfounded and naïve belief
Slide10Why? Primary and Secondary Prevention Often Are Not Enough
10
Primary prevention
Low-salt diet Stress reduction
Secondary prevention
Intensive intervention
Inexpensive
diuretics
Beta-blockers
ACE inhibitors
Other novel, patient-specific treatments
The Medical Analogy:
High Blood Pressure Treatment
Slide11A Case Study: Kelsey
11
In fourth grade
Reads at a second-grade level
Participated in a secondary intervention using a research-validated program
Group of six 30 minutes, 4 times a week, for 7 weeksExplicit instruction Led by knowledgeable paraprofessional
Slide12Kelsey’s Secondary Intervention Progress
12
Progress monitored on a measure of passage reading fluency
Her aim/goal line
(where we want her weekly scores to be)
Her progress
(her actual scores)
Slide13Kelsey is exactly the type of child who needs intensive intervention.Kelsey received good instruction.Kelsey needs a more intensive instructional program.
Kelsey Is Not Responding to Secondary Prevention
13
Many children in intensive intervention participated in good programs.
Their problems are not anyone’s “fault.”
Some children just need
more
time structure practice clarity teacher attention
different
methods of explanation content
Slide1414
After Secondary Prevention:
What Do We Do for Kelsey Now?
Slide15Data-Based Individualization
Improving Skills for Students With Intensive Needs
15
Slide16Secondary prevention with greater intensityProgress monitoringDiagnostic assessmentAdaptation of the interventionIterations5A. Progress monitoring5B. Analysis5C. Adaptation
Steps of DBI in Reading
16
Danielson & Rosenquist, 2014; Lemons, Kearns, & Davidson, 2014
1
x
2
3
+
4
5
Slide17Secondary Prevention With Greater Intensity
17
Slide18Secondary prevention programNot an approach or a loosely structured set of activitiesResearch-validated program (tested by researchers)Clear sequence of lessonsExplicit instruction (I do, we do, you do) approach (Archer & Hughes, 2011)Fidelity of implementationGreater intensity (quantitative changes)Greater frequency, length of sessions, or durationSmaller group sizeLess heterogeneity in the group (students more similar in level)
Secondary Prevention With Greater Intensity
18
Slide19Kelsey’s Secondary Prevention Program
19
Explicit
Systematic
Research-Based
(Fuchs, Kearns et al., 2012)
Focused on Foundational Skills
Sight words
Sound-symbol correspondence
Decoding
Spelling
Reading level-appropriate texts
Slide20Kelsey’s Progress After Secondary Prevention
20
Oral reading fluency (accuracy; %)
Oral reading fluency (rate)
MAZE
Slight
improvement in oral reading fluency rate, and accuracy
Slide21Intensifying Secondary Prevention: Quantitative Changes
21
4 days
5 days
Time
4 students
3 students
Group
Slide22Progress Monitoring
22
Slide23Reliable and valid measure (evaluated by researchers)Use “Academic Progress Monitoring Tools Chart” available at intensiveintervention.org Easy-to-administer measureTakes little teacher and student timeEasy to scoreMeasure can be given weeklyEnough parallel formsDesigned for regular administration
Choose a Progress Monitoring (PM) Measure
23
Slide24Determine the correct levelStudent’s instructional level Not student’s grade levelDetermine student’s aim and plot it
Collect Initial Data and Create an Aimline
24
Kelsey is doing second-grade oral reading fluency Using second-grade benchmark (85) or Using second-grade expected rate of improvement (to 72)
Slide25Collect data weeklyAfter seven weeks (8 data points), evaluate progressIs student tracking the aimline?Yes—stay on targetAbove—increase the goal or stay on targetBelow—diagnose and adapt instruction
Collect Data Through Initial DBI
25
Slide26Diagnostic Assessment
26
Slide27Informal Diagnostic Assessment
27
Error analysis of PM data
Classroom assessments and work samples
Standardized assessments (if possible)
Slide28Review the diagnostic assessmentsCome up with a theory about what might be causing the student’s academic difficultyStart considering adaptations
Using the Assessment Results
28
bunny vu… IDK
knife twin
Spellings include all sounds
Replaces nonwords with real words
Good sight word knowledge
PM errors are mainly for polysyllabic words
spin … IDK count?
Kelsey
tends to guess
and needs strategies to
decode polysyllabic
words.
Slide29Adaptation
29
Slide3020 minutes with teacher in small group, rather than 15 minutes5 minutes of one-to-one time with teacher15 minutes of partner practice, rather than whole-group reading activities in general education
Adaptation for Kelsey:Quantitative Changes
30
Slide31Adaptation for Kelsey:Qualitative Changes
Skip ahead in the scope and sequence to the polysyllabic lessons
Supplement with polysyllabic
strategies …
Slide32Polysyllabic Strategy Options
32
32
Peeling off
Overt strategy
Lovett, Lacarenza, &
Borden, 2000
Archer, Gleason, & Vachon, 2002
“I peel off (affix) at the beginning (or end) of the word. The root is ____. The word is ____.”
(p. 468)
“First, I will try /
first pronunciation/, then I will try /second pronunciation/, and see which gives me a real word.” (p. 469)
Vowel alert
Covert strategy
Slide33Polysyllabic Strategy Options
DISSECT Lenz & Hughes, 1990
Discover the contextIsolate the word’s prefixSeparate the word’s suffixSay the word’s stem or base wordExamine the word’s stemCheck with another personTry to find the word in the dictionary
BESTO’Connor et al., 2002; O’Connor, Fulmer, Harty, & Bell, 2005; O’Connor & Bell, 2004
Break the word apartExamine each part Say each partTry the whole thing in context
Mnemonic strategies
Slide34Polysyllabic Strategy Options
34
Wilson, 2002
Lindamood &
Lindamood, 1998
Syllable marking
Tracking with syllables
Slide35How to decide:Think about the principles for intensive interventionWhich strategies have small steps?Which strategies have precise language (3Cs language: clear, concise, consistent)?Which strategies lend themselves to modeling real reading behavior?ChoicesPeeling offVowel alertOvert and covert strategies
Polysyllabic Strategy Chosen
35
Slide36Results of Adaptation
36
Slide37Iterations
37
Slide38Check Progress Weekly: Are the Adaptations Still Working?
38
Slide39What should we do now?Diagnose: What is the source of the problem?Adapt: How can we change the program again to produce greater growth?
After Four Points Below the Line, Diagnose and Adapt Again
39
Slide40Important Considerations for Making DBI Work
Tips From Our Work in Schools
40
Slide41Make Sure You Choose a Valid and Reliable PM System
41
Running records
Program-specific mastery measures
X
X
Slide42The Instructional Platform Is a PROGRAM
42
X
An adequate resource but not an instructional platform: Not systematic and explicit
Slide43The Instructional Platform Is a PROGRAM
43
X
An adequate website with actual lesson plans, but it is not a program that is tightly and carefully designed
Slide44The Adaptations Make Sense
44
Balance training
Kearns & Fuchs (2013)
Brain workouts
Working memory treatment
Neurofeedback training
X
To date, few scientific studies suggest these “cognitive” approaches work: Stick to academics
Slide45Every other week is not enough during DBI.Weekly monitoring is needed to show small changes.
Monitor Progress Enough
45
Slide46Do not forget to loop them in early in the process.Make sure the entire staff knows about DBI and basically what will happen.Include other service providers, such as speech pathologists, who may have insight and ideas.
Make Sure All Key Individuals Come to DBI Meetings
46
Slide47Tools ChartsAcademic Intervention: http://www.intensiveintervention.org/chart/instructional-intervention-tools Progress Monitoring: http://www.intensiveintervention.org/chart/progress-monitoring
NCII Resources
47
Slide48DBI Training Series http://www.intensiveintervention.org/content/dbi-training-series Webinars http://www.intensiveintervention.org/resources/webinarsRegister now for our April 29th webinar: “So What do I do Now? Strategies for Intensifying Intervention when Standard Approaches Don’t Work”
NCII Resources
48
Slide49Group Discussion
49
Slide50Archer, A. L., Gleason, M.,,& Vachon, V. (2002). REWARDS (Reading Excellence: Word Attack & Rate Development Strategies). Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford. Danielson, L., & Rosenquist, C. (2014). Introduction to the TEC special issue on data-based individualization. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46, 6–12.Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Vaughn, S. (2014). What is intensive instruction and why is it important?. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46, 14.Lemons, C. J., Kearns, D. M., & Davidson, K. A. (2014). Data-based individualization in reading: Intensifying interventions for students with significant reading disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46, 20–29. Lenz, B. K., & Hughes, C. A. (1990). A word identification strategy for adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 149–158, 163.Lindamood, P., & Lindamood, P. (l998). The Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing program for reading, spelling, and speech, Austin, TX: PRO-ED, Inc.Lovett, M. W., Lacerenza, L., & Borden, S. L. (2000). Putting struggling readers on the PHAST track: A program to integrate phonological and strategy-based remedial reading instruction and maximize outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 458–476.O’Connor, R. E., Bell, K. M., Harty, K. R., Larkin, L. K., Sackor, S., & Zigmond, N. (2002). Teaching reading to poor readers in the intermediate grades: A comparison of text difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 474–485.O’Connor, R. E., & Bell, K. M. (2004). Teaching students with reading disability to read words. In A. Stone, E. Silliman, B. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 479–496). New York, NY: Guilford Press.O’Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K., & Bell, K. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and child outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440–455.Wilson, B. (2002). The Wilson Reading System. Millbury, MA: Wilson Language Training.
References
50
Slide51This module was produced under the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service, or enterprise mentioned in this website is intended or should be inferred.
Disclaimer
51
Slide52National Center on Intensive Intervention1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NWWashington, DC 20007-3835866-577-5787www.intensiveintervention.orgEmail: ncii@air.org
52