Reading performance is a primary concern in both regular and special education. Reading is also the dominant medium through which educators conduct lessons, or students acquire information in subjects such as science and mathematics. Reading performance can be measured in a variety of ways. The present study examined the performance of students with mild educational handicaps (n = 28) or learning disabilities (n = 38) on a combination of norm-referenced and curriculum-based assessment (CBA) approaches that used science content. Overall, there were no significant differences between the samples on measures of word recognition, but significant differences favoring students with learning disabilities did occur in comprehension.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bergerud, D., Lovitt, T., & Horton, S. (1988). The effectiveness of textbook adaptations in life science for high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 70–76.
2.
Blecha, M.K., Gega, P.C., & Green, M. (1982). The new exploring science. River Forest, IL: Laidlaw Bros.
3.
Cawley, J. (1968). Word recognition performance of mentally handicapped and average children: Implications for classroom diagnosis. Mental Retardation, 6(3), 28–31.
4.
Cawley, J.F. (1985). Nonmathematics appraisal. In J. Cawley (Ed.), Practical mathematics appraisal of the learning disabled (pp. 147–174). Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
5.
Cawley, J., Kahn, H., & Tedesco, A. (1988). Vocational education and the learning disabled. Manuscript submitted for publication.
6.
Cawley, J., & Miller, J. (in progress). Science for the mildly handicapped. USDOE: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Grant No. G008730017.
Deno, S.L., Mirkin, P.K., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49, 36–45.
9.
Donahoe, K., & Zigmond, N. (1986, April). High school grades of urban LD students and low achieving peers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
10.
Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53, 159–200.
11.
Dunn, L.M., & Markwardt, F.C. (1970). Peabody individual achievement test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
12.
Elliott, D., Nagle, K., & Woodward, W. (1986, April). Scientific literacy in elementary school science textbooks. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
13.
Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20–28.
Gickling, E.E., & Thompson, V.P. (1985). A personal view of curriculum-based assessment. Exceptional Children, 52, 205–218.
16.
Jenkins, J., & Pany, D. (1978). Standardized achievement tests: How useful for special education? Exceptional Children, 44, 448–453.
17.
Louisiana State Department of Education. (1986). Pupil appraisal handbook: Bulletin 1508.. Author: Baton Rouge.
18.
Lovitt, T., Rudsit, J., Jenkins, J., Pious, S., & Benedetti, D. (1985). Two methods of adapting science materials for learning disabled and regular seventh graders. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 275–285.
19.
Marston, D., & Magnusson, D. (1985). Implementing curriculum-based measurement in special and regular education settings. Exceptional Children, 52, 266–276.
20.
Shinn, M., & Marston, D. (1985). Differentiating mildly handicapped, low-achieving and regular education students using curriculum-based assessment procedures. Remedial and Special Education, 6(2), 31–38.
21.
Ysseldyke, J., Thurlow, M., Christenson, S., & Weiss, J. (1987). Time allocated to instruction of mentally retarded, learning disabled, emotionally disturbed and nonhandicapped elementary students. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 23–42.
