Science has been an important partner of the field of learning disabilities since its inception. Special educators have used science to confirm or reject approaches to identifying and teaching students with disabilities. Current research and practice is using science to find better approaches to preventing learning difficulties and reducing the number of students referred for special education. However, I caution that if we want science to have the desired impact on the educational and social outcomes of students with learning disabilities, we must take care not to misuse it.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Carnine, D. (1992). Expanding the notion of teachers' rights: Access to tools that work. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 7—19.
2.
Chard, D.J., & Kame'enui, E.J. (2000). Struggling first-grade readers: The frequency and progress of their reading. The Journal of Special Education, 34, 28—38.
3.
Chard, D.J. (in press). Toward a science of professional development in early reading instruction. Exceptionality.
4.
Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M., Moody, S.W., & Schumm, J.S. (2000). How reading outcomes of students with disabilities are related to instructional grouping formats: A meta-analytic review. In R. Gersten, E. Schiller, & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Contemporary special education research: Syntheses of the knowledge base on critical instructional issues (pp. 105— 135). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum .
5.
Elmore, R.F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for professional development in education. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute.
6.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (1995). What's “special” about special education?Phi Delta Kappan,76, 522—530.
7.
Gersten, R., Chard, D.J., & Baker, S. (2000). Factors enhancing sustained use of research-based instructional practices. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33, 445— 457.
8.
Good, R.H., Simmons, D.C., Kame'enui, E.J., & Chard, D.J. (2003). Using dynamic indicators of basic early literacy in a school-wide model for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention. Manuscript in preparation.
9.
Hammill, D.D., & Larsen, S.C. (1974). The effectiveness of psycholinguistic training . Exceptional Children, 41, 5—14. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1999, 20 U. S. C. §§ 1400—1487.
10.
Kirk, S.A. (1968). Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities: Its origins and implications. In J. Hellmuth (Ed.), Learning disorders (Vol. 3, pp. 395—427). Seattle, WA: Special Child Publications.
11.
Kirk, S., & Bateman, B.D. (1962). Diagnosis and remediation of learning disabilities . Exceptional Children, 29, 73—78.
12.
Levy, S., & Vaughn, S. (2002). An observational study of teachers' reading instruction of students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 215—235.
13.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction . Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
14.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et seq.
15.
Sagan, C. (1997). The demon-haunted world: Science as a candle in the dark. London: Headline.
16.
Shapiro, J.P., Loeb, P., Bowermaster, D., Wright, A., Headden, S., & Toch, T. (1993). Separate and unequal. U.S. News and World Report, 115(23), 46—60.
17.
Simmeonson, R.J. (1994). Promoting children's health, education, and well-being . In R. J. Simeonsson (Ed.), Risk, resilience, and prevention (pp. 3—11). Baltimore : Brookes.
18.
Swanson, H.L., & Hoskyn, M. (1998). Experimental intervention research on students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 68, 277—321.
19.
Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L.S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137—146.
20.
Vaughn, S., Gersten, R., & Chard, D.J. (2000). The underlying message in LD intervention research: Findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children, 67, 99—114.
21.
Vaughn, S., Moody, S.W., & Schumm, J.S. (1998). Broken promises: Reading instruction in the resource room. Exceptional Children, 64, 211—225.
