In co-taught classes, general education and special education teachers can improve the content-area learning and literacy skills of students with learning disabilities by helping them read texts effectively. Co-teachers can improve comprehension by providing students with background and vocabulary knowledge before reading. In this article, a routine for introducing background (world) and vocabulary (word) knowledge—the world knowledge and word knowledge routine (world and word)—is described. The article includes explanations how each part of the routine works and uses an example to illustrate how co-teachers could use the routine to promote student reading comprehension.
BeckI. L.McKeownM. G.KucanL. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
2.
BiancarosaG.SnowC. E. (2006). Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Alliance for Excellent Education.
3.
BiemillerA.BooteC. (2006). An effective method for building meaning vocabulary in primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.44
4.
BrownellM. T.BishopA. G.GerstenR.KlingnerJ. K.PenfieldR. D.DiminoJ.. . . SindelarP. T. (2009). The role of domain expertise in beginning special education teacher quality. Exceptional Children, 75, 391–411.
5.
CromleyJ. G.AzevedoR. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.311
6.
DeshlerD. D.SchumakerB.LenzK.BulgrenJ. A.HockM. F.KnightJ.EhrenB. J. (2001). Ensuring content-area learning by secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 96–108.
7.
EckerU. K. H.SwireB.LewandowskyS. (2014). Correcting misinformation—A challenge for education and cognitive science. In RappD. N.BraaschJ. L. G. (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences (pp. 13–38). MIT Press.
8.
Faggella-LubyM. N.GranerP. S.DeshlerD. D.ValentinoS. (2012). Building a house of sand: Why disciplinary literacy is not sufficient to replace general strategies for adolescent learners who struggle. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 69–84.
9.
GillisV. (2014). Disciplinary literacy: Adapt not adopt. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(8), 614–623. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.301
10.
GuthrieJ. T.KlaudaS. L. (2012). Making textbook reading meaningful. Educational Leadership, 69(6), 64–68.
11.
HallL. A. (2005). Teachers and content area reading: Attitudes, beliefs, and change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 403–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.009
12.
HattieJ. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 80`eta-analyses related to achievement. Routledge
HooverW.GoughP. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127–160.
15.
JacksonS. (1948, June26). The lottery. The New Yorker, pp. 25–28.
16.
KamilM. L.BormanG. D.DoleJ.KralC. C.SalingerT.TorgesenJ. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices—A practice guide (NCEE 2008-4027). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
17.
KendeouP.van den BroekP. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567–1577.
18.
KendeouP.van den BroekP.HelderA.KarlssonJ. (2014). A cognitive view of reading comprehension: Implications for reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 10–16.
19.
LeeC. D.SpratlyA. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of adolescent literacy. Carnegie Corporation of New York.
20.
MacSuga-GageA.SimonsenB. (2015). Examining the effects of teacher-directed opportunities to respond on student outcomes: A systematic review of the literature. Education & Treatment of Children, 38(2), 211–240. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2015.0009
21.
MartinA. J. (2016). Using Load Reduction Instruction (LRI) to boost motivation and engagement. British Psychological Society.
22.
McNamaraD. S.MaglianoJ. P. (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. In RossB. H. (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 51). pp. 297–384.
RechtD. R.LeslieL. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 16–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.1.16
27.
RickettsJ.LervågA.DawsonN.TaylorL. A.HulmeC. (2019). Reading and oral vocabulary development in early adolescence. Scientific Studies of Reading. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2019.1689244
28.
RosenshineB. (2009). The empirical support for direct instruction. In TobiasS.DuffyT. M. (Eds.), Constructivist instruction (pp. 201–220). Routledge
29.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.McDuffieK. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73, 392–416.
30.
Southern Poverty Law Center. (2011). Teaching the movement: The state of Civil Rights education in the United States 2014.
31.
TroyerM. (2017). A mixed-methods study of adolescents’ motivation to read. Teachers College Record, 119(5), 1–48.
32.
WatsonS. M.GableR. A.GearS. B.HughesK. C. (2012). Evidence-based strategies for improving the reading comprehension of secondary students: Implications for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27, 79–89.
33.
WexlerJ. A.KearnsD. M.LemonsC.StapletonL.PollackM.ClancyE. E.HoganE.LyonC.SheltonA. (2020). Improving instruction in the co-taught middle school classroom to support reading comprehension. Intervention in School and Clinic.
XieH.MayerR. E.WangF.ZhouZ. (2019). Coordinating visual and auditory cueing in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(2), 235–255.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
