BaxendellB. W. (2003). Consistent, coherent, creative: The three C's of graphic organizers. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 35 (3), 46–53.
2.
BoonR. T.ForeC.AyresK.SpencerV. G. (2005). The effects of cognitive organizers to facilitate content-area learning for students with mild disabilities: A pilot study. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32, 101–117.
3.
BrighamF. J.ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (1995). Elaborative maps for enhanced learning of historical information: Uniting spatial, verbal, and imaginal information. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 440–460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002246699502800404.
4.
BulgrenJ.DeshlerD. D.LenzB. K. (2007). Engaging adolescents with LD in higher order thinking about history concepts using integrated content enhancement routines. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 121–133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400020301.
5.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_ELA%20Standards.pdf.
6.
ConleyM. W. (2008). Cognitive strategy instruction for adolescents: What we know about the promise, and what we don't know about the potential. Harvard Educational Review, 78 (1), 84–106.
7.
DeshlerD. D.SchumakerJ. B.LenzB. K.BulgrenJ. A.HockM. F.EhrenB. J. (2001). Ensuring content-area learning by secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 96–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0938-8982.00011.
8.
DiCeccoV. M.GleasonM. M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 306–320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00222194020350040201.
9.
FletcherJ. M.LyonG. R.FuchsL. S.BarnesM. A. (2007). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention. New York, NY: Guilford.
10.
GajriaM.JitendraA. K.SoodS.SacksG. (2007). Improving comprehension of expository text in students with LD: A research synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 210–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400030301.
11.
GerstenR.BakerS. K.Smith-JohnsonJ.DiminoJ.PetersonA. (2006). Eyes on the prize: Teaching complex historical content to middle school students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 264–280.
12.
GerstenR.FuchsL. S.WilliamsJ. P.BakerS. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279–320. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543071002279.
KimA.VaughnS.WanzekJ.WeiS. (2004). Graphic organizers and their effects on the reading comprehension of students with LD: A synthesis of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 105–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370020201.
15.
LeeC. D.SpratleyA. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
16.
MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E. (1989). Mnemonic social studies instruction: Classroom applications. Remedial and Special Education, 10 (3), 40–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/074193258901000308.
17.
MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.BakkenJ. P.BrighamF. J. (1992). A complex mnemonic strategy for teaching states and their capitals: Comparing forward and backward associations. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 7, 96–103.
18.
MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.WhedonC. (1997). Using mnemonic strategies to teach information about U.S. presidents: A classroom-based investigation. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 20, 13–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1511089.
19.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). The Nation's Report Card: Reading 2009 (NCES 2010–458). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
20.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). The Nation's Report Card: Reading 2011 (NCES 2012–457). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
21.
ScanlonD.DeshlerD. D.SchumakerJ. B. (1997). Can a strategy be taught and learned in secondary inclusive classrooms?Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11 (1), 41–57.
22.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (1989). Reconstructive elaborations: A model for content area learning. American Research Journal, 26, 311–327. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1163035.
23.
SwansonE.HairrellA.KentS.CiulloS.WanzekJ. A.VaughnS. (2012). A synthesis and meta-analysis of reading interventions using social studies content for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20 (10), 1–18.
24.
TerrillM.ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (2004). SAT vocabulary instruction for high school students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39, 288–294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10534512040390050501.
25.
VaughnS.GerstenR.ChardD. J. (2000). The underlying message in LD intervention research: Findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children, 67, 99–114.