The Project CALI (Content Area Literacy Instruction) instructional framework is designed to enhance reading comprehension for all students, those with disabilities as well as their typically developing peers, in inclusive co-taught middle school content-area classrooms. For students with and at-risk for disabilities, even well-designed, research-based, and whole-class instruction often leads to inadequate improvement in reading comprehension and thus learning of content material. In CALI, teachers use student data to determine which students need more support and targeted, individualized instruction, and by contrast, which students may benefit from opportunities to extend their learning with more challenging texts and student-managed work. This article provides guidance for designing and implementing customizable lessons using station-teaching to individualize instruction. The Project CALI student support model is the final instructional piece of the CALI instructional framework.
AftabJ. (2015). Teachers’ beliefs about differentiated instruction in mixed ability classrooms: A case of time limitation. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 2(2), 94–114.
2.
BeckI.McKeownM. G.KucanL. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary development. Guilford Press.
3.
BoardmanA. G.RobertsG.VaughnS.WexlerJ.MurrayC. S.KosanovichM. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescent struggling readers: A practice brief. RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
4.
CantrellS. C.BurnsL. D.CallawayP. (2008). Middle- and high-school content area teachers’ perceptions about literacy teaching and learning. Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(1), 76–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070802434899
5.
ConnorC. M.MorrisonF. J. (2016). Individualizing student instruction in reading: Implications for policy and practice. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 54–61.
6.
ConnorC. M.MorrisonF. J.FishmanB. J.PonitzC. C.GlasneyS.UnderwoodP. S.. . . SchatschneiderC. (2009). The ISI classroom observation system: Examining the literacy instruction provided to individual students. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09332373
7.
CookL.FriendM. (1995). Co-teaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28, 1–16.
8.
CookS. C.RaoK. (2018). Systematically applying UDL to effective practices for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 41(3), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948717749936
9.
DixonF. A.YsselN.McConnellJ. M.HardinT. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214529042
10.
EdmondsM. S.VaughnS.WexlerJ.ReutebuchC.CableA.TackettK. K.SchnakenbergJ. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–300.
FriendM. (2015). Welcome to co-teaching 2.0. Educational Leadership, 73, 16–22.
13.
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(2), 279–320.
14.
GibsonL.Jr. (2013). Differentiated instruction and students with learning disabilities. Advances in Special Education, 24, 161–183.
JohnsonL.McMasterK. (2013). Adapting research-based practices with fidelity: Flexibility by design. In CookB.TankersleyM.LandrumT. (Eds.), Evidence-based practices (pp. 65-91). Emerald Group.
17.
KamilM. L.BormanG. D.DoleJ.KralC. C.SlingerT.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.
18.
KearnsD. M.LyonC. P.PollackM. S. (2021). Teaching world and word knowledge to access content-area texts in co-taught classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic, 56(4) 208-216. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944371
19.
KlingnerJ. K.VaughnS.BoardmanA. (2015). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning disabilities (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
20.
The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (2008). Adolescent literacy and older students with learning disabilities: A report from the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31, 211–218.
21.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2014). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning.
22.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2019). TALIS 2018 results (volume 1): Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en
23.
PollackM. S.SheltonA.ClancyE.LemonsC. (2021). Sentence-level gist: Literacy instruction for students with learning disabilities in co-taught classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic, 56(4) 233–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944378
24.
SantangeloT.TomlinsonC. A. (2012). Teacher educators’ perceptions and use of differentiated instruction practices: An exploratory investigation. Action in Teacher Education, 34(4), 309–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2012.717032
25.
SchummJ. S.VaughnS. (1995). Meaningful professional development in accommodating students with disabilities lessons learned. Remedial and Special Education, 16(6), 344–353.
26.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.McDuffieK. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Council for Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392–416.
SheltonA.LemonsC. J.WexlerJ. (2021). Supporting main idea identification and text summarization in middle school co-taught classes. Intervention in School and Clinic, 56(4) 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944380
29.
SolisM.VaughnS.SwansonE.McCulleyL. (2012). Collaborative models of instruction: The empirical foundations of inclusion and co-teaching. Psychology in the Schools, 49(5), 498–510. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21606
30.
SubbanP. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7, 935–947.
31.
TomlinsonC. A. (2005). Traveling the road to differentiation in staff development. Journal of Staff Development, 26(4), 14–18.
32.
TomlinsonC. A.BrightonC.HertbergH.CallahanC. M.MoonT. R.BrimijoinK.. . . ReynoldsT. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2-3), 119–145.
33.
TomlinsonC. A.MoonT. R.CallahanC. M. (1998). How well are we addressing academic diversity in the middle school?Middle School Journal, 29(3), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.1998.11494501
34.
VaughnS.Tejero HughesM.Watson MoodyS.ElbaumB. (2001). Instructional grouping for reading for students with LD: Implications for practice. Intervention in School and Clinic, 36(3), 131–137.
35.
WexlerJ.KearnsD. M.HoganE. K.ClancyE.SheltonA. E. (2021). Preparing to implement evidence-based literacy practices in the co-taught classroom. Intervention in School and Clinic, 56(4) 200–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944369
36.
WexlerJ.KearnsD. M.LemonsC. J.MitchellM.ClancyE.DavidsonK. A.. . . WeiY. (2018). Reading comprehension and co-teaching practices in middle school English language arts classrooms. Exceptional Children, 84(4), 384–402.
37.
WexlerJ.MitchellM. A.ClancyE. E.SilvermanR. D. (2017). An investigation of literacy practices in high school science classrooms. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 33(3), 258–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2016.1193832
