This article summarizes the critical findings of recent research syntheses funded by the Office of Special Education Programs and the National Center for Learning Disabilities. The syntheses examined research on higher-order processing and problem-solving, reading comprehension, written expression, and grouping practices associated with improved outcomes in reading for students with learning disabilities. Common principles of instruction are identified across the syntheses. These principles are summarized and illustrated with research-based exemplars of best practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonL.EvertsonC.BrophyJ. (1979). An experimental study of effective teaching in first-grade reading groups. Elementary School Journal, 79, 193–223.
2.
Arreaga-MayerC.TerryB.GreenwoodC. R. (1998). Classwide peer tutoring. In ToppingK.EhlyS. (Eds.), Peer-assisted learning (pp. 105–119). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.*
3.
BakerJ.ZigmondN. (1990). Are regular education classes equipped to accommodate students with learning disabilities?Exceptional Children, 56, 515–526.
4.
BallD. L. (1995). Blurring the boundaries of research and practice. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 354–363.
5.
BarrR.DreebenR. (1991). Grouping students for reading instruction. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Vol. II (pp. 885–910). New York: Longman.*
6.
BatemanB. (1968). The efficacy of an auditory and a visual method of first grade reading instruction with auditory and visual learners. In SmithH. K. (Ed.), Perception and reading (pp. 105–112). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 074 442).
7.
BerningerV.AbbottR.RoganL.ReedE.AbbottS.BrooksA.VaughanK.GrahamS. (1998). Teaching spelling to children with specific learning disabilities: The mind's ear and eye beat the computer or pencil. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21, 1–17.
8.
BerningerV.VaughanK.AbbottR.AbbottS.RoganL.BrooksA.ReedE. (1997). Treatment of handwriting problems in beginning writers: Transfer from handwriting to composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 652–666.
9.
BillingsleyB. S.WildmanT. M. (1988). The effects of prereading activities on the comprehension monitoring of learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disabilities Research, 4, 36–44.
10.
BlackorbyJ.WagnerM. (1996). Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study. Exceptional Children, 62, 399–413.
11.
BransfordJ. D.BrownA. L.CockingR. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 436 276).
12.
BrownA. L.PalincsarA. S. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control training. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2(1), 1–17.
13.
CalfeeR.BrownR. (1979). Grouping students for instruction. In DukeD. L. (Ed.), Classroom management. Seventy-eighth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 144–182). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.*
14.
CarnineD. (1991). Curricular interventions for teaching higher order thinking to all students: Introduction to the special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 261–269.
ChanL. K. S. (1991). Promoting strategy generalization through self-instructional training in students with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 427–433.
17.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.*
18.
DeWitzP. (1997, March). Comprehension instruction: A research agenda for the 21st century: Understanding expository texts. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
19.
DurkinD. (1979). What classroom observation reveals about reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481–533.
20.
ElbaumB. E.VaughnS. (1999, May). A meta-analysis of intervention studies for students with LD and their effects on self-concept. Paper presented at the National Council for Learning Disabilities Summit, Washington, DC.
21.
ElbaumB.VaughnS.HughesM.MoodyS. W. (1999). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65, 399–415.
22.
ElbaumB.VaughnS.HughesM.MoodyS. W.SchummJ. S. (2000). How reading outcomes of students with disabilities are related to instructional grouping formats: A meta-analytic review. In GerstenR.SchillerE.VaughnS. (Eds.), Contemporary special education research (pp. 105–135). Mahawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.*
23.
EnglertC. S.RaphaelT. E. (1988). Constructing well-formed prose: Process, structure, and metacognitive knowledge. Exceptional Children, 54, 513–520.
24.
EnglertC. S.RaphaelT. E.MariageT. V. (1994). Developing a school-based discourse for literacy learning: A principled search for understanding. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17(1), 2–32.
25.
EnglertC. S.ThomasC. C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A comparison between learning disabled and non-learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10(2), 93–105.
26.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.MathesP. H.SimmonsD. C. (1997). Peer-assisted strategies: Making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 174–206.
27.
GallM.GerstenR.GraceD.EricksonD.StieberS. (1987, April). Instructional correlates of effective intermediate algebra instruction: A process-product study. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
28.
GerstenR. (1998). Recent advances in instructional research for students with learning disabilities: An overview. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 162–170.
29.
GerstenR.BakerS. (in press). Teaching expressive writing to students with learning disabilities. Elementary School Journal.
30.
GerstenR.BakerS.PugachM.ChardD. J.ScanlonD. (in press). Contemporary special education teaching. In RichardsonV. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
31.
GerstenR.CarnineD. W.WhiteW. A. (1984). The pursuit of clarity: Direct instruction and applied behavior analysis. In HewardW.HeronT. E.HillD. S.Trap-PorterJ. (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education (pp. 38–57). Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.*
32.
GerstenR.WilliamsJ.FuchsL.BakerS. (1998). Improving reading comprehension for children with disabilities: A review of research (Final Report: Section 1, U. S. Department of Education Contract HS 921700).
33.
GerstenR.WoodwardJ.DarchC. (1986). Direct instruction: A research-based approach to curriculum design and teaching. Exceptional Children, 53, 17–31.
34.
GoldmanS. R.HasselbringT. S. (1997). Achieving meaningful mathematics literacy for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 198–208.
35.
GrahamS.HarrisK. R. (1989). Components analysis of cognitive strategy instruction: Effects on learning disabled students' compositions and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 353–361.
36.
GravesA. W. (1986). Effects of direct instruction and metacomprehension training on finding main ideas. Learning Disabilities Research, 1(2), 90–100.
37.
GravesA.MontagueM. (1991). Using story grammar cueing to improve the writing of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6, 246–250.
38.
GreenwoodC. R. (1999). Reflections on a research career: Perspectives on 35 years of research at the Juniper Gardens Children's Project. Exceptional Children, 66, 7–21.
39.
HammillD.LarsenS. (1974). The effectiveness of psycholinguistic training. Exceptional Children, 41, 5–14.
40.
HarrisK. R.PressleyM. (1991). The nature of cognitive strategy instruction: Interactive strategy construction. Exceptional Children, 57, 392–404.
41.
HiebertE. H. (1983). An examination of ability grouping for reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 231–255.
42.
IsaacsonS. L. (1994). Integrating process, product, and purpose: The role of instruction. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 10, 39–62.
43.
JenkinsJ. R.HeliotisJ. D.SteinM. L.HaynesM. C. (1987). Improving reading comprehension by using paragraph restatements. Exceptional Children, 54, 54–59.
44.
KeoghB. K. (1982). Research in learning disability: A view of status and need. In DasJ. P.MulchahyR. F.WallA. E. (Eds.), Theory and research in learning disabilities (pp. 27–44). New York: Plenum Press.*
45.
KolligianJ.SternbergR. J. (1987). Intelligence, information processing, and specific learning disabilities: A triarchic synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(1), 8–17.
46.
KucanL.BeckI. L. (1997). Thinking aloud and reading comprehension research: Inquiry, instruction, and social interaction. Review of Educational Research, 67, 271–299.
47.
LampertM. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 29–63.
48.
MaheadyL. (1997). Preparing teachers for instructing multiple ability groups. Teacher Education and Special Education, 20, 322–339.
49.
MannL. (1979). On the trail of process: A historical perspective on cognitive processes and their training. New York: Grune & Stratton.*
50.
MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.BakkenJ. P.WhedonC. (1996). Reading comprehension: A synthesis of research in learning disabilities. In ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (pp. 201–227). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.*
51.
MathesP. G.FuchsL. S. (1994). The efficacy of peer tutoring in reading for students with mild disabilities: A best-evidence synthesis. School Psychology Review, 23, 59–80.
52.
McIntoshR.VaughnS.SchummJ.HaagerD.LeeO. (1993). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 60, 249–261.
53.
McKinneyJ. D.OsborneS. S.SchulteA. C. (1993). Academic consequences of learning disability: Longitudinal prediction of outcomes at 11 years of age. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 8, 19–27.
54.
MoodyS. W.VaughnS.SchummJ. S. (1997). Instructional grouping for reading: Teachers' views. Remedial and Special Education, 18, 347–356.
55.
PressleyM. (1998). Comprehension strategies instruction. In OsbornJ.LehrF. (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning (pp. 113–133). New York: Guilford.*
56.
RadencichM. C.McKayL. J. (1995). Flexible grouping for literacy in the elementary grades. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.*
57.
RosenholtzS. J.WilsonB. (1980). The effect of classroom structure on shared perceptions of ability. American Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 75–82.
58.
SchummJ. S.MoodyS. W.VaughnS. (in press). Grouping for reading instruction: Does one size fit all?Journal of Learning Disabilities.
59.
SwansonH. L. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford.*
60.
SwansonH. L. (in press). Intervention research for adolescents with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of outcomes related to high-order processing. Elementary School Journal.
61.
SwansonH. L.AlexanderJ. E. (1997). Cognitive processes as predictors of word recognition and reading comprehension in learning-disabled and skilled readers: Revisiting the specificity hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 128–158.
62.
SwansonH. L.HoskynM. (1998). Experimental intervention research on students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 68, 277–321.
63.
SwansonH. L.HoskynM.LeeC. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford.*
64.
TaylorM. B.WilliamsJ. P. (1983). Comprehension of learning-disabled readers: Task and text variations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 743–751.
65.
VaughnS.HughesM. T.MoodyS. W.ElbaumB. (in press). Instructional grouping for reading for students with learning disabilities: Implications for practice. Intervention in School and Clinic.
66.
WilliamsJ. P.BrownL. G.SilversteinA. K.deCaniJ. S. (1994). An instructional program in comprehension of narrative themes for adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 205–221.
67.
WongB. Y. L. (1999). Metacognition in writing. In GallimoreR.BernheimerL. P.MacMillanD. L.SpeeceD. L.VaughnS. (Eds.), Developmental perspectives on children with high-incidence disabilities. (pp. 183–198) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.*
68.
WongB. Y. L.JonesW. (1982). Increasing metacomprehension in learning disabled and normally achieving students through self-questioning training. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 228–240.
69.
YsseldykeJ. E. (1973). Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching: The search for aptitude-treatment interactions. In MannL.SabatinoD. A. (Eds.), The first review of special education (pp. 5–32). Philadelphia: Journal of Special Education Press, Grune and Stratton.*
