In this review, the best practices for facilitating reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities are described and summarized. these best practices were derived from the results of an extensive literature review of research in reading comprehension with students with learning disabilities. analysis of all relevant literature revealed consistently high effects for some reading comprehension strategies. strongest outcomes were observed for teacher-led questioning and self-questioning strategies, followed by text-en hancem ent strategies, and, finally, strategies involving basic skills instruction and reinforcement. the few studies that were located in the area of whole language yielded less positive outcomes. implications for effective practice are described.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A., Wilkinson, I. A. G. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the Commission on Reading. Washington, DC: National Academy of Education.
2.
Bakken, J. P. (1995). Reading comprehension of expository science material and students with learning disabilities: A comparison of strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, Department of Educational Studies, West Lafayette, IN.
3.
Billingsley, B. S., & Wildman, T. M. (1988). The effects of prereading activities on the comprehension monitoring of learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disabilities Research, 4, 36–44.
4.
Borkowski, J. G., Weyhing, R. S., & Carr, M. (1988). Effects of attributional retraining on strategy-based reading comprehension in learning-disabled students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 46–53.
5.
Bos, C. S., & Anders, P. L. (1990). Effects of interactive vocabulary instruction on the vocabulary learning and reading comprehension of junior high learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 31–42.
6.
Bos, C. S., Anders, P. L., Filip, D., & Jaffe, L. E. (1989). The effects of an interactive instructional strategy for enhancing reading comprehension and content area learning for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 384–390.
7.
Calfee, R., & Drum, P. (1986). Research on teaching reading. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 804–849). New York: Macmillan.
8.
Carlisle, J. F. (1993). Selecting approaches to vocabulary instruction for the reading disabled. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 8, 97–105.
9.
Carnine, D., & Kinder, B. D. (1985). Teaching low performing students to apply generative and schema strategies to narrative and expository material. Remedial and Special Education, 6(1), 20–30.
10.
Carnine, D., Silbert, J., & Kameenui, E. (1990). Direct instruction reading (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
11.
Chan, L. K. S., & Cole, P. G. (1986). The effects of comprehension monitoring training on the reading competence of learning disabled and regular class students. Remedial and Special Education, 7(4), 33–40.
12.
Cinncione, K. M. (1990). The literacy development of two second-grade learning-disabled boys in a whole language resource room. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hofstra University, New York.
13.
Clark, F. L., Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., Alley, G. R., & Warner, M. M. (1984). Visual imagery and self-questioning: Strategies to improve comprehension of written material. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 145–149.
14.
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1987). A dual coding perspective on encoding processes. In M.A. McDaniel & M. Pressley (Eds.), Imagery and related mnemonic processes: Theories, individual differences, and applications (pp. 5–33). New York: Springer-Verlag.
15.
Coles, G. (1988). The learning mystique: A critical look at “learning disabilities.”New York: Pantheon.
16.
Coop, K. M. (1982). The use of induced imagery to increase reading and listening comprehension for learning disabled students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
17.
Darch, C., & Carnine, D. (1986). Teaching content area material to learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 53, 240–246.
18.
Darch, C., & Gersten, R. (1986). Direction-setting activities in reading comprehension: A comparison of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9, 235–243.
19.
Darch, C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1987). Teaching LD students critical reading skills: A systematic replication. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 82–91.
20.
DeBeni, R., & Pazzaglia, F. (1991). Lettura e metacognizione [Reading and metacognition]. Trento, Italy. Erickson.
21.
Deshler, D. D., Ellis, E. S., & Lenz, B. K. (1996). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities: Strategies and methods (2nd ed.) Denver, CO: Love.
22.
Ellis, E. S., & Graves, A. W. (1990). Teaching rural students with learning disabilities: A paraphrasing strategy to increase comprehension of main ideas. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 10(2), 2–10.
23.
Englert, C. S., & Mariage, T. V. (1991). Making students partners in the comprehension process: Organizing the reading “POSSE.”Learning Disability Quarterly, 14, 123–138.
24.
Englert, C. S, Tarrant, K. L., Mariage, T. V., & Oxer, T. (1994). Lesson talk as the work of reading groups: The effectiveness of two interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 165–185.
25.
Five, C. L. (1992). Special voices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
26.
Flaro, L. (1987). The development and evaluation of a reading comprehension strategy with learning disabled students. Reading Improvement, 24, 222–229.
27.
Fleisher, L. S., & Jenkins, J. R. (1983). The effect of word-and comprehension-emphasis instruction on reading performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 146–154.
28.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20–28.
29.
Gajria, M., & Salvia, J. (1992). The effects of summarization instruction on text comprehension of students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58, 508–516.
30.
Gersten, R., & Dimino, J. (1993). Visions and revisions: A special education perspective on the whole language controversy. Remedial and Special Education, 14(4), 5–13.
31.
Graves, A. W. (1986). Effects of direct instruction and metacomprehension training on finding main ideas. Learning Disabilities Research, 1, 90–100.
32.
Greene, C., Symons, S., & Richards, C. (1996). Elaborative interrogation effects for children with learning disabilities: Isolated facts versus connected prose. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 19–42.
33.
Gurney, D., Gersten, R., Dimino, J., & Carnine, D. (1990). Story grammar: Effective literature instruction for high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 335–342, 348.
34.
Hallahan, D. P., Kauffman, J. M., & Lloyd, J. W. (1996). Introduction to learning disabilities. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
35.
Hallahan, D. P., Keller, C. E., & Ball, D. W. (1986). A comparison of prevalence rate variability from state to state for each of the categories of special education. Remedial and Special Education, 7(2), 8–14.
36.
Hallahan, D. P., & Reeve, R. E. (1980). Selective attention and distractibility. In B. K. Keogh (Ed.), Advances in special education: Vol. 1. Basic constructs and theoretical orientations (pp. 141–181). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
37.
Harber, J. R. (1983). The effects of illustrations on the reading performance of learning disabled and normal children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 55–60.
38.
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1993). Cognitive strategy instruction and whole language: A case study. Remedial and Special Education, 14(4), 30–34.
39.
Horton, S. V., Boone, R. A., & Lovitt, T. C. (1990). Teaching social studies to learning disabled high school students: Effects of a hypertext study guide. British Journal of Educational Technology, 21, 118–131.
40.
Horton, S. V., & Lovitt, T. C. (1989). Using study guides with three classifications of secondary students. The Journal of Special Education, 22, 447–462.
41.
Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., Givens, A., & Nelson, R. (1989). Teaching social studies to high school students with academic handicaps in a mainstreamed setting: Effects of a computerized study guide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 102–107.
42.
Idol, L. (1987). Group story mapping: A comprehension strategy for both skilled and unskilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 196–205.
43.
Idol, L., & Croll, V. J. (1987). Story-mapping training as a means of improving reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 214–229.
44.
Idol-Maestas, L. (1985). Getting ready to read: Guided probing for poor comprehenders. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 243–254.
45.
Jenkins, J. R., Barksdale, A., & Clinton, L. (1978). Improving reading comprehension and oral reading: Generalization across behaviors, settings, and time. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11(10), 5–15.
46.
Jenkins, J. R., Heliotis, J. D., Stein, M. L., & Haynes, M. C. (1987). Improving reading comprehension by using paragraph restatements. Exceptional Children, 54, 54–59.
47.
Jenkins, J. R., Larson, K., & Fleisher, L. (1983). Effects of error correction on word recognition and reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 139–145.
48.
Johnson, P. H. (1992). Understanding reading disability: A case study approach. In T. Hehir & T. Latus (Eds.), Special education at century's end: Evolution of theory and practice since 1970 (Reprint Series No. 23, Harvard Educational Review, pp. 275–304). Cambridge, MA: President and Fellows of Harvard College.
49.
Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1985). The science of learning disabilities. San Diego, CA: College Hill.
50.
Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1987). Substance over style: Assessing the efficacy of modality testing and teaching. Exceptional Children, 54, 228–234.
51.
Kavale, K. A., Fuchs, D., & Scruggs, T. E. (1994). Setting the record straight on learning disabilities and low achievement. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 70–77.
52.
King-Sears, M. E., Mercer, C., & Sindelar, P. (1992). Toward independence with keyword mnemonics: A strategy for science vocabulary instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 13(5), 22–33.
53.
Labercane, G., & Battle, J. (1987). Cognitive processing strategies, self-esteem, and reading comprehension of learning disabled students. B.C. Journal of Special Education, 11, 167–185.
54.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.
55.
Leigh, J. (1980). Whole language approaches: Premises and possibilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 62–69.
56.
Lenz, B. K., Alley, G. R., & Schumaker, J. B. (1987). Activating the inactive learner: Advance organizers in the secondary content classroom. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 53–67.
57.
Levie, W. H. (1987). Research on pictures: A guide to the literature. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration: Vol. 1. Basic research (pp. 1–50). New York: Springer-Verlag.
58.
Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration: Vol. 1. Basic research (pp. 51–114). New York: Springer-Verlag.
59.
Licht, B. G., & Kistner, J. A. (1986). Motivational problems of learning-disabled children: Individual differences and their implications for treatment. In J. K. Torgesen & B. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 225–256). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
60.
Lloyd, J., Cullinan, D., Heins, E. D., & Epstein, M. H. (1980). Direct instruction: Effects on oral and written language comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 70–76.
61.
Lovitt, T. C., & Hansen, C. L. (1976). The use of contingent skipping and drilling to improve oral reading and comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9, 20–26.
62.
Lucangeli, D., Galderisi, D., & Cornoldi, C. (1995). Specific and general transfer effects following metamemory training. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 10, 11–21.
63.
Malone, L. D., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1992). Reading comprehension instruction: Summarization and self-monitoring training for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58, 270–279.
64.
Martin, G., & Pear, J. (1996). Behavior modification: What it is and how to do it (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
65.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Peters, E. E. (1987). Increasing prose recall of learning disabled and reading disabled students via spatial organizers. Journal of Educational Research, 8, 272–276.
66.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1988). Increasing content area learning of learning disabled students: Research implementation. Learning Disabilities Research, 4, 17–25.
67.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1989). Constructing more meaningful relationships: Mnemonic instruction for special populations. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 83–111.
68.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Bakken, J. P., & Whedon, C. (1996). Reading comprehension: A synthesis of research in learning disabilities. In T. E. Scruggs & M. A. Mastropieri (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 10, Part B, pp. 201–227). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
69.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & Fulk, B. J. M. (1990). Teaching abstract vocabulary with the keyword method: Effects on recall and comprehension. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 92–96.
70.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Hamilton, S. L., Wolfe, S., Whedon, C., & Canevaro, A. (1996). Promoting thinking skills for students with learning disabilities: Effects on recall of expository prose. Exceptionality, 6, 1–11.
71.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & Levin, J. R. (1985). Maximizing what exceptional students can learn: A review of research on the keyword method and related mnemonic techniques. Remedial and Special Education, 6(2), 39–45.
72.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & Levin, J. R. (1987). Learning disabled students' memory for expository prose: Mnemonic versus nonmnemonic pictures. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 505–519.
73.
Mather, N. (1992). Whole language reading instruction for students with learning disabilities: Caught in the cross fire. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 7, 87–95.
74.
Mathes, P. G., & Fuchs, L. S. (1993). Peer-mediated reading instruction in special education resource rooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 8, 233–243.
75.
McCormick, S., & Cooper, J. O. (1991). Can SQ3R facilitate learning disabled students' literal comprehension of expository text? Three experiments. Reading Psychology, 12, 239–271.
76.
McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. L. (1990). The identification and characteristics of students with learning disabilities in Indiana. Learning Disabilities Research, 5, 72–78.
77.
Mehan, H., Hertweck, A., & Meihls, J.L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students' educational careers. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
78.
Mercer, C. D., & Mercer, A. R. (1993). Teaching students with learning problems (4th ed.). New York: Merrill/Macmillan.
79.
Mezynski, K. (1983). Issues concerning the acquisition of knowledge: Effects of vocabulary training on reading comprehension. Review of Educational Research, 53, 253–279.
80.
Newby, R. F., Caldwell, J., & Recht, D. R. (1989). Improving the reading comprehension of children with dysphonetic and dyseidetic dyslexia using story grammar. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 373–380.
81.
O'Shea, L. J., Sindelar, P. T., & O'Shea, D. J. (1987). The effects of repeated readings and attentional cues on the reading fluency and comprehension of learning disabled readers. Learning Disabilities Research, 2, 103–109.
82.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
83.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117–175.
84.
Palincsar, A. S., & Perry, N. E. (1995). Developmental, cognitive, and sociocultural perspectives on assessing and instructing reading. School Psychology Review, 24, 331–344.
85.
Pany, D., & Jenkins, J. R. (1978). Learning word meanings: A comparison of instructional procedures. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1, 21–32.
86.
Pany, D., Jenkins, J. R., & Schreck, J. (1982). Vocabulary instruction: Effects on word knowledge and reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 202–215.
87.
Pany, D., & McCoy, K. M. (1988). Effects of corrective feedback on word accuracy and reading comprehension of readers with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 546–550.
88.
Pazzaglia, F., Cornoldi, C., & DeBeni, R. (1995). Knowledge about reading and self-evaluation in reading disabled children. In T. E. Scruggs & M. A. Mastropieri (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 9, pp. 91–118). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
89.
Peeck, J. (1987). The role of illustrations in processing and remembering illustrated text. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration: Vol. 1. Basic research (pp. 115–151). New York: Springer-Verlag.
90.
Polloway, E. A., Epstein, M. H., Polloway, C. H., Patton, J. R., & Ball, D. W. (1986). Corrective reading program: An analysis of effectiveness with learning disabled and mentally retarded students. Remedial and Special Education, 7(4), 41–47.
91.
Pressley, M., & Rankin, J. (1994). More about whole language methods of reading instruction for students at risk for early reading failure. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 157–168.
92.
Pressley, M., Symons, S., McGoldrick, J. A., Snyder, B. L. (1995). Reading comprehension strategies. In M. Pressley, V. Woloshyn, & Associates (Eds.), Cognitive strategy instruction that really improves children's academic performance (pp. 57–100). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
93.
Pressley, M., Wood, E., Woloshyn, V. E., Martin, V., King, A., & Menke, D. (1992). Encouraging mindful use of prior knowledge: Attempting to construct explanatory answers facilitates learning. Educational Psychologist, 27, 91–109.
94.
Rashotte, C. A., & Torgesen, J. K. (1985). Repeated reading and reading fluency in learning disabled children. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 180–188.
95.
Rose, T. L. (1986). Effects of illustrations on reading comprehension of learning disabled students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 542–544.
96.
Rose, M. C., Cundick, B. P., & Higbee, K. L. (1983). Verbal rehearsal and visual imagery: Mnemonic aids for learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 352–354.
97.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64, 479–530.
98.
Routman, R. (1991). Invitations: Changing as teachers and learners K-12. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
99.
Rudenga, E. A. V. (1992). Incompatibility? Ethnographic case studies of “learning disabled” students in a whole language classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
100.
Sachs, A. (1983). The effects of three prereading activities on learning disabled students' reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 248–251.
101.
Sachs, A. (1984). Accessing scripts before reading the story. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 226–228.
102.
Samuels, S. J. (1979). The method of repeated readings. The Reading Teacher, 4, 403–408.
103.
Schmidt, M. W. (1989). Method of questioning and placement of questions: Effects on LD students' comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 192–198.
104.
Schreiber, P. A. (1980). On the acquisition of reading fluency. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12, 177–186.
105.
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.
106.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1988). Legitimizing the field of learning disabilities: Does research orientation matter?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 219–222.
107.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1989). Mnemonic instruction of LD students: A field-based evaluation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 119–125.
108.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1990). The case for mnemonic instruction: From laboratory investigations to classroom applications. The Journal of Special Education, 24, 7–29.
109.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1992). Classroom applications of mnemonic instruction: Acquisition, maintenance, and generalization. Exceptional Children, 58, 219–229.
110.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1995). Qualitative research methods in the study of learning and behavioral disabilities: An analysis of recent research. In T. E. Scruggs & M. A. Mastropieri (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 9, pp. 251–274). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
111.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Casto, G. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single subject research: Methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2), 24–33.
112.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., McLoone, B. B., Levin, J. R., & Morrison, C. R. (1987). Mnemonic facilitation of learning disabled students' memory for expository prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 27–34.
113.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Sullivan, G. S. (1994). Promoting relational thinking skills: Elaborative interrogation for mildly handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 60, 450–457.
114.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., Sullivan, G. S., & Hesser, L. S. (1993). Improving reasoning and recall: The differential effects of elaborative interrogation and mnemonic elaboration. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16, 233–240.
115.
Scruggs, T. E., & Richter, L. (1988). Tutoring learning disabled students: A critical review. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 274–286.
116.
Sheikh, A. A., & Sheikh, K. S. (1985) Imagery in education: Imagery in the educational process. Farmingdale, NY: Baywood.
117.
Sindelar, P. T., Monda, L. E., & O'Shea, L. J. (1990). Effects of repeated readings on instructional-and mastery-level readers. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 220–226.
118.
Smith, D. D., & Lovitt, T. C. (1976). The differential effects of reinforcement contingencies on arithmetic performance. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9, 32–40.
119.
Smith, F. (Ed.), (1973). Psycholinguisitics and reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
120.
Smith, P. L., & Friend, M. (1986). Training LD adolescents in a strategy for using text structures to aid recall of instructional prose. Learning Disabilities Research, 2, 38–44.
121.
Snider, V. E. (1989). Reading comprehension performance of adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 87–96.
122.
Spear, L. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (1987). An information-processing framework for understanding reading disability. In S. J. Ceci (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive, social, and neuropsychological aspects of learning disabilities (Vol. 2, pp. 3–32). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
123.
Spear-Swirling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1994). The road not taken: An integrative theoretical model of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 91–103, 122.
124.
Stanovich, K. E. (1994). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher, 47, 280–291.
125.
Stein, C. L., & Goldman, J. (1980). Beginning reading instruction for children with minimal brain dysfunction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13(4), 52–55.
126.
Stockdale, B. S., & Crump, W. D. (1981). Alternative reading strategies: A case study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 401–405.
127.
Sullivan, G. S., Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1996). Reasoning and remembering: Coaching thinking with students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 310–322.
128.
Suzuki, N. S. (1985). Imagery research with children: Implications for education. In A. A. Sheikh & K. S. Sheikh (Eds.), Imagery in education: Imagery in the educational process (pp. 179–198). Farmingdale, NY: Baywood.
129.
Swanson, H. L. (Ed.), (1987). Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities: Memory and learning disabilities. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
130.
Talbott, E., Lloyd, J. W., & Tankersley, M. (1994). Effects of reading comprehension interventions with students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 223–232.
131.
Torgesen, J. K. (1994). Learning disabilities theory: Issues and advances. In S. Vaughn & C. Bos (Eds.), Research issues in learning disabilities (pp. 3–21). New York: Springer-Verlag.
132.
Torgesen, J. K., Dahlem, W. E., & Greenstein, J. (1987). Using verbatim text recordings to enhance reading comprehension in learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disabilities Focus, 3, 30–38.
133.
Torgesen, J. K., & Licht, B. (1983). The learning-disabled child as an inactive learner: Retrospect and prospects. In J. D. McKinney & L. Feagans (Eds.), Topics in learning disabilities (Vol. 1, pp. 3–32). Rockville, MD: Aspen.
134.
Warner, M. M., & Alley, G. R. (1981). Teaching learning disabled junior high students to use visual imagery as a strategy for facilitating recall of reading passages (Research Rep. No. 49). Lawrence: University of Kansas, Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
135.
Williams, J. P. (1986). The role of phonemic awareness in reading. In J. K. Torgesen & B. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 399–436). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
136.
Williams, J. P., Brown, L. G., Silverstein, A. K., & deCani, J. S. (1994). An instructional program in comprehension of narrative themes for adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 205–221.
137.
Winn, B. (1987). Charts, graphs, and diagrams in educational materials. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration: Vol. 1. Basic research (pp. 152–198). New York: Springer-Verlag.
138.
Wong, B. Y. L., & Jones, W. (1982). Increasing metacomprehension in learning disabled and normally achieving students through self-questioning training. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 228–240.
139.
Wong, B. Y. L., Wong, R., Perry, N., & Sawatsky, D. (1986). The efficacy of a self-questioning summarization strategy for use by underachievers and learning disabled adolescents in social studies. Learning Disabilities Focus, 2(2), 20–35.
