Search

The purpose of this article is to provide an alternative interpretation of the National Reading Panel's meta-analysis on phonics instruction. The NRP based its conclusion that phonics instruction was superior to other approaches on the interpretation of mean effect d statistics reported in its meta-analysis. In addition to looking at these d's, we computed and interpreted the mean effect correlations (r's) and r-squares that corresponded to the reported d's. Our conclusions were different from those reported by the NRP. Instead of phonics approaches being superior to nonphonics approaches (as indicated when statistically significant d's are the only criterion considered), we argue that the advantages of phonics instruction relative to nonphonics instruction have not been demonstrated clearly (as indicated when practical significance r's and r-squares are considered).

Most students who receive special education services have significant difficulties with reading. Because teachers are considered the major source of referral for special education services, they must know the characteristic reading behaviors that distinguish students with reading disabilities. The purpose of this study was to validate literature-based reading behaviors by professionals who work with students with reading disabilities (RD) and to identify those behaviors that predict reading disabilities. Utilizing a rating scale developed from the neuropsychological and learning disability literature, 391 professionals were asked to identify reading behaviors in their poor readers identified as having learning disabilities (LD). Findings from t-test analyses revealed statistically significant differences between students with LD who had reading disabilities and students with LD without reading disabilities, affirming the literature-based group of behaviors that constitute reading disability. Additionally, reading rate was found to be most predictive of reading disability in the LD group with reading disabilities. Implications include characteristic reading behaviors that can be used with other reading measures during screening and diagnosis and that can be considered when planning remedial intervention programs. (Contains 2 tables.)

This research analyzed the combined results of three meta-analyses which examined the extent to which a variety of measures of specific abilities related to reading. More than 450 studies were reviewed and almost 11,000 different coefficients were analyzed. The best predictors of reading proved to be other written language abilities (i.e., abilities involving print). The implications were: (1) professionals interested in improving literacy skills should focus on teaching written language abilities such as print awareness and book handling, letters, phoneme-letter correspondences, word recognition, alphabet knowledge, and comprehension and (2) the current interest in the role of nonprint abilities in reading such as phonological awareness, rapid naming, intelligence, and memory might be overemphasized.

This study investigated the relative importance of semantic, grammatical, phonological, and rapid naming abilities in predicting word identification skills in 200 children (grades 1-6) using correlation, factor analysis, multiple regression, and predictive outcome analysis techniques. Composite measures of these abilities correlated significantly with word identification. However, no composite measure predicted poor word identification skills at the .75 criterion rate. (Contains references.) (Author/DB)

A study examined literature on mathematics learning disabilities (LD) and identified specific behaviors of students with mathematics LD. Data are presented from observations of 391 special educators on 1,724 students with LD, 870 with math weaknesses. Difficulty with multi-step problems was the single most important behavior for predicting math weaknesses. (Contains extensive references.) (Author/CR)

This article describes the development of the learning disability (LD) movement from 1800 to the present. It examines the ideas that contributed to the theoretical basis preceding the formation of the LD movement, legislation and events that established LD as a specific area of study and contributed to its growth, and a glimpse into the future. (JDD)

This article reviews the efforts made since 1962 to define learning disabilities, discusses 11 prominent definitions, identifies important conceptual elements on which the definitions differ, and calls for a consensual acceptance of the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities definition. (PB)

This research analyzed the combined results of three meta-analyses which examined the extent to which a variety of measures of specific abilities related to reading. More than 450 studies were reviewed and almost 11,000 different coefficients were analyzed. The best predictors of reading proved to be other written language abilities (i.e., abilities involving print). The implications were: (1) professionals interested in improving literacy skills should focus on teaching written language abilities such as print awareness and book handling, letters, phoneme-letter correspondences, word recognition, alphabet knowledge, and comprehension and (2) the current interest in the role of nonprint abilities in reading such as phonological awareness, rapid naming, intelligence, and memory might be overemphasized., During the past 50 years, researchers have explored the relationship between reading and many different abilities. Generally, these investigators were studying theoretical questions about the nature of reading; they were [...]

The new definition of learning disabilities proposed by the National Joint Committee for Learning Disabilities is discussed in terms of its need, procedures followed in its development, the Committee's intention regarding critical elements, and the definition's current status (acceptance by four of the six member organizations). (DB)

The development of a new definition of learning disabilities accepted by organizations comprising the National Joint Committee for Learning Disabilities in 1981 is reviewed including reasons for a new definition, procedures followed in its development, the Committee's intended meaning for each phrase, and the current status of the definition. (DB)

Research articles published in 10 major journals during the years 1984-1987 were evaluated to determine how many satisfied the recommendations of the Council for Learning Disabilities' Research Committee on reporting subject data. Only 4 of the 277 articles included acceptable information in 7 recommended areas of subject data. (Author/JDD)

Presents a synthesis of research on the relationships of listening, speaking, and writing to reading. (MP)

The article is a response to R. Maggiore's article "Reliability of Proposed Short Form of Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (ITPA)." The authors present evidence to rebut Maggiore's essentially negative conclusions regarding the reliability of the short form test. (For original paper, see EJ 194 153.) (Author/PHR)

The article presents the keynote address from the First National Convention (October, 1979) of the Division for Children with Learning Disabilities. (SBH)

The history of difficulties with definitions of learning disabilities (LD) is reviewed and the definition proposed by the National Joint Committee for Learning Disabilities is described. LD is seen as a generic term referring to a heterogeneous group of disorders presumed to be due to central nervous system dysfunction. (CL)