Advertisement

Component Model-Based Remedial Treatment of Reading Disabilities

  • P. G. Aaron
  • Heidi Kotva
Part of the Neuropsychology and Cognition book series (NPCO, volume 16)

Abstract

In the US, children with average or higher intellectual ability but have difficulty in learning to read are described as having Learning Disability (LD, hereafter). The assumption that underlies the classification of poor readers into the LD and non-LD categories is that there are qualitative differences in the cognitive skills of these categories of poor readers. In addition to the questionable validity of this assumption (e.g., Fletcher, 1992), implementation of the discrepancy formula has run into several conceptual and practical problems. One of the difficulties arises from certain statistical problems and computational difficulties associated with the formula itself (c.f., Reynolds, 1985). During the course of the past few years, some of these statistical bugs have been removed and the formula patched up. Nevertheless, a major problem of a practical nature remains. That is, the correlation between IQ and reading achievement seldom exceeds.50 indicating that IQ scores do not account for more than 25% of variance seen in the reading performance of children from elementary grades (Stanovich, Cunningham, & Feeman, 1984). This means IQ is not a potent predictor of reading potential. Another conceptual problem arises from the likelihood that IQ does not influence reading ability unidirectionally, but that the relationship between IQ and reading is reciprocal in the sense that not only the level of IQ can influence the reaing score but reading experience also can affect IQ.

Keywords

Reading Comprehension Phonological Awareness Poor Reader Reading Disability Learn Disability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aaron, P.G. (1997). The impending demise of the discrepancy formula. Review of Educational Research, 67, (4), 461–502.Google Scholar
  2. Aaron, P.G. (1989). Dyslexia and hyperlexia. Boston, MA.: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aaron, P.G. (1991) Can reading disabilities be diagnosed without using intelligence tests? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24 (3), 178–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aaron, P.G., & Joshi, R.M. (1992), Reading problems: Consultation and remediation. New York. The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  5. Aaron, P.G., & Boyd, M. (1995). Decoding skill as a limiting factor of comprehension. Presentation at the NATO Advanced Institute, Nov. 22, Alvor, Portugal.Google Scholar
  6. Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about prints. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Alegria, J., Pignot, E., & Morais, J. (1982). Phonetic analysis of speech and memory codes in beginning readers. Memory & Cognition, 10, 451–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Anderson, V., Chan, C.K., & Henne, R. (1995). The effects of strategy instruction on the literacy models and performance by reading and writing-delayed middle school students. In K.A. Hinchman, D.J. Leu, & C.K. Kinzer (Eds.), Forty Fourth Year Book of the National Reading Conference. Pp. 180–189.Google Scholar
  9. Ball, E.W., & Blachman, B.A. (1988). Phoneme segmentation training: Effect on reading readiness. Annals of Dyslexia, 38, 208–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ball, E.W., & Blachman, B.A. (1991). Does phoneme segmentation training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bednarczyk, A. (1991). The effectiveness of story grammar instruction within a self-instructional strategy development frame-work for students with learning disabilities. Ph.D., Dissertation, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD.Google Scholar
  12. Bishop, D.V., & Butterworth, G.E. (1980). Verbal performance discrepancies: Relationship to birth risk and specific reading retardation. Cortex, 16, 375–389.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Byrne, B., & Barnsley, R. (1995). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children. A 2-and 3-year follow up and a new pre-school trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, (3), 488–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. (1985). Rhyme and reason in reading and spelling. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  15. Chan, L.K., & Cole, P.G. (1986). The effects of comprehension monitoring training on reading competence of learning disabled and regular class students. Remedial and Special Education, 7 (4), 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chan, L.K. (1991). Promoting strategy generalization through self-instructional training in students with reading disabilities. J of Learning Disabilities, 24 (7), 427–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cossu, G., Shankweiler, D., Liberman, I., Tola, G., & Katz, L. (1988). Awareness of phonological segments and reading ability in Italian children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 9, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crain, S. (1989). Why poor readers misunderstand spoken sentences. In D. Shankweiler & I.Y. Liberman, (Eds.) Phonology and reading disability. Ann Arbor, The Univ. of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  19. Cromer, W. (1970). The difference model: A new explanation for some reading difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 471–483.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dermody, M. (1988). Metacognitive strategies for the development of reading comprehension for younger children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  21. Dermody, M. & Speaker, R.B. (1995). Effects of reciprocal strategy training in prediction clarification, question generating, and summarization on fourth graders’ readingcomprehension. In K.A. Hinchman, D.J. Leu, & C.K. Kinzer (Eds.), Forty Fourth Year Book of the National Reading Conference. Pp. 190–196.Google Scholar
  22. Duffy, G.G. Roehler, L.R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, G., Book, C., Meloth, M., Vavrus, L., Weselman, R., Putna, J., & Basiri, D. (1987). The effects of explaining the reasoning associated with using reading strategies.Google Scholar
  23. Ehri, L.C., & Saltmarsh, J. (1995). Beginning readers outperform older disabled readers in learning to read words by sight. Reading & Writing, 7 (3), 295–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Epps, S., & Tindall, G. (1987). The effectiveness of differential programming in serving students with mild handicaps: Placement options and instructional programming, in M.C. Wang, M.C. Reynolds, & H.J. Walberg (Eds.). Handbook of special education: Research and Practice, Vol. 1. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  25. Felton, R.H. (1993). Effects of instruction on the decoding skills of children with phonological processing problems. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26 (9), 583–589.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Felton, R.H., & Pepper, P.P. (1995). Early identification and intervention of phonological deficits in kindergarten and early elementary children at risk for reading disability. School Psychology Review, 24 (3), 405–414.Google Scholar
  27. Ferro, S.C., & Pressley, M.G. (1991). Imagery generation by learning disabled and average-achieving 11-to-13 year olds. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14, 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fletcher, J. M. (1992). The validity of distinguishing children with language and learning disabilities according to discrepancies with IQ: Introduction to the special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 546–548.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Foorman, B; Francis, D., Winikates, D., Mehta, P. Schatschneider, C., & Fletcher, J. (1997). Early interventions for children with reading disabilities. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1 (3), 255–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Frith, U., & Snowling, M. (1983). Reading for meaning and reading for sound in autistic and dyslexic children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1, 320–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gajria, M., & Salvia, J. (1992). The effects of summarization instruction on text comprehension of students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58, (6), 508–516.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Gambrell, L.B., & Bales, R.J. (1986). Mental imagery and the comprehension-monitoring performance of fourth and fifth-grade poor readers.. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 454–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gold, J., & Fleisher, L.S. (1986). Comprehension breakdown with inductively organized text: Differences between average and disabled readers. Remedial & Special Education, 7 (4), 26–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gough, P., & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7 (1), 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (1993). Self-regulated strategy development: Helping students with learning problems develop as writers. The Elementary School Journal, 94 (2), 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Haynes, M.C., & Jenkins, R.R. (1986). Reading instruction in special education resource rooms. American Educational Research Journal, 23, (2), 161–190.Google Scholar
  37. Healy, J. (1982). The enigma of hyperlexia. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hoover, W.A., & Gough, P.B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading & Writing, An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2, 127–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Idol-Maestas, L. (1985). Getting ready to read: Guided probing for poor comprehenders. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jackson, M.,D., & McClelland, J.L. (1979). Processing determinants of reading speed. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 108 (2), 151–181.Google Scholar
  41. Jenkins, J.R., Heliotis, J.D., Stein, M.L., & Haynes, M.C. (1987). Improving reading comprehension using paragraph restatements. Exceptional Children, 54, 54–59.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Johnson, L., Graham, S., & Harris, K. (1997). The effects of goal setting and self-instruction on learning a reading comprehension strategy: A study of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, (1), 80–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Juel, C. (1991). Beginning reading. In R. Barr., M.L. Kamil, P.B., Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.2, pp. 759–788). New York, Longman.Google Scholar
  44. Kavale, K.A. (1988). The long-term consequences of learning disabilities. In M.C. Wang, M.C. Reynolds, & H.J. Walberg (Eds.) Handbook of special education: Research and practice. Vol. 2, New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  45. Kavale, K.A., & Reese, J.H. (1992). The character of learning disabilities: An Iowa profile. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, 74–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kintsch, W., & Kozminzky, E. (1977). Summarizing stories after reading and listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 491–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Langer, J.A. (1984). Examining background knowledge and text comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, XIX (4), 468–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Liberman, I.Y. (1983). A language-oriented view of reading and its disabilities. In H. Myklebust (Ed.), Progress in Learning Disabilities, Vol 5.Google Scholar
  49. Liberman, I.Y., & Shankweiler, D. (1979). Speech, the alphabet, and teaching to read. In L.B. Resnik & P.A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice in early reading (Vol. 2, Pp 109–134). Hillsdale, NJ.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  50. Lie, A. (1991). Effects of a training program for stimulating skills in word analysis in first-grade children. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 234–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lindamood, C.H., & Lindamood, P.C. (1975). Auditory Discrimination in Depth. Chicago, IL., The Riverside Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  52. Lovett, M.W., Chaplin, P.M., Ransby, M.J, & Borden, S. (1990). Training the word- recognitionskills of reading disabled children: Treatment and transfer effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (4), 769–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lundberg, I., Frost, J., & Peterson, O. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in pre-school children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23 (3), 263–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lundberg, I., Olofsson, A., & Wall, S. (1980). Reading and spelling skills in the first school years, predicted from phonemic awareness skills in kindergarten. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 21, 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lyon, R. (1985). Education validation studies of learning disabilities subtypes. In B. Rourke (Ed.), Learning disabilities in children: Advances in subtype analysis.Google Scholar
  56. Lysynchuk, L., Pressley, M., & Vye, N.J. (1990). Reciprocal teaching improves standardized reading comprehension performance in poor comprehenders. The Elementary School Journal, 90, 4 69–484.Google Scholar
  57. Mann, V.A., & Liberman, I.Y. (1984). Phonological awareness and verbal short-term memory. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 17, 592–599.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Marshall, J.C., & Newcombe, (1980). The conceptual status of deep dyslexia: An historical perspective. In M. Coltheart, K.E. Patterson, & J.C. Marshall (Eds.), Deep Dyslexia. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  59. Marston, D., Deno, S., Kim, D., Diment, K., & Rogers, D. (1995). Comparison of reading intervention approaches for students with mild disabilities. Exceptional Children, 62, (1), 20–37.Google Scholar
  60. McKinney, J.D., & Feagans, L. (1984). Academic and behavioral characteristics: Longitudinal studies of learning disabled children and average achievers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7 (3), 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. O’Shea, L.J., Sindelar, P., & O’Shea, D.J. (1987). The effects of repeated readings and attentional cues on the reading fluency and comprehension of learning disabled readers. Learning Disabilities Research, 2, 103–109.Google Scholar
  62. Palincsar, A. (1987). Cited in Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C.(1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64 (4), p. 480.Google Scholar
  63. Palincsar, A., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1, 117–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Palincsar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1988). Teaching and practising thinking skills to promote comprehension in the context of group problem-solving. Remedial & Special Education, 9, 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Palmer, J., McCleod, C.M., Hunt, E., & Davidson, J. (1985). Information processing correlates of reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Patterson, K.E., Marshall, J.C., & Coltheart, M. (1985). Surface Dyslexia. Hillsdale, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  67. Pressley, M., Johnson, C.J., Symons, S., Goldrick, J. & Kurita, J. (1989). Strategies that improve memory and comprehension of what is read. Elementary School Journal, 90, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 92, (5), 13–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Reynolds, C.R. (1985). Measuring the aptitude — achievement discrepancy in learning disability diagnosis. Remedial & Special Education, 5 (3), 19–23.Google Scholar
  70. Roberts, M., & Smith, D. (1980). The relationship among correct and error oral reading rates and comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 54–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rosenshine, B., Meister S., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66 (2), 181–221.Google Scholar
  72. Rosner, J. (1974). Auditory analysis training with prereaders. The Reading Teacher, 27, 379–384.Google Scholar
  73. Royer, J., Kulhavy, R., Lee, S., & Peterson, S. (1986). The relationship between reading and listening comprehension. Educational and Psychological Research, 6, 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Scanlon, D.M., & Vellutino, F.R. (1977). A comparison of the instructional backgrounds and cognitive profiles of poor, average, and good readers who were initially identified as at risk for reading failure.Scientific Studies of Reading, 1 (3), 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Schunk, D.H., & Rice, J.M. (1992). Influence of reading comprehension strategy information on children’s achievement outcomes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Shankweiler, D., Crain, S., Katz, L., Fowler, A.E., Liberman, A., Brady, S., Thornton, R., Lundquist, E., Dreyer, L., Fletcher, J., Steubing, K., Shaywitz, S., & Shaywitz, B.A. (1995). Cognitive profiles of reading-disabled children: Comparison of language skills in phonology, morphology, and syntax. Psychological Science, 6, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Share,D.L., McGee, R., & Silva, P. (1989). IQ and reading progress: A test of the capacity notion of IQ. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 28, 97–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Short, E.J., Feagans, L., McKinney, J., & Appelbaum, M.I. (1986). Longitudinal stability of LD subtypes based on age- and IQ-achievement discrepancies. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9, 214–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Short, E.J., & Ryan, E.B. (1984). Metacognitive differences between skilled and less skilled readers: Remediating deficits through story grammar and attribution training. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Siegel, L.S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities., 22, 469–478.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Snider, V.E. (1989). Reading comprehension performance of adolescents with reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Spring, C., & French, L. (1991). Identifying children with specific reading disabilities from listening and reading discrepancy scores. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23 (1), 53–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Stanovich, K.E., Cunningham, A.E., & Feeman, D.J. (1984). Intelligence, cognitive skills, and early reading progress. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, (3), 278–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Stanovich, K.E., Cunningham, A.E., & Cramer, B. (1984). Assessing phonological awareness in kindergarten children: Issues of task comparability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Stothard, S. (1994). The nature and treatment of reading comprehension difficulties in children. In C. Hulme & M.Snowling (Eds.)., Reading development and dyslexia. London, Whurr Publishers.Google Scholar
  87. Stothard, S., & Hulme, C. (1992). Reading comprehension difficulties in children: The role of language comprehension and working memory skills. Reading & Writing, 4, 245–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Swanson, H.L., Carson, C., & Saches-Lee, C.M. (1996). A selective synthesis of intervention research for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 25 (3), 370–391.Google Scholar
  89. Symons, S., McGoldrick, A.J., Snyder, B.L., & Pressley, M. (1990). Reading comprehension in M. Pressley, (Ed.) Cognitive strategy instruction that improves children’s academic performance. Cambridge, M.A., Brookline BooksGoogle Scholar
  90. Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K., & Rashotte, C.A. (1997). Prevention and remediation of severe reading disabilities: Keeping the end in mind. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1 (3), 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. van den Bos, K.P. (1989). Relationship between cognitive development, decoding skill, and reading comprehension in learning-disabled Dutch children. In P.G. Aaron & R.M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and writing disorders in different orthographic systems. (Pp. 75–86). Boston, MA.: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wagner, R.K. & Torgesen, J.K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wang, M.C., & Baker, E.T. (1985–1986). Mainstreaming programs: Design features and effects. Journal of Special Education, 19, 503–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Weisberg, R. (1988). A change in focus of reading comprehension research: A review of reading/learning disabilities research based on an interactive model of reading. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Weisberg, R., & Balajthy, E. (1983). A generative learning strategy for disabled readers. Cited by Weisberg, R. (1988). A change in focus of reading comprehension research: A review of reading/learning disabilities research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Weisberg, R., & Balajthy, E. (1986). Effects of topic familiarity on disabled readers’ comprehension of the compare/contrast text structure.Google Scholar
  97. Cited by Weisberg, R. (1988). A change in focus of reading comprehension research: A review of reading/learning disabilities research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Williams, J.P. (1980). Teaching decoding with an emphasis on phoneme analysis and phoneme blending. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 1–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Wleklinski, M.H. (1993). Effectiveness of special education programs on the reading achievement of students with learning disabilities. Unpublished Ph.D., dissertation. Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN. USA.Google Scholar
  100. Wong, B.Y., Wong, R., & Le Mare, L. (1982). The effects of knowledge of criterion task on comprehension and recall in normal achieving and learning disabled students. Journal of Educational Research, 76, 119–126.Google Scholar
  101. Wong, B.Y., Wong, R., Perry, N., & Sawatsky, D. (1986). The efficacy of self-questioning summarization strategy for use by underachievers and learning disabled adolescents in social studies. Learning Disabilities Focus, 2 (2), 20–35.Google Scholar
  102. Yuill, N., & Oakhill, J. (1991). Children’s problems in text comprehension: An experimental investigation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. G. Aaron
    • 1
  • Heidi Kotva
    • 1
  1. 1.Indiana State UniversityTerre HauteUSA

Personalised recommendations