Here it is!  My very first Top 10 List, as a blogger!

What follows is a brief summary of the research I have read up to this point in time, with regards to teaching students with Intellectual Disability (ID) or Significant Cognitive Disability (SCD) to read..

Please scroll down to see details to explain each point, and references.

1. IQ scores are not as important as you might think, when it comes to choosing reading interventions.
2.  Some practices in teaching reading are well accepted, due to the large amount of research that has amassed over time to support them.   
3. Students with ID / SCD require achievable goals to be clearly identified by teachers.
4. It may be necessary to use alternate forms of assessment when determining whether an intervention has been effective for your students with SCD.
5. It is important to understand and accept that progress for students with Significant Cognitive Disability (SCD) or Intellectual Disability (ID) will likely be very slow.   
6. When identifying practices and programs for use with students, it is necessary to be skeptical and to look at research studies and articles critically.
7. It is essential to have a basic understanding of the vocabulary used in research studies to determine the impact of a given approach.
8. Deciding whether to continue an intervention with students with SCD should be based on data. 
9. Use the principles of educational psychology, when teaching struggling readers, and in particular, those with SCD.
10. Provide many, many repetitions, to enable the student to learn. Build the skills to the point that the student recalls the information with automaticity.

 

Here is the list a second time, with points to elaborate.

 

1. IQ scores are not as important as you might think, when it comes to choosing reading interventions.

 

• • We do not need to teach reading differently to students with low IQ, as compared to other struggling readers (Stuebing, K. K., Barth, A. E., Molfese, P. J., Weiss, B., & Fletcher, J. M., 2009).

 

• • In a meta-analysis that looked at how students with low IQ learn to read, as compared to struggling readers who have average IQ, it was found that there is no difference in how these two groups of students learn to read (Stuebing, K. K., Barth, A. E., Molfese, P. J., Weiss, B., & Fletcher, J. M. (2009).

 

• • IQ scores do not have a role in planning interventions, or in matching interventions to readers, since there is no important difference in how we should approach teaching reading, to the two types of students (Stuebing, et. Al., (2009).

 

• • There is no difference in “growth patterns” and “no significant differences between these two groups of readers on how they develop reading precursor skills” (Wristers, Francis, Foorman, Fletcher, & Swank, as cited in Joseph, 2002).

 

 

• • It is a good idea to use reading programs that were designed for struggling readers in general, with those who have low IQ. Students with ID “should be provided with evidence-based reading instruction” (Allor et al., 2014, p. 302).

 

2. Some practices in teaching reading are well accepted, due to the large amount of research that has amassed over time to support them.   

•  “…it makes the most sense to think about research as proceeding as a slow accumulation of knowledge over time and to read across many different studies on a particular question or topic.  Although breakthroughs or headline-making studies periodically appear, it is usually a mass of related studies over a period of years that lead to a well-accepted or durable conclusion” (Duke and Martin, 2011, p. 21).

 

• These features (below) were described as essential in teaching students with Intellectual Disabilities (ID) by Allor, et al., (2014)
• • Use Direct Instruction
  • Use highly detailed lessons allowing for explicit instruction
  • A fast pace is often necessary, to maximize student engagement and motivation
  • It is necessary to model all skills repeatedly and clearly
  • The teacher must carry out frequent cumulative reviews, to ensure mastery and maintenance of skills (p. 293)
  • Use of very “consistent, explicit, and repetitive routines, focusing on key-skills” is important (p. 303)
  • Individual pacing and behavioral supports are often necessary
  • It is necessary that groups be kept small, with only one to four students to each teacher (p. 303).

 

 

3. Students with ID / SCD require achievable goals to be clearly identified by teachers.

• • Just as is necessary when teaching students without disabilities, clear goals need to be determined at the outset.

 

• • Lemons, C.J., Zigmond, N, Kloo, A.M., Hill, D.R., Mrachko, A.A., Pattera, M.F., Bost, T.J. & Davis, S.M. (2013), reasoned that teachers would be better equipped to create realistic, appropriate goals if they had better data on the existing skills of this population of students, and could measure progress more accurately and frequently (p. 410).

 

4. It may be necessary to use alternate forms of assessment when determining whether an intervention has been effective for your students with SCD.

 

• • One difficulty is that when reading tests, designed for use with the typical student population, are used with students with disabilities, it is not known which tests to use and for what grade-level (Lemons et al., 2013, p. 411).

 

• • “More sensitive measures are needed to determine when small amounts of progress are being made so teachers and students will recognize the results of their hard work and continue instruction that is effective” (Allor, Mathes, Roberts, Cheatham & Otaiba, 2014, p. 304).

 

5. It is important to understand and accept that progress for students with Significant Cognitive Disability (SCD) or Intellectual Disability (ID) will likely be very slow.   

 

• • “Students with low IQ do benefit from comprehensive reading programs that were designed for struggling readers, and readers with LD, but progress is slower” (Allor, Mathes, Roberts, Cheatham & Otalia 2014, p. 303).

 

• • The progress one might expect to see could may take many years, as opposed to many months, to achieve. Allor et al. (2014) noted that it took between one and three years for students in Grades 3 to 8 with Intellectual Disability, to achieve reading scores in the average range on Grade 1 reading passages.

 

6. When identifying practices and programs for use with students, it is necessary to be skeptical and to look at research studies and articles critically.

 

• • “…it is rare to encounter an education program or practice that does not claim to be ‘research-based’. We must go beyond these claims and, in the spirit of healthy skepticism, demand the compelling evidence that a program works” (p. 57).

 

• • Seeing the description “research proven” is not a guarantee that the program can be trusted more than others.  Use of these terms alone means very little. We have to ask questions that allow us to get underneath any individual’s, organization’s, or company’s use of these terms (Duke and Martin, 2011, p.  17).

 

• • There are a series of questions that can be asked, in an effort to look critically at the claims made.  Some questions one might ask are:

• • • • How was this program tested?
      • Who was it tested on?
      • Is there a match between the people who participated in the study, and the students I intend to use this intervention with? 
      • Are they of the same age group and do they have other important characteristics in common? (Duke and Martin, 2011, p. 18)
      • Does the study look at the same, specific goal that I am working on with my students? (Duke and Martin, 2011, p. 18)
      • Does the study meet the other criteria described by Duke and Martin, with regards to outcome measures / standards / quality / degree of impact, and so on? (pp. 18-19)

7. It is essential to have a basic understanding of the vocabulary used in research studies to determine the impact of a given approach.

 

• • In terms of effect size, John Hattie sets the “bar of acceptability at 0.4, and calls this the “hinge point” ((Fisher, Frey and Hattie, 2016, pp. 8-9). This is the number we need to look for when reading research.

 

• • For more information on understanding research, please see my previous post, “Important Research Terms Defined for New Graduate Students and Interested Teachers” (Busch, Mar 1, 2020)

 

8. Deciding whether to continue an intervention with students with SCD should be based on data.  

 

• • Take baseline data before you begin your intervention.

 

• • Select interventions that are proven by research to be effective for struggling readers

 

• • After a period of six months, take data again, to see whether growth in the specific skills you are targeting has occurred. Use this information to decide whether to continue with the same intervention, whether to make some important adjustments, or to try something else.

 

 

• • If the students involved have made less than a year’s progress over the course of a year, many people believe it is good practice to end the intervention, and to try something else (Rick Freeze, personal communication to author, February 23, 2020).

 

• • Fisher, Frey and Hattie (2016) explain that “students naturally mature and develop over the course of a year, and thus actions, activities, and interventions that teachers use should extend learning beyond what a student can achieve by simply attending school for a year” (italics in original, p. 8).

 

9. Use the principles of educational psychology, when teaching struggling readers, and in particular, those with SCD.

 

• • “Delivering reinforcers for efforts made toward achieving a goal can be considered as ways of providing support to students. This cannot be stressed enough when working with children with reading difficulties” (Joseph, 2002).

 

• • Use immediate reinforcement of behaviors that you want to increase.  “…it is crucial that educators and parents shape reading behaviors through praise and rewards contingent upon efforts made at achieving reading skills” (Joseph, 2002)

 

• • Use scaffolding to provide necessary support to the child when introducing new information then, fade your support over time. Your prompts will be “gradually faded once the child approximates independent functioning while completing tasks” (Wood, Bruner, and Ross as cited in Joseph, 2002)

 

10. Provide many, many repetitions, to enable the student to learn. Build the skills to the point that the student recalls the information with automaticity.

• • “Within the time allotted for literacy activities, students need opportunities to make frequent responses during oral and silent reading as well as writing lessons” (Joseph 2002).

 

• • Children with learning disabilities [and significant cognitive disabilities] need more opportunities to practice than their peers (McCormick, as cited in Joseph, 2002).

 

• • Build the skills to the point that the student recalls the information with automaticity. Once the student can recall the information with ease and immediately, they will be able to use their brain for other skills, like comprehension (Freeze, 2020)

 

 

Do you agree with these points?  Do you feel that something important was missed?  Please tell me what you think needs to be added.  I welcome your comments!

For more information on teaching struggling readers, I strongly recommend the following two articles:

https://www.readingrockets.org/article/best-practices-planning-interventions-students-reading-problems

https://clarekosnik.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/10_things_to_know_about_research_duke_trtr1002.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Allor, J. H., Mathes, P. G., Roberts, J. K., Cheatham, J.P. & Otalia, S. A. (2014).  Is scientifically based reading instruction effective for students with below-average IQs?  Council for Exceptional Children, 80 (3), 287-306.

Duke, N.K. & Martin, N.M. (2011).  10 Things Every Literacy Educator Should Know About Research.  The Reading Teacher, 65, 9-22.

Fisher, D., Frey, N, & Hattie, J. (2016).  Visible learning for literacy:  Implementing the practices that work best to accelerate student learning.  Corwin.

Steve Fleischman, “Before Choosing Ask Three Questions” in Proven Programs in Education: Classroom Management and Assessment, ed.  Robert E. Slavin (Thousand Oaks:  Corwin, 2014), 55-59.

Freeze, R. (2020). Precision Reading: Instructors’ Handbook (3rd Edition). Winnipeg, MB: D. R. Freeze Educational Publications (www.precisionreading.com).

Joseph, L.  (2002).  Best practices in planning interventions for students with reading problems.  Reading Rockets.  Retrieved February 22, 2020 from https://www.readingrockets.org/article/best-practices-planning-interventions-students-reading-problems

Lemons, C.J., Zigmond, N., Kloo, A.M., Hill, D.R., Mrachko, A.A., Paterra, M.F., Bost, T.J., &  Davis, S.M. (2013).  Performance of students with significant cognitive disabilities on early-grade curriculum-based measures of word and passage fluency.  Council for Exceptional Children, 79 (4), 408-426.

Rosen, P.  (n.d.).  The discrepancy model:  What you need to know.  Retrieved February 22, 2020 from  https://www.understood.org/en/school-learning/evaluations/evaluation-basics/the-discrepancy-model-what-you-need-to-know

Stuebing, K. K., Barth, A. E., Molfese, P. J., Weiss, B., & Fletcher, J. M.  (2009).  IQ is not strongly related to response to reading instruction:  a meta-analytic interpretation.  Council for Exceptional Children,  76 (1), 31-51.

Torres, C., Farley, C. A., & Cook, B.G. (2014).  A Special Educator’s Guide to Successfully Implementing Evidence-Based Practices.  Teaching Exceptional Children, 47 (2), 85-93.