Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 355–379 | Cite as

The direct and indirect effects of word reading and vocabulary on adolescents’ reading comprehension: Comparing struggling and adequate comprehenders

  • Eric L. Oslund
  • Nathan H. Clemens
  • Deborah C. Simmons
  • Leslie E. Simmons
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The current study examined statistically significant differences between struggling and adequate readers using a multicomponent model of reading comprehension in 796 sixth through eighth graders, with a primary focus on word reading and vocabulary. Path analyses and Wald tests were used to investigate the direct and indirect relations of word identification, vocabulary, silent reading efficiency, and inference-making on reading comprehension. Comparing struggling versus adequate comprehenders revealed statistically significant differences in path coefficients. In both groups, vocabulary had the largest total effect when considering its direct and indirect effects. Word identification was the strongest direct predictor for struggling comprehenders (β = .18 for struggling vs. β = − .03 for adequate), while vocabulary was the strongest predictor for adequate comprehenders (β = .40 for adequate vs. β = .14 for struggling). Findings reinforce (a) vocabulary knowledge plays a primary role in explaining individual differences in adolescent reading comprehension, (b) the need to differentiate intervention to address underlying difficulties of struggling readers, and (c) the relations of reading component skills (e.g., word reading and silent reading efficiency) to reading comprehension may be different based on reader proficiency.

Keywords

Adolescent Reading comprehension Vocabulary Word identification Path analysis 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305F100013 to Texas A&M University as part of the Reading for Understanding Research Initiative. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

References

  1. Aaron, P. G., Joshi, R. M., Ayotollah, M., Ellsberry, A., Henderson, J., & Lindsey, K. (1999). Decoding and sight-word naming: Are they independent components of word recognition skill? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11, 89–127. doi: 10.1023/a:1008088618970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmed, Y., Francis, D. J., York, M., Fletcher, J. M., Barnes, M., & Kulesz, P. (2016). Validation of the direct and inferential mediation (DIME) model of reading comprehension in grades 7 through 12. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44, 68–82. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.02.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Trivedi, P., Olson, E., Gould, L., Hiramatsu, S., et al. (2010). Applying the multiple dimensions of reading fluency to assessment and instruction. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28, 3–18. doi: 10.1177/0734282909336083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brasseur-Hock, I. F., Hock, M. F., Kieffer, M., Biancarosa, G., & Deshler, D. D. (2011). Adolescent struggling readers in urban schools: Results of a latent class analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 438–452. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braze, D., Tabor, W., Shankweiler, D. P., & Mencl, W. E. (2007). Speaking up for vocabulary: Reading skill differences in young adults. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 226–243. doi: 10.1177/00222194070400030401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brozo, W. G., & Afflerbach, P. P. (2010). Adolescent literacy inventory: Grades 6–12. New York, NY: Pearson.Google Scholar
  7. Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., Barnes, M. A., & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inference-making ability, and their relation to knowledge. Memory and Cognition, 29, 850–859. doi: 10.3758/bf03196414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–42. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calvo, M. G. (2005). Relative contribution of vocabulary knowledge and working memory span to elaborative inferences in reading. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 53–65. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2004.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Calvo, M. G., Estevez, A., & Dowens, M. G. (2003). Time course of elaborative inferences in reading as a function of prior vocabulary knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 13, 611–631. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00055-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Catts, H. W., Compton, D., Tomblin, J. B., & Bridges, M. S. (2012). Prevalence and nature of late-emerging poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 166–181. doi: 10.1037/a0025323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., & Fey, M. E. (2003). Subgrouping poor readers on the basis of individual differences in reading-related abilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 151–164. doi: 10.1177/002221940303600208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chall, J. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate. Journal of Reading, 12, 313–315.Google Scholar
  14. Compton, D. L., Miller, A. C., Elleman, A. M., & Steacy, L. M. (2014). Have we forsaken reading theory in the name of “quick fix” interventions for children with reading disability? Scientific Studies of Reading, 18, 55–73. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2013.836200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 311–325. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010). Comprehension of scientific text: A domain-specific test of the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 687–700. doi: 10.1037/a0019452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cunningham, A. E., Stanovich, K. E., & Wilson, M. R. (1990). Cognitive variation in adult college students differing in reading ability. In T. H. Carr & B. A. Levy (Eds.), Reading and its development: Component skills approaches (pp. 129–159). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 277–299. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Denton, C. A., & Al Otaiba, S. (2011). Teaching word identification to students with reading difficulties and disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 43(7), 1–25.Google Scholar
  20. Denton, C. A., Barth, A. E., Fletcher, J. M., Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., Cirino, P. T., et al. (2011). The relations among oral and silent reading fluency and comprehension in middle school: Implications for identification and instruction of students with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 109–135. doi: 10.1080/10888431003623546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dixon, P., LeFevre, J. A., & Twilley, L. C. (1988). Word knowledge and working memory as predictors of reading skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 465–472. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Duncan, L. G., McGeown, S. P., Griffiths, Y. M., Stothard, S. E., & Dobai, A. (2016). Adolescent reading skill and engagement with digital and traditional literacies as predictors of reading comprehension. British Journal of Psychology, 107, 209–238. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., et al. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehenson outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79, 262–300. doi: 10.3102/0034654308325998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ehri, L. C., & McCormick, S. (1998). Phases of word learning: Implications for instruction with delayed and disabled readers. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 365–389). Newark, DE: International Reading Association Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Elleman, A. M., Lindo, E. J., Morphy, P., & Compton, D. L. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2, 1–44. doi: 10.1080/19345740802539200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. A. (2007). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  27. Flynn, L. J., Zheng, X., & Swanson, H. L. (2012). Instructing struggling older readers: A selective meta-analysis of intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 27, 21–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00347.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fogarty, M., Oslund, E., Simmons, D., Davis, J., Simmons, L., Anderson, L., et al. (2014). Examining the effectiveness of a multicomponent reading comprehension intervention in middle schools: A focus on treatment fidelity. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 425–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. García, J. R., & Cain, K. (2014). Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English. Review of Educational Research, 84, 74–111. doi: 10.3102/0034654313499616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. doi: 10.1177/074193258600700104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hock, M. F., Brasseur, I. F., Deshler, D. D., Catts, H. W., Marquis, J. G., Mark, C. A., et al. (2009). What is the reading component skill profile of adolescent struggling readers in urban schools? Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 21–38.Google Scholar
  32. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Joshi, R. M. (2005). Vocabulary: A critical component of comprehension. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 21, 209–219. doi: 10.1080/10573560590949278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., Torgesen, J., et al. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A practice guide (NCEE Publication No. 2008-4027). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences.Google Scholar
  35. Katzir, T., Kim, Y., Wolf, M., O'Brien, B., Kennedy, B., Lovett, M., et al. (2006). Reading fluency: The whole is more than the parts. Annals of Dyslexia, 56, 51–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keenan, J. M., Betjemann, R. S., & Olson, R. K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12, 281–300. doi: 10.1080/10888430802132279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keenan, J., Hua, A., Hulslander, J., Christopher, M., & Olson, R. K. (2014, July). How do sources of individual differences in reading comprehension vary with age and assessment? Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, Santa Fe, NM.Google Scholar
  38. Keenan, J. M., & Meenan, C. E. (2014). Test differences in diagnosing reading comprehension deficits. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47, 125–135. doi: 10.1177/0022219412439326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2005). The effects of readers’ misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 235–245. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kim, Y. S. G. (2017). Why the simple view of reading is not simplistic: Unpacking component skills of reading using a direct and indirect effect model of reading (DIER). Scientific Studies of Reading, 21, 310–333. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2017.1291643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–183. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kintsch, W., & Kintsch, E. (2005). Comprehension. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Current issues in reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 71–92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  43. Klauda, S. L., & Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Relationships of three components of reading fluency to reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 310–321. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lepola, J., Lynch, J., Kiuru, N., Laakkonen, E., & Niemi, P. (2016). Early oral language comprehension, task orientation, and foundational reading skills as predictors of grade 3 reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 51, 373–390. doi: 10.1002/rrq.145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2010). Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests (4th ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
  46. McNamara, D. S., de Vega, M., & O’Reilly, T. (2007). Comprehension skill, inference-making, and the role of knowledge. In F. Schmalhofer & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes (pp. 233–253). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  47. Mellard, D., & Fall, E. (2012). Component model of reading comprehension for adult education participants. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35, 10–23. doi: 10.1177/0731948711429197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mellard, D. F., Fall, E., & Woods, K. L. (2010). A path analysis of reading comprehension for adults with low literacy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 154–165. doi: 10.1177/0022219409359345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Miciak, J., Stuebing, K. K., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., Barth, A. E., & Fletcher, J. M. (2014). Cognitive attributes of adequate and inadequate responders to reading intervention in middle school. School Psychology Review, 43, 407–427. doi: 10.17105/SPR-13-0052.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2016). The condition of education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  51. Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Barros, R. (2012). The development of word recognition and its significance for comprehension and fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 959–973. doi: 10.1037/a0027412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Oakhill, J. V. (1982). Constructive processes in skilled and less skilled comprehenders’ memory for sentences. British Journal of Psychology, 73, 13–20. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1982.tb01785.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Oakhill, J. V. (1993). Children’s difficulties in reading comprehension. Educational Psychology Review, 5, 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Oslund, E. L., Clemens, N. H., Simmons, D. C., Smith, S., & Simmons, L. E. (2016). How vocabulary knowledge of middle-school students from low socioeconomic backgrounds influences comprehension processes and outcomes. Learning and Individual Differences, 45, 159–165. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2015.11.013.
  55. Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 357–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Perfetti, C. A. (2010). Decoding, vocabulary, and comprehension: The golden triangle of reading skill. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading researchers to life: Essays in honor of Isabel Beck (pp. 291–303). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  58. Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18, 22–37. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2013.827687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Prior, A., Goldina, A., Shany, M., Geva, E., & Katzir, T. (2014). Lexical inference in L2: Predictive roles of vocabulary knowledge and reading skill beyond reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 27, 1467–1484. doi: 10.1007/s11145-014-9501-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Protopapas, A., Sideridis, G. D., Mouzaki, A., & Simos, P. G. (2007). Development of lexical mediation in the relation between reading comprehension and word reading skills in Greek. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 165–197. doi: 10.1080/10888430701344322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rose, L. T., & Rouhani, P. (2012). Influence of verbal working memory depends on vocabulary: Oral reading fluency in adolescents with dyslexia. Mind, Brain, and Education, 6, 1–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-228X.2011.01135.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sabatini, J. P., O’Reilly, T., Halderman, L. K., & Bruce, K. (2014). Integrating scenario-based and component reading skill measures to understand the reading behavior of struggling readers. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 29, 36–43. doi: 10.1111/ldrp.12028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sáez, L., Nese, J., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2016). Individual differences in kindergarten through grade 2 fluency relations. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 100–109. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.05.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Scammacca, N. K., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., & Steubing, K. (2015). A meta-analysis of interventions for struggling readers in grades 4–12: 1980–2011. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 369–390. doi: 10.1177/0022219413504995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Shankweiler, D., Lundquist, E., Katz, L., Stuebing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., Brady, S., et al. (1999). Comprehension and decoding: Patterns of association in children with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 69–94. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr0301_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Silverman, R. D., Proctor, C. P., Harring, J. R., Hartranft, A. M., Doyle, B., & Zelinke, S. B. (2015). Language skills and reading comprehension in English monolingual and Spanish–English bilingual children in grades 2–5. Reading and Writing, 28, 1381–1405. doi: 10.1007/s11145-015-9575-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Silverman, R. D., Speece, D. L., Harring, J. R., & Ritchey, K. D. (2013). Fluency has a role in the simple view of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 108–133. doi: 10.1080/10888438.2011.618153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Simmons, D. C., Coyne, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., Kwok, O.-M., Simmons, L., et al. (2011). Effects of supplemental reading interventions in authentic contexts: A comparison of kindergarteners’ response. Exceptional Children, 77, 207–228. doi: 10.1177/001440291107700204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Spear-Swerling, L. (2006). Children’s reading comprehension and oral reading fluency in easy text. Reading and Writing, 19, 199–220. doi: 10.1007/s11145-005-4114-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Spencer, M., Quinn, J. M., & Wagner, R. K. (2014). Specific reading comprehension disability: Major problem, myth, or misnomer? Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 29, 3–9. doi: 10.1111/ldrp.12024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sweet, A. (2005). Assessment of reading comprehension: The RAND reading study group vision. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children’s reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 3–12). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.Google Scholar
  72. Tighe, E. L., & Schatschneider, C. (2016). Examining the relationships of component reading skills to reading comprehension in struggling adult readers: A meta-analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49, 395–409. doi: 10.1177/0022219414555415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tilstra, J., McMaster, K., Van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & Rapp, D. (2009). Simple but complex: Components of the simple view of reading across grade levels. Journal of Research in Reading, 32, 383–401. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01401.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tobia, V., & Marzocchi, G. M. (2014). Predictors of reading fluency in Italian orthography: Evidence from a cross-sectional study of primary school students. Child Neuropsychology, 20, 449–469. doi: 10.1080/09297049.2013.814768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Torgesen, J. K. (2002). The prevention of reading difficulties. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 7–26. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00092-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Torgesen, J. K., Houston, D. D., Rissman, L. M., Decker, S. M., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., et al. (2007). Academic literacy instruction for adolescents: A guidance document from the Center on Instruction. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.Google Scholar
  77. Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R., & Rashotte, C. (1999). TOWRE-2: Test of word reading efficiency. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
  78. Torppa, M., Tolvanen, A., Poikkeus, A. M., Eklund, K., Lerkkanen, M. K., Leskinen, E., et al. (2007). Reading development subtypes and their early characteristics. Annals of Dyslexia, 57, 3–32. doi: 10.1007/s11881-007-0003-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. van den Broek, P. (2010). Using texts in science education: Cognitive processes and knowledge representation. Science, 328, 453–458. doi: 10.1126/science.1182594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. van den Broek, P., Young, M., Tzeng, Y., & Linderholm, T. (1999). The landscape model of reading: Inferences and the online construction of a memory representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 71–98). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  81. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  82. Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Roberts, G., Barth, A. A., Cirino, P. T., Romain, M. A., et al. (2011). Effects of individualized and standardized interventions on middle school students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77, 391–407. doi: 10.1177/001440291107700401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Vellutino, F. R., Tunmer, W. E., Jaccard, J. J., & Chen, R. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 3–32. doi: 10.1080/10888430709336632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Pearson, N. A. (2010). Test of silent reading efficiency and comprehension. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed Inc.Google Scholar
  85. Yovanoff, P., Duesbery, L., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2005). Grade-level invariance of a theoretical causal structure predicting reading comprehension with vocabulary and oral reading fluency. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(3), 4–12. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2005.00014.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric L. Oslund
    • 1
  • Nathan H. Clemens
    • 2
  • Deborah C. Simmons
    • 3
  • Leslie E. Simmons
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Elementary and Special EducationMiddle Tennessee State UniversityMurfreesboroUSA
  2. 2.Department of Special EducationUniversity of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  3. 3.Department of Educational PsychologyTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options