ArcherA. L.GleasonM. M.VachonV. L. (2003). Decoding and fluency: Foundation skills for struggling older readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26, 89–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1593592.
2.
ArcherA. L.HughesC. A. (2011). Explicit instruction—Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
3.
BaumannJ. F.Kame'enuiE. J.AshG. E. (2003). Research on vocabulary instruction: Voltaire redux. In FloodJ.LappD.SquireJ. R.JensenJ. M. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (2nd ed., pp. 752–785). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4.
BhattacharyaA.EhriL. C. (2004). Graphosyllabic analysis helps adolescent struggling readers read and spell words. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 331–348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370040501.
5.
BiancarosaG.SnowC. E. (2004). Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
6.
BrighamF. J.ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (2011). Science education and students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 26, 223–232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00343.x.
7.
DeshlerD. D.ShumakerJ. B. (2006). High school students with disabilities: Strategies for accessing the curriculum. New York, NY: Corwin Press.
8.
EbbersS. M.DentonC. A. (2008). A root awakening: Vocabulary instruction for older students with reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23, 90–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2008.00267.x.
9.
EdmondsM. S.VaughnS.WexlerJ.ReutebuchC. K.CableA.TackettK. K.SchnakenbergJ. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79, 262–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325998.
10.
Faggella-LubyM. N.DeshlerD. D. (2008). Reading comprehension in adolescents with LD: What we know; what we need to learn. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 70–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2008.00265.x.
11.
FangZ.SchleppegrellM. J. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas—A language-based pedagogy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
12.
HallahanD. P.LloydJ. W.KauffmanJ. M.WeissM. P.MartinezE. A. (2005). Learning disabilities: Foundations, characteristics, and effective teaching (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
13.
HarrisM. L.ShumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D. (2011). The effects of strategic morphological analysis instruction on the vocabulary performance of secondary students with and without disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34, 17–34.
14.
KamilM. L.BormanG. D.DoleJ.KralC. C.SalingerT.TorgesenJ. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A Practice Guide (NCEE #2008–4027). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc.
15.
KennedyM. J. (2011). Effects of content acquisition podcasts on vocabulary performance of secondary students with and without learning disabilities. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from UMI Proquest Dissertations & Theses. (3458221).
16.
KennedyM. J.DeshlerD. D. (2010). Literacy instruction, technology, and students with learning disabilities: Research we have, research we need. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 289–298.
17.
KennedyM. J.NewtonJ. R.HainesS. J.Walther-ThomasC. S.KellemsR. O. (2012). A triarchic model for teaching “Introduction to special education”: Case studies, content acquisition podcasts, and effective feedback. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 20, 251–275.
18.
KennedyM. J.ThomasC. N. (2012). Effects of content acquisition podcasts to develop preservice teachers' knowledge of positive behavioral interventions and supports. Exceptionality, 20, 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2011.611088.
19.
LeeC. D.SpratleyA. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenge of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
20.
MasonL. H.HedinL. (2011). Reading science text: Challenges for students with learning disabilities and considerations for teachers. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 26, 214–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00342.x.
21.
MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.LevinJ. R. (1987). Learning-disabled students' memory for expository prose: Mnemonic versus nonmnemonic pictures. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 505–519.
22.
MayerR. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist, 63, 760–769. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.8.760.
23.
MayerR. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
24.
ReedD. K. (2008). A synthesis of morphology interventions and effects on reading outcomes for students in grades K-12. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 36–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00261.x.
25.
RobertsG.TorgesenJ. K.BoardmanA.ScammaccaN. (2008). Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 63–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2008.00264.x.
26.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.BerkeleyS.GraetzJ. E. (2011). Do special education interventions improve learning of secondary content?Remedial and Special Education. 31, 437–449. http://dx.doi.org/:10.1177/0741932508327465.
StrangmanN.DaltonB. (2005). Using technology to support struggling readers: A review of the research. In EdyburnD.HigginsK.BooneR. (Eds.), Handbook of special education technology research and practice (pp. 545–570). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design.
29.
SwansonH. L. (2001). Research on interventions for adolescents with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of outcomes related to higher-order processing. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 331–348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/499671.
30.
TherrienW. J.TaylorJ. C.HospJ. L.KaldenbergE. R.GorshJ. (2011). Science instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 26, 188–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00340.x.
31.
VaughnS.WexlerJ.RobertsG.BarthA. A.CirinoP. T.RomainM. A.DentonC. (2011). Effects of individualized and standardized interventions on middle school students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77, 391–408.
32.
VillanuevaM. G.HandB. (2011). Science for all: Engaging students with special needs in and about science. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 26, 233–240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00344.x.
33.
WexlerJ.VaughnS.EdmondsM.ReutebuchC. K. (2008). A synthesis of fluency interventions for secondary struggling readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21, 317–347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9085-7.