Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T06:25:49.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Remediating specific learning disabilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2009

By
Karen E. Wills
Edited by
Scott J. Hunter  and
Jacobus Donders
Scott J. Hunter
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Jacobus Donders
Affiliation:
Mary Free Bed Rehabilitation Hospital, Grand Rapids
Get access

Summary

Neuropsychologists have collaborated with neurologists, educational and school psychologists, and other educators, in studying the nature and treatment of specific learning disabilities (SLD) (e.g. Lyon et al., 2006; Semrud-Clikeman, Fine & Harder, 2005; Moats, 2004). For many years, neuropsychologists have focused their efforts on identifying cognitive correlates of SLD, working from the perspective that children with SLD had qualitatively different learning styles or information processing abilities when compared with other children. However, except for well-replicated difficulties with phonological processing and naming speed among young children at risk of reading problems, consistent correlates or predictors of these differences in learning have not been found. Furthermore, while research on the etiology of SLD, including isolation of chromosomal anomalies in some families with reading disabilities (Plomin & Kovas, 2005), has clarified a biological basis for some SLDs, it has not directly contributed to enhancing either identification or remediation.

Concurrent research in neuropsychology, behavioral genetics, and developmental neuroscience has led to a reconceptualization of the developing brain as “plastic,” and influenced by its milieu throughout the lifespan. For example, functional neuroimaging research has documented brain plasticity in response to reading interventions, buttressing studies showing that specific interventions can improve reading skills in people with dyslexia (Shaywitz et al., 2004). Recent studies have confirmed structural and functional brain differences between good and poor readers.

Type
Chapter
Information
Pediatric Neuropsychological Intervention , pp. 224 - 252
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashcraft, M. & Faust, M. (1994). Mathematics anxiety and mental arithmetic performance: An exploratory investigation. Cognition & Emotion, 8, 97–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aylward, E. H., Richards, T. L., Berninger, V. W.et al. (2003). Instructional treatment associated with changes in brain activation in children with dyslexia. Neurology, 22, 212–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbaresi, W., Katusic, S. K., Colligan, R. C., Weaver, A. L. & Jacobsen, S. J. (2005). Math learning disorder: incidence in a population-based birth cohort, 1976–1982. Ambulatory Pediatrics, 5, 281–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, M. A., Pengelly, S., Dennis, M.et al. (2002). Mathematics skills in good readers with hydrocephalus. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 8, 72–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berch, D. B. (2005). Making sense of number sense: implications for children with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 333–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berninger, V. (2004). Understanding the “graphia” in developmental dysgraphia: A developmental neuropsychological perspective for disorders in producing written language. (Ch. 15). In Dewey, D. & Tupper, D., eds., Developmental motor disorders: A neuropsychological perspective. New York: Guilford, pp. 328–50.Google Scholar
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R., Jones, J.et al. (2006). Early development of language by hand: Composing, reading, listening, and speaking connections; three letter-writing modes; and fast-mapping in spelling. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 61–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berninger, V. & Amtmann, D. (2003). Preventing written expression disabilities through early and continuing assessment and intervention for handwriting and/or spelling problems: Research into practice. In Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S., eds., Handbook of learning disabilities. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 345–63.Google Scholar
Berninger, V., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R.et al. (2002). Teaching spelling and composition alone and together: Implications for the simple view of writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blachman, B. A. (1997). Early intervention and phonological awareness: A cautionary tale. In Blachman, B., ed., Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 408–30.Google Scholar
Bos, C. S. & Anders, P. L. (1990). Interactive teaching and learning: Instructional practices for teaching content and strategic knowledge. In Scruggs, T. E. & Wong, B. Y. L., eds., Intervention research in learning disabilities. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 161–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butterworth, B. (2005). The development of arithmetical abilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Tomblin, J. B. & Zhang, X. (2002). A longitudinal investigation of reading outcomes in children with language impairments. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 1142–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, D. B. & Uhry, J. K. (1995). Dyslexia: Theory and practice of remedial instruction. Baltimore, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Compton, D., Olinghouse, N., Elleman, A.et al. (2005). Putting transfer back on trial: Modeling individual differences in the transfer of decoding skill gains to other aspects of reading acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coyne, M. D., Kame'enui, E. J., Simmons, D. C. & Harn, B. A. (2004). Beginning reading intervention as inoculation or insulin: First-grade reading performance of strong responders to kindergarten intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 90–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jong, P. F. & Vrielink, L. O. (2004). Rapid automatic naming: easy to measure, hard to improve (quickly). Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 65–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deloche, G. & Seron, X., eds. (1987). Mathematical disabilities: A cognitive neuropsychological perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dennis, M. & Barnes, M. A. (2002). Math and numeracy in young adults with spina bifida and hydrocephalus. Developmental Neuropsychology, 21, 141–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Denton, C. A. & Mathes, P. G. (2003). Intervention for struggling readers: Possibilities and challenges. In Foorman, B. R., ed., Preventing and remediating reading difficulties. New York: York Press, pp. 229–52.Google Scholar
Desoete, A. & Roeyers, H. (2005). Cognitive skills in mathematical problem solving in grade 3. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 119–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donlan, C., ed. (1998). The development of mathematical skill. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Donovan, M. S. & Cross, C. T. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Eisenmajer, N., Ross, N. & Pratt, C. (2005). Specificity and characteristics of learning disabilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 1108–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, J. M. (2005). Predicting math outcomes: Reading predictors and comorbidity. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 308–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, J. M., Coulter, W. A., Reschly, D. J. & Vaughn, S. (2004). Alternative approaches to the definition and identification of learning disabilities: Some questions and answers. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 304–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Morris, R. D. & Lyon, G. R. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of learning disabilities in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34, 506–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Francis, D. J., Fletchers, J. M., Stuebing, K. K.et al. (2005). Psychometric approaches to the identification of LD: IQ and achievement scores are not sufficient. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, A. R., MacKinnon, J. R. & Miller, L. T. (2004). Assistive technology and handwriting problems: what do occupational therapists recommend?Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71, 150–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. & Young, C. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 157–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D. & Hamlett, C. L. (l989). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special Education, 102, 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D. & Prentice, K. (2004). Responsiveness to mathematical problem-solving instruction: Comparing students at risk of mathematics disability with or without risk of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 293–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L. & Stecker, P. M. (1991). Effects of curriculum-based measurement and consultation on teacher planning and student achievement in mathematics operations. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 617–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Prentice, K.et al. (2003). Enhancing third-grade students' mathematical problem solving with self-regulated learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 306–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geary, D. C. (1995). Improving mathematical instruction and remediation. In Geary, D. C., ed, (Chap. 8). Children's mathematical development. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 261–88.Google Scholar
Graham, S. & Harris, K. (1996). Addressing problems in attention, memory, and executive function. In Lyon, G. R. & Krasnegor, N. A., eds., Attention, memory, and executive function. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, pp. 349–66.Google Scholar
Graham, S. & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S., eds., Handbook of learning disabilities. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 323–44.Google Scholar
Graham, S., Harris, K. R. & Chorzempa, B. F. (2002). Contribution of spelling instruction to the spelling, writing, and reading of poor spellers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 669–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, S., Struck, M., Santoro, J. & Berninger, V. W. (2006). Dimensions of good and poor handwriting legibility in first and second graders: Motor programs, visual-spatial arrangement, and letter formation parameter setting. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 43–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hallahan, D. P. & Mock, D. R. (2003). A brief history of the field of learning disabilities. In Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S., eds., Handbook of learning disabilities. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 16–29.Google Scholar
Handley-Moore, D., Deitz, J., Billingsley, F. F. & Coggins, T. E. (2003). Facilitating written work using computer word processing and word prediction. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 57, 139–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendin, H. (2005). Defining youth suicide. In Evans, D.et al., eds., Treating and preventing adolescent mental health disorders: What we know and what we don't know. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetzroni, O. E. & Shreiber, B. (2004). Word processing as an assistive technology tool for enhancing academic outcomes of students with writing disabilities in the general classroom. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 143–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hooper, S., Swartz, C., Wakely, M., Kruif, R. & Montgomery, J. (2002). Executive functions in elementary school children with and without problems in written expression. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kamps, D. M. & Greenwood, C. R. (2005). Formulating secondary-level reading interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 500–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katusic, S. K., Colligan, R. C., Barbaresi, W. J., Schaid, D. J. & Jacobsen, S. J. (2001). Incidence of reading disability in a population-based birth cohort, 1976–1982, Rochester, Minnesota. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 76, 1075–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, C. & Sutton, J. (1991). Specific mathematics disorders. In Obrzut, J. & Hynd, G., eds., Neuropsychological foundations of learning disabilities. New York: Academic Press, pp. 549–72.Google Scholar
Keller, J. & Dauenheimer, D. (2003). Stereotype threat in the classroom: dejection mediates the disrupting threat effect on women's math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 371–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhn, M. R. & Stahl, S. A. (2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S. & Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 211–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenker, J., Scherer, M. J., Fuhrer, M. J., Jutai, J. W. & DeRuyter, F. (2005). Psychometric and administrative properties of measures used in assistive technology device outcomes research. Assistive Technology, 17, 7–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lere, R., Lerer, M. & Artner, J. (1977). The effects of methylphenidate on the handwriting of children with minimal brain dysfunction. Journal of Pediatrics, 91, 127–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, B. A. (2001). Moving the bottom: Improving reading fluency. In Wolf, M., ed., Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain. New York: York Press, pp. 357–82.Google Scholar
Lindamood, P. & Lindamood, P. (1998). The Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing Program for reading, spelling, and speech. Austin, TX: PRO-ED, Inc.Google Scholar
Lovett, M. W., Barron, R. W. & Benson, N. J. (2003). Effective remediation of word identification and decoding difficulties in school-age children with reading disabilities. In Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S., eds., Handbook of learning disabilities. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 273–92.Google Scholar
Lyon, G. R., Fletcher, J. M., Fuchs, L. S. & Chhabra, V. (2006). Learning disabilities, Chap. 8. In Mash, E. & Barkley, R., eds., The treatment of childhood disorders, 3rd edn. New York: Guildford press.Google Scholar
Lyon, G. R., Fletcher, J. M., Shaywitz, S. E. et al. (2001). Rethinking learning disabilities. In Finn, Jr C. E.., Rotherham, R. A. J. & Hokanson, Jr C. R.., eds. Rethinking special education for a new century. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and Progressive Policy Institute, pp. 259–87.Google Scholar
MacArthur, C. A. (1996). Using technology to enhance the writing processes of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 344–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manset-Williams, G. & Nelson, J. (2005). Balanced, strategic reading instruction for upper-elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative study of two approaches. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 28, 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez, R. S. & Semrud-Clikeman, M. (2004). Emotional adjustment and school functioning of young adolescents with multiple versus single learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 411–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayes, S. D., Calhoun, S. L. & Lane, S. E. (2005). Diagnosing children's writing disabilities: different tests give different results. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 101, 72–8.Google ScholarPubMed
McClelland, M. M., Kessenich, M. & Morrison, F. J. (2003). Pathways to early literacy: the complex interplay of child, family, and sociocultural factors. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 31, 411–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGuiness, C., McGuiness, D. & McGuiness, G. (1996). Phono-Graphix: A new method for remediating reading difficulties. Annals of Dyslexia, 46, 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moats, L. (2004). Relevance of neuroscience to effective education for students with reading and other learning disabilities. Journal of Child Neurology, 19, 840–5.Google ScholarPubMed
National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), . (2003). National Assessment of Educational Progress: The Nation's Report Card. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.Google Scholar
Noel, M. (2005). Finger agnosia: a predictor of numerical abilities in children?Child Neuropsychology, 11, 413–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, R. E., Fulmer, D., Harty, K. R. & Bell, K. M. (2005 a). Layers of reading intervention in kindergarten through third grade: Changes in teaching and student outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 440–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, R. E., Harty, K. R. & Fulmer, D. (2005 b). Tiers of intervention in kindergrten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 532–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papanicolaou, A. C., Simos, P. G., Breier, J. I.et al. (2003). Brain mechanisms for reading in children with and without dyslexia: a review of studies of normal development and plasticity. Developmental Neuropsychology, 24, 593–612.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pokorni, J., Worthington, C. & Jamison, P. (2004). Phonological awareness intervention: Comparison of Fast ForWord, Earobics, and LIPS. Journal of Educational Research, 97, 147–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plomin, R. & Kovas, Y. (2005). Generalist genes and learning disabilities. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 592–617.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Posner, M. I. (2005). Genes and experience shape brain networks of conscious control. Progress in Brain Research, 150, 173–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education, . (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Washington DC: US Department of Education.Google Scholar
Rabiner, D. L., Malone, P. S. & the Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, . (2004). The impact of tutoring on early reading achievement for children with and without attention problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 273–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rourke, B. & Conway, J. (1997). Disabilities of arithmetic and mathematical reasoning: Perspectives from neurology and neuropsychology. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 34–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rourke, B., Vlugt, H. & Rourke, S. (2002). Practice of clinical child neuropsychology: an introduction. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Sarkari, S., Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M.et al. (2002). Contributions of magnetic source imaging to the understanding of dyslexia. Seminars in Pediatric Neurology, 9, 229–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schumaker, J. B., Deshler, D. D. & McKnight, P. (2002). Ensuring success in the secondary general education curriculum through the use of teaching routines. In Shinn, M. A., Walker, H. M. & Stoner, G., eds., Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches. Bethesda, MD: NASP Publications, pp. 791–823.Google Scholar
Semrud-Clikeman, M., Fine, J. G. & Harder, L. (2005). Providing neuropsychological services to students with learning disabilities. In D'Amato, R. C., Fletcher-Janzen, E. & Reynolds, C. R., eds., Handbook of school neuropsychology. New York: Wiley, pp. 403–24.Google Scholar
Shalev, R. S. (2004). Developmental dyscalculia. Journal of Child Neurology, 19, 765–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shalev, R. S., Manor, O. & Gross-Tsur, V. (2005). Developmental dyscalculia: a prospective six-year follow-up. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 47, 121–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shanahan, T. & Barr, R. (1995). Reading Recovery: An independent evaluation of the effects of an early instructional intervention for at-risk learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 958–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaywitz, B. A., Shaywitz, S. E., Blachman, B.et al. (2004). Development of left occipitotemporal systems for skilled reading children after a phonologically-based intervention. Biological Psychiatry, 55, 926–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A.Fletcher, J. M. & Escobar, M. D. (1990). Prevalence of reading disability in boys and girls: results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Pediatrics in Reviews, 24, 147–53.CrossRef
Shaywitz, S. E., Fletcher, J. M., Holahan, J. M.et al. (1999). Persistence of dyslexia: The Connecticut Longitudinal Study at adolescence. Pediatrics, 104, 1351–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., Bergman, E.et al. (2002). Dyslexia-specific brain activation profile becomes normal following successful remedial training. Neurology, 58, 1203–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., Sarkari, S.et al. (2005). Early development of neurophysiological processes involved in normal reading and reading disability. Neuropsychology, 19, 787–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
St. Sauver, J. L., Katusic, S. K., Barbaresi, W. J., Colligan, R. C. & Jacobsen, S. J. (2001). Boy/girl differences in risk for reading disability: potential clues?American Journal of Epidemiology, 154, 787–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stahl, S. A. (2004). What do we know about fluency? Findings of the National Reading Panel. In McCardle, P. & Chhabra, V., eds., The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes, pp. 187–212.Google Scholar
Steubing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., LeDoux, J. M.et al. (2002). Validity of IQ-discrepancy classifications of reading disabilities: A meta-analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 469–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svensson, I., Lundberg, I. & Jacobson, C. (2001). The prevalence of reading and spelling difficulties among inmates of institutions for compulsory care of juvenile delinquents. Dyslexia, 7, 62–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual responses in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgesen, J. K. (2004). Lessons learned from research on interventions for students who have difficulty learning to read. In McCardle, P. & Chhabra, V., eds., The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes, pp. 355–82.Google Scholar
Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K.et al. (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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Troia, G. & Grham, S. (2002). The effectiveness of a highly explicit, teacher-directed strategy instruction routine: Changing the writing performance of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 290–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tunmer, W. E., Chapman, J. W. & Prochnow, J. E. (2003). Preventing negative Matthews effects in at-risk readers: A retrospective study. In Foorman, B. R., ed., Preventing and remediating reading difficulties. New York: York Press, pp. 121–64.Google Scholar
Vaughn, S. & Klingner, J. K. (2004). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning disabilities. In Stone, C., , E., Ehren, B. & Apel, K. (eds.) Handbook of language and literacy development and disorders. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M. & Jaccard, J. (2003). Toward distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as primary sources of difficulty in learning to read: A two year follow-up of difficult to remediate and readily remediated poor readers. In Foorman, B. R., ed., Preventing and remediating reading difficulties. New York: York Press, pp. 73–120.Google Scholar
Wadsworth, S. J., Olson, R. K., Pennington, B. F. & DeFries, J. C. (2000). Differential genetic etiology of reading disability as a function of IQ. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 192–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, B., Shippen, M., Alberto, P., Houchins, D. & Cihak, D. (2005). Using the Expressive Writing Program to improve the writing skills of high school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 175–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, M. & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 211–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, M., Miller, L. & Donnelly, K. (2002). Retrieval, Automaticity, Vocabulary Elaboration, Orthography (RAVE-O): A comprehensive, fluency-based reading intervention program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 375–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×