In this article, the ways in which special education for students with learning disabilities was perceived as “special” historically and what we know about effective special education instructional practices for students with learning disabilities currently are summarized. The influence of monitoring progress, providing explicit and systematic instruction, understanding the critical factors associated with progress in academic areas such as reading and math, and teaching students in small groups with many opportunities to practice and obtain feedback are essential features of special education for students with learning disabilities. A model for providing integrated services between general and special education for students with learning disabilities is described.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abbott, M., Walton, C., Tapia, Y., & Greenwood, C.R. (1999). Research to practice: A “blueprint” for closing the gap in local schools. Exceptional Children , 65, 339—352.
2.
Arter, J.A., & Jenkins, J.R. (1979). Differential diagnosis-prescriptive teaching: A critical appraisal. Review of Educational Research, 49, 517—555.
3.
Baker, J.M., & Zigmond, N. (1995). The meaning and practice of inclusion for students with learning disabilities: Themes and implications from the five cases. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 163—180.
4.
Bloom, B.S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13(6), 4—16.
5.
Carnine, D. (1997). Bridging the research-to-practice gap. Exceptional Children, 63, 513—521.
6.
Chall, J.S. (2000). The academic achievement challenge: What really works in the classroom?New York: Guilford Press.
7.
Committee on Preventing Reading Difficulties. ( 1998). Preventing reading di ficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
8.
Cooper, H. (1996). Speaking power to truth: Reflections of an educational researcher after 4 years of school board service. Educational Researcher, 25(1), 29—34.
9.
Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children, 52, 219—232.
10.
Dickson, S.V., & Bursuck, W.D. (1999). Implementing a model for preventing reading failure: A report from the field. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14, 191—202.
11.
Elbaum, B.E., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M.T., & Moody, S.W. (1999). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65, 399—415.
12.
Elbaum, B.E., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M.T., & Moody, S.W. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure?Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 605—619.
13.
Fernald, G.M. (1943). Remedial techniques in basic school subjects. New York: McGraw-Hill.
14.
Fernald, G.M., & Keller, H. (1921). The effect of kineasthetic factors on the development of word recognition in the case of non-readers. Journal of Educational Research, 4, 355—377.
15.
Foorman, B., Francis, D., Fletcher, J., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, P. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37—55.
16.
Fuchs, D. (1996). Educational intervention and students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal , 7, 63—67.
17.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (1998). Researchers and teachers working together to adapt instruction for diverse learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 126—137.
18.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 204—219.
19.
Gelzheiser, L.M., Meyers, J., Slesinski, C., Douglas, C., & Lewis, L. (1994). Patterns of accommodations provided to students with disabilities in integrated classrooms. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED395401)
20.
Gersten, R.M., & Jimenez, R.T. (1998). Promoting learning for culturally and linguistically diverse students. Classroom applications from contemporary research. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED415715)
21.
Gersten, R., Schiller, E.P., & Vaughn, S. (2000). Contemporary special education research: Syntheses of the knowledge base on critical instructional issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
22.
Gersten, R., & Vaughn, S. (2001). Meta-analyses in learning disabilities: Introduction to the special issue. Elementary School Journal, 101, 247— 249.
23.
Gersten, R., Vaughn, S., Deshler, D., & Schiller, E. (1997). What we know about using research findings: Implications for improving special education practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 466—476.
24.
Gillingham, A., & Stillman, B.W. (1936). Remedial work for reading, spelling, and penmanship. New York: Sachett & Wilhelms.
25.
Good, R., & Kaminski, R. (1996). Assessment for instructional decisions: Toward a proactive/prevention model of decision-making for early literacy skills . School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 326—336.
26.
Hammill, D.D., & Larsen, S.C. (1974). The effectiveness of psycholinguistic training . Exceptional Children, 41, 5—14.
27.
Hammill, D.D., & Larsen, S.C. (1978). The effectiveness of psycholinguistic training: A reaffirmation of position. Exceptional Children, 44, 402—414.
28.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. § 1401 (26).
29.
Johnson, D., & Myklebust, H.R. (1967). Learning disabilities: Educational principles and practices. New York: Grune & Stratton.
30.
Juel, C. (1991). Cross-age tutoring between student athletes and at-risk children. The Reading Teacher, 45, 178—186.
31.
Kavale, K.A. (1980). Auditory-visual integration and its relationship to reading achievement: A meta-analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skill, 51, 947— 955.
32.
Kavale, K.A. (1981). Functions of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA): Are they trainable?Exceptional Children , 47, 496—510.
33.
Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (1987). Substance over style: Assessing the efficacy of modality testing and teaching. Exceptional Children, 54, 228—239.
34.
Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (2000). Policy decisions in special education: The role of meta-analysis. In R. Gersten, E. P. Schiller, & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Contemporary special education research (pp. 281—326). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
35.
Kavale, K.A., Hirshoren, A., & Forness, S.R. (1998). Meta-analytic validation of the Dunn and Dunn model of learning-style preferences: A critique of what was Dunn. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 75—80.
36.
Kavale, K.A., & Mattson, D. (1983). “One jumped off the balance beam”: Meta-analysis of perceptual-motor training. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 165—173.
37.
Keogh, B.K. (1994a). A matrix of decision points in the measurement of learning disabilities. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities (pp. 15—26). Baltimore: Brookes.
38.
Keogh, B.K. (1994b). What the special education research agenda should look like in the year 2000. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 62—69.
Kirk, S.A., & Kirk, W.D. (1971). Psycholinguistic learning disabilities: Diagnosis and remediation. Urbana: University of Illinois.
41.
Kirk, S.A., McCarthy, J.J., & Kirk, W.D. (1968). Examiner's manual: Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities. Urbana: University of Illinois.
42.
Klingner, J.K., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M.T., & Arguelles, M.E. (1999). Sustaining research-based practices in reading: A 3-year follow-up. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 263—274, 287.
43.
Kulik, J.A., & Kulik, C.C. (1987). Effects of ability grouping on student achievement . Equity and Excellence, 23, 22—30.
44.
Larrivee, B. (1981). Modality preference as a model for differentiating beginning reading instruction: A review of the issues. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 180—188.
45.
Larsen, S.C., Parker, R.M., & Hammill, D.D. (1982). Effectiveness of psycholinguistic training: A response to Kavale. Exceptional Children, 49, 60—66.
46.
Lloyd, J.W., Weintraub, F.J., & Safer, N.D. (1997). A bridge between research and practice: Building consensus. Exceptional Children, 63, 535—538.
47.
Lou, Y., Abrami, P.C., Spence, J.C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., & D'Apollonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 423—458.
48.
Lund, K.A., Foster, G.E., & McCall-Perez, F.C. (1978). The effectiveness of psycholinguistic training: A reevaluation. Exceptional Children , 44, 310—319.
49.
Lyon, G.R. (1985). Identification and remediation of learning disability subtypes: Preliminary findings. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 1, 21—35.
50.
Lyon, G.R. (1994). Critical issues in the measurement of learning disabilities. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities (pp. 3—13). Baltimore: Brookes .
51.
Malouf, D.B., & Schiller, E.P. (1995). Practice and research in special education. Exceptional Children, 61, 414—424.
52.
Mann, L. (1979). On the trail of process. New York: Grune & Stratton.
53.
McIntosh, R., Vaughn, S., Schumm, J., Haager, D., & Lee, O. (1993). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 60, 249—261.
54.
McIntyre, C.W., & Pickering, J.S. (1995). Clinical studies of multisensory structured language education for students with dyslexia and related disorders . Salem, OR: The International Multisensory Structured Language Education Council.
55.
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 . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development.
56.
O'Connor, R. (2000). Increasing the intensity of intervention in kindergarten and first grade. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice , 15, 43—54.
57.
Orton, S.T. (1937). Reading, writing and speech problems in children . New York: Norton.
58.
Rashotte, C.A., MacPhee, K., & Torgesen, J.K. (2001). The effectiveness of a group reading instruction program with poor readers in multiple grades. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 119—134.
Slavin, R.E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57, 293—336.
61.
Speece, D.L., & Case, L.P. (2001). Classification in context: An alternative approach to identifying early reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 735—749.
62.
Stanovich, K.E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading. New York: Guilford Press.
63.
Stanovich, P.J., & Stanovich, K.E. (1997). Research into practice in special education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 477—481.
64.
Stone, C.A. (1998). Moving validated instructional practices into the classroom: Learning from examples about the rough road to success. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 121—125.
65.
Strauss, A.A., & Lehtinen, L.E. (1947). Psychopathology and education of the brain-injured child. New York: Grune & Stratton.
66.
Swanson, H.L., Carson, C., & Sachs-Lee, C.M. (1996). A selective synthesis of intervention research for students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 25, 370—391.
67.
Swanson, H.L., Hoskyn, M., & Lee, C. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities . New York: Guilford Press.
68.
Thurlow, M.L., Ysseldyke, J.E., Wotruba, J.W., & Algozzine, B. (1993). Instruction in special education classrooms under varying student-teacher ratios. The Elementary School Journal , 93, 305—320.
69.
Torgesen, J.K. (1996). Thoughts about intervention research in learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal , 7, 55—58.
70.
Torgesen, J.K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55—64.
71.
Torgesen, 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, 33—58.
72.
Vaughn, S., & Dammann, J.E. (2001). Science and sanity in special education. Behavior Disorder, 27, 21—29.
73.
Vaughn, S., Gersten, R., & Chard, D.J. (2000). The underlying message in LD intervention research: Findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children, 67, 99—114.
74.
Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children , 69, 391—409.
75.
Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Kouzekanani, K., Bryant, D.P., Dickson, S., & Blozis, S. (in press). Grouping for reading instruction: Students with reading difficulties who are monolingual English speakers or English language learners . Remedial and Special Education.
76.
Vellutino, F., Scanlon, D.M., Sipay, E., Small, S., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denckla, M. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601—638.
77.
Walberg, H.J. (1998). Foreward. In K. Topping & S. Ehly (Eds.), Peer-assisted learning (pp. ix—xii). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
78.
Wasik, B.A., & Slavin, R.E. (1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly , 28, 178—200.
79.
Zigmond, N., Jenkins, J., Fuchs, L.S., Deno, S., Fuchs, D., Baker, J.N., et al. (1995, March). Special education in restructured schools: Findings from three multi-year studies. Phi Delta Kappan,76, 531—540.
