Alternate Methods for Identifying Alternate Methods for Identifying Children with Learning Disabilities: Children with Learning Disabilities:

Some Synergies with Reading First in Some Synergies with Reading First in FloridaFlorida

Joseph K. TorgesenJoseph K. Torgesen

Director, Florida Center for Reading ResearchDirector, Florida Center for Reading Research

Association of Special Education Directors, Tampa, Sept, 2002Association of Special Education Directors, Tampa, Sept, 2002

The Interesting times we live in….The Interesting times we live in….

Educational challenges …..Educational challenges …..

Public scrutiny….. Public scrutiny…..

Research into practice….Research into practice….

Expectations for higher performance... Expectations for higher performance...

Please pass the antacid!!!Please pass the antacid!!!

Outline of topics to be covered:Outline of topics to be covered:

1. Presentation of findings from the Learning Disabilities 1. Presentation of findings from the Learning Disabilities RoundtableRoundtable

a. Rejection of discrepancy-based identification modela. Rejection of discrepancy-based identification modelb. Most likely alternative identification modelb. Most likely alternative identification model

2. How Florida’s Reading First initiative may support 2. How Florida’s Reading First initiative may support new identification models for reading disabilitiesnew identification models for reading disabilities

3. If we have time--setting higher expectations for 3. If we have time--setting higher expectations for achievement of children with reading disabilities: achievement of children with reading disabilities: lessons from recent researchlessons from recent research

““Finding Common Ground” -- A Brief HistoryFinding Common Ground” -- A Brief History

1. October, 2000 -- planning meeting of OSEP and small 1. October, 2000 -- planning meeting of OSEP and small group of research/policy leadersgroup of research/policy leaders

2. August, 2001 -- Learning Disabilities Summit involving 2. August, 2001 -- Learning Disabilities Summit involving presentation and discussion of white paperspresentation and discussion of white papers

3. Roundtable participants from LD organizations of the 3. Roundtable participants from LD organizations of the NJCLD meet to find “common ground” and make NJCLD meet to find “common ground” and make recommendations. Research participants formulate set of recommendations. Research participants formulate set of recommendations-- issue report -- recommendations-- issue report -- Specific Learning Specific Learning Disabilities: Finding Common GroundDisabilities: Finding Common Ground

Consensus statements reaffirming the concept of Consensus statements reaffirming the concept of learning disabilitieslearning disabilities

1. The concept of Specific Learning Disabilities is valid, 1. The concept of Specific Learning Disabilities is valid, supported by strong converging evidence supported by strong converging evidence

2. Specific learning disabilities are neurologically-based 2. Specific learning disabilities are neurologically-based and intrinsic to the individualand intrinsic to the individual

3. Individuals with specific learning disabilities show intra-3. Individuals with specific learning disabilities show intra-individual differences in skills and abilitiesindividual differences in skills and abilities

4. Specific learning disabilities persist across the life span, 4. Specific learning disabilities persist across the life span, though manifestations and intensity may vary as a function of though manifestations and intensity may vary as a function of developmental state and environmental demandsdevelopmental state and environmental demands

5. Specific learning disabilities are evident across ethnic, 5. Specific learning disabilities are evident across ethnic, cultural, language, and economic groupscultural, language, and economic groups

Consensus statements about Eligibility Consensus statements about Eligibility

1. Information from a comprehensive individual evaluation 1. Information from a comprehensive individual evaluation using multiple methods and sources of information must using multiple methods and sources of information must be used to determine eligibility for servicesbe used to determine eligibility for services

2. Decisions on eligility must be made through an 2. Decisions on eligility must be made through an interdisciplinary team, using informed clinical judgements interdisciplinary team, using informed clinical judgements directed by relevant datadirected by relevant data

3. A student identified as having SLD may need different 3. A student identified as having SLD may need different levels of services under IDEA at various times during the levels of services under IDEA at various times during the school experienceschool experience

4. The ability-achievement discrepancy formula should not be 4. The ability-achievement discrepancy formula should not be used for determining eligibilityused for determining eligibility

Why has the IQ-Achievement Discrepancy Criteria Why has the IQ-Achievement Discrepancy Criteria been rejected so decisively?been rejected so decisively?

““I would like to encourage this Commission to I would like to encourage this Commission to drive a drive a stake through the heartstake through the heart of this overreliance on the of this overreliance on the discrepancy model for determining the kinds of discrepancy model for determining the kinds of children that need services. children that need services. It doesn’t make any It doesn’t make any sense to mesense to me. I’ve wondered for 25 years why it is that . I’ve wondered for 25 years why it is that we continue to use it and over-rely on it as a way of we continue to use it and over-rely on it as a way of determining what children are eligible for services in determining what children are eligible for services in special education” Commissioner Wade Hornspecial education” Commissioner Wade Horn

Why has the IQ-Achievement Discrepancy Criteria Why has the IQ-Achievement Discrepancy Criteria been rejected so decisively?been rejected so decisively?

It was rejected on scientific grounds for two broad It was rejected on scientific grounds for two broad reasons:reasons:

It is a psychometrically unsound practiceIt is a psychometrically unsound practice

It is inconsistent with what we have learned about It is inconsistent with what we have learned about reading disabilities over the past 20 yearsreading disabilities over the past 20 years

1. Difficulty learning to 1. Difficulty learning to read wordsread words accurately and fluently accurately and fluently

2. Insufficient vocabulary, general knowledge, and 2. Insufficient vocabulary, general knowledge, and reasoning skills to support reasoning skills to support comprehensioncomprehension of of written languagewritten language

3. Absence or loss of initial 3. Absence or loss of initial motivationmotivation to read, or failure to read, or failure to develop a mature appreciation of the rewards of to develop a mature appreciation of the rewards of reading.reading.

Three potential stumbling blocks to Three potential stumbling blocks to becoming a good readerbecoming a good reader (NRC Report, 1998)(NRC Report, 1998)

The difficulties children have in The difficulties children have in learning to read directly reflect the learning to read directly reflect the two basic tasks that are involved in two basic tasks that are involved in becoming a good readerbecoming a good reader

1. “Breaking the Code”-- learning how 1. “Breaking the Code”-- learning how thethe words in our language are words in our language are representedrepresented in print, and acquiring skill fluent in print, and acquiring skill fluent skills.skills.2. Developing the knowledge and 2. Developing the knowledge and strategiesstrategies that are required to construct thethat are required to construct the meaning of text.meaning of text.

MotivationMotivation

Almost all children who experience Almost all children who experience reading problems in elementary school reading problems in elementary school have difficulties acquiring accurate and have difficulties acquiring accurate and

fluent word reading skillsfluent word reading skills

Extreme difficulties mastering the use of Extreme difficulties mastering the use of “phonics” skills as an aid to early, independent “phonics” skills as an aid to early, independent readingreading

• difficulties learning letter-sound correspondencesdifficulties learning letter-sound correspondences• difficulties with the skills of blending and analyzing difficulties with the skills of blending and analyzing

the sounds in words (phonemic awareness). the sounds in words (phonemic awareness).

Slow development of “sight vocabulary” Slow development of “sight vocabulary” arising from:arising from:

•limited exposure to textlimited exposure to text•lack of strategies to reliably identify words in textlack of strategies to reliably identify words in text

Children who experience difficulties acquiring accurate and Children who experience difficulties acquiring accurate and fluent word reading skills show two kinds of difficulties with fluent word reading skills show two kinds of difficulties with word reading word reading

When asked to read grade level text:When asked to read grade level text:

1. The child cannot recognize a sufficiently high 1. The child cannot recognize a sufficiently high proportion of the words easily, at a single glance, proportion of the words easily, at a single glance, to support fluent reading. Too many of the words to support fluent reading. Too many of the words fall outside the child’s “sight vocabulary.”fall outside the child’s “sight vocabulary.”

2. The child does not employ efficient strategies to 2. The child does not employ efficient strategies to accurately and quickly identify unknown words. Use accurately and quickly identify unknown words. Use of phonemic decoding strategies is particularly of phonemic decoding strategies is particularly impaired. impaired.

The nature of the underlying difficulty for most The nature of the underlying difficulty for most children who have problems acquiring children who have problems acquiring

accurate and fluent word reading problemsaccurate and fluent word reading problems

Weaknesses in the phonological area of Weaknesses in the phonological area of language abilitylanguage ability inherent, or intrinsic, disabilityinherent, or intrinsic, disability lack of certain types of language experiencelack of certain types of language experience

Expressed primarily by delays in the development Expressed primarily by delays in the development of phonological awarenessof phonological awareness

Phonological Language Ability is not highly Correlated with General Verbal Ability as measured by IQ tests

Verbal Intelligence

Pho

nolo

gica

l A

bilit

y

Low High

High

Low

Dyslexic

““Dyslexia is one of several distinct learningDyslexia is one of several distinct learning

disabilities. It is a specific language-based disabilities. It is a specific language-based

disorder of constitutional origin characterized disorder of constitutional origin characterized

by difficulties in single word decoding …. by difficulties in single word decoding …. frequently associated with difficulties processing frequently associated with difficulties processing the phonological features of language”the phonological features of language”

Phonological Language Ability is not highly Correlated with General Verbal Ability as measured by IQ tests

Verbal Intelligence

Pho

nolo

gica

l A

bilit

y

Low High

High

Low

Dyslexic

1. Children with reading problems not discrepant 1. Children with reading problems not discrepant from their intelligence appear to have the same from their intelligence appear to have the same type of problems with early reading as children type of problems with early reading as children whose reading is discrepant from their IQ: they whose reading is discrepant from their IQ: they both have difficulties resulting from weaknesses in both have difficulties resulting from weaknesses in the phonological domain.the phonological domain.

3. Discrepant and non-discrepant children require the 3. Discrepant and non-discrepant children require the same type of instruction in basic reading skills in same type of instruction in basic reading skills in order to acquire critical beginning reading skills.order to acquire critical beginning reading skills.

What is the fundamental conceptual error in using IQ-What is the fundamental conceptual error in using IQ-achievement discrepancies to identify young children with achievement discrepancies to identify young children with reading disabilities?reading disabilities?

2. “Slow learners” have difficulties learning to read, not 2. “Slow learners” have difficulties learning to read, not because of low IQ, but because of weaknesses in because of low IQ, but because of weaknesses in the phonological language domain. the phonological language domain.

Very simply putVery simply put, we have two broad classes of children , we have two broad classes of children who experience difficulties learning to read in school:who experience difficulties learning to read in school:

Children who enter school with adequate general verbal Children who enter school with adequate general verbal ability and knowledge, but specific weaknesses in the ability and knowledge, but specific weaknesses in the phonological language domainphonological language domain

Children who enter school with weaknesses in the Children who enter school with weaknesses in the phonological language domain, phonological language domain, who also havewho also have weaknesses in broader language domains such as weaknesses in broader language domains such as vocabulary and verbal knowledgevocabulary and verbal knowledge

Both groups have the same phonological problem that Both groups have the same phonological problem that makes it difficult to learn to read, but only one group (the makes it difficult to learn to read, but only one group (the discrepant one) is eligible for services as learning discrepant one) is eligible for services as learning disabled.disabled.

What is the identification/eligibility model currently being What is the identification/eligibility model currently being proposed to replace IQ-achievement discrepancy?proposed to replace IQ-achievement discrepancy?

Sometimes referred to as:Sometimes referred to as:

Problem solving modelProblem solving model

Response to intervention modelResponse to intervention model

Three-tiered modelThree-tiered model

Basic elements of the model:Basic elements of the model:

1. All children receive high quality general instruction in 1. All children receive high quality general instruction in the regular classroomthe regular classroom

2. Regular education teachers, special education teachers, 2. Regular education teachers, special education teachers, and other support personnel collaborate to provide and other support personnel collaborate to provide immediate intensive interventions for students lagging immediate intensive interventions for students lagging behindbehind

3. Students who do not respond sufficiently to second tier 3. Students who do not respond sufficiently to second tier interventions become eligible for even more intensive and interventions become eligible for even more intensive and specialized services through IDEA.specialized services through IDEA.

““Students determined to be at risk for academic failure Students determined to be at risk for academic failure are afforded scientifically-based general education are afforded scientifically-based general education interventions for a fixed period of time. During the course interventions for a fixed period of time. During the course of this intervention, their progress is evaluated on a of this intervention, their progress is evaluated on a frequent basis using a variety of curriculum-based frequent basis using a variety of curriculum-based measures. Students who do not display meaningful measures. Students who do not display meaningful gains and who appear to be unresponsive to intervention gains and who appear to be unresponsive to intervention during this period, as measured by level of performance during this period, as measured by level of performance and rate of learning, are candidates for referral for and rate of learning, are candidates for referral for special education evaluation”special education evaluation”

Finding Common Ground (p. 16)Finding Common Ground (p. 16)

A School-Wide Change Project A School-Wide Change Project Hartsfield Elementary SchoolHartsfield Elementary School

School Characteristics:School Characteristics:

70% Free and Reduced Lunch (going up each 70% Free and Reduced Lunch (going up each year)year)

65% minority (mostly African-American)65% minority (mostly African-American)

Elements of Curriculum Change:Elements of Curriculum Change:

Movement to a more balanced reading curriculum Movement to a more balanced reading curriculum beginning in 1994-1995 school year (incomplete beginning in 1994-1995 school year (incomplete implementation) for K-2implementation) for K-2Improved implementation in 1995-1996Improved implementation in 1995-1996Implementation in Fall of 1996 of screening and Implementation in Fall of 1996 of screening and more intensive small group instruction for at-risk more intensive small group instruction for at-risk studentsstudents

Proportion falling below the 25th

percentile in word reading ability at the end of first grade

10

20

30

31.8

20.4

10.96.7

3.7

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999Average Percentile 48.9 55.2 61.4 73.5 81.7for entire grade (n=105)

Hartsfield Elementary Progress over five years

Screening at beginning of first grade, with extra instruction for those in bottom 30-40%

Proportion falling below the 25th

Percentile 10

20

30

Proportion falling below the 25th

Percentile 10

20

30

31.8

20.4

10.96.7

3.7

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999Average Percentile 48.9 55.2 61.4 73.5 81.7

14.5

9.05.4 2.4

1996 1997 1998 1999

Average Percentile 58.2 67.1 74.1 81.5

Hartsfield Elementary Progress over five years

Potential benefits of this approachPotential benefits of this approach

It focuses a spotlight on the educational opportunities It focuses a spotlight on the educational opportunities provided to each student--have they been adequately provided to each student--have they been adequately individualized, sufficiently structured, and intensive enough individualized, sufficiently structured, and intensive enough to support learning in all reasonably capable students. to support learning in all reasonably capable students.

It requires timely monitoring of student learning progressIt requires timely monitoring of student learning progress

It increases opportunities for collaboration and shared It increases opportunities for collaboration and shared responsibility between regular and special education responsibility between regular and special education personnelpersonnel

It is consistent with movement toward early identification and It is consistent with movement toward early identification and focus on preventive, rather than remedial instruction. Does not focus on preventive, rather than remedial instruction. Does not require “wait to fail” before intervention.require “wait to fail” before intervention.

Small scale try-outs have found:Small scale try-outs have found:

Increased accountability for student learning in general Increased accountability for student learning in general and special educationand special education

Decreased numbers of students placed in high incidence Decreased numbers of students placed in high incidence special education categoriesspecial education categories

Reduction in number of evaluations conducted that do not Reduction in number of evaluations conducted that do not result in special ed. classification or improved learning result in special ed. classification or improved learning outcomesoutcomes

Improved problem solving efforts by regular education Improved problem solving efforts by regular education personnelpersonnel

Positive reactions from participants and stakeholdersPositive reactions from participants and stakeholders

Remaining concerns and issues:Remaining concerns and issues:

There is insufficient data available regarding the effects of There is insufficient data available regarding the effects of this approach on student outcomesthis approach on student outcomes

Work needs to be done to identify all the essential Work needs to be done to identify all the essential components needed to make the model work (training, components needed to make the model work (training, personnel, interventions, professional competence).personnel, interventions, professional competence).

Work also needs to be done to address whether this Work also needs to be done to address whether this approach will result in more timely service delivery--we don’t approach will result in more timely service delivery--we don’t want another “wait to fail” model.want another “wait to fail” model.

Clarification is needed to explain and demonstrate how Clarification is needed to explain and demonstrate how students qualify for and are provided services in each tier of students qualify for and are provided services in each tier of this approachthis approach

Remaining concerns and issues (cont):Remaining concerns and issues (cont):

How will the approach be implemented in later grades?How will the approach be implemented in later grades?

How will the approach differentiate between students across How will the approach differentiate between students across different disability subtypes?different disability subtypes?

Points of vulnerability shared with the present system:Points of vulnerability shared with the present system:

Depends upon personnel with professional competence to Depends upon personnel with professional competence to make complex clinical judgements and not focus on single make complex clinical judgements and not focus on single criteriacriteria

Reducing the number of referrals for special education Reducing the number of referrals for special education depends directly on the quality of classroom instruction and depends directly on the quality of classroom instruction and second tier, classroom based interventionssecond tier, classroom based interventions

Responsibility for student outcomes must be fully shared Responsibility for student outcomes must be fully shared between regular and special education personnelbetween regular and special education personnel

Depends on consistent, high quality functioning of an inter-Depends on consistent, high quality functioning of an inter-disciplinary team.disciplinary team.

Will not eliminate problems, but should change the kinds Will not eliminate problems, but should change the kinds of questions we ask to a more productive directionof questions we ask to a more productive direction

How the implementation of Florida’s Reading First program How the implementation of Florida’s Reading First program may help to prepare for changes required by the new may help to prepare for changes required by the new

modelmodel

Immediate Goals of Reading First in Florida:Immediate Goals of Reading First in Florida:

Improve the quality of initial classroom instruction in reading for children Improve the quality of initial classroom instruction in reading for children in high poverty, low performing schools through better curriculum and in high poverty, low performing schools through better curriculum and professional developmentprofessional development

Increase the amount and utility of early assessments so that children Increase the amount and utility of early assessments so that children lagging behind in reading growth can be identified earlierlagging behind in reading growth can be identified earlier

Provide training to teachers and other support personnel in the provision of Provide training to teachers and other support personnel in the provision of immediate and intensive interventions targeted on the most critical immediate and intensive interventions targeted on the most critical developmental reading skillsdevelopmental reading skills

Florida’s formula for reading Florida’s formula for reading improvement based on the scientific improvement based on the scientific

research in reading and reading research in reading and reading development:development:

5 + 3 + 5 + 3 + iiii + + iiiiii = =

NNo o CChild hild LLeft eft BBehindehind

55 + 3 + + 3 + iiii + + iiiiii = NCLB = NCLB

Five Instructional Components:Five Instructional Components:

Phonemic AwarenessPhonemic Awareness

PhonicsPhonics

FluencyFluency

VocabularyVocabulary

Comprehension strategiesComprehension strategies

Identifying words Identifying words accurately and accurately and fluentlyfluently

Constructing Constructing meaning meaning once words once words are identifiedare identified

Three types of assessment to guide instruction:Three types of assessment to guide instruction:

ScreeningScreening to identify children who may to identify children who may need extra helpneed extra help

DiagnosisDiagnosis to determine their specific to determine their specific instructional needsinstructional needs

Progress MonitoringProgress Monitoring to determine if children to determine if children are making adequate progress within current are making adequate progress within current instructional environmentinstructional environment

5 + 5 + 33 + + iiii + + iiiiii = NCLB = NCLB

Consistently high quality Consistently high quality initial instructioninitial instruction in all in all K-3 classrooms K-3 classrooms

The characteristics of a good program are that it The characteristics of a good program are that it contains the five elements identified in the contains the five elements identified in the legislation, and that these elements are integrated legislation, and that these elements are integrated into “a coherent instructional design.” A coherent into “a coherent instructional design.” A coherent design includes design includes explicit instructional strategiesexplicit instructional strategies, , coordinated instructional sequencescoordinated instructional sequences, , ample ample practice opportunitiespractice opportunities and and aligned student aligned student materials.”materials.”

5 + 3 + 5 + 3 + iiii + + iiiiii = NCLB = NCLB

Immediate Intensive InterventionImmediate Intensive Intervention

5 + 3 + 5 + 3 + iiii + + iiiiii = NCLB = NCLB

Because of the huge diversity in children’s Because of the huge diversity in children’s talent and preparation for learning to read, talent and preparation for learning to read, some children will require much, much more some children will require much, much more instruction and practice than othersinstruction and practice than others

Some of these Some of these immediate intensive immediate intensive interventionsinterventions may be done by the classroom may be done by the classroom teacher, others will need to be done by other teacher, others will need to be done by other teaching personnelteaching personnel

A range of methods can be used to provide A range of methods can be used to provide immediate, intensive interventionsimmediate, intensive interventions

Small group work with the classroom teacherSmall group work with the classroom teacher

Small group work with a reading resource (Title 1) teacherSmall group work with a reading resource (Title 1) teacher

Small group work with a special education teacherSmall group work with a special education teacher

Small group work with an aide or paraprofessional Small group work with an aide or paraprofessional

1:1 work with volunteers1:1 work with volunteers

1:1 work with classroom or cross age peers1:1 work with classroom or cross age peers

30

70 75th

50th

25th

October January May

Nati

on

al

Perc

en

tile

Growth in Word Reading Ability

Leadership at the State level for Leadership at the State level for Just Read, Florida!Just Read, Florida!

Reading Office at DOEReading Office at DOEMary Laura OpenshawMary Laura Openshaw

Florida Center for Florida Center for Reading ResearchReading Research

FCRRFCRR

Family Literacy and Family Literacy and Reading Excellence CenterReading Excellence Center

FLaREFLaRE

(Reading First)(Reading First)

Florida Center for Reading ResearchFlorida Center for Reading Research

MissionMission

1. Continue to conduct basic research on reading that will 1. Continue to conduct basic research on reading that will benefit students of all ages throughout the country benefit students of all ages throughout the country

3. Conduct applied research and develop procedures to 3. Conduct applied research and develop procedures to benefit all students in Floridabenefit all students in Florida

4. Assist in the dissemination of research based 4. Assist in the dissemination of research based practices in reading – coordinate with FLaRE Center practices in reading – coordinate with FLaRE Center to insure that professional development is consistent to insure that professional development is consistent with scientifically based research in readingwith scientifically based research in reading

2. Provide technical assistance in support of 2. Provide technical assistance in support of implementation for Reading First Schoolsimplementation for Reading First Schools

Florida Center for Reading ResearchFlorida Center for Reading Research

Some initial projects of FCRRSome initial projects of FCRR

2. Development and implementation of a web-based 2. Development and implementation of a web-based progress monitoring system for students, teachers, progress monitoring system for students, teachers, and districts in grades K-3and districts in grades K-3

3. Prepare series of “FCRR reports” about research base 3. Prepare series of “FCRR reports” about research base of specific curriculum materials and technology in of specific curriculum materials and technology in readingreading

4. Develop new methods of computer based progress 4. Develop new methods of computer based progress monitoring in critical reading skills for children in monitoring in critical reading skills for children in grades K-3grades K-3

1. Provide State-wide training in use of objective 1. Provide State-wide training in use of objective progress monitoring tests for all reading first schoolsprogress monitoring tests for all reading first schools

Potential synergies between Potential synergies between Reading FirstReading First programs and a programs and a model of LD identification based on response to intervention:model of LD identification based on response to intervention:

Every Reading First school must use screening, diagnostic, Every Reading First school must use screening, diagnostic, and progress monitoring, and objective outcome and progress monitoring, and objective outcome assessments for children in grades K-3. assessments for children in grades K-3.

Part of every reading first plan must include methods for Part of every reading first plan must include methods for providing immediate and intensive interventions for children providing immediate and intensive interventions for children lagging behind in critical reading skills. lagging behind in critical reading skills.

Within the next several years, every K-3 teacher in Florida will Within the next several years, every K-3 teacher in Florida will receive training in the principles of scientifically based receive training in the principles of scientifically based instruction in readinginstruction in reading

Every Reading First school will be required to implement a Every Reading First school will be required to implement a core reading curriculum consistent with what is currently core reading curriculum consistent with what is currently known about effective instruction in readingknown about effective instruction in reading

The web based system being developed for state-wide use The web based system being developed for state-wide use will receive data from progress monitoring and outcome will receive data from progress monitoring and outcome assessments and deliver timely and informative reports assessments and deliver timely and informative reports about progress in critical areas to teachers, principals, and about progress in critical areas to teachers, principals, and district personnel four or more times a year.district personnel four or more times a year.

Reading First grants will provide support for professional Reading First grants will provide support for professional development in reading instruction to special education development in reading instruction to special education teachers in grades K-12teachers in grades K-12

Principals will receive training and support in the management Principals will receive training and support in the management and supervision skills required for an effective school-wide and supervision skills required for an effective school-wide reading programreading program

Regular classroom teachers will receive training in Regular classroom teachers will receive training in differentiated instructiondifferentiated instruction

Synergies (cont):Synergies (cont):

If we have time… some thoughts and If we have time… some thoughts and data about instructional intensity for data about instructional intensity for students with reading difficultiesstudents with reading difficulties

What do we know about the What do we know about the effectiveness of most effectiveness of most

“special education” for “special education” for children with reading children with reading

disabilities?disabilities?

We know that it tends to We know that it tends to stabilize stabilize the relative deficit in the relative deficit in

reading skill rather than reading skill rather than remediateremediate it. it.

Change in Reading Skill for Children with Reading Disabilities who Experience Growth in Reading of .04 Standard

Deviations a Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Grade Level

Sta

nd

ard

Sco

re i

n

Rea

din

g AverageReadersDisabledReaders

70 71.8

Characteristics of interventions in many Characteristics of interventions in many “special education” settings that limit its “special education” settings that limit its effectivenesseffectiveness

1. Insufficient intensity -- teachers carrying too 1. Insufficient intensity -- teachers carrying too large a case load to allow sufficient instructional large a case load to allow sufficient instructional time.time.

2. Weak instruction in phonemic awareness and 2. Weak instruction in phonemic awareness and phonemic decoding skills--often consisting of phonemic decoding skills--often consisting of “phonics worksheets” -- not enough direct “phonics worksheets” -- not enough direct instruction and application of appropriate reading instruction and application of appropriate reading strategies in textstrategies in text

3. Little or no direct instruction in comprehension 3. Little or no direct instruction in comprehension strategiesstrategies

A study of intensive, highly skilled intervention with A study of intensive, highly skilled intervention with 60 children who had severe reading disabilities60 children who had severe reading disabilities

Children were between 8 and 10 years of ageChildren were between 8 and 10 years of age

Had been receiving special education services for an average of Had been receiving special education services for an average of 16 months16 monthsNominated as worst readers: at least 1.5 S.D’s below grade levelNominated as worst readers: at least 1.5 S.D’s below grade level

Average Word Attack=67, Word Identification=69, Verbal IQ=93Average Word Attack=67, Word Identification=69, Verbal IQ=93

Randomly assigned to two instructional conditions that both Randomly assigned to two instructional conditions that both taught “phonics” explicitly, but used different procedures with taught “phonics” explicitly, but used different procedures with different emphasisdifferent emphasisChildren in both conditions received 67.5 hours of one-on-one Children in both conditions received 67.5 hours of one-on-one instruction, 2 hours a day for 8 weeksinstruction, 2 hours a day for 8 weeks

Children were followed for two years after the intervention was Children were followed for two years after the intervention was completedcompleted

Both Interventions incorporated principles of Both Interventions incorporated principles of instruction that have generally been found to be instruction that have generally been found to be successful for children with reading disabilitiessuccessful for children with reading disabilities

Ample opportunities for guided practice of new Ample opportunities for guided practice of new skillsskillsBoth taught using one-to-one tutoring methods-Both taught using one-to-one tutoring methods-intensiveintensiveSystematic cueing of appropriate strategies in Systematic cueing of appropriate strategies in contextcontextTaught phonemic decoding strategies explicitlyTaught phonemic decoding strategies explicitly

““more intensive, more relentless, more more intensive, more relentless, more precisely delivered, more highly structured precisely delivered, more highly structured and direct, and more carefully monitored and direct, and more carefully monitored for procedural fidelity and effects” for procedural fidelity and effects” (Kavale, (Kavale, 1996)1996)

Interval in Months Between Measurements

P-Pretest Pre Post 1 year 2 year

75

80

85

90

95

LIPS

EP

Growth in Total Reading Skill Before, During, and Following Intensive Intervention

Sta

ndar

d S

core

A Clinical Sample of 48 Students aged 8-16A Clinical Sample of 48 Students aged 8-16

Middle and upper-middle class studentsMiddle and upper-middle class students

Mean Age 11 yearsMean Age 11 years

79% White, 67% Male79% White, 67% Male

Received 45-80 hours (mean=60) hours of instructionReceived 45-80 hours (mean=60) hours of instruction

Intervention provided in groups of 2-4Intervention provided in groups of 2-4

Remedial Method: Spell Read P.A.T.Remedial Method: Spell Read P.A.T.

Mean beginning Word Identification Score = 92 Mean beginning Word Identification Score = 92

Children with word level skills around the 30th percentileChildren with word level skills around the 30th percentile

99

108

114 113

Outcomes from 60 Hours of Small Group Intervention with upper middle class students--Spell Read

70

80

100

Sta

nd

ard

Sco

re

90

Word Attack

Text Reading Accuracy

Reading Comp.

Text Reading

Rate

9390

86

71

110

30%

A School-based, treatment control study of 40 studentsA School-based, treatment control study of 40 students

60% Free and reduced lunch 60% Free and reduced lunch

Mean Age 12 years (range 11-14)Mean Age 12 years (range 11-14)

45% White, 45% Black, 10% other45% White, 45% Black, 10% other

53% in special education53% in special education

Received 94-108 hours (mean=100) hours of instructionReceived 94-108 hours (mean=100) hours of instruction

Intervention provided in groups of 4-5Intervention provided in groups of 4-5

Remedial Methods: Spell Read P.A.T., Soar to SuccessRemedial Methods: Spell Read P.A.T., Soar to Success

Mean Word Identification Score = 83Mean Word Identification Score = 83

Children begin with word level skills around 10th percentileChildren begin with word level skills around 10th percentile

79

96

111

96

Outcomes from 100 Hours of Small Group Intervention--Spell Read

70

80

100

Sta

nd

ard

Sco

re

90

Word Attack

Text Reading Accuracy

Reading Comp.

Text Reading

Rate

88

77 77

65

110

30%

““We can, whenever and wherever we We can, whenever and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children choose, successfully teach all children to read. We already have reams of to read. We already have reams of research, hundreds of successful research, hundreds of successful programs, and thousands of effective programs, and thousands of effective schools to show us the way. schools to show us the way. Whether Whether or not we do it must finally depend on or not we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we how we feel about the fact that we haven’t so far.”haven’t so far.” (McEwan, 1998)(McEwan, 1998)