Reading and Writing

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 299–316

Recent developments in reading intervention research: Introduction to the special issue

Article

References

  1. Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 414–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Calfee, R. (1983). The mind of the dyslexic. Annals of Dyslexia, 33, 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Calfee, R., & Drum, P. (1986). Research on teaching reading. In M. C. Whittock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 804–849). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  4. Carroll, J. M., Snowling, M. J., Hulme, C., & Stevenson, J. (2003). The development of phonological awareness in preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 39, 913–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Catts, H., Kamhi, A. (2005). Language and reading disabilities. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  6. Clay, M. M. (1993). Reading recovery. Auckland: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  7. Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Bryant, J. D. (2006). Selecting at-risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 394–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., & Francis, D. J. (2006). An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 447–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Denton, C. A., & Mathes, P. G. (2003). Intervention for struggling readers: Possibilities and challenges. In B. R. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 229–251). Baltimore, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  10. Deschler, D. D., Mellard, D. F., Tollefson, J. M., & Byrd, S. E. (2005). Research topics in responsiveness to intervention: Introduction to the special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 483–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehri, L. C. (2005). Development of sight word reading: Phases and findings. In M. J. Snowling, & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A Handbook (pp. 135–154). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ehri, L., & McCormick, S. (1998). Phases of word learning: Implications for instruction with delayed and disabled readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 14, 135–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fletcher, J. M., Denton, C., & Francis, D. (2005). Validity of alternative approaches for the identification of learning disabilities: Operationalizing unexpected underachievement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 545–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fletcher, J. M., Shaywitz, S. E., Shankweiler, D. P., Katz, L., Liberman, I. Y., Stuebing, K. K., et al. (1994). Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 1–18.Google Scholar
  15. Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foorman, B. R., Seals, L. M., Anthony, J., & Pollard-Durodala, S. (2003). A vocabulary enrichment program for third and fourth grade African-American students: Description, implementation, and impact. In B. R. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 419–441). Baltimore, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  17. Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Steubing, K. K., Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, B. A., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2005). Psychometric approaches to the identification of LD: IQ and achievement scores are not sufficient. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuch, D., & Fuch, L. S. (2006). Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., McMaster, K. N., Al Otaiba, S. (2003). Identifying children at risk for reading failure: Curriculum-based measurement and the dual-discrepancy approach. In H. L. Swanson, H. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of Learning Disabilities (pp. 431–449). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  20. Fuchs, D., & Young, C.L. (2006). On the irrelevance of intelligence in predicting responsiveness to reading instruction. Exceptional Children, 73, 8–30.Google Scholar
  21. Gaskins, I. W., Downer, M. A., Anderson, R., Cunningham, P. M., Gaskins, R. M., Schommer, M., the teachers of the Benchmark School (1988). A metacognitive approach to phonics: Using what you know to decode what you don’t know. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gersten, R., & Dimino, J. A. (2006). RTI (response to intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (yet again). Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gough, P. B., & Hillinger, M. L. (1980). Learning to read: An unnatural act. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 30, 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6–10.Google Scholar
  25. Hatcher, P. J., Goetz, K., Snowling, M. J., Hulme, C., Gibbs, S., & Smith, G. (2006). Evidence for the effectiveness of the Early Literacy Support programme. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 351–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hatcher, P. J., & Hulme, C. (1999). Phonemes, rhymes, and intelligence as predictors of children’s responsiveness to remedial reading instruction: Evidence from a longitudinal intervention study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 130–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hatcher, P. J., Hulme, C., & Ellis, A. W. (1994). Ameliorating early reading failure by integrating the teaching of reading and phonological skill: The phonological linkage hypothesis. Child Development, 65, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoover, W. A., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). The components of reading. In G. B. Thompson, W. E. Tunmer, & T. Nicholson (Eds.), Reading acquisition processes (pp. 1–19). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  29. Iversen, S., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2005). The effects of varying group size on the Reading Recovery approach to preventive early intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 456–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S., & Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 211–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lyon, G. R., & Moats, L. C. (1997). Critical conceptual and methodological considerations in reading intervention research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 578–588.Google Scholar
  33. Mathes, P. G., Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J., Francis, D. J., & Schatschneider, C. (2005). The effects of theoretically different instruction and student characteristics on the skills of struggling readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 148–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McMaster, K. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., & Compton, D. (2005). Responding to nonresponders: An experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71, 445–463.Google Scholar
  35. Morris, D., Tyner, B., & Perney, J. (2000). Early steps: Replicating the effects of a first-grade reading intervention program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 681–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nation, K. (2005). Children’s reading comprehension difficulties. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 248–265). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. O’Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K. R., & Bell, K. M. (2005). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  39. Pressley, M., Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2006). The state of educational intervention research as viewed through the lens of literacy instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Scarborough, H. (2005). Developmental relationships between language and reading: Reconciling a beautiful hypothesis with some ugly facts. In H. W. Catts, & A. G. Kamhi (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disabilities (pp. 3–24). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Snowling, M. J., Gallagher, A., & Frith, U. (2003). Family risk of dyslexia is continuous: Individual differences in the precursors of reading skill. Child Development, 74, 358–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 340–406.Google Scholar
  44. Stanovich, K. E. (1991). Discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Has intelligence led us astray? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stanovich, K. E., & Siegel, L. (1994). Phenotypic performance profile for children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stuebing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., LeDoux, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2002). Validity of IQ-discrepancy classification of reading disabilities: A meta-analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 469–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Torgesen, J. K. (2004). Lessons learned from research on interventions for students who have difficulty learning to read. In P. McCardle, & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 355–382). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar
  48. Torgesen, J. K. (2005). Recent discoveries on remedial interventions for children with dyslexia. In M. J. Snowling, & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 521–537). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S., & Conway, T. (2001a). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58, 78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Alexander, A. (2001b). Principles of fluency instruction in reading: Relationships with established empirical outcomes. In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp. 333–355). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  51. Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Rose, E., Lindamood, P., Conway, T., et al. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 579–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (1996). A developmental model of dyslexia: Can the construct be saved? Dyslexia, 2, 179–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (1998). Language prediction skill, phonological recoding ability and beginning reading. In C. Hulme, & R.M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and spelling: Development and disorder (pp. 33–37). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  54. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2003). The reading recovery approach to preventive early intervention. As good as it gets? Reading Psychology, 24, 337–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2004). Reading recovery: Distinguishing myth from reality. In R. M. Joshi (Ed.), Dyslexia: Myths, misconceptions, and some practical application (pp. 99–114). Baltimore, MD: International Dyslexia Association.Google Scholar
  56. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2006). Metalinguistic abilities, phonological recoding skills, and the use of sentence context in beginning reading development: A longitudinal study. In R. M. Joshi, & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 617–635). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  57. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (2007). Language-related differences between discrepancy-defined and non-discrepancy-defined poor readers: A longitudinal study of dyslexia in New Zealand. Dyslexia, 13, 42–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tunmer, W. E., Chapman, J. W., & Prochnow, J. E. (2003). Preventing negative Matthew effects in at-risk readers: A retrospective study. In B. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 121–163). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  59. Tunmer, W. E., Herriman, M. L., & Nesdale, A. R. (1988). Metalinguistic abilities and beginning reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 134–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tunmer, W. E., & Hoover, W. A. (1993). Components of variance models of language-related factors in reading disability: A conceptual overview. In M. Joshi, & C. K. Leong (Eds.), Reading disabilities: Diagnosis and component processes (pp. 135–173). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  61. Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional children, 69, 391–409.Google Scholar
  62. Vellutino, F. R., & Denckla, M. (1991). Cognitive and neuropsychological foundations of word identification in poor, normally developing readers. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 571–608). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  63. Vellutino, F. R., & Fletcher, J. M. (2005). Developmental dyslexia. In M. J. Snowling, & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 362–378). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Jaccard, J. (2003). Toward distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as primary sources of difficulty in learning to read: A two year follow-up of difficult-to-remediate, readily remediated poor readers. In B. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 73–120). Baltimore, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  65. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Lyon, G. R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R. S., et al. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult to remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experimental deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S., & Fanuele, D. P. (2006). Response to intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities: Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first-grade interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Educational StudiesMassey UniversityPalmerston NorthNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations