Advertisement

New Directions in Preservice and Inservice Professional Development for Teaching Students with and Without Specific Learning Disabilities in Middle Childhood and Early Adolescence

  • Virginia W. BerningerEmail author
  • R. Malatesha Joshi
Chapter
Part of the Literacy Studies book series (LITS, volume 13)

Abstract

This chapter proposed evidence-based approaches to professional development of educators with focus on teaching writing as well as reading during middle childhood and adolescence to students with and without specific learning disabilities (SLD). Key features for both preservice and inservice professional development are considered. One key feature is grounding professional development in conceptual frameworks for all language systems (Language by Ear, Language by Mouth, Language by Eye, and Language by Hand), a multi-component language learning system, and domains of development (cognitive/memory, language, sensori-motor, attention/executive functions, and social emotional). An example of inservice professional development for developing morphological awareness as well as phonological awareness for teaching word spelling and reading for English, a morphophonemic orthography, is provided.

Keywords

Evidence-based professional development for literacy instruction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Preparation of this chapter was supported by HD P50HD071764 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

References

  1. Aaron, P. G., & Joshi, R. M. (2006). Written language is as natural as spoken language. A biolinguistic perspective. Reading Psychology, 27, 263–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aaron, P. G., Joshi, R. M., Gooden, R., & Bentum, K. (2008). Diagnosis and treatment of reading disabilities based on the component model of reading. An alternative to the discrepancy model of LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 67–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abbott, S., & Berninger, V. (1999). It’s never too late to remediate: A developmental approach to teaching word recognition. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 223–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Apel, K., Wolter, J., & Masterson, J. (2006). Effects of phonotactic and orthotactic probabilities during fast mapping on 5-year-olds’ learning to spell. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arfé, B., Dockrell, J., & Berninger, V. (Eds.) (2015). Writing development in children with hearing loss, dyslexia, or oral language problems: Implications for assessment and instruction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Also available as an ebook.Google Scholar
  6. Berninger, V. (1998). Process assessment of the learner (PAL). Guides for intervention. Reading and writing. Also intervention kit with handwriting lessons and talking letters. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  7. Berninger, V. (2000). Dyslexia an invisible, treatable disorder: The story of Einstein’s Ninja Turtles. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23, 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berninger, V. (2008). Defining and differentiating dyslexia, dysgraphia, and language learning disability within a working memory model. In E. Silliman & M. Mody (Eds.), Language impairment and reading disability-interactions among brain, behavior, and experience (pp. 103–134). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  9. Berninger, V. W. (2015). Interdisciplinary frameworks for schools: Best professional practices for serving the needs of all students. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14437-002. Companion Websites with Readings and Resources and Advisory Panel. All royalties go to Division 16 to support these websites and develop future editions.
  10. Berninger, V., & Abbott, S. (2003). PAL research-supported reading and writing lessons. Instructional manual and reproducibles. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt/PsyCorp.Google Scholar
  11. Berninger, V., & Fayol, M. (2008). Why spelling is important and how to teach it effectively. Encyclopedia of language and literacy development (pp. 1–13). London, UK: Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network. Retrieved from: http://www.literacyencyclopedia.ca/pdfs/topic.php?topId=234.Google Scholar
  12. Berninger, V., Nagy, W., Carlisle, J., Thomson, J., Hoffer, D., Abbott, S., et al. (2003). Effective treatment for dyslexics in grades 4 to 6. In B. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 382–417). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  13. Berninger, V., Raskind, W., Richards, T., Abbott, R., & Stock, P. (2008). A multidisciplinary approach to understanding developmental dyslexia within working memory architecture: Genotypes, phenotypes, brain, and instruction. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33, 707–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Berninger, V., & Richards, T. (2002). Brain literacy for educators and psychologists. New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
  15. Berninger, V., & Richards, T. (2010). Inter-relationships among behavioral markers, genes, brain, and treatment in dyslexia and dysgraphia. Future Neurology, 5, 597–617. doi: 10.2217/fnl.10.22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Berninger, V., Swanson, H. L., & Griffin, W. (2014). Understanding developmental and learning disabilities within functional-systems frameworks: Building on the contributions of J.P. Das. In T. Papadopoulos, R. Parrilla, & J. Kirby (Eds.), Cognition, intelligence, and achievement (pp. 397–418). New Delhi, India: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  17. Berninger, V., Winn, W., Stock, P., Abbott, R., Eschen, K., Lin, C., et al. (2008). Tier 3 specialized writing instruction for students with dyslexia. Reading and Writing. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21, 95–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Berninger, V., & Wolf, B. (2009). Helping students with dyslexia and dysgraphia make connections: Differentiated instruction lesson plans in reading and writing. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  19. Berninger, V., & Wolf, B. (2016). Dyslexia, dysgraphia, OWL LD, and dyscalculia: Lessons from teaching and science (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Also available as e-book.Google Scholar
  20. Berninger, V., Lee, Y., Abbott, R. & Breznitz, Z. (2013, published on line; 2011). Teaching children with dyslexia to spell in reading-writers’ workshop. Annals of Dyslexia, 63(1). doi: 10.1007/s11881-011-0054-0.Google Scholar
  21. Binks-Cantrell, E., Washburn, E., Joshi, R. M., & Hougen, M. (2012). Peter effect in the preparation of reading teachers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16, 526–536. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2011.601434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bourassa, D., & Treiman, R. (2001). Spelling development and disability: The importance of linguistic factors. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 172–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Carlisle, J. (1994). Morphological awareness, spelling, and story writing. Possible relationships for elementary-age children with and without learning disabilities. In N. Jordan & J. Goldsmith-Phillips (Eds.), Learning disabilities: New directions for assessment and intervention (pp. 123–145). Boston, MA: Allyn Bacon.Google Scholar
  24. Carlisle, J., & Nomanbhoy, D. (1993). Phonological and morphological awareness in first graders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 177–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Carreker, S., & Joshi, R. M. (2010). Response to intervention: Are the Emperor’s clothes really new? Psicothema, 22, 943–948.Google Scholar
  26. Cartwright, K. (Ed.). (2008). Flexibility in literacy processes and instructional practice: Implications of developing representational ability for literacy teaching and learning. New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  27. Casalis, S., Cole, P., & Sopo, D. (2004). Morphological awareness in development. Annals of Dyslexia, 5, 114–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ehri, L. (1997). Learning to read and learning to spell are one and the same, almost. In C. Perfetti, L. Rieben, & M. Fayol (Eds.), Learning to spell. Research, theory, and practice (pp. 237–269). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  29. Fayol, M., Alamargot, D., & Berninger, V. (Eds.). (2012). Translation of thought to written text while composing: Advancing theory, knowledge, methods, and applications. New York, NY: Psychology Press/Taylor Francis Group.Google Scholar
  30. Fowler, A., & Liberman, I. (1995). The role of phonology and orthography in morphological awareness. In L. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 157–188). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  31. Fry, E. (1996). Spelling book. Level 1–6. Words most needed plus phonics. Westminster, CA: Teacher Created Materials. www.teachercreated.com.Google Scholar
  32. Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie corporation time to act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Google Scholar
  33. Henry, M. (2010). Unlocking literacy. Effective decoding and spelling instruction (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Joshi, R., & Aaron, P. G. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of orthography and literacy. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  35. Joshi, R., Binks, E., Graham, L., Ocker-Dean, E., Smith, D., & Boulware-Gooden, R. (2009). Do textbooks used in university reading education courses conform to the instructional recommendations of the National Reading Panel? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 458–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Joshi, R. M., Treiman, R., Carreker, S., & Moats, L. (2008–2009, Winter). How words cast their spell. American Educator, 34, 6–16, 42–43.Google Scholar
  37. Leong, C. K. (2000). Rapid processing of base and derived forms of words and grades 4, 5 and 6 children’s spelling. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 277–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Liberman, A. (1999). The reading researcher and the reading teacher need the right theory of speech. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 95–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lovett, M. (1987). A developmental perspective on reading dysfunction: Accuracy and speed criteria of normal and deficient reading skill. Child Development, 58, 234–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McCardle, P., & Berninger, V. (Eds.) (2015). Narrowing the achievement gap for native American students: Paying the educational debt. New York, NY: Routledge. (All Royalties go to foundations supporting Native American students.) See http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415727167. To view the video recording of the co-access UW OMAD/College of Education Discussion: Native American Outreach at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_2jU9AwtQg
  41. Moats, L. (2014). What teachers don’t know and why they aren’t learning it: Addressing the need for content and pedagogy in teacher education. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties.? doi: 10.1080/19404158.2014.941093 Google Scholar
  42. Moats, L. C. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.Google Scholar
  43. Nagy, W., Berninger, V., & Abbott, R. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 134–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2006). Improving literacy by teaching morphemes. (Improving learning series). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Bindman, M. (1997). Morphological spelling strategies: Developmental stages and processes. Developmental Psychology, 33, 637–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Olson, R., Forsberg, H., & Wise, B. (1994). Genes, environment, and the development of orthographic skills. In V. Berninger (Ed.), The varieties of orthographic knowledge I: Theoretical and developmental issues (pp. 27–71). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pacton, S., Fayol, M., & Perruchet, P. (2005). Children’s implicit learning of graphotactic and morphological regularities. Child Development, 76, 324–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pacton, S., Perruchet, P., Fayol, M., & Cleeremans, A. (2001). Implicit learning in real world context: The case of orthographic regularities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 401–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pittman, R., Joshi, M., & Carreker, S. (2014). Improving the spelling ability among speakers of African American English through explicit instruction. Literacy Research and Instruction, 53, 107–133. doi: 10.1080/19388071.2013.870623. http://dx.doi.org/10/1080/19388071.2013/870623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Posner, M., & Rothbart, M. (2007). Educating the human brain. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Silliman, E., Bahr, R., & Peters, M. (2006). Spelling patterns in preadolescents with atypical language skills: Phonological, morphological, and orthographic factors. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 93–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spector, C. (2009). Humor and play with language as far as words go activities for understanding ambiguous language and humor, revised edition. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  53. Stahl, S., & Nagy, W. (2005). Teaching word meaning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  54. Treiman, R. (1985). Onsets and rimes as units of spoken syllables: Evidence from children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 39, 161–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Venezky, R. (1970). The structure of English orthography. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Venezky, R. (1995). From orthography to psychology to reading. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), The varieties of orthographic knowledge. II. Relationships to phonology, reading, and writing (pp. 23–45). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Venezky, R. (1999). The American way of spelling: The structure and origins of American English orthography. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  2. 2.College of Education & Human DevelopmentTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations