Identifying Children with Specific Reading Disabilities From Listening and Reading Discrepancy Scores

Abstract

A method of identifying children with specific reading disabilities by identifying discrepancies between their reading and listening comprehension scores was validated with disabled and nondisabled readers in Grades 4, 5, and 6. The method is based on a modification of the reading comprehension subtest of the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (Dunn & Markwardt, 1970). In this modification, even-numbered sentences are read by subjects, and odd-numbered sentences are read by the test administrator as subjects listen. The features of this test that reduce demands on working memory, thereby making it suitable for the detection of a discrepancy between reading and listening comprehension in readers with disabilities, are discussed. A significant group-by-modality interaction was obtained. Children with reading disabilities scored significantly lower on reading than on listening comprehension, while nondisabled readers scored slightly higher, but not significantly so, on reading than on listening comprehension. The appropriateness of this method as a substitute for the traditional method, which is based on the detection of a discrepancy between intelligence and reading and which has recently been proscribed in certain school districts, is discussed. Issues concerning the listening comprehension skills of disabled readers are also discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baddeley, A.D. (1979). Working memory and reading. In P.A. Kolers , M. Wrolstad , & H. Bouma (Eds.), Processing of visible language (Vol. 1, pp. 355–;370). New York: Plenum Press.

Chall, J.S. (1979). The great debate: Ten years later, with a modest proposal for reading stages. In L.B. Resnick & P.A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 1, pp. 29–;55). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dunn, L.M. , & Markwardt, F.C. (1970). Manual: Peabody individual achievement test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

Farnham-Diggory, S. , & Gregg, L.W. (1975). Short term memory function in young readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 19, 279–;298.

Fletcher, J.M. , Satz, P. , & Scholes, R.J. (1981). Developmental changes in the linguistic performance correlates of reading achievement. Brain and Language, 13, 78–;90.

Jastak, S. , & Wilkinson, G.S. (1984). Administration manual: Wide range achievement test–;Revised. Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.

Jorm, A.F. (1983). Specific reading retardation and working memory: A review. British Journal of Psychology, 74, 311–;342.

Larry P. v. Riles, 793 F.2d 969 (9th Cir. 1984).

Liberman, I.Y. , Shankweiler, D. , Liberman, A.M. , Fowler, C. , & Fischer, F.W. (1977). Phonetic segmentation and recoding in the beginning reader. In A.S. Reber & D.L. Scarborough (Eds.), Toward a psychology of reading (pp. 207–;225). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

10.

Mann, V.A. , Liberman, I.Y. , & Shankweiler, D. (1980). Children's memory for sentences and word strings in relation to reading ability. Memory and Cognition, 8, 329–;335.

11.

Mann, V.A. , Shankweiler, D. , & Smith, S.T. (1984). The association between comprehension of spoken sentences and early reading ability: The role of phonetic representation. Journal of Child Language, 11, 627–;643.

12.

Perfetti, C.A. , & Lesgold, A.M. (1977). Discourse comprehension and sources of individual differences. In J.A. Just & P.A. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 141–;183). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

13.

Shankweiler, D. , & Crain, S. (1986). Language mechanisms and reading disorder: A modular approach. Cognition, 24, 139–;168.

14.

Shankweiler, D. , Smith, S.T. , & Mann, V.A. (1984). Repetition and comprehension of spoken sentences by reading-disabled children. Brain and Language, 23, 241–;257.

15.

Smith, S.T. , Mann, V.A. , & Shankweiler, D. (1986). Spoken sentence comprehension by good and poor readers: A study with the token test. Cortex, 22, 627–;632.

16.

Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–;406.

17.

Stein, C.L. , Cairns, H.S. , & Zurif, E.B. (1984). Sentence comprehension limitations related to syntactic deficits in reading-disabled children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 5, 305–;322.

18.

Sticht, T.G. (1979). Applications of the audread model to reading evaluation and instruction. In L.B. Resnick & P.A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 1, pp. 209–;226). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

19.

Task Force . (1987, January). Alternative assessment task force report. CASP Today, p. 20.

20.

Torgesen, J.K. , Greenstein, J.J. , Houck, A.G. , & Portes, P. (1985). Further examinations of information processing difficulties of learning disabled children with memory span difficulties (Experiments 1, 2, 3, and 4). Unpublished manuscript, Florida State University, Tallahassee.

21.

Torgesen, J.K. , Rashotte, C.A. , & Greenstein, J.J. (1985). Listening comprehension in learning disabled children who perform poorly on memory span tasks (Experiments 5, 6, and 7). Unpublished manuscript, Florida State University, Tallahassee.

22.

Vellutino, F.R. (1979). Dyslexia: Theory and research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

23.

Vogel, S.A. (1975). Syntactic abilities in normal and dyslexic children. Baltimore: University Park Press.

24.

Wickens, D.D. , Born, D.G. , & Allen, C.K. (1963). Proactive inhibition and item similarity in short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 440–;445.