Five common reading methods and materials were described and shown to 32 middle school students with learning disabilities. Subjects rated the acceptability and utility of each method by filling out a questionnaire under the direction of researchers. Students responded equally favorably to four of the techniques and methods (language experience, direct instruction, multisensory, and neurological impress). Subjects responded most favorably to the basal reader. Results are discussed in terms of provision of remedial services.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlleyG., & DeshlerD. (1979). Teaching the learning disabled adolescent: Strategies and methods.Denver: Love.
2.
BrittainC. V. (1968). An exploration for the basis of peer-compliance and parent-compliance in adolescence. Adolescence, 2, 445–458.
3.
ClarkF. L. (1982). Learning disabilities in adolescent and young adult populations: Research implications. Focus on Exceptional Children, 15, 1–12.
4.
DaytonC. M. (1970). The design of educational experiments.New York: McGraw-Hill.
5.
DurrW. K. (1986). Houghton-Mifflin reading.Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
FernaldG. M. (1943). Remedial techniques in basic school subjects.New York: McGraw-Hill.
8.
GearhartB. R., & GearhartC. J. (1989). Learning disabilities: Educational strategies (5th Ed). Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing.
9.
GoodmanK.ShannonP.FreemanY., & MurphyS. (1988). Report card on the basal.Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owens.
10.
HazelJ. S.SchumakerJ. B.ShermanJ. A., & Sheldon-WildgenJ. (1982). Group training for social skills. A program for court-adjudicated, probationary youths. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 9, 35–53.
11.
HeckelmanR. G. (1969). The neurological impress method of remedial reading instruction. Academic Therapy, 4, 277–282.
12.
HinkleD. E.WiersmaD. E., & JursS. G. (1988). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences.Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
13.
JenkinsJ. R., & HeinenA. (1989). Students' preferences for service delivery: Pull-out, in-class, or integrated models. Exceptional Children, 6, 516–523.
LeeD. M., & AllenR. V. (1963). Learning to read through experience (2nd Ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
16.
LenzB. K.AlleyG. R., & SchumakerJ. B. (1987). Activating the inactive learner: Advance organizers in the secondary content classroom. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 53–67.
17.
LipaS. E. (1983). Reading disability: A new look at an old issue. Journal of Learning Disability, 16, 453–457.
18.
MartinR. (1975). Legal challenges to behavior modification.Champaign, IL: Research Press.
19.
ReidD. K. (1988). Teaching the learning disabled.Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
20.
ReimersT. W.WackerD. P., & KoepplG. (1987). Acceptability of behavioral interventions: A review of the literature. School Psychology Review, 16, 212–227.
21.
ReynoldsC. R. (1984-1985). Critical measurement issues in learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 18, 451–475.
22.
SAS (1982). User's guide: Statistics. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute, Inc.
23.
SchumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D.AlleyG. R., & WarnerM. M. (1983). Toward the development of an interaction model for learning disabled adolescents: The University of Kansas Institute. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 4 (1), 45–74.
24.
SinghN. N., & KatzR. C. (1985). On the modification of acceptability ratings for alternative child treatments. Behavior Modification, 9, 375–386.
25.
Von BrockJ. B., & ElliotS. N. (1987). Influence of treatment effectiveness information on the acceptability of classroom interventions. Journal of School Psychology, 25, 131–144.
26.
WallaceG.CohenS., & PollowayE. (1987). Language arts.Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
27.
WallaceG., & KauffmanJ. M. (1986). Teaching students with learning and behavior problems (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
28.
WiederholtJ. L., & HaleG. (1982). Indirect and direct treatment of reading disabilities. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 1, 79–85.
29.
WolfM. M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.
