Observational data collected on 17 special education students and 17 regular education students in grades three and four were analyzed to document the nature of the instructional ecology (task, structure, teacher location, and teacher activity) and student responding during those portions of the school day allocated to reading. Few differences were found in the nature of the instructional ecology; special education students were allocated significantly more time for individual structures and received more approval from the teacher than regular education students. While differences were found for specific types of student responses, there were no differences in overall academic responding during reading. Percentage data did suggest possible differences in specific academic responses for the two groups of students as a function of the task and teaching structure. Implications for instruction and future research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Berliner, D., & Rosenshine, B. (1977). The acquisition of knowledge in the classroom. In R. Anderson, R. Spiro, & W. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2.
Bloom, B. (1980). The new direction in educational research: Alterable variables. Phi Delta Kappan, 61, 382–385.
3.
Borg, W. (1980). Time and school learning. In C. Denham & A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn (pp. 33–72). Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
4.
Chaing, B., Thorpe, H. W., & Darch, C. B. (1980). Effects of cross-age tutoring on word-recognition performance of learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 11–19.
5.
Cornbleth, C., & Korth, W. (1980). Context factors and individual differences in pupil involvement in learning activities. Journal of Educational Research, 73, 318–323.
6.
Cornelius, P. L., & Semmel, M. I. (1982). Effects of summer instruction on reading achievement regression of learning disabled students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 409–413.
7.
Dowdy, C. A., Crump, W. D., & Welch, M. W. (1982). Reading flexibility of learning disabled and normal students at three grade levels. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 253–263.
8.
Frederick, W., & Walberg, H. (1980). Learning as a function of time. Journal of Educational Research, 73, 183–194.
9.
Graden, J., Thurlow, M., & Ysseldyke, J. (1983a). Instructional ecology and academic responding time for students at three levels of teacher perceived behavioral competence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.
10.
Graden, J., Thurlow, M., & Ysseldyke, J. (1983b). When are students most academically engaged? Students' academic responding time in different instructional ecologies (Research Report No. 119). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
11.
Greenwood, C. R., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1978). Code for instructional structure and student academic response: CISSAR. Kansas City: Juniper Gardens Children's Project, Bureau of Child Research, University of Kansas.
12.
Greenwood, C. R., Delquadri, J. C., Stanley, S. O., Terry, B., & Hall, R. V. (1981). Process-product study of relationships among instructional ecology, student response, and academic achievement. Unpublished manuscript, Juniper Gardens Children's Project, University of Kansas.
13.
Helms, D. (1980). A basic skills instructional improvement program: An overview. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
14.
Henderson, A. J., & Shores, R. E. (1982). How learning disabled students' failure to attend to suffixes affects their oral reading performance. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 178–182.
15.
Hoge, R., & Luce, S. (1979). Predicting academic achievement from classroom behavior. Review of Educational Research, 49, 479–496.
16.
Kavale, K. (1980). The reasoning abilities of normal and learning disabled readers on measures of reading comprehension. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 3, 34–45.
17.
Kavale, K. (1982). Meta-analysis of the relationship between visual perceptual skills and reading achievement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 42–51.
18.
Leigh, J. E. (1980). Whole-language approaches: Premises and possibilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 62–69.
19.
Leonard, J. (1981). 180 day barrier: Issues and concerns. Exceptional Children, 46, 246–253.
20.
Lloyd, J., Cullinan, D., Heins, E. D., & Epstein, M. H. (1980). Direct instruction on oral and written language comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3(4), 70–76.
21.
Pany, D., Jenkins, J. R., & Schreck, J. (1982). Vocabulary instruction: Effects on word knowledge and reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 202–215.
22.
Rosenshine, B. (1976). Recent research on teaching behavior and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 27, 61–64.
23.
Rosenshine, B. (1978). Academic engaged time, content covered, and direct instruction. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 152–776).
24.
Rosenshine, B. (1979). Content, time, and direct instruction. In P. Peterson & H. Walberg (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications (pp. 28–56). Berkeley: McCutchan.
25.
Rosenshine, B., & Berliner, D. (1978). Academic engaged time. British Journal of Teacher Education, 4, 3–16.
26.
Ruff, F. (1978). Instructional variables and student achievement in reading and mathematics: A synthesis of recent product-process research. Unpublished manuscript, Research for Better Schools, Philadelphia.
27.
Schumaker, J. B., Deshler, D. D., Alley, G. R., Warner, M. M., & Denton, P. H. (1982). Multipass: A learning strategy for improving reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 295–304.
28.
Seidenberg, P. L. (1982). Implications of schemata theory for learning disabled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 352–354.
29.
Stanley, S. O., & Greenwood, C. R. (1980). CISSAR: Code for instructional structure and student academic response: Observer's manual. Kansas City: Juniper Gardens Children's Project, University of Kansas.
30.
Stanley, S. O., & Greenwood, C. R. (1983). How much “opportunity to respond” does the minority disadvantaged student receive in school? Exceptional Children, 49, 370–373.
31.
Stockdale, B. S., & Crump, W. D. (1981). Alternative reading strategies: A case study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 401–406.
32.
Swanson, H. L. (1982). Verbal short-term memory encoding of learning disabled, deaf, and normal readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 21–28.
33.
Ysseldyke, J. E., & Algozzine, B. (1983). Where to begin in diagnosing reading problems. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities. 2, 60–69.
34.
Ysseldyke, J., Thurlow, M. L., Graden, J. L., Wesson, C., Algozzine, B., & Deno, S. L. (1983). Generalizations from five years of research on assessment and decision making: The University of Minnesota Institute, Exceptional Education Quarterly, 4, 75–93.
