Teaching Students with

Moderate Disabilities to Read:

Insights from Research

2004
Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services
Florida Department of Education
This is one of many publications available through the Bureau of Instructional Support
and Community Services, Florida Department of Education, designed to assist school
districts, state agencies which support educational programs, and parents in the provision
of special programs. For additional information on this publication, or for a list of available
publications, contact the Clearinghouse Information Center, Bureau of Instructional Support
and Community Services, Florida Department of Education, Room 628, Turlington Building,
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400.

telephone: (850) 245-0477

FAX: (850) 245-0987

Suncom: 205-0477

email: [email protected]

website: www.myfloridaeducation.com/commhome
 Teaching Students with
Moderate Disabilities to Read:
Insights from Research

2004
Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services
Florida Department of Education
This product was developed by the Accommodations and Modifications for Students with
Disabilities Project through the Learning Systems Institute, Florida State University, funded
by the State of Florida, Department of Education, Bureau of Instructional Stupport and
Community Services, through federal assistance under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA), Part B.

Florida Department of Education

Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services

Shan Goff, K-12 Deputy Chancellor for Student Achievement

Michele Polland, Administrator, ESE Program Development and Services
Evy Friend, Supervisor, ESE Program Development and Services
Iris Palazesi, Supervisor, ESE Program Development and Services

Copyright
State of Florida
Department of State
2004

Authorization for reproduction is hereby granted to the State System of Public Education
consistent with Section 1006.39 (2), Florida Statutes. No authorization is granted for
distribution or reproduction outside the State System of Public Education without prior
approval in writing.
 Teaching Students with
Moderate Disabilities to Read:
Insights from Research

by
Debby Houston, Ph.D.
Learning Systems Institute
Florida State University
and
Joe Torgesen, Ph.D.
Florida Center for Reading Research
Florida State University

2004
Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services
Florida Department of Education
 Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express sincere thanks to the individuals listed below who
participated in the development of this document. Their input and suggestions were critical to
the development of the book.

Formative Evaluation
Elaine Harrison, Nims Middle School, Leon County School District, Tallahassee, Florida
Robin Garland, Everhart School, Leon County School District, Tallahassee, Florida
Melissa Herring, Everhart School, Leon County School District, Tallahassee, Florida

Expert Review
Stephanie Al-Otaiba, Department of Special Education and
Florida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
Marcia Grek, Florida Center for Reading Research,
Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
Karli McKenzie, Project CENTRAL,
University of Central Florida – Daytona Beach, Daytona Beach, Florida
Donna Gilles, Center for Autism and Related Disorders,
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
Denise Rusnak, Program Specialist,
Broward County School District, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Mike Muldoon, Program Specialist, ESE Program Development and Services,
Florida Department of Education, Tallahassee, Florida
Evy Friend, Supervisor, ESE Program Development and Services,
Florida Department of Education, Tallahassee, Florida

Learning Systems Institute, Florida State University

Marty Beech, Project Director, Accommodations and Modifications for Students with
Disabilities Project
Katie Hatcher, Graduate Assistant, Accommodations and Modifications for Students with
Disabilities Project

Graphic design and illustrations provided by Bill Otersen, Tallahassee, Florida.

Table of Contents
What is this document about? ......................................................................................1

Why do we need to think about reading for students

with moderate disabilities?...........................................................................................3
National Reading Initiatives................................................................................ 3
State Initiatives.................................................................................................... 4
Reading and Students with Moderate Disabilities ............................................ 5

What do I need to know about reading?........................................................................7

The Simple View
View of Reading .............................................................................. 7
Typical Reading Development ........................................................................... 8
The National Reading Panel Five Areas of Reading Instruction......................11
Evidence about the Impact of Reading Instruction
for Students with Moderate Disabilities ........................................................... 13

Info Box: Decisions about Research............................................................................ 15

What do we know about teaching reading to students

with moderate disabilities?......................................................................................... 16
Pre-Reading.......................................................................................................17
Learning to Read ...............................................................................................17
Reading to Learn .............................................................................................. 19

What should teachers do? ..........................................................................................20

Info Box: Reading for Students with Moderate Disabilities

–Summary of Current Knowledge ................................................................................24

Where can I get more information?.............................................................................25

Reading Instruction .......................................................................................... 25
Reading Programs That Use Scientifically Based Reading Research ........... 28
Reading Assessments...................................................................................... 28
Specific Tests and Assessment Methods........................................................ 29
Training for Teachers to Improve Reading Instruction .................................... 30
Keeping Current about Findings from Research on Teaching Reading ........ 31

References ............................................................................................................... 33

References by Topic ................................................................................................. 45

v
Blank page
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

What is this document about?

The purpose of this document is to provide current information about teaching

reading to students with moderate disabilities. The term moderate disability refers to
individuals with ability levels that are expected to require ongoing support for adult
living. This typically includes students with disabilities such as trainable mental
handicaps, autism, autism-spectrum disorders, and significant language impairments.

The document provides an overview of reading development and research on

effective reading instruction and shows how the interaction between these two areas
can influence reading instruction for students with moderate disabilities. A brief
summary of what reading is, how it develops, and what we know about effective
reading instruction provides the basis for discussing reading for students with
moderate disabilities. This summary is followed by a condensed description of what
we know about teaching reading to students with moderate disabilities from evidence
in research. Suggestions are also provided for ways teachers can use that information
in their classrooms. A sizeable resource section beginning on page 25 is included to
provide ideas for obtaining additional information to improve reading instruction, as it
emerges from research. Throughout the document, sections labeled as an “Info Box”
are included to provide readers with background information to enhance understanding
of the material in the book.

1
Blank page
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Why do we need to think about reading for students

with moderate disabilities?

Many people believe that individuals with moderate disabilities cannot learn how to
read. They think that reading is too complicated and requires high levels of language
and cognitive ability that individuals with moderate disabilities do not possess.
However, research about reading has begun to provide evidence that students with
moderate disabilities can be taught reading skills.

Why do we need to think about reading for students with moderate disabilities?
To answer this question we need to consider two things. The first consideration is
that reading is an important life skill. Reading is a critical skill for participation in
all aspects of life, including school, work, and the community. It is a major key to
accessing knowledge, gaining independence, and exercising life choices. The second
consideration is that everyone in the State of Florida is putting a greater emphasis on
reading, with the long-term goal to increase the reading proficiency of all students,
including students with disabilities. This effort is in response to national and state
policies that require the use of reading instruction that is aligned with the most recent
research.

National Reading Initiatives

A body of research exists that provides strong evidence about the nature of effective
instruction that can improve reading performance for students. The National Reading
Panel (NRP), a group formed at the request of Congress and the Secretary of Education
in 1998, was charged with reviewing the effectiveness of various approaches to
teaching students to read. They were asked to describe the evidence from scientifically
based reading research so that policy makers and educators could use that knowledge
to determine “what works” and improve reading instruction. The panel identified five
essential components of reading instruction for beginning readers:

1 sounds
Phonemic Awareness—the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate individual
(phonemes) in spoken words

2 Phonics—the ability to understand and use relationships between letters of

written language and the sounds of spoken language

3 Fluency—the
Fluency ability to read a text accurately, quickly, and with proper expression

3
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

4 and
Vocabulary—the ability to use words to communicate effectively in speaking
Vocabulary—the
Vocabulary
listening (oral vocabulary) or to recognize or use in print (reading vocabulary)

5 print.
Text Comprehension—the ability to gain understanding and information from

Federal policy makers felt so strongly about the importance of research-based

instructional approaches that they used the information from the National Reading
Panel to design the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation (Elementary and
Secondary Education Act, 2001). The legislation requires that instruction be founded
on scientifically based research to improve student performance.

The National Reading Panel report has been summarized for educators in a variety
of sources, including Put Reading First—The Research Building Blocks for Teaching
Readd published by the National Institute for Literacy. This publication
Children to Rea
provides a reader-friendly summary of the research with many examples of classroom
applications. For more information on locating this document and other resources on
reading research, see “Where can I get more information?” on page 25.

State Initiatives
Florida citizens and policy makers have been concerned about
student reading performance for many years. Governor Jeb Bush
established the Just Read, Florida! initiative in 2001 to target reading
improvement statewide. This comprehensive initiative calls on
educators, families, communities, and businesses to help improve
reading skills for students in Florida.

Activities of the Just Read, Florida! initiative are designed to

implement the National Reading Panel findings and are aligned with
the No Child Left Behind legislation. In fact, Florida was one of the first states to
receive a federal grant to implement the Reading First requirements of No Child Left
Behind for students in kindergarten through grade three. All schools participating
in Reading First must provide instruction and assessment in the five areas of reading
instruction identified by the NRP. They must provide instruction that is differentiated
to meet the learning needs of all students, including those who need more intensive
intervention.

The expectations of No Child Left Behind apply to all students, particularly those at
risk for reading failure or for low academic achievement. NCLB requires that students

4
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

be provided scientifically based teaching methods that have been proven to work as a
means to ensure that all students will learn. Students with disabilities are part of the at-
risk population and must also be provided scientifically based reading instruction.

Reading and Students with Moderate Disabilities

Research and case studies have shown that students with moderate disabilities can
learn to read, although more commonly at a lower rate or proficiency level compared
to typically developing peers. There is evidence that some students with moderate
disabilities use phonic skills to sound out words and they can comprehend stories about
events or topics that are familiar to them. Some have learned how to read words in
their environment that allow them to function more independently, while others have
become proficient enough to be able to read simple books, magazines, and newspapers.

In spite of this evidence, surveys have revealed that many parents and teachers of
students with moderate disabilities often have extremely low expectations for reading
and literacy for these students. They simply don’t expect that students with moderate
disabilities can learn to read. Parents may not spend as much time reading to their
child if they do not believe he or she can learn to read. Likewise, other surveys and
observations have shown that only small amounts of instructional time are devoted
to teaching reading to students with moderate disabilities. As a result, students with
moderate disabilities generally enter school with less exposure to print at home and
receive less classroom instruction than their peers receive. Teachers and families may
place a greater emphasis on life skill goals, have insufficient knowledge about reading
potential, or lack training in reading instruction, which are all possible explanations for
these findings.

There are legislative requirements that influence the content of instruction that is
selected for students with moderate disabilities. The No Child Left Behind legislation
applies to all learners and requires reading instruction be provided using scientifically
based research. A second federal law must be considered for students with disabilities.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the federal law governing
programs for students with disabilities, requires that all students have access to
the general education curriculum. Reading is a primary component of the general
education curriculum. As a result, instruction in reading must be considered for
students with moderate disabilities.

Given the importance of reading as a lifelong skill and the need to provide access to
the general curriculum, it is important to include reading as an area of instruction
for students with moderate disabilities. To make sure that these students can access
the potential benefits of reading, they need to receive scientifically based reading
instruction in order to reach their own reading potential.

5
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

There is limited research on how to best teach students with moderate disabilities
to read. The current knowledge base for teaching reading focuses on typical and
struggling readers. It is not yet clear if this knowledge translates directly to instruction
for students with moderate disabilities. In the absence of clear direction about the exact
sequence and methods for teaching these students, teachers must base their practices
on the research related to teaching reading to all students. They must also monitor
the emerging research on reading instruction for students with moderate disabilities.
Teachers can use information from these two areas of research to make instructional
decisions that will allow students with moderate disabilities to learn to read as
proficiently as possible.

6
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

What do I need to know about reading?

The answer to this question focuses on four major topics. The

first is a description of the Simple View of reading developed
by Phil Gough that addresses two broad areas of skills that are
necessary for reading. The Simple View provides the context for our discussions about
reading. The second topic is a review of how these skills develop for typical readers.
Once we understand how reading develops, it is important to consider the third topic,
how to most effectively teach students as they progress through these developmental
phases. This discussion targets essential areas of reading instruction that help students
develop the type of skills needed for reading. The targeted areas are considered
essential because they are identified from scientific research on reading. The fourth
topic is how this knowledge base relates to developing reading instruction for students
with moderate disabilities.

The Simple View of Reading

The best measure of a student’s success in learning to read is the ability to
comprehend, or understand, what he or she reads. The Simple View of reading, which
is widely supported in current research, is that reading comprehension depends on two
broad sets of skills. The first group of skills contribute to the ability to accurately and
fluently identify the words in text. This is referred to as word reading ability.

The second set of skills in the Simple View involves all of the knowledge and skills
that are required for comprehending language. Comprehending the meaning of
written language is heavily dependent on the student’s general verbal or language
comprehension skills. In other words, understanding written language requires many
of the same kind of skills and knowledge as is required to comprehend oral language.
The main difference is that in reading, the student must also be able to accurately
identify words in print.

If a student cannot accurately identify, or decode, most of the words in a passage of

text, it will be very difficult to comprehend the meaning of the passage. Likewise, if
a student can read the text accurately, but doesn’t know the meaning of many of the
words or cannot comprehend the concepts expressed, then reading comprehension will
suffer. In short, the Simple View of reading states that students use word recognition
skills to identify written words while at the same time they are using their general
verbal knowledge and language comprehension abilities to construct the meaning of
what they are reading.

Of course, comprehending written material is not exactly like comprehending oral

language. For one thing, in oral language comprehension, the listener cannot easily
7
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

skip back to previous material to correct a misunderstanding. For another, the reader
can adjust the pace of reading to allow for more difficult material, and that is not
always possible when listening to oral language. There are a number of strategies that
readers can use to improve their comprehension that are not available to listeners.
However, the fact remains that most of the language skills that contribute to reading
comprehension are also required when comprehending oral language. Therefore, the
Simple View of reading is that successful reading is based on the ability to decode or
read words as well as the ability to comprehend language.

Typical Reading Development

The ability to read generally develops in a predictable way for most individuals.
This section provides a brief overview of typical reading development as a reminder
to readers about how students progress through the reading process. It will help us
understand the steps in the progression to effective reading and provide a foundation
for identifying similarities and differences in learning patterns for students with
moderate disabilities. The discussion is organized around three stages: pre-reading,
learning to read, and reading to learn. The overview draws on models of reading
development by Jeanne Chall, Linnea Ehri, Louise Spear-Swerling, and Robert J.
Sternberg. Teachers who want more details on these models can use the references for
these authors beginning on page 33 as a source for more information.

It is important to remember that the stages of reading development are not discrete,
self-contained entities; the transition between stages is often very gradual, and the
student may be at one stage for certain types of material while functioning at another
stage for material at a different level of difficulty. With that said, we can discuss three
general stages of reading development. They are the pre-reading stage in which
students are developing language skills and awareness, the learning to read read stage that
focuses on building skills to read words, and the reading to learn stage when students
are expanding their reading vocabulary and comprehension skills. The stages represent
phases of progression through the reading development process, but they are not meant
to suggest that instruction should focus on only one set of skills during each stage.
For example, language development to build vocabulary and general knowledge is
important throughout each phase. In addition, even after students enter the reading to
learn phase, they continue to acquire knowledge about words that help them become
more accurate and fluent readers. Further, comprehension is the goal of reading at all
levels, even though the learning to rea
readd stage emphasizes developing decoding skills.

Pre-Reading Stage
Language development is the primary focus for students in this stage. As students
develop expressive language that allows them to communicate their thoughts
and receptive language that allows them to understand what they hear, they

8
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

are acquiring the vocabulary and verbal thinking skills that are essential for
reading comprehension. During this period, they also begin to be aware that
print represents spoken words, and they may begin to acquire some initial
familiarity with letters. Students often learn to recite the alphabet during this
phase. Given the right learning opportunities, students in the pre-reading
phase may also begin to acquire some initial awareness of the phonological
structure of words (i.e., that words can be divided into parts or that they can
have the same beginning or ending sounds). They may also learn to recognize
some very familiar words by sight. For example, familiar signs and words
are recognized (e.g., the word “stop” as it occurs in stop signs, the word
“McDonald’s” associated with the golden arches, the word “look” because
it has two “eyes” in the middle) by their distinctive visual appearance and
the context in which they typically occur. Students use memorization as the
method to learn to recognize these words, and they are not yet actively using
the regular relationships between letters and sounds in their reading. This is
an important point, because it would be extremely difficult for anyone to learn
enough words through memorization to become a fluent reader at even the
third-grade level. Students in the pre-reading stage also begin to pretend to
read and develop basic concepts about print (holding the book upright, pointing
to words as they tell the story, left to right orientation).

Learning to Read Words

At the beginning of this stage, students shift from using arbitrary distinctive
visual features to recognize words (e.g., a word’s shape, or its length, or the
“tail” on the last letter in the word “dog”) to using the relationships between
letters and sounds in words as their main clue to a word’s identity. It is during
this stage that students master the alphabetic principle so that they can reliably
use the correspondences between letters and sounds in words as an aid to
accurately guessing the identity of words they have never seen before in print.
At the beginning of this stage, students may only sound out a few of the letters
in a word before they try to guess what it is, and they often will make
mistakes. As students become more skilled at using phonics, letter-sound
relationships, to decode new words, they accurately sound out more of
the phonemes in words (particularly the vowels), and they become more
accurate readers. At the same time they are learning to use letter-sound
cues to help them read novel words, students are also learning that another
important clue to the identity of new words comes from the meaning of what
they are reading. Their task in learning to read new words is to gather as much
information as they can from their knowledge of letter-sound relationships, and
then combine that with their sense of the meaning of the passage, to find a word
that matches the sounds they have decoded and also makes sense in the context
of what they are reading. In fact, scientists who study the reading process have

9
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

suggested that teachers should encourage students to first sound out words
as much as they can, and then think of a word that has those sounds in it that
also fits the meaning of what they are reading. Once students learn to do this
consistently, they are on their way to becoming accurate and fluent readers.

As students practice using their phonics and contextual skills to identify the
unknown words they encounter in text, they gradually learn to recognize
more and more words by sight. Scientists tell us that students form memory
representations for words after they have identified them correctly in print
several times. These representations are created quickly in most students
because they are able to use their awareness of the sounds in words to help
them remember their spellings. Students who have not developed good phonics
skills will have more difficulty learning to recognize words at a single glance.
As this phase continues, students also become familiar with common letter
sequences like “ing,” “at,” or “un” that help them decode words in larger
chunks.

The real key to the successful conclusion of the learning to read

read phase is to
acquire powerful phonemic decoding skills while at the same time building a
large vocabulary of words that can be recognized by sight. In fact, it is the latter
accomplishment that is the key to fluent reading. As students learn to recognize
more and more words at a single glance, they become more and more fluent
readers.

It is important to note that, if our goal is to have students read accurately and
fluently above a first- or second-grade developmental level, it will be very
difficult to directly teach them to instantly recognize all the words they will
need to know. There are simply too many different words to learn. That is
why it is important for students to develop skill and confidence in being able
to “attack” words they have never seen before in print using a combination
of phonemic analysis and contextual skills. If they rely on context alone to
identify new words, they will make too many mistakes, and will not be able to
build the memory representations for words that are the basis for fluent reading.
If they do not learn to use phonemic analysis as they encounter new words,
they also will not be able to use their awareness of the sounds in words to help
them remember word spellings, and their memories for words will be weak.
Thus, the key to becoming a fluent and accurate reader at the third- or fourth-
grade level is to acquire good alphabetic reading skills (phonics), and then
practice using those skills with lots of reading. As students acquire a larger
and larger vocabulary of words they can recognize by sight, this paves the
way for students’ attention to shift from laboring to identify words to getting
information from what they read.

10
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Reading to Learn
Throughout the learning to read phase, teachers need to help students expand
their vocabulary and language comprehension skills. During the reading to
learn phase, students continue to expand their background knowledge and vocabulary
while they increase the capacity to quickly identify words. They begin to read to gain
new information from a wide variety of reading materials and topics. Students spend
time thinking about what they read while they are reading. They are just beginning
to develop reading comprehension strategies. These strategies allow them to identify
facts, descriptions of concepts, or different viewpoints in what they are reading.

In the middle of this stage, students link information and use strategies that apply their
own vocabulary and prior knowledge to analyzing text and reading critically. Students
begin to apply their strategies to gain meaning from multiple viewpoints and analyze
more complex texts to identify layers of facts and concepts. Strategies expand to build
toward proficiency in analyzing text and critical reading.

The reading to learn stage actually never ends, because students’ vocabulary and
background knowledge become continually more sophisticated. They are able to use
what they read to formulate their own ideas and construct their own judgments about
how the information applies to their own ideas. Students are able to decide if what
they read provides adequate information for their purpose and identify when they
need to locate additional sources of information. Just as students were developing
comprehension skills as they were learning to read, students continue to use decoding
skills from the previous stage when the situation requires it (such as decoding technical
words or foreign language terms.)

The National Reading Panel

Five Areas of Reading Instruction
We have discussed the two areas of broad skills – word reading
and comprehension – that constitute successful reading. We have
also reviewed how students typically progress through the stages of
reading development. Next, we will think about the areas that are
critical to effective reading instruction.

The research review conducted by the National Reading Panel revealed five areas
that must be addressed to provide effective reading instruction: phonemic awareness,
phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension. It is important to understand the
roles these areas of instruction play as students build reading skills. These roles were
explained in the previous section on typical reading development. This section provides
further discussion of how instruction can be used to develop reading skills. Specific

11
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

information about the scientifically based research and instruction for each area can be
located in “Where can I get more information?” on page 25.

Phonemic awareness is the ability to recognize and work with individual sounds,
or phonemes, in spoken words. This ability is critical to helping students make the
connections between phonemes in words and the letters that represent the sounds in
written words. Students who do not have this ability will struggle with learning to
read and spell. The good news is that students can be taught to develop their phonemic
awareness skills through systematic, explicit instruction. Phonemic awareness is
most closely associated with the pre-readin
pre-readingg stage of reading development, although
it can extend into the learning to read
read stage, if needed. At a beginning stage of
development in phonemic awareness, students can learn to judge whether two words
rhyme. Later, they will be able to tell which of several words begins with the same
sound as a target word. More complete development of phonemic awareness is shown
when students can pronounce all the separate sounds in a word like “cat” /c/ /a/ /t/ or
“first” /f/ /ir/ /s/ /t/.

Phonics instruction helps students understand and learn the regular relationships
between spoken sounds and letters in words. It builds the bridge between letters in
written language and the individual sounds in spoken language. Once students are
aware of sounds in spoken language, they can use phonics to decipher and write
new words. Phonics knowledge gives students a tool to decode words that they have
not learned to read by sight. Just as with phonemic awareness, phonics instruction
should be systematic and explicit. Phonics instruction is a major part of the learning
to read stage. Students will use phonics knowledge throughout the reading process as
they encounter words that are not automatically recognized.

Fluency instruction and practice helps students to develop skills to read text accurately
and quickly. Although being able to recognize most words at a single glance is very
important for fluency, fluency goes beyond just recognizing individual words. Students
are fluent when they are able to read text smoothly, accurately, and with expression.
In order to read with expression, students must comprehend the meaning of what they
are reading. Thus, when we say that a student is a fluent reader, we mean that he or
she can read text at the appropriate grade level, at the proper rate, and with good
comprehension. Once students have acquired the skills to read accurately, fluency
develops most directly through extended practice in reading. The development of
fluency is emphasized at the learning to read
read stage, but fluency with increasingly
difficult material continues to develop long after entering the reading to learn stage.

12
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Vocabulary instruction focuses on building knowledge of what words mean.

Students use this knowledge to make sense of the words they hear in language or
read in text. When students are confronted with written words that are not part of
their oral vocabulary, they must learn the meaning of the words before the text will
make sense to them. Students learn most of their vocabulary indirectly through their
daily experiences. Some vocabulary should be taught directly, such as the meanings
for specific words or strategies to learn new words. Vocabulary instruction should be a
part of reading instruction from the very beginning, and this is likely to be particularly
true for students with moderate disabilities. In fact, for students with limited oral
language skills, a lack of understanding of the meaning of words is likely to be one
of the major factors that will limit their ability to comprehend written material.
Remember, students will be able to comprehend written material at no higher level
than they can comprehend oral language. Thus, enhancement of language skills is an
important part of reading instruction for all students.

Text comprehension instruction gives students skills that allow them to make sense
of what they read. Good readers have a reason for reading: they want information,
pleasure, or to meet a personal goal. They also think about what they are reading
as they read. While reading, they may adjust reading speed if the text is unfamiliar,
think about their previous knowledge and try to link it to the new information,
or check facts that are not clear as they read. Once students are able to gain
meaning from recognized words, they begin to build comprehension skills. Reading
comprehension can be improved through explicitly teaching students strategies and
how to use the strategies. As with vocabulary, comprehension instruction should occur
from the beginning of reading instruction. For students who have not yet learned to
read words accurately, comprehension skills can be taught through oral language
activities. Once students have mastered basic comprehension and word reading
skills, then attention shifts during the reading to learn stage to even more complex
comprehension and text study strategies.

Evidence about the Impact of Reading Instruction

for Students with Moderate Disabilities
Three major pieces of information have been reviewed – the Simple View of successful
reading, how reading typically develops, and a summary of the areas of research-based
reading instruction. The information leads to an understanding of what reading is, how
it develops, and the essential components of how it should be taught. The next step is
to review how that information can be used to design reading instruction for students
with moderate disabilities.

Teachers need to know and be able to use the most effective (to get the best results)
and efficient (with the least effort) reading instruction techniques. From what we

13
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

understand about reading development, it is clear that instructional emphasis on

vocabulary and verbal comprehension skills can support reading achievement. We
also know that students require intensive instruction designed to match individual
learning progression and rate to master most skills and concepts. Knowing how
students with moderate disabilities approach the reading processes of word
recognition and comprehension will give teachers better guidance about how
quickly students can learn, how the instructional sequence and practice should be
designed, and how to help students achieve higher levels of proficiency.

The idea that reading comprehension is heavily dependent on general language

comprehension suggests a critical issue in thinking about appropriate goals for
reading instruction with students who have moderate disabilities. While there
seems little question that well-focused and sustained instruction in reading can
help these students acquire basic reading skills, we must recognize that their
ultimate ability to comprehend written material will be determined by their general
language comprehension skills. It is important to move the students to the reading
level that gives them the most independence based on their language capabilities.
So, in addition to working to build their word-level skills (those involved in
identifying printed words), we must also do all we can to stimulate the growth of
their vocabulary and verbal comprehension skills.

The research evidence we have about effective reading instruction for typically
developing students can be useful, even though the studies did not include students
with moderate disabilities. These strategies for effective reading instruction may be
an effective way to work with students with moderate disabilities. However, we do
not yet know exactly which variations in the development process or instructional
techniques (e.g., strategies for initial presentation and modeling, the amount of
extra practice, the type of review techniques) will lead to stronger reading skills
for students with moderate disabilities. Since the phases of reading instruction
are not linked to any particular age or grade, teachers of students with moderate
disabilities should match their students’ ability to the corresponding reading
development phase and proceed with reading instruction appropriate for that stage.

14
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Decisions about Research

X
BO In order to meet accountability demands and improve
FO
student learning, the findings of research must be translated
IN

into practices that are applicable in the classroom. Research

can provide guidance to teachers to design instruction that
will produce specific student outcomes.

Educational researchers follow certain sets of procedures and guidelines to

conduct research. For example, the number of individuals included in the study
must be large enough so that the results can be generalized, or applied to other
groups of similar individuals. Case studies or research with very small numbers of
individuals can provide initial evidence, but these results may not be generalized
with confidence. Another example of an established research procedure is when
the researcher compares the outcomes of a group of students who used the
instructional program (experimental or treatment group) with a group of students
who used a different program (control group) to measure the effectiveness of
a certain intervention or instructional program. The guidelines for research
procedures help ensure we can be confident about the results.

Only recently have the guidelines for educational research been translated to
make it easier to evaluate research findings and know how to apply the findings
to daily instruction. The simple evaluation system used in this document to
communicate evidence about research findings consolidates information from
a variety of research evaluation systems. It is divided into categories to provide
information about the quantity and nature of the research. It is designed to provide
a quick reference to help teachers feel confident that the research evidence will
translate to their classroom. The categories in the evaluation system are
described below. Strong

Strong – Several studies exist with adequate sample size and use of
treatment and control groups to generalize to the targeted population.

Promising – At least one study exists with an adequate sample size

Promising Promising
and use of treatment and control groups to generalize to the targeted
population.
Beginning
Beginning – One or more studies exist with small numbers of students
Beginning
or that did not use treatment and control groups.

15
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

What do we know about teaching reading to students with

moderate disabilities?

There is an emerging body of research and information about teaching reading

to students with moderate disabilities. We also know much about their learning
characteristics and effective general instructional techniques. For instance, we know
that students with moderate disabilities typically need extended time, practice, and
applications in context to master skills. They may benefit from assistive technology
and augmentative communication devices for learning and this may apply to reading
instruction. It is also common that students with moderate disabilities experience
significant delays in oral language and comprehension development. To make the
best judgments about reading instruction, we must use what we know about teaching
reading and pair it with what we know about effective instruction for these learners.

There is research evidence that provides guidance about the nature of reading
instruction for students with moderate disabilities. The information that follows
provides a summary of this evidence. It is organized in three sections based upon the
broad stages of reading development described previously. Within each section is a
summary of the findings in the research studies that were reviewed. The summary
statements are intended to reflect the core finding from the studies. Summary
statements are coded using the categories described in the “Info Box: Decisions about
Research” on page 15. Remember that the summary statement is not a reflection of
the design and results of a single study; rather it is a description of the evidence that is
available from the studies reviewed. All information below describes evidence from
studies that included or were specifically designed to investigate reading characteristics
of students with moderate disabilities and techniques for effective reading instruction.
A list of studies reviewed for each item is provided in the “References by Topic”
section beginning on page 45.

16
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Pre-Reading
The information in this section applies to the pre-readin
pre-readingg stage when students are
working on language development, becoming aware of sounds in words and developing
concepts about print. It provides information that is useful to teachers as they plan to
prepare students with moderate disabilities for getting ready to read.

Structured comments. Parents and teachers can provide structured comments

when reading with a student that will help the student get ready to read. The types
of comments include descriptions of what is on the page and observations about
what might happen next in the story. One of the real benefits of shared reading
between adults and students is the opportunity it can provide for students to expand
their language usage. Thus, adults should not do all the talking in these situations.
See item 2 in “What Should Teachers Do?” on page 21 for an example of how to
effectively structure comments when reading.

Interactive technology. The use of interactive technology that highlights words on

the screen as the story is read aloud increases the understanding of the concepts of
print that are necessary to move into the learning to read stage.

Oral vocabulary. Oral vocabulary development of students with moderate

disabilities at the pre-reading stage links to future reading vocabulary and
comprehension. Students who have more advanced oral vocabulary are able to read
with a higher level of comprehension. This evidence is from studies focused on
students capable of oral communication.

Learning to Read
The learning to read
read stage is when students are learning to accurately and fluently
identify words in text. They are developing decoding skills and building the capacity
to recognize a large number of words with ease and expression. Recent studies
address how students with moderate disabilities develop and learn word reading
skills. Information about specific techniques for reading achievement for this group of
students is provided below.

Direct instruction. Direct instruction is a systematic instructional method

that includes step-by-step instruction and varied amounts of practice based on
assessment of student performance that leads to student mastery of concepts and
skills. There is evidence that these methods are effective when used for teaching
students with moderate disabilities to decode and build comprehension skills. The
direct instruction method is also referred to as explicit instruction.

17
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Sight word instruction. Most of the research on reading that focuses on students
with moderate disabilities investigates learning individual sight words. However,
the National Reading Panel reading research findings do not support teaching
individual words alone. There are simply too many words to learn if they must be
taught individually, one by one. We should recognize from the beginning that such
a strategy would not enable students to become independent readers. However, if
students have severely limited general ability and do not respond to comprehensive
reading instruction, it may be most efficient to teach them a limited sight
vocabulary of functional words to help them negotiate their environment. Students
can learn sight words using a variety of strategies such as time delay techniques,
drill with words on flash cards, and practicing with peers.

Word recognition instruction. Students with moderate disabilities profit from

instruction in word recognition components such as phonics and fluency. The
studies that showed these results typically measured student performance after
participating in a comprehensive reading program. They did not investigate the
impact of instruction in individual areas alone, such as phonics and fluency.

Instructional procedures. Students with moderate disabilities can be taught to

use step-by-step procedures to prompt them to apply their knowledge of phonemic
awareness. They can also be taught to use step-by-step procedures to model and
practice phonics skills. While the students can learn the steps in the procedures,
more information is needed before we know if students can use the procedures
independently with new words.

Word study techniques. Students with moderate disabilities may benefit from
instruction in a word study technique called “word sorts.” This technique teaches
students to categorize words based upon sound and spelling patterns and addresses
the relationship between sounds and printed words and beginning phonics skills.

Graphic presentation of words. Students with moderate disabilities perform better

on sound and word recognition tasks when presented with the letter or word alone.
The pairing of words with picture cues related to meaning or shape of individual
letters or words is often used as an instructional strategy for students with moderate
disabilities. However, this finding would suggest that the picture cues do not
improve student performance.

Computer-assisted instruction. Computer-assisted instruction and practice

activities paired with regular classroom reading instruction produced good results
in increasing phonemic awareness. The study was conducted with students with
autism.

18
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Peer tutoring. Class-wide peer tutoring can be used to improve reading fluency.
Results indicated an increased rate of words read correctly. The study was
conducted with students with autism.

Reading rate. Students with moderate disabilities read slower than typically
developing peers did when passages were less meaningful. However, one study
showed that reading rate did not appear to negatively influence comprehension of
the sentences read by students with moderate disabilities.

Reading to Learn
Gaining understanding from the written word is what reading is all about. Readers
must have the vocabulary knowledge to understand the meaning of words and
comprehend the information in the passage. The following information provides
a summary of findings from studies with students with moderate disabilities
that investigated the skills that are part of the reading to learn stage of reading
development.

Reading vocabulary. Several studies indicated that the reading vocabulary

of students with moderate disabilities increased as a result of instruction in a
comprehensive reading program.

Making inferences. Students with moderate disabilities were able to make

inferences from narrative (story) reading passages with the same quality and
quantity as typically developing students on the same reading level. The findings
were different for expository (nonfiction) reading passages. Students with moderate
disabilities generated the same quantity of inferences as the typically developing
students, but the inferences were less plausible for this type of reading passage and
may reflect a lack of comprehension.

Main ideas. Students with moderate disabilities were able to distinguish the ideas
most and least important in a reading passage, but were less able to distinguish
ideas with a medium level of importance when compared to typically developing
peers.

Fact recall and cause-effect. Both typically developing peers and students with
moderate disabilities could recall facts and make cause-effect statements better
when the story had a direct path of events and details leading from start to finish of
the story.

Peer tutoring. Comprehension scores of students with moderate disabilities were

higher when they were involved in peer tutoring compared to regular instruction
alone.

19
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

What should teachers do?

1. Make sure students with moderate disabilities have the

opportunity to learn how to read.

• Have high expectations and consider the possibility that students with moderate
disabilities can acquire reading skills when provided well-focused and sustained
instruction.
Research evidence has shown that some students with moderate
disabilities have increased reading skills when they receive instruction in
comprehensive reading programs. Comprehensive reading programs are
those that address the five areas of reading instruction and provide teacher
tools to adjust instruction to student need. The reading programs adopted
by Florida’s instructional materials selection process are comprehensive
reading programs. To find out more about these programs, visit the
Florida Department of Education website ((www.firn.edu/doe/instmat/
gradek5.htm
gradek5.htm).

• Increase the amount of time provided for reading instruction.

• Emphasize instruction that will stimulate the growth of student vocabulary and
verbal comprehension skills.
• Provide students with reading instruction that will build reading skills and develop
comprehension that corresponds to their general language comprehension skills.
Work with parents to coordinate practice time to stimulate oral vocabulary and
comprehension as well as provide guided practice to develop reading skills.
• Include reading instruction and data about student reading performance in
individual educational plan (IEP) team discussions and goal-setting.

20
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

2. Emphasize development of general language skills in the

classroom and at home, especially at the pre-reading stage.

• Create a dialogue with the student about the pictures and stories in picture books
that requires the use of different vocabulary words or construction of sentences.
The adult asks questions and encourages the student to expand on the
answer. When students have beginning language, questions focus on items
pictured on the page. Questions might ask about identity (What is it?), color
(What color is that one?), or action (What is the duck doing?). As students
develop better language skills, the questions can focus on sequences or
relationships in the story (Why is the mother happy?) or about a link between
the student’s personal experience and the story (Do we have something
like that to ride on?). The adult can then model language by expanding the
student’s statements (e.g., the student says “duck swimming,” and the adult
would reply “Yes, the duck is swimming.”)

3. Provide specific training to build sensitivity to sounds and how to

put sounds together to make words.

• Use activities to train students to recognize and identify sounds and to put sounds
together to make words. Sensitivity to the phonological elements in words develops
gradually during the preschool and kindergarten years, and may develop much
more slowly in children with moderate disabilities. Children first become aware of
individual words in sentences, then syllables within words, and finally they acquire
awareness of the individual phonemes in words.
Clapping the words in sentences—Say a sentence, and then show children
how they can clap for each separate word in the sentence. If children have
difficulty, say the words in the sentence slowly.

Clapping the syllables in words—Syllables are relatively easy for children to

identify in words with up to three syllables. Show them how to clap for each
syllable by modeling and slowing down the pronunciation of the word.

Rhyming games—Rhyming games are useful activities to help children

begin to pay attention to the internal phonological structure of words. It will
be easier for children to indicate whether two words rhyme than it will be for
them to generate rhyming words.

Matching pictures to sounds—A variety of games can be played with picture

cards showing words that begin with different sounds. If children have
trouble “hearing” the first sound in words, the teacher should segment the
sound and elongate its pronunciation (e.g., /mmmm/ /a/ /t/, /mmmm/ /o/ /p/).

Finding objects—Use picture books for this activity, or have children search
the room for objects that begin with a sound that the teacher specifies.

21
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

• Encourage students who are just becoming aware of sounds and words to imitate
adults using print and talk about what they are doing.

Encourage students to pretend to read a familiar story book and talk about
the story.

Provide opportunities for students to pretend to write their name or letters to

their parents or friends. Discuss what they are “writing.”

4. Use best knowledge and research to plan your instructional

approach.

• Organize instruction based upon the effective instructional practices for reading.
The reading research for typically developing students provides a good framework
for developing reading skills.
• Use instructional methods that support student progress in developing reading
skills.
Use direct instruction to teach the steps in a skill; use many examples
to illustrate a skill or concept; provide guided practice before moving to
independent practice.

• Keep a daily or weekly record of student progress in reading skills. Use this
information to document student growth, adjust instruction and decide when to
move to the next skill or try a new instructional technique, and plan long-range
strategies for reading instruction.
• Use classroom assessment and formal reading assessments to measure student
progress.
Classroom assessment—The student reads aloud a passage from his or her
book for one minute. The teacher notes the words that are read accurately
and the number of words read and compares the results to the student’s
previous performance.

Formal assessments—Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Literacy Skills

(DIBELS), a standardized curriculum-based measure, is an example of a
formal assessment that can be used to track progress in reading skills. The
decision to use a formal assessment such as DIBELS should be made on an
individual student basis dependent on the student’s performance level and
how the test was standardized.

• Integrate opportunities for students to practice reading throughout the day.

• Expand and structure reading practice using peer tutoring and computer-assisted
instruction for specific reading skills.

22
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

• Teach procedures to provide support when students need prompts during

learning.

Step-by-step procedure—To help students remember how to use

phonics to identify unrecognized words, the teacher teaches the steps in
applying phonics rules, such as 1. Look at the word, 2. Say the sound for
each letter, 3. Put the sounds together, 4. Say the word. These steps may
be posted around the room, taped to student desks, and used orally to
remind students to use phonics knowledge.

• Use graphic organizers as advance organizers, note-taking guides, or story

review tools to provide needed structure.

Note-taking guide for comprehension of a story—Students use a form

divided into sections such as (1) main character, (2) main character’s
problem, (3) important events, and (4) how the problem was solved to
record information as they read the story.

5. Keep up-to-date on current research.

• Learn about the National Reading Panel reading components and increase or
update skills in teaching reading.

• Be informed and seek new information about effective reading instruction

for students with moderate disabilities as it emerges. Much of what is currently
known is based on a few studies. As additional studies are conducted, the
conclusions may shift.

23
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Reading for Students with Moderate

X
BO
Disabilities—Summary of Current Knowledge
FO
IN

• There are many research studies and individual accounts that show that
students with moderate disabilities can learn reading skills, although generally
with less fluency and comprehension than typically developing peers achieve.

• Reading comprehension ability is directly related to oral language

comprehension level.

• Reading consists of two types of broad skills: word reading and print
comprehension.

• The five essential components of effective reading instruction are phonological

awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.

• The stages of reading development provide a framework for understanding the

progression of learning to read proficiently and where students are performing
within that progression.

• The research specifically related to effective reading instruction for students

with moderate disabilities is emerging. Initial evidence suggests the following:

- Explicit instruction has the best results.

- Structured cues and supports are helpful to students as they master

reading skills.

- Peer tutoring and computer-assisted instruction (matched to the skill)

are effective strategies for practice.

- Direct instruction and practice to help students recognize high-

frequency, high-utility words can be helpful in establishing minimal
functional reading skills. However, students will not become independent
readers unless they have acquired some ability to identify unknown words
in text using phonemic analysis and clues from context.

24
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Where can I get more information?

Reading Instruction
Put Reading First, The Research Building Blocks for Teaching
Children to Read.
Read This document was published by the Center for the
Improvement of Early Reading Achievement in September 2001. Copies
are available from the National Institute for Literacy at ED Pubs, P.O.
Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398; telephone 1-800-228-8813. The
document may be downloaded at www.nifl.gov.

Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science: What Expert Teachers of Reading Should Know
and Be Able to Do. This document was published by the American Federation of
Teachers in 1999. Copies are available for $5.00 each from AFT Order Department,
555 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001. The document may be
downloaded at www.aft.org/edissues/rocketscience.htm.

What Every Teacher Should Know about Phonological Awareness. This document was
authored by Joe Torgesen and Patricia Mathis and published by the Florida Department
of Education. Copies are available free of charge to Florida residents and may be
ordered by mail at Clearinghouse Information Center, Room 628, Turlington Building,
325 W. Gaines Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400; telephone 850-245-0477.
Request item number 9870. The document may be downloaded at
www.myfloridaeducation.com/commhome.

How Should Reading Be Taught? This article is authored by

Keith Rayner, Barbara R. Foorman, Charles A. Perfetti, David
Pesetsky, and Mark S. Seidenberg and was published in the
March 2002 issue of Scientific American. Information on how
to obtain a copy is available at www.sciam.com.

Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction. This book is authored by I. L.

Beck, M. G. McKeown, and L. Kucan and published by Guildford Press in 2002. It is
an excellent, short book on building vocabulary to help reading comprehension.

Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR)

The FCRR was established to produce and disseminate knowledge about
reading by conducting applied and basic research. The Center also assists
with implementing Florida reading initiatives such as Just Read, Florida!
and Florida’s plan to implement the Reading First grants associated with
the No Child Left Behind Act. The website provides information about
all the FCRR activities and links to important state and federal reading
initiatives and information. The website is www.fcrr.org.

25
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Just Read, Florida!

This website describes activities and resources for educators, families,
and communities in Florida. The website is www.justreadflorida.com.

FLaRE
FLaRE provides information about literacy instruction and assessment.
It is coordinated with other Florida literacy initiatives and is primarily
focused on staff development and training for Florida’s teachers and administrators in
the area of reading. The website is ucfed.ucf.edu/flare/indexhome.htm.

National Reading Panel (NRP)

The National Reading Panel conducted an analysis of research on reading instruction
and wrote a report to disseminate the findings. The National Reading Panel Report
and summaries provide a thorough discussion of research-based reading practices. The
NRP documents are available on-line at www.nationalreadingpanel.org.

National Institute for Literacy (NIFL)

The NIFL receives federal funding to provide information about
developing essential literacy skills. The NIFL coordinates with the
U.S. Department of Education and the Department of Child Health
and Human Development to provide up to date information regarding
high-quality literacy services. The website provides links to key reading
research websites and documents that provide information about reading.
The website is www.nifl.gov.

Partnership for Reading

The partnership is a collaborative effort between the National Institute for Literacy, the
U.S. Department of Education, and the Department of Child Health and
Human Development. The purpose of the partnership is to disseminate
research about education practices. The partnership website provides
summaries of research, links to key reading websites, and a searchable
database of research studies used in the National Reading Panel review.
The partnership will facilitate the updating of information as new
research results are available. The website is
www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/index.html.

Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement

This federally funded project provides a variety of information on effective reading
instruction. This includes detailed information to help understand, provide instruction,
and assess the areas of effective reading instruction (referred to as Big Ideas). The
information included in BIG IDEAS in Beginning Reading is thorough and easy to
use. The website is readinguoregon.edu.

26
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

The Center for Literacy and Disabilities Studies

This center addresses the literacy learning needs of persons
with disabilities of all ages. It concentrates most of its resources
on individuals with severe and multiple disabilities. The goals
include improving literacy by developing effective research-based
strategies and instructional tools, providing preservice and inservice
education to families and professionals, conducing research and
development projects to increase the knowledge base about literacy
and disabilities, and supporting policy development to increase literacy learning
opportunities for persons with disabilities. The website is www.med.unc.edu/ahs/clds.

Center for the Improvement of Early Reading (CIERA)

This federally funded center is a consortium of educators from universities, publishers,
professional organizations, and school districts. The website provides research-based
information for teachers in the form of technical reports, presentations, publications,
and professional development guides. The website is www.ciera.org.

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL)

This organization exists to bring findings from research to professionals who work to
improve teaching and learning. It is funded through competitive grants and addresses
research topics in many areas. The products include a wide range of resources specific
to reading, including resource guides, searchable databases on assessments and
instruction, and professional development resources. The website is www.sedl.org/
reading/.
reading/.
reading/

No Child Left Behind

The No Child Left Behind Act website provides a variety of information about
the legislation. It also is a source of facts on various topics including reading and
assessment of student progress. The website is www.nochildleftbehind.go
www.nochildleftbehind.gov/.
www.nochildleftbehind.gov/ v/.

The U. S. Department of Education

This website covers the full range of topics under the auspices of the U.S.
Department of Education. Of particular interest to teachers are the links
to educational resources. The website is www.ed.gov/index.jsp.

27
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Reading Programs That Use

Scientifically Based Reading Research
The Florida Center for Reading Research
The FCRR, described on page 25, has established a review process
to analyze reading curriculum and materials and evaluate how well
the materials align to Reading First and current research in reading.
The “FCRR Reports” provide factual information about the programs
including a description of strengths and weaknesses, references, and
links to the program website. Programs included in the report are those requested
by Florida school districts. The reports are not intended to endorse, advertise, or
provide official approval of the programs. The “FCRR Reports” can be accessed at
www.fcrr.org/reports.htm.

The American Federation of Teachers

In 1999, the AFT produced a report that identified promising reading and language
arts programs. The document Building on the Best, Learning from What Works:
Seven Promising Reading and Language Arts Programs provides a summary of
reading programs and the evidence upon which the program selection was made. This
document is available from www.aft.org/edissues/whatworks/index.htm.

Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement

This federally funded project, described on page 26, provides a variety of information
on effective reading instruction. Specifically related to selecting reading programs,
readers may find A Consumer’s Guide to Evaluating a Core Reading Program Grades
K-3 helpful. The document is part of the BIG IDEAS in Beginning Reading section
and can be downloaded at reading/uoregon.edu/big_ideas/au_programs.php/
reading/uoregon.edu/big_ideas/au_programs.php/.
reading/uoregon.edu/big_ideas/au_programs.php/.

Reading Assessments
The Florida Center for Reading Research
The FCRR website has a section on assessment that provides general information,
specific information designed to help Reading First schools implement their plans, and
lists of assessments that meet high standards of reliability and validity. There are also
several charts that list tests and describe the purpose and skills that are measured. This
information can be located at www.fcrr.org/assessment.htm.

The Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement

The Institute provides a variety of resources about scientifically based reading research
and classroom application. There are many resources related to reading assessment.
Of particular interest is the Analysis of Reading Assessment Instruments for K-3. The
analysis results can be sorted by type (screening, diagnosis, progress monitoring,
and outcome), grade level, or reading component. The information is located at
idea.uoregon.edu/assessment/index.html.
28
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Specific Tests and Assessment Methods

Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS)
This is a screening and progress monitoring assessment of critical early pre-reading
and reading skills. The test is based upon curriculum-based measurement procedures
that make it easier to see discrete increments of improvement. This is particularly
helpful with students who require frequent monitoring to determine progress. The
DIBELS tests are very brief and can be administered by teachers to individual
students. This assessment instrument is readily available in most Florida schools and is
required to be used in Reading First schools. For more information about DIBELS visit
www.dibels.uoregon.edu.

Fox in a Box: An Adventure in Literacy

This individual literacy assessment is for students levels K-3. It
addresses phonological awareness, phonics, reading, oral expression,
listening, writing, vocabulary, and fluency. It can be used for screening,
diagnostic information, monitoring progress, and as an outcome
assessment. For more information contact www.ctb.com/products/
product_summary.jsp.

Informal Inventories
These assessments provide a method to gather general information to plan instruction,
assess instructional activities, and monitor student progress. They include items
like informal reading inventories, error analysis, and curriculum-based assessment.
Curriculum-based assessment is particularly useful to teachers as a tool for monitoring
instructional progress. It uses tests of performance that come directly from the
curriculum. For example, a child may be asked to read passages from his or her
reading book for one minute. The teacher can measure the accuracy
and the speed of reading and compare the student’s performance
with his previous performance rather than with peers’ performance.
Such measures or probes are used periodically (monthly, quarterly)
to monitor student progress. Because the assessment is directly tied to the curriculum
content, it allows the teacher to match instruction to a student’s current abilities and
pinpoint areas where curriculum adaptations or modifications are needed. The results
of curriculum-based assessment are useful to teachers in planning instruction and
monitoring progress.

Curriculum-based assessment can be confused with curriculum-based measurement.

The primary difference is that curriculum-based measurement has undergone
procedures to establish reliability and validity, as well as standardized administration
procedures such as DIBELS describe above. The results of curriculum-based
measurement can be used as a formal assessment and allow comparisons among
students.

29
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

One great resource on informal assessment information in reading is

Cool Tools, produced by Project CENTRAL, funded by the Florida
Department of Education. The Cool Tools document can be downloaded
from reach.ucf.edu/~CENTRAL/frames.htm.

Diagnostic Assessments of Reading (DAR)

This assessment tool is designed to diagnose specific reading abilities
in six areas: word analysis, oral reading, silent reading, comprehension, spelling,
and word meaning. Individuals must be trained to administer the assessment and
to interpret assessment results. Many Florida schools have individuals trained to
administer this assessment. Contact your school administrator or district reading
administrator for information on resources in your district.

Early Reading Diagnostic Assessment (ERDA)

This assessment is individually administered and is designed as a diagnostic tool to
evaluate early reading skills of students from kindergarten to grade 3. Individuals
must be trained to administer the assessment and to interpret assessment results. Many
Florida schools have individuals trained to administer this assessment. Contact your
school administrator or district reading administrator for information on resources in
your district.

Training for Teachers to Improve

Reading Instruction
Florida Online Reading Professional Development
FOR-PD is an online staff development project designed to help teachers improve
reading instruction for students in grades pre-K through twelve. FOR-PD courses
include intensive, current, interactive, effective, and efficient multimedia
professional growth programs. The courses can be taken for inservice or
graduate credit that will apply to reading certification requirements. For
more information, visit the website at www.itrc.ucf.edu/forpd.

Project CENTRAL
Project CENTRAL is a project funded by the Florida Department
of Education through IDEA to identify and disseminate information
and training about research-based effective instructional practices for students
with disabilities. The project coordinates training to maintain a cadre of trainers in
identified practices that are available to schools throughout Florida. Several practices
are linked to reading. They include phonological awareness, curriculum-based
measurement, and administration and use of DIBELS. For more information about
training available in your area contact Project CENTRAL at www.reach.ucf.edu/
~CENTRAL/.
~CENTRAL/.
~CENTRAL/

30
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

School District Professional Development

When districts select a new core reading instruction program, they provide specific
training for teachers to understand how the program was designed and how to use
the program effectively. Any reading program currently approved for the Florida
Instructional Materials Adoption in Reading has demonstrated that it is based on
scientifically based reading research and incorporates materials to meet the needs of all
students, including those with disabilities. Contact your exceptional student education
administrator or district reading program administrator to find out what is available in
your school district.

Keeping Current about Findings from Research

on Teaching Reading
Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR)
The FCRR, described earlier, provides updates on research activities, “FCRR Reports”
on instructional materials for reading, and information about Reading First activities in
Florida. The website is www.fcrr.org.

What Works Clearinghouse

The U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences has
developed this clearinghouse to provide an independent, trustworthy
source of scientific evidence on what works in education. The
Clearinghouse is currently in the first year of developing a series
of “Evidence Reports”. Among the topics that will be available are
“Interventions in Beginning Reading” and “Peer-Assisted Learning in Elementary
Schools”. The website is w-w-c.org.

The Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement

The Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, described above,
updates assessment and instructional information regularly based upon review of
scientific research. The website is idea.uoregon.edu.

Partnership for Reading

The Partnership, described earlier, has established a mission to disseminate evidence-
based research. The website provides a searchable research article database, links to
important reading resources, and summaries of evidence-based reading instruction
components. The website is www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/index.html.

31
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

Professional Organizations
Professional organizations provide an opportunity to interact with colleagues and
researchers through professional journals, websites, professional development
programs, and conferences. The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) has
targeted reading as a primary concern. CEC offers professional development
activities and produces documents about reading for students with disabilities. The
CEC website is www.cec.sped.org.

32
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond
DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems.

Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking about learning and print. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.

Al Otaiba, S., & Hosp, M. (in press). Service learning: Training preservice teachers
to provide effective literacy instruction to students with Down Syndrome. Teaching
Exceptional Children.

Al Otaiba, S. (2001). Children who do not respond to early literacy instruction: A

longitudinal study across kindergarten and first grade. Reading Research Quarterly,
36(4), 344-349.

Andersen, B. L., Licht, B. G., Ullmann, R. K., Buck, S. T., & Redd, W. H. (1979).
Paraprofessional reading tutors: Assessment of the Edmark Reading Program and
flexible teaching. American Journal of Community Psychology, 7(6),
7 689-699.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Adler, C. R. (2001). Putting reading first: The research
building blocks for teaching children to read.
read Jessup, MD: National Institute for
Literacy.

B
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust
vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford.

Bos, C. S., & Tierney, R. J. (1984). Inferential reading abilities of mildly mentally
retarded and nonretarded students. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 89(1), 75-
82.

Boudreau, D. M., & Hedberg, N. L. (1999). A comparison of early literacy skills in

children with specific language impairment and their typically developing peers.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 249-260.

33
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

Boyle, J. R., & Walker-Seibert, T. (1997). The effects of a phonological awareness

strategy on the reading skills of children with mild disabilities. Learning Disabilities:
A Multidisciplinary Journal, 83, 145-153.

Browder, D. M., & D’Huyvetters, K. K. (1988). An evaluation of transfer of stimulus

control and of comprehension in sight word reading for children with mental
retardation and emotional disturbance. School Psychology Review, 17( 2), 331-342.

Browder, D. M., & Lalli, J. S. (1991). Review of research on sight word instruction.
Research in Developmental Disabilities, 12, 203-228.

Browder, D. M., & Minarovic, T. J. (2000). Utilizing sight words in self-instruction

training for employees with moderate mental retardation in competitive jobs.
Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35(1),
78-89.

Browder, D. M., & Shear, S. M. (1996). Interspersal of known items in a treatment

package to teach sight words to students with behavior disorders. The Journal of
Special Education, 29(4), 400-413.

Browder, D. M., & Xin, Y. P. (1998). A meta-analysis and review of sight word
research and its implications for teaching functional reading to individuals with
moderate and severe disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 32(3), 130-153.

Burgess, S. R., Hecht, S. A., & Lonigan, C. J. (2002). Relations of the home literacy
environment HLE to the development of reading-related abilities: A one-year
longitudinal study. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(4),
37 408-426.

Butler, F. M. (1999). Reading partners: Students can help each other learn to read!
Education and Treatment of Children, 22(4), 415-426.

C
Carnine, D. (1999.) Campaigns for moving research into practice. Remedial and
Special Education, 20(1), 2-6.

Casey, W., Jones, D., Kugler, B., & Watkins, B. (1988). Integration of Down’s
syndrome children in the primary school: A longitudinal study of cognitive
development and academic attainments. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
58, 279-286.

34
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J. B. (2001). Estimating the risk of
future reading difficulties in kindergarten children: A research-based model and its
clinical implementation. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 38-
50.

Cawley, J. F., & Parmar, R. S. (1995). Comparisons in reading and reading-related

tasks among students with average intellectual ability and students with mild mental
retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental
Disabilities, 30(2), 118-129.

Center for Early Education and Development. (2000). Measuring growth and
development. Early Report, 27(2).
27 Retrieved December 30, 2002, from: http://
www.coled.umn.edu/ceed/publications/earlyreport/fall00.htm.

Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA). (2001). Put
reading first. The research building blocks for teaching children to read, kindergarten
through grade 3. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy at ED Pubs.

Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading developmen

development.t New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cole, P. G., & Mengler, E. D. (1994). Phonemic processing of children with language
deficits: Which tasks best discriminate children with learning disabilities from average
readers? Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 15, 223-243.

Conners, F. A. (1992). Reading instruction for students with moderate mental

retardation: Review and analysis of research. American Journal on Mental
Retardation, 96(6), 577-597.

Conners, F. A., Atwell, J. A., Rosenquist, C. J., & Sligh, A. C. (2001). Abilities
underlying decoding differences in children with intellectual disability. Journal of
Intellectual Disability Research, 45(4), 292-299.

Cuvo, A. J., & Klatt, K. P. (1992). Effects of community-based, videotape, and flash
card instruction of community-referenced sight words on students with mental
retardation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 499-512.

D- E
Dickson, S. V., Simmons, D. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1995). Text organization and its
relation to reading comprehension: A synthesis of the research. (Tech. Rep. No. 17).
Eugene: University of Oregon, College of Education.

35
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References
Didden, R., Prinsen, H., and Sigafoos, J. (2000). The blocking effect of pictorial
prompts on sight-word reading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33(3), 317-320.

Ehri, L. C. (2002). Phases of acquisition in learning to read words and implications for
teaching. Learning and Teaching Reading,
Reading 7-28.

Erickson, K. A., & Koppenhaver, D. A. (1995). Developing a literacy program for

children with severe disabilities. The Reading Teacher, 48(8), 676-684.

Erickson, K. A., Koppenhaver, D. A., & Yoder, D. E. (1994). Literacy and adults with
developmental disabilities. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, Center for Literacy and Disability Studies, National Center on Adult Literacy.

F
Fitzgerald, J., Roberts, J., Pierce, P., & Schuele, M. (1995). Evaluation of home literacy
environment: An illustration with preschool children with Down syndrome. Reading
Difficulties, 11
and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 11, 311-334.

Franklin, K., Mirenda, P., & Phillips, G. (1996). Comparisons of five symbol
assessment protocols with nondisabled preschoolers and learners with severe
intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 63-77.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. (2002). Developing first-grade reading fluency through peer
mediation. Center on Accelerating Student Learning, 55, 1-4.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Burish, P. (2000). Peer-assisted learning strategies: An
evidence-based practice to promote reading achievement. Learning Disabilities
Research and Practice, 15(2), 85-91.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Thompson, A. (2002). Exploring the importance of reading
programs for kindergartners with disabilities in mainstream classrooms. Exceptional
Children, 68(3), 295-310.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Al Otaiba, S., Thompson, A., Yen, L., McMaster, K. N.,
Svenson, E., & Yang, N. J. (2001). Helping kindergartners with reading readiness:
Teachers and researchers in partnerships. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 76-80.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Kazdan, S. (1999). Effects of peer-assisted learning
strategies on high school students with serious reading problems. Remedial and
Special Education, 20(5), 309-318.

36
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, S., Yen, L., Yang, N. J., Braun, M.,
& O’Connor, R. E. (2001). Is reading important in reading-readiness programs? A
randomized field trial with teachers as program implementers. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 93(2), 251-267.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, S., Yen, L., Yang, N. J., Braun,
M., & O’Connor, R. E. (2002). Exploring the importance of reading programs for
kindergartners with disabilities in mainstream classrooms. Exceptional Children,
68(3), 295-311.

Fuchs, L. S. (n.d.). Compendium of reading practices for grades K-3. Retrieved

April 16, 2003, from Vanderbilt University, National Center on Accelerating Student
Learning website: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/CASL/reports.html.

G
Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., Morris, L. L., Munson Doyle, P., & Meyer, S. (1990). Teaching
sight word reading in a group instructional arrangement using constant time delay.
Exceptionality, 1, 81-96.

Georgieva, D., & Cholakova, M. (1996, July). Speech and language disorders in
children with intellectual disability.
disability Paper presented at the Annual World Congress
of the International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual Disabilities,
Helsinki, Finland.

Gersten, R., Williams, J. P., Fuchs, L., Baker, S., Koppenhaver, D., Spadorcia, S., &
Harrison, M. (1998). Improving reading comprehension for children with disabilities:
A review of research. (Final report). Washington, DC: Special Education Programs
ED/OSERS.

Gillon, G. T. (2000). The efficacy of phonological awareness intervention for children

with spoken language impairment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in
Schools, 31,
31 126-141.

Gough, P. B. (1996). How children learn to read and why they fail. Annals of Dyslexia,
46,
46 3-20.

H
Hasselbring, T. S., Goin, L., Taylor, R., Bottge, B., & Daley, P. (1997). The computer
doesn’t embarrass me. Educational Leadership, 55(3), 30-33.

37
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

Hedrick, W. B., Katims, D. S., & Carr, N. J. (1999). Implementing a multimethod,

multilevel literacy program for students with mental retardation. Focus on Autism
and Other Developmental Disabilities, 144,
144 231-239.

Heiman, M., Nelson, K., Tjus, T., & Gillberg, C. (1995). Increasing reading and
communication skills in children with autism through an interactive multimedia
computer program. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25(5), 459-480.

Hockenberger, E. H., Goldstein, H., & Haas, L. S. (1999). Effects of commenting

during joint book reading by mothers with low SES. Topics in Early Childhood
Special Education, 19(1), 15-27.

Hoogeveen, F. R., Kouwenhoven, J. A., & Smeets, P. M. (1989). Establishing sound

blending in moderately mentally retarded children: Implications of verbal instruction
10 333-348.
and pictorial prompting. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 10,

Horton, S. V., & Lovitt, T. C. (1989). Using study guides with three classifications of
224 447-462.
secondary students. The Journal of Special Education, 224,

Hutinger, P., Bell, C., Beard, M., Bond, J., Johanson, J., & Terry, C. (1998). The early
childhood emergent literacy technology research study. (Final report). Macomb, IL:
Macomb Projects at Western Illinois University. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED418545).

I-J
Idol, L. (1987). A critical thinking map to improve content area comprehension of
poor readers. Remedial and Special Education, 8(4), 28-40.

Jaspers, M. W. M., & VanLieshout, E. C. D. M. (1994). A CAI program for

instructing text analysis and modeling of word problems to educable mentally
retarded children. Instructional Science, 22, 115-136.

Jenkins, J. R., Matlock, B., & Slocum, T. A. (1989). Two approaches to vocabulary
instruction: The teaching of individual word meanings and practice in deriving word
meaning from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(2), 215-235.

Jenkinson, J. C. (1987). Word recognition and the nature of reading difficulty in

children with an intellectual disability: A review. International Journal of Disability,
Development, and Education, 36(1), 39-56.

38
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

Joseph, L. M., & McCachran, M. (2003). Comparison of a word study phonics

technique between students with moderate to mild mental retardation and struggling
readers without disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities,
38(2), 192-199.

Justice, L. M., & Ezell, H. K. (2002). Use of storybook reading to increase print
awareness in at-risk children. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11,
17-29.

K
Kamps, D. M., Barbetta, P. M., Leonard, B. R., & Delquadri, J. (1994). Classwide
peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading skills and promote peer
interactions among students with autism and general education peers. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(1),
27 49-61.

Kamps, D., Leonard, B., Potucek, J. & Garrison-Harrell, L. (1995). Cooperative

learning groups in reading: An integration strategy for children with autism and
general classroom peers. Behavioral Disorders, 21(1), 89-109.

Katims, D. S. (2001). Literacy assessment of students with mental retardation:

An exploratory investigation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and
Developmental Disabilities, 36(4), 363-372.

Katims, D. S. (2000). Literacy instruction for people with mental retardation:

Historical highlights and contemporary analysis. Education and Training in Mental
Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35(1), 3-15.

Kay-Raining Bird, E., Cleave, P. L., & McConnell, L. (2000). Reading and
phonological awareness in children with Down syndrome: A longitudinal study.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 9 319-330.

Klenk, L., & Kibby, M. W. (2000). Re-mediating reading difficulties: Appraising the
past, reconciling the present, constructing the future. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal,
P.D. Pearson, and R.Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, volume III (pp. 667-
689).

Kliewer, C., & Biklen, D. (2001). School’s not really a place for reading: A research
synthesis of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities. Journal of the
Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(1), 1-12.

39
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References
Kliewer, C., & Landis, D. (1999). Individualizing literacy instruction for young children
with moderate to severe disabilities. Exceptional Children, 66(1), 85-100.

Koppenhaver, D. A., Coleman, P. P., Kalman, S. L., & Yoder, D. E. (1991). The
implications of emergent literacy research for children with developmental disabilities.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 11 38-44.
L
Lane, S. D., & Critchfield, T. S. (1998). Classification of vowels and consonants by
individuals with moderate mental retardation: Development of arbitrary relations via
match-to-sample training with compound stimuli. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
31(1), 21-41.

Lanquetot, R. (1984). Autistic children and reading. Reading Teacher, 38(2), 182-186.

Levy, S., & Chard, D. J. (2001). Research on reading instruction for students with
emotional and behavioural disorders. International Journal of Disability, Development
and Education, 48(4), 429-444.

Lewis, S., & Tolla, J. (2003). Creating and using tactile experience books for young
children with visual impairments. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(3), 22-28.

Locke, P. A., & Butterfield, R. (1998). Promoting literacy for individuals with severe
to moderate disabilities (Position Paper, CSUN 99). Retrieved October 28, 2002, from
http://www.dinf.ne.jp/doc/english/Us_Eu/conf/csun_99/session0038.html.

Luftig, R. L., & Johnson, R. E. (1982). Identification and recall of structurally important
units in prose by mentally retarded learners. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
86(5), 495-502.

M
Marino, G., & Gerber, B. L. (1990). A total communication reading program. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 22(4), 33-35.

Marvin, C., & Mirenda, P. (1994). Literacy practices in head start and early childhood
special education classrooms. Early Education and Development, 5(4), 289-300.

Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T., Mohler, L., Beranek, M., Spencer, V., Boon, R. T., &
Talbott, E. (2001). Can middle school students with serious reading difficulties help each
other and learn anything? Learning Disabilities, Research, and Practice, 16(1), 18-27.

40
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

Mathes, P. G., Howard, J. K., Allen, S. H., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Peer-assisted learning
strategies for first-grade readers: Responding to the needs of diverse learners. Reading
Research Quarterly, 33(1), 62-94.

McGee, G. G., Krantz, P. J., & McClannahan, L. E. (1986). An extension of incidental

teaching procedures to reading instruction for autistic children. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 19(2), 147-157.

Miracle, S. A., Collins, B. C., Schuster, J. W., & Grisham-Brown, J. (2001). Peer-
versus teacher-delivered instruction: Effects on acquisition and maintenance.
Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36(4),
373-385.

Mirenda, P. (1993). AAC: Bonding the uncertain mosaic. Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 99, 3-9.

N -Q
Nevin, A. (Ed.) (2000). Lesson plans to teach self-determination across the curriculum
developed by spring 2000 special education teacher education interns. Phoenix:
Arizona State University, West, College of Education Special Education Programs.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EC307956).

Nietupski, J., Williams, W., & York, R. (1979). Teaching selected phonic word analysis
reading skills to TMR labeled students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 11(4), 140-143.

O’Connor, R. (2000). Increasing the intensity of intervention in kindergarten and first

grade. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15(1), 43-54.

O’Connor, R. E., Notari-Syverson, A., & Vadasy, P. F. (1996). Ladders to literacy: The
effects of teacher-led phonological activities for kindergarten children with and without
disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63(1), 117-131.

Oelwein, P. L. (1995). Teaching reading to children with Down syndrome: A guide for
parents and teachers. Bethesda, MD: Woodbine House.

Pufpaff, L. A., Blischak, D. M., & Lloyd, L. L. (2000). Effects of modified orthography
on the identification of printed words. American Journal on Mental Retardation,
105(1), 14-24.

Oldrieve, R. M. (1997). Success with reading and spelling. Teaching Exceptional

Children, 29(4), 57-61.

41
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

R
Rosenbaum, M., & Breiling, J. (1976). The development and functional control of
reading comprehension behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 9(3), 323-333.

Rush, K. L. (1999). Caregiver-child interactions and early literacy development of

preschool children from low-income environments. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education, 19(1), 3-14.

S
Scanlon, D. M., & Vellutino, F. R. (1996). Prerequisite skills, early instruction, and
success in first-grade reading: Selected results from a longitudinal study. Mental
Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Review, 2, 54-63.

Schatschneider, C., Carlson, C. D., Francis, D. J., Foorman, B. R., & Fletcher, J. M.
(2002). Relationship of rapid automatized naming and phonological awareness in
early reading development: Implications for the double-deficit hypothesis. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 35(3), 245-256.

Schloss, P. J., Alper, S., Young, H., Arnold-Reid, G., Aylward, M., & Dudenhoeffer, S.
(1995). Acquisition of functional sight words in community-based recreation settings.
The Journal of Special Education, 291,291 84-96.

Schmidt, R. J., Rozendal, M. S., & Greenman, G. G. (2002). Reading instruction in the
inclusion classroom. Remedial and Special Education, 23(3), 130-140.

Sevcik, R. A., Romski, M. A., & Wilkinson, K. M. (1991). Roles of graphic symbols
in the language acquisition process for persons with severe cognitive disabilities.
Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 161-170.

Sheehy, K. (2002). The effective use of symbols in teaching word recognition to

children with severe learning difficulties: A comparison of word alone, integrated
picture cueing and the handle technique. International Journal of Disability,
Development and Education, 49(1), 47-59.

Smith, S. B., Baker, S., & Oudeans, M. K. (2001). Making a difference in the
classroom with early literacy instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(6), 8-14.

Silliman, E. R., Bahr, R., Beasman, J., & Wilkinson, L. C. (2000). Scaffolds for
learning to read in an inclusion classroom. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in
Schools, 31,
31 265-279.

42
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References
Singh, N. N. (1990). Effects of two error-correction procedures on oral reading errors:
Word supply versus sentence repeat. Behavior Modification,
Modification, 14(2),
14 188-199.

Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Off track: When poor readers become
“learning disabled”
disabled”. Boulder: Westview Press, Inc.

Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations

and new frontiers. New York: Guilford Press.

Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive determinants of reading in mentally retarded

individuals. International Review of Research in Mental Retardation, 13, 181-214.

Steelman, J. D., Pierce, P. L., Alger, M. J., Shannon, J., Koppenhaver, D. A., &
Yoder, D. E. (1993). Developing an emergent literacy curriculum for children with
developmental disabilities. The Clinical Connection, 6(4), 10-15.

T-V
Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Clark, K., & Walpole, S. (2000). Effective schools and
accomplished teachers: Lessons about primary-grade reading instruction in low-
income schools. The Elementary School Journal, 101(2), 121-246.

Tjus, T., Heimann, M., & Nelson, K. (1998). Gains in literacy through the use of a
specially developed multimedia computer strategy. Autism, 2(2), 139-156.

Torgeson, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S.,
& Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading
disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1), 33-58.

Tucker, D. L., & Bakken, J. P. (2000). How do your kids do at reading? And how do
you assess them? Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(6), 14-19.

Vandever, T. R., Maggart, W. T., & Nasser, S. (1976). Three approaches to beginning
reading instruction for EMR children. Mental Retardation, 14(4), 29-32.

Van Kleeck, A., & Vander Woude, J. (2003). Book sharing with preschoolers with
language delays. In Van Kleeck, A., Stahl, S. A., and Bauer, E. B. (Eds.), On Reading
Books to Children. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Velleman, S. L., & Vihman, M. M. (2002). Whole-word phonology and templates:

Trap, bootstrap, or some of each? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools,
33, 9-23.

43
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References

W-Z
Walsh, B. F., & Lamberts, F. (1979). Errorless discrimination and picture fading as
techniques for teaching sight words to TMR students. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 8(35) 473-479.

Warby, D. B., Greene, M. T., Higgins, K., & Lovitt, T. C. (1999). Suggestions for
translating research into classroom practices. Intervention in School and Clinic, 3(44),
205-211, 223.

Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (2001). Emergent literacy: Development from

prereaders to readers. In Neuman, S. B., & Dickinson, D. K. (Eds.) Handbook of early
literacy research. New York: Guilford Press.

Wilder, A. A., & Williams, J. P. (2001). Students with severe learning disabilities can
learn higher-order comprehension skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2),
268-278.

Wolman, C. (1991). Sensitivity to causal cohesion in stories by children with mild

mental retardation, children with learning disabilities, and children without disabilities.
The Journal of Special Education, 25(2), 135-154.

Wolery, M., Ault, M. J., Gast, D. L., Doyle, P. M., & Mills, B. M. (1990). Use of choral
and individual attentional responses with constant time delay when teaching sight word
reading. Remedial and Special Education, 11(5), 47-58.

Wren, S. (2000). The cognitive foundations of learning to read: A framework. Austin:

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.

Yaden, D. B., Rowe, D. W., & MacGillivray, L. (2000). Emergent literacy: A matter
polyphony of perspectives. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, and R. Barr
(Eds.), Handbook of reading research, volume III. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

44
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References by Topic

Limited Experience
Fitzgerald, J., Roberts, J., Pierce, P., & Schuele, M. (1995). Evaluation of home literacy
environment: An illustration with preschool children with Down syndrome. Reading
and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties,
Difficulties, 11
11, 311-334.

Gersten, R., Williams, J. P., Fuchs, L., Baker, S., Koppenhaver, D., Spadorcia, S., &
Harrison, M. (1998). Improving reading comprehension for children with disabilities:
A review of research. (Final report). Washington, DC: Special Education Programs
(ED/OSERS).

Kliewer, C., & Biklen, D. (2001). School’s not really a place for reading: A research
synthesis of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities. Journal of the
Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(1), 1-12.

Kliewer, C., & Landis, D. (1999). Individualizing literacy instruction for young
children with moderate to severe disabilities. Exceptional Children, 66(1), 85-100.

Koppenhaver, D. A., Coleman, P. P., Kalman, S. L., & Yoder, D. E. (1991). The
implications of emergent literacy research for children with developmental disabilities.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 1(1), 38-44.

Marvin, C., & Mirenda, P. (1994). Literacy practices in head start and early childhood
special education classrooms. Early Education and Development, 5(4), 289-300.

Structured Comments
Hockenberger, E. H., Goldstein, H., & Haas, L. S. (1999).
Effects of commenting during joint book reading by mothers with low SES. Topics in
Early Childhood Special Education, 19(1), 15-27.

Van Kleeck, A., & Vander Woude, J. (2003). Book sharing with preschoolers with
language delays. In van Kleeck, A., Stahl, S. A., and Bauer, E. B. (Eds.). On reading
books to children. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Interactive Technology
Hutinger, P., Bell, C., Beard, M., Bond, J., Johanson, J., & Terry, C. (1998). The early
childhood emergent literacy technology research study. (Final report). Macomb, IL:
Macomb Projects at Western Illinois University. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED418545).

45
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References by Topic

Oral Vocabulary
Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive determinants of reading in mentally retarded
individuals. International Review of Research in Mental Retardation, 13, 181-214.

Direct Instruction
Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years
beyond DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Services.

Schloss, P. J., Alper, S., Young, H., Arnold-Reid, G., Aylward, M., & Dudenhoeffer, S.
(1995). Acquisition of functional sight words in community-based recreation settings.
The Journal of Special Education, 29(1), 84-96.
Sight Word Instruction
Browder, D. M., & D’Huyvetters, K. K. (1988). An evaluation of transfer of stimulus
control and of comprehension in sight word reading for children with mental
retardation and emotional disturbance. School Psychology Review, 17(2),
17 331-342.

Browder, D. M., & Lalli, J. S. (1991). Review of research on sight word instruction.
Research in Developmental Disabilities, 12, 203-228.

Browder, D. M., & Minarovic, T. J. (2000). Utilizing sight words in self-instruction

training for employees with moderate mental retardation in competitive jobs.
Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35(1),
78-89.

Browder, D. M., & Shear, S. M. (1996). Interspersal of known items in a treatment

package to teach sight words to students with behavior disorders. The Journal of
Special Education, 29(4), 400-413.

Browder, D. M., & Xin, Y. P. (1998). A meta-analysis and review of sight word
research and its implications for teaching functional reading to individuals with
moderate and severe disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 32(3), 130-153.

Butler, F. M. (1999). Reading partners: Students can help each other learn to read!
Education and Treatment of Children, 22(4), 415-426.

Cuvo, A. J., & Klatt, K. P. (1992). Effects of community-based, videotape, and flash
card instruction of community-referenced sight words on students with mental
retardation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 499-512.

46
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References by Topic

Sight Word Instruction

Didden, R., Prinsen, H., & Sigafoos, J. (2000). The blocking effect of pictorial prompts
on sight-word reading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33(3), 317-320.

Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., Morris, L. L., Munson Doyle, P., & Meyer, S. (1990). Teaching
sight word reading in a group instructional arrangement using constant time delay.
Exceptionality, 11, 81-96.

Lanquetot, R. (1984). Autistic children and reading. Reading Teacher, 38(2), 182-186.

Marino, G., & Gerber, B. L. (1990). A total communication reading program. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 22(4), 33-35.

McGee, G. G., Krantz, P. J., & McClannahan, L. E. (1986). An extension of incidental

teaching procedures to reading instruction for autistic children. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 19(2), 147-157.

Miracle, S. A., Collins, B. C., Schuster, J. W., & Grisham-Brown, J. (2001). Peer-versus
teacher-delivered instruction: Effects on acquisition and maintenance. Education and
Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36(4), 373-385.

Pufpaff, L. A., Blischak, D. M., & Lloyd, L. L. (2000). Effects of modified orthography
on the identification of printed words. American Journal on Mental Retardation,
105(1), 14-24.

Schloss, P. J., Alper, S., Young, H., Arnold-Reid, G., Aylward, M., & Dudenhoeffer, S.
(1995). Acquisition of functional sight words in community-based recreation settings.
The Journal of Special Education, 29(1), 84-96.

Sheehy, K. (2002). The effective use of symbols in teaching word recognition to

children with severe learning difficulties: A comparison of word alone, integrated
picture cueing and the handle technique. International Journal of Disability,
Development and Education, 49(1), 47-59.

Singh, N. N. (1990). Effects of two error-correction procedures on oral reading errors.

Word supply versus sentence repeat. Behavior Modifi
Modification,
cation, 114(2),
4 188-199.

Wolery, M., Ault, M. J., Gast, D. L., Doyle, P. M., & Mills, B. M. (1990). Use of choral
and individual attentional responses with constant time delay when teaching sight word
reading. Remedial and Special Education, 11(5), 47-58.

47
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References by Topic

Word Recognition Components

Conners, F. A. (1992). Reading instruction for students with moderate mental
retardation: Review and analysis of research. American Journal on Mental
Retardation, 96(6), 577-597.

Hedrick, W. B., Katims, D. S., & Carr, N. J. (1999). Implementing a multimethod,

multilevel literacy program for students with mental retardation. Focus on Autism and
Other Developmental Disabilities, 14(4), 231-239.

Kay-Raining Bird, E., Cleave, P. L., & McConnell, L. (2000). Reading and
phonological awareness in children with Down syndrome: A longitudinal study.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 9 319-330.

Nietupski, J., Williams, W., & York, R. (1979). Teaching selected phonic word analysis
reading skills to TMR labeled students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 11(4), 140-143.

O’Connor, R. E., Notari-Syverson, A., & Vadasy, P. F. (1996). Ladders to literacy: The
effects of teacher-led phonological activities for kindergarten children with and without
disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63(1), 117-131.
Explicit Strategies
Hoogeveen, F. R., Kouwenhoven, J. A., & Smeets, P. M. (1989). Establishing sound
blending in moderately mentally retarded children: Implications of verbal instruction
and pictorial prompting. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 10, 333-348.
Word Study Techniques
Joseph, L. M., & McCachran, M. (2003). Comparison of a word study phonics
technique between students with moderate to mild mental retardation and struggling
readers without disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities,
38(2), 192-199.

Graphic Presentation of Words

Hoogeveen, F. R., Kouwenhoven, J. A., & Smeets, P. M. (1989). Establishing sound
blending in moderately mentally retarded children: Implications of verbal instruction
and pictorial prompting. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 10, 333-348.

48
 Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References by Topic

Computer Assisted Instruction

Heiman, M., Nelson, K., Tjus, T., & Gillberg, C. (1995). Increasing reading and
communication skills in children with autism through an interactive multimedia
computer program. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25(5), 459-480.

Tjus, T., Heimann, M., & Nelson, K. (1998). Gains in literacy through the use of a
specially developed multimedia computer strategy. Autism, 2(2), 139-156.
Peer Tutoring (Learning to Read)
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, S., Yen, L., Yang, N. J., Braun, M.,
& O’Connor, R. E. (2001). Is reading important in reading-readiness programs? A
randomized field trial with teachers as program implementers. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 993(2), 251-267.

Kamps, D. M., Barbetta, P. M., Leonard, B. R., & Delquadri, J. (1994). Classwide
peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading skills and promote peer
interactions among students with autism and general education peers. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(1),
27 49-61.
Reading Rate
Gersten, R., Williams, J. P., Fuchs, L., Baker, S., Koppenhaver, D., Spadorcia, S., &
Harrison, M. (1998). Improving reading comprehension for children with disabilities:
A review of research. (Final report). Washington, DC: Special Education Programs
ED/OSERS.
Reading Vocabulary
Hedrick, W. B., Katims, D. S., & Carr, N. J. (1999). Implementing a multimethod,
multilevel literacy program for students with mental retardation. Focus on Autism and
Other Developmental Disabilities, 14(4), 231-239.

Kay-Raining Bird, E., Cleave, P. L, & McConnell, L. (2000). Reading and

phonological awareness in children with Down syndrome: A longitudinal study.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 319-330.
Making Inferences
Bos, C. S., & Tierney, R. J. (1984). Inferential reading abilities of mildly mentally
retarded and nonretarded students. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 89(1), 75-
82.

49
Teaching Students with Moderate Disabilities to Read: Insights from Research

References by Topic
Main Ideas
Luftig, R. L., & Johnson, R. E. (1982). Identification and recall of structurally
important units in prose by mentally retarded learners. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 86(5),
Deficiency, 86 495-502.

Fact Recall and Cause-Effect

Wolman, C. (1991). Sensitivity to causal cohesion in stories by children with mild
mental retardation, children with learning disabilities, and children without disabilities.
The Journal of Special Education, 25(2), 135-154.

Kamps, D. M., Barbetta, P. M., Leonard, B. R., & Delquadri, J. (1994). Classwide
peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading skills and promote peer
interactions among students with autism and general education peers. Journal of
27 49-61.
Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(1),

Peer Tutoring
Kamps, D., Leonard, B., Potucek, J., & Garrison-Harrell, L. (1995). Cooperative
learning groups in reading: An integration strategy for children with autism and
general classroom peers. Behavioral Disorders, 21(1), 89-109.

Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T., Mohler, L., Beranek, M., Spencer, V., Boon, R. T., &
Talbott, E. (2001). Can middle school students with serious reading difficulties help
each other and learn anything? Learning Disabilities, Research, and Practice, 16(1),
18-27.

50
Blank page
Jim Horne, Commissioner

ESE 312280