Components of Effective Reading Instruction (continued)

Phonemic awareness is well developed in normally-achieving readers by the end of grade one and basic phonics knowledge by the end of grade three, so these areas are not usually included in regular-classroom instruction beyond the primary grades. However, for youngsters with learning disabilities in reading, difficulties with phonemic awareness and phonics knowledge often persist well beyond grade three. If a child with LD has deficits in these areas, skilled and intensive remediation is essential to his or her reading progress. In addition, poor reading fluency is extremely common among older youngsters with LD, even those whose difficulties with phonemic awareness and phonics have been successfully remediated. Poor fluency is especially problematic in the upper grades because it impairs comprehension, reduces motivation to read, and makes it difficult for children to keep up with the reading demands of their classes. Thus, instruction that specifically targets fluency is very important. Finally, the use of oral comprehension activities may continue to be valuable for older youngsters with reading disabilities, because their oral comprehension often far exceeds their reading comprehension. Oral activities may be a vehicle for students with LD to develop higher-level comprehension skills and to display abilities that would not be revealed in their reading and writing. However, oral activities should not substitute for intensive remediation of specific reading weaknesses; otherwise, students with LD will not develop the skills they need to be capable, independent readers.

Examples of Sources

Peer-reviewed journal articles:

Bus, A. G., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1999). Phonological awareness and early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 403-414.

Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading-comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279-320.

Lovett, M. W., Lacerenza, L., Borden, S., Frijters, J., Steinbach, K., & DePalma, M. (2000). Components of effective remediation for developmental reading disabilities: Combining phonological and strategy-based instruction to improve outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 263-283.

Meyer, M. S., & Felton, R. H. (1999). Repeated reading to enhance fluency: Old approaches and new directions. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 283-306.

Rankin-Erickson, J. L., & Pressley, M. (2000). A survey of instructional practices of special education teachers nominated as effective teachers of literacy. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 206-225.

Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C., Voeller, K., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33-58.

Wolf, M., Miller, L., & Donnelly, K. (2000). Retrieval, automaticity, vocabulary, engagement with language, orthography (RAVE-O): A comprehensive fluency-based reading intervention program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 375-386.

Other helpful sources:

Biemiller, A. (1999). Language and reading success. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Ehri, L. C. (2004). Teaching phonemic awareness and phonics: An explanation of the National Reading Panel meta-analyses. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Co.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.

National Research Council. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Peterson, C. L., Caverly, D. C., Nicholson, S. A., O’Neil, S., & Cusenbary, S. (2000). Building reading proficiency at the secondary level: A guide to resources. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.