Exploring the Nature of Compensation Strategies in Individuals With Dyslexia

Abstract

Some individuals with developmental dyslexia are able to acquire age-appropriate reading comprehension abilities by the time they reach postsecondary education. This study explored the role that study strategies have with secondary students with dyslexia in achieving age-appropriate reading comprehension skills. The findings of this study indicated that study strategies were not significant predictors of reading comprehension abilities, though cognitive ability was a robust predictor. Furthermore, oral reading fluency was not a significant predictor. These findings further support that as words become more complex, oral reading fluency may not be related to reading comprehension. Practical implications and suggestions for future directions in this area are discussed.

Reviewing Evidence on the Relations Between Oral Reading Fluency and Reading Comprehension for Adolescents

“…Literature reviews on ORF for elementary-age readers (Fuchs et al, 2001;Reschly et al, 2009) and its technical adequacy (Reschly et al, 2009;Wayman et al, 2007) have shown a correlation with RC. Longitudinal studies and qualitative investigations of university and adult readers (e.g., Birch & Chase, 2004;Corkett et al, 1998;Fink, 1998) and some quantitative studies with adolescent readers (e.g., Clemens et al, 2017;Valencia et al, 2010) have indicated varied influences of ORF on RC, and some readers with dyslexia have been able to compensate for weak word-level skills to achieve proficient RC (Gelbar et al, 2018). However, there has not been a synthesis of related quantitative studies focusing on adolescents and, specifically, those with limited reading proficiency.…”

“…ORF as accuracy and rate. In 12 of 23 studies, researchers defined ORF as the number of WCPM, often referred to as oral reading automaticity (WCPM; Brasseur-Hock et al, 2011;Clemens et al, 2019;Denton et al, 2011;Eason et al, 2013;Gelbar et al, 2018;Hock et al, 2009;Kershaw & Schatschneider, 2012;Lesaux & Kieffer, 2010;Ritchey et al, 2015;Savage, 2006;Tighe & Schatschneider, 2014;Tolar et al, 2014). Most of these studies included more than one standardized measure to • GRD participants were low across all reading skills.…”

“…assess ORF with passage reading and, sometimes, also included measures of isolated word reading. For passage reading, researchers used the GORT Fluency Index (Brasseur- Hock et al, 2011;Cutting et al, 2009;Eason et al, 2013;Hock et al, 2009;Paige et al, 2014) and varied curriculum-based measurements (CBM; Clemens et al, 2017Clemens et al, , 2019Denton et al, 2011;Gelbar et al, 2018;Kershaw & Schatschneider, 2012;Lesaux & Kieffer, 2010;Ritchey et al, 2015;Tighe & Schatschneider, 2014;Tilstra et al, 2009;Tolar et al, 2014). The GORT Fluency Index is the combined scores of the rate and accuracy subtests.…”

“…In eight studies, researchers used the Passage Comprehension subtest of the Gray Oral Reading Test (GORT) as one of their standardized assessments of RC (Adlof et al, 2006;Brasseur-Hock et al, 2011;Clemens et al, 2017Clemens et al, , 2019Cutting et al, 2009;Cutting & Scarborough, 2006;Eason et al, 2013;Hock et al, 2009). In many of these same studies, plus a few others, researchers used the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, known to have more inferential questions and a better balance between narrative and expository than other standardized RC assessments (Clemens et al, 2017(Clemens et al, , 2019Cutting & Scarborough, 2006;Gelbar et al, 2018;Lesaux & Kieffer, 2010;Ritchey et al, 2015;Tilstra et al, 2009).…”

A Review of the Self-Regulation Strategy Inventory—Self-Report (SRSI-SR)

“…Finally, another avenue of future work could investigate the psychometric properties of the SRSI-SR when used with non-typically developing students, such as those students with learning disabilities. Only one study has thus far undertaken this task (Gelbar, Bray, Kehle, Madaus, & Makel, 2016), so future research should build from these initial findings.…”