No abstract

This article synthesizes previous observation studies conducted during reading with students with learning disabilities (LD) and emotional/behavioral disorders (EBD). A systematic search of all research conducted between 1975 and 2000 yielded a total of 16 studies (11 independent samples) that met all preestablished criteria. These studies yielded several findings: (a) There was substantial time allocated for reading instruction, though the time varied based on whether students were in special education or general education or both; (b) students were provided more individual and group instruction in special education; (c) the quality of reading instruction was low, overall, with excessive time allocated to waiting and limited time allocated to actual reading of text; and (d) independent seatwork and worksheets consumed large amounts of time allocated for reading. Only a small percentage of students with EBD were participants in the studies. The findings should be interpreted as generalizable primarily for students with learning disabilities. Overall concern about the quality of reading instruction was discussed, as well as future implications for professional development for teachers and instruction for students.

Drawing upon theory-driven vocabulary instruction and the vocabulary-reading comprehension connection, this study compared the effectiveness of three interactive vocabulary strategies derived from the knowledge hypothesis with definition instruction derived from the access and instrumental hypotheses. Subjects were 61 learning disabled junior-high students. Using content-area texts, students participated in one of three interactive strategies — semantic mapping (SM), semantic feature analysis (SFA), and semantic / syntactic feature analysis (SSFA) — or in definition instruction (DI). Learning was measured both at short and long term by vocabulary and comprehension multiple-choice items and written recalls. Results from the multiple-choice items suggested that students participating in the interactive strategies demonstrated greater comprehension and vocabulary learning than students receiving definition instruction. Results of the written recalls indicated qualitatively and quantitatively greater recalls at long term for students in the SFA and SSFA conditions compared with the DI condition. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

A major conclusion from the last decade of research on children with poor reading performance is that early, systematic instruction in phonological awareness and letter-sound correspondences improves early reading and spelling skills and results in a reduction of the number of students who are reading below grade level. To teach reading to at-risk students and students with learning disabilities, teachers need to have positive perceptions regarding the role of systematic, explicit instruction, as well as knowledge of English language structure. The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions and knowledge of general educators at two professional levels toward early literacy instruction for students at risk for reading failure. Unfortunately, our findings are similar to those obtained by Moats in 1994: Many general education teachers, at both preservice and inservice levels, are not prepared adequately for this challenging task.