A number of explanations have been proposed in recent years to account for the observed preponderance of boys with a reading disability. The most notable explanations offered for gender differences in reading disability relate to differences in phonemic awareness, auditory processing, behaviour, neurology, variability in cognitive ability and reading motivation. The purpose of this article was to review the available evidence supporting each of these explanations. The impact of confounding variables, including sample selection, sample bias, intelligence, and socioeconomic status was also discussed. Although the different explanations have, to some degree, an impact on overall reading achievement, it does not appear that any single explanation wholly accounts for gender differences in reading ability, and that gender is not a strong or consistent predictor of reading success.

Survey-based research was conducted with preservice teachers, from a large regional Australian university, to explore their views about inclusion and their readiness to teach in inclusive classrooms. Open-ended questions were included in the survey to glean information on the respondents' feelings and concerns about inclusion and inclusive practices. In addition, questions were framed to allow the respondents to discuss ways that the university could better prepare them as practising teachers. The responses to each of these questions were content analysed to delineate categories, and frequencies were calculated on the most salient categories. The results of this analysis are reported and comparisons are made of the views expressed by the respondents before they experienced an inclusive education subject and a related practicum with those expressed after. The implications of the results for teacher education programs are considered.

Despite advances in our knowledge of evidence-based inclusive educational practice, much of this knowledge does not reach routine classroom practice. There remains a significant gap between our accumulated knowledge about what can work in classrooms and the extent to which evidence-based practice is used in sustainable ways. This inability to bridge the research-to-practice gap has an adverse effect on the progress of inclusion in schools and the ability of individual teachers to respond to the needs of all students. This review examines those factors that both enable and interfere with the successful translation of research to practice in education settings.

This article investigates issues to do with student voice. Much attention is given within the literature to including the voice of students without disabilities in educational debate. Indeed, clear connections have been made between the use of student voice and raising student achievement (Mitra, 2004). Given the validation of such voices, it is paradoxical that limited attention is accorded to the views of students with disabilities (Habel, Bloom, Ray, & Bacon, 1999). This position paper explores reasons why the viewpoints of students with disabilities are not routinely investigated or listened to, and puts forward a case for stronger attention to be given to such voices. The article concludes by offering suggestions as to how to collect such viewpoints.

This study examined the group differences of 49 boys and girls from two different groups of Turkish children with and without attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD) in the following two variables: emotional intensity and perceived self-efficacy. In order to measure emotional intensity and perceived self-efficacy, children completed the Emotion Regulation Interview (ERI) and described their ideas regarding how they would feel and act in six emotionally challenging situations. Findings from ERI indicated that Turkish children with AD/HD reported more intense feelings of anger and worry but also having confidence in their ability to regulate this arousal. Overall, results suggested underlying problems with emotion regulation in children with AD/HD.

Response to Intervention (RTI) models of reading instruction have received much attention in the literature (Fuchs, Mock, Morgan, & Young, 2003; Hosp & Ardoin, 2008; Justice, 2006). Such models call for frequent and high-quality assessment of students' skills. One skill that is vital in the process of learning to read is the ability to sound out letters and blend these sounds together to produce a word. According to Dual Route models of reading (e.g., Coltheart, Rastle, Perry, Langdon, & Ziegler, 2001), these skills comprise the sublexical route to reading. This is best assessed by tests of nonword reading. In this article, 17 tests of nonword reading were reviewed in light of RTI and Dual Route models. The aim of the review was to determine the best available nonword reading tests for use at the Tier One and Tier Two levels of intervention, and the best available nonword reading test for diagnostic (Tier Three) purposes. The review determined that several good-quality tests of nonword reading, suitable for assessing the general functioning of the sublexical route to reading (at the Tier One and Tier Two level), are available, but that no test of nonword reading is available that fulfils all of the desirable criteria for a Tier Three, diagnostic assessment.

This research examined the reported level of implementation of eight practices in a national sample of Australian special education teachers, replicating the North American study of Burns and Ysseldyke (2009). The 194 respondents reported extensive use of a number of evidence-based practices, such as direct instruction and applied behaviour analysis. Conversely, a number of practices that have very weak empirical foundations or can be considered disproven, such as perceptual-motor training and modality instruction, continue to be used at moderate-to-high levels. In addition, compared to their North American counterparts, Australian special education teachers used a number of evidence-based practices significantly less frequently and used perceptual-motor programs more frequently. Implications of these results are discussed.

Supporting students with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) in inclusive settings presents both opportunities and significant challenges to school communities. This study, which explored the lived experience of nine students with ASD in an inclusive high school in Australia, is based on the belief that by listening to the voices of students, school communities will be in a better position to collaboratively create supportive learning and social environments. The findings of this small-scale study deepen our knowledge from the student perspective of the inclusive educational practices that facilitate and constrain the learning and participation of students with ASD. The students' perspectives were examined in relation to the characteristics of successful inclusive schools identified by Kluth (2003). Implications for inclusive educational practice that meets the needs of students with ASD are presented.

Children with vision impairment (VI) and blindness are largely educated in mainstream schools in Australia. Specialist itinerant support teachers – vision (ISTVs) travel from school to school to facilitate the education of these children. The purposes of this study were to examine the barriers that ISTVs face in this role, and to identify strategies used to address these barriers. Seven ISTVs participated in the study. Focus group interviews were conducted to collect data from participants. Constant comparison, a form of thematic analysis, was used to examine the data. Results indicate that barriers include a lack of understanding among regular school educators of the needs of children with VI, lack of awareness of the role of ISTVs, insufficient resources and time, and inadequate training. Frequent communication and good working relationships with staff help to minimise or negate many of the potential barriers. However, barriers such as lack of time and inadequate training remain unaddressed and require the attention of policymakers at higher levels.

The special education teaching profession has experienced longstanding problems with shortages of qualified teaching staff and with high turnover rates of these staff. A variety of issues are related to these problems, including the nature of the support that early career special education teachers receive. In this case study research, the use of external mentoring support to two early career special education teachers in their first year of teaching was examined. This mentoring support was provided by an experienced special educator who did not work at the teachers' schools. The results suggest that external forms of mentoring support may offer important advantages over traditional, site-based forms of support.

With current preparation for the release of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) in 2013, many changes have been proposed for the diagnostic criteria, including changes to the pervasive development disorder category — of which Asperger's disorder is a part. Using focus group discussions this study explored how Asperger's disorder is perceived by Australian health and education staff, parents of children diagnosed with Asperger's disorder and community members. A total of 51 people participated in eight focus groups. Theory-led thematic analysis of the discussions revealed five themes of aetiology uncertainty, challenging behaviour, barriers in service provision, terminology confusion and label stigma. These themes are discussed in relation to the proposed diagnostic changes and implications for future research.

The highly regular orthographies (spelling systems) of many nations expedite literacy development, and their children experience a rapid transition from early literacy (learning to read and write) to sophisticated literacy (reading and writing to learn). In contrast, English orthographic complexity impedes literacy development, particularly for weak readers (Galletly & Knight, in press a, b). This article proposes a model of differential disadvantage of Anglophone weak readers due to cognitive processing weakness and the high cognitive load of learning to read and write English. The disadvantage is differential, first with Anglophone weak readers disadvantaged compared to weak readers in nations with regular orthographies, and second, with subgroups of Anglophone weak readers being more disadvantaged, depending on their levels of language skills and cognitive processing efficiency. Anglophone weak readers with pre-existing language disorder experience the highest levels of differential disadvantage. Weak cognitive processing and automisation in the face of continuing high cognitive load seems a basis for them frequently showing comorbidities, with features of multiple disorder categories (Catts, Adlof, Hogan, & Ellis Weismer, 2005), including autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), auditory processing disorder, motor weakness, and social and behavioural impairment. The model is a useful framework for considering the instructional needs of weak readers. Areas where research is needed for building ways forward in optimising literacy development is discussed.

In Volume 35, Issue 1 of the Australasian Journal of Special Education, Carter, Stephenson and Strnadová (2011) replicated a study by Burns and Ysseldyke (2009). In Carter et al.'s study, 194 Australian special educators were asked to rate the extent to which they used eight instructional practices. These practices were applied behaviour analysis, direct instruction, formative evaluation, mnemonic strategies, modality training, perceptual-motor training, psycholinguistic training, and social skills training. The first four of these practices had moderate to high effect sizes (and were regarded by the authors as more desirable techniques), and the final four practices had low effect sizes, on the basis of past meta-analytic research. Carter et al.'s findings were that while the Australian teachers used some desirable strategies relatively frequently, they also used some less desirable practices frequently and so desirable instructional practices should be encouraged at the expense of less effective practices. While these results are of interest, they also have the potential to mislead readers and later sections of the current article examine these potential misconceptions.

Dempsey (this issue) has provided a commentary on our study (Carter, Stephenson, & Strnadová, 2011) examining the reported rates of use of instructional practices by Australian special educators. Examining this commentary, it is evident that on many issues we are on the same page and agree on many of the fundamental conclusions to be drawn from the study. Nevertheless, Dempsey did express concern regarding several aspects of the reporting of the study, which were suggested to have the ‘potential to mislead’ readers. In essence, these criticisms revolve around four substantive points and these will each be addressed.