Journal of Learning Disabilities最新文献

{"title":"What Environments Support Reading Growth Among Current Compared With Former Reading Intervention Recipients? A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Their Schools.","authors":"Garret J Hall, Peter M Nelson, David C Parker","doi":"10.1177/00222194241236164","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241236164","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>School context can shape relative intervention response in myriad ways due to factors, such as instructional quality, resource allocation, peer effects, and correlations between the school context and characteristics of enrolled students (e.g., higher-poverty students attending higher-poverty schools). In the current study, we used data from 16,000 U.S. Grade 3 students in a community-based supplemental reading intervention program to investigate the degree to which school context factors (percentage eligible for free/reduced-price lunch [FRPL], school-level achievement) relate to the differences in triannual reading fluency growth rates between students actively receiving supplemental intervention (active recipients) and those that formerly received intervention (and therefore only received general class instruction at this time; former recipients). Using Bayesian multilevel modeling, our findings indicate that school-level FRPL eligibility played a more prominent factor in growth rate differences between these two groups than school-level reading achievement. However, school-level reading achievement was much more strongly related to reading fluency differences between active and former intervention recipients at the beginning of the school year (when controlling for FRPL). Implications for investigating school-level heterogeneity in intervention response and sustainability are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"46-61"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140337283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Derivational Morphology Training in French-Speaking 9- to 14- Year-Old Children and Adolescents With Developmental Dyslexia: Does It Improve Morphological Awareness, Reading, and Spelling Outcome Measures?","authors":"Estelle Ardanouy, Pascal Zesiger, Hélène Delage","doi":"10.1177/00222194231223526","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194231223526","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Children with developmental dyslexia (DD) display partially preserved morphology skills which they rely upon for reading and spelling. Therefore, we conducted explicit and intensive training of derivational morphology in French and Swiss individuals with DD, ages 9 to 14 years, in order to assess its effect on: morphological awareness, reading (speed and accuracy), and spelling. Our pre-posttest design included a group trained in derivational morphology and a group of children who continued their business-as-usual rehabilitation program with their speech-language therapist. Results showed effects on morphological awareness and on the spelling of complex words, with a large between-group effect size for trained items and a large to moderate effect size for untrained items. All these gains tended to be maintained over time on the delayed posttest, 2 months later. For reading, the results were more contrasted, with large between-group effect sizes for accuracy and speed for trained items, reducing to a small effect for accuracy on the delayed posttest. For untrained items, small effects were observed on accuracy (at both posttests) but not on speed. These results are very promising and argue in favor of using derivational morphology as a medium to improve literacy skills in French-speaking children and adolescents with DD.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"62-77"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636023/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139698717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ongoing Teacher Support for Data-Based Individualization: A Meta-Analysis and Synthesis.","authors":"Emma Shanahan, Seohyeon Choi, Jechun An, Bess Casey-Wilke, Seyma Birinci, Caroline Roberts, Emily Reno","doi":"10.1177/00222194241271335","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241271335","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although data-based individualization (DBI) has positive effects on learning outcomes for students with learning difficulties, this framework can be difficult for teachers to implement due to its complexity and contextual barriers. The first aim of this synthesis was to investigate the effects of ongoing professional development (PD) support for DBI on teachers' DBI knowledge, skills, beliefs, and fidelity and the achievement of preschool to Grade 12 students with academic difficulties. The second aim was to report on characteristics of this support and explore whether features were associated with effects. We identified 26 studies, 16 and 22 of which examined teacher and student outcomes, respectively. Meta-analyses indicated that the weighted mean effect size for DBI with ongoing support for teachers was <i>g</i> = 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.43, 1.28], <i>p</i> < .001, <i>I</i>² = 83.74%, <i>k</i> = 46) and <i>g</i> = 0.31 for students (95% CI = [0.19, 0.42], <i>p</i> < .001, <i>I</i>² = 61.38%, <i>k</i> = 103). We did not identify moderators of treatment effects. However, subset effects were descriptively larger for ongoing support that targeted data-based instructional changes or included collaborative problem-solving. Researchers may improve future DBI PD by focusing on support for teachers' instructional changes, describing support practices in greater detail, and advancing technological supports.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"3-18"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636021/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142141367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Graph Out Loud: Pre-Service Teachers' Data Decisions and Interpretations of CBM Progress Graphs.","authors":"Jessica R Toste, Marissa J Filderman, Nathan H Clemens, Erica Fry","doi":"10.1177/00222194241231768","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241231768","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Data-based instruction (DBI) is a process in which teachers use progress data to make ongoing instructional decisions for students with learning disabilities. Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a common form of progress monitoring, and CBM data are placed on a graph to guide decision-making. Despite the central role that graph interpretation plays in the successful implementation of DBI, relatively little attention has been devoted to investigating this skill among special education teachers. In the present study, we examined the data decisions of 32 U.S. pre-service special education teachers (29 females and 3 males). Participants viewed data presented sequentially on CBM progress graphs and used a think-aloud procedure to explain their reasoning each time they indicated they would make instructional changes. We also asked participants to make the same type of decisions in response to static CBM progress graphs depicting 10 weeks of data. Overall, there was inconsistency in pre-service teachers' responses related to <i>when</i> or <i>why</i> they would make an instructional change. Decisions were often influenced by graph-related features, such as variability in the data. Furthermore, responses suggested misunderstandings that led to premature instructional change decisions and reliance on individual data points.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"33-45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636013/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139984228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act: Clarifying the Relationship Between Free Appropriate Public Education and Least Restrictive Environment","authors":"Mitchell Louis Yell, M. Renee Bradley","doi":"10.1177/00222194241305352","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241305352","url":null,"abstract":"In 2025, the Individuals with Disabilities Education (IDEA) will have been the primary law driving the field of special education for 50 years. A contentious area of disagreement has been the relationship between two primary mandates of the law: the obligation of schools to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to eligible students with disabilities and the obligation to place these students in the least restrictive environment (LRE) appropriate to each student’s individual needs. The conflict over LRE can be traced throughout the history of IDEA, in debates referenced as “mainstreaming,” “regular education initiative,” “inclusion,” and “full inclusion.” In this case, we draw on (a) Congressional intent as shown in the writings of a co-sponsor of the law, (b) the language of the law and regulations, (c) special education rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court and other U.S. Courts of Appeals addressing FAPE and LRE, and (d) policy guidance from the U.S. Department of Education. We argue that there is no basis for believing that FAPE and LRE are in conflict. Rather, the FAPE requirement of the IDEA is the primary obligation of school districts, and it sets the parameters for determining the LRE. To believe otherwise represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. We describe how for students eligible under the category of learning disabilities, this perceived conflict has been especially challenging. Historically, the IDEA has made a distinction between high-incidence disabilities, those that occur more frequently, and low-incidence disabilities, those that occur less frequently. At some point, these distinctions morphed into a belief that high-incidence disabilities required less-intensive interventions and were more suited to regular class placement than those students with low-incidence disabilities. This distinction is incorrect. For each student identified as eligible for special education services, the determination of LRE should be an individualized decision based on student needs and where those needs can be best met. This discussion is a critical one for students with learning disabilities and all students with disabilities who may require intensive individualized supports, regardless of prior conceptions of low- and high-disability categories.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142869895","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Why Do Parenting Styles Matter? The Relation Between Parenting Styles, Cyberbullying, and Problematic Internet Use Among Children With and Without SLD/ADHD","authors":"Sigal Eden, Hila Tal","doi":"10.1177/00222194241301051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241301051","url":null,"abstract":"This study focuses on the pervasive issues of cyberbullying and problematic internet use (PIU) among youth, particularly in children with disabilities. To elucidate the role of parents in mitigating these challenges, the study examines the prevalence of three parenting styles (permissive/authoritarian/authoritative), and their correlation with cyberbullying and PIU among children with or without specific learning disorder (SLD) or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD). The study comprised of 300 participants: 150 children—9 to 12 years old, matched with their 150 parents, divided into two groups—SLD/ADHD and those with typical-development. Comparative analysis revealed that the SLD/ADHD group scored higher in the authoritarian style compared with the typical-development group. Furthermore, authoritative parenting style correlated with lower incidences of cyberbullying and PIU, and foster a more positive parent–child relationship, which in turn contributed to reduced cyberbullying and PIU. These findings underscore the importance of adopting an authoritative parenting style among parents, particularly among parents of children with SLD/ADHD.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142823165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Supporting Teachers' Data-Based Individualization of Early Writing Instruction: An Efficacy Trial.","authors":"Kristen L McMaster, Erica S Lembke, Emma Shanahan, Seohyeon Choi, Jechun An, Christopher Schatschneider, McKinzie D Duesenberg-Marshall, Seyma Birinci, Elizabeth McCollom, Carol Garman, Kim Moore","doi":"10.1177/00222194241300324","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241300324","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a multiyear, multisite, randomized control trial, we examined the effects of comprehensive professional development designed to support teachers' data-based instruction (DBI) for students with intensive early writing needs. Teachers (<i>N</i> = 154; primarily special educators or intervention specialists) were assigned randomly to a treatment group (<i>n</i> = 76), in which they received tools, learning, and coaching to support their DBI implementation over 20 weeks, or to a control group (<i>n</i> = 78). Students either received DBI in early writing (<i>n</i> = 155) from treatment teachers or their usual writing instruction (<i>n</i> = 154) from control teachers. Treatment teachers outperformed controls on measures of DBI knowledge and skills (<i>d</i> = 1.57) and self-efficacy for writing instruction (<i>d</i> = .94), and treatment students outperformed controls on proximal and distal writing outcomes (<i>d</i>s = .14-.29). Student characteristics (grade, special education status, English learner status, and race/ethnicity) did not moderate intervention effects. We discuss findings in terms of the importance of supporting students with intensive learning needs, the efficacy and feasibility of implementing DBI-TLC, and implications for pre- and in-service teacher training and support.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"222194241300324"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142796165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Efficacy of Small Group Reading Intervention for Grade 2 and 3 Children With Reading Difficulties: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Kristy Dunn, George K. Georgiou, Robert Savage, Rauno Parrila","doi":"10.1177/00222194241297058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241297058","url":null,"abstract":"We examined whether Phonics + Set for Variability (S fV) reading intervention would lead to better irregular word reading compared to Phonics + Morphology within a cluster randomized control trial (RCT) design with a follow-up measurement. The participants were 273 Grade 2 and 3 students with reading difficulties (139 in the Phonics + S fV and 134 in the Phonics + Morphology) who received intervention in small groups (2–4 children), 4 times a week, 30 minutes each time, for 15 weeks. Results of hierarchical linear modeling showed that there was a significant effect of intervention on all reading outcomes (e.g., from pre- to posttest the effect sizes for Phonics + S fV ranged from g = 0.74 to 1.54 and for Phonics + Morphology from g = 0.75 to 1.49). Unexpectedly, there were no differences between the intervention conditions in any of the outcome variables, including irregular word reading and morphological awareness that the interventions partly focused on.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142597921","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Vulnerability to Achievement Stressors: More Evidence That Students With Learning Disabilities Require Intensive Intervention","authors":"Jessica M. Namkung, Lynn S. Fuchs","doi":"10.1177/00222194241297051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241297051","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we introduce the term vulnerability to achievement stressors, which refers to differentially low achievement when shifts in the educational environment “stress” or threaten the capacity of an individual or a group of individuals to make academic progress. We also introduce a methodological framework for assessing vulnerability to achievement stressors. Vulnerability to achievement stressors in students with learning disabilities (LD), relative to students without disabilities, is illustrated with two achievement stressors: (a) the shift in learning standards codified in Common Core State Standards, specifically the increase in complexity of the fourth-grade fractions curriculum, and (b) the COVID-19 pandemic, which decreased instructional structure by disrupting in-person teaching. Because these illustrations were embedded within randomized controlled trials, each with an inclusive instruction condition and an intensive intervention condition, they also provide the basis for concluding that intensive intervention is more effective than inclusive instruction for addressing students with LD’s vulnerability to achievement stressors and for narrowing their persistently severe achievement gaps.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142597920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Considerations for Intensifying Word-Problem Interventions for Students With MD: A Qualitative Umbrella Review of Relevant Meta-Analyses.","authors":"Jonte A Myers, Tessa L Arsenault, Sarah R Powell, Bradley S Witzel, Emily Tanner, Terri D Pigott","doi":"10.1177/00222194241281293","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241281293","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Word problem-solving (WPS) poses a significant challenge for many students, particularly those with mathematics difficulties (MD), hindering their overall mathematical development. To improve WPS proficiency, providing individualized and intensive interventions is critical. This umbrella review examined 11 medium- to high-quality meta-analyses to identify intervention and participant characteristics, informed by the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity (TII) framework, that consistently moderate WPS outcomes for students with MD. Our analysis identified four characteristics with consistent moderating effects: intervention model, number of treatment sessions, group size, and academic risk area. This result suggests that these variables are potential considerations when customizing and intensifying WPS interventions to maximize their effectiveness for students with MD. We discuss the implications of these findings for practice and research and acknowledge the limitations of our review.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"222194241281293"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142592095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}