Intervention for Dyslexia - The British Dyslexia Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Morris, D., Tyner, B. & Perney, J. (2000) Early Steps: replicating the effects of a firstgrade reading intervention program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 681-693. Moseley, D.V. (1990) Literacy: a technological breakthrough. In M. Hunter-Carsch et al. (Eds) Primary English in the National Curriculum. Blackwell: Oxford. Moss, H. (2000). Using literacy development programs. In J. Townend & M. Turner (Eds.) Dyslexia in Practice: A guide for teachers. London: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 155-182. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000) Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 004769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Nicholson, T. (2000) Reading the writing on the wall. Palmerston North, New Zealand: Dunmore Press. Nicolson, R.I. and Fawcett, A.J. (1990) Automaticity: a new framework for dyslexia research. Cognition, 35, 159–182. Nicolson, R.I. and Fawcett, A.J. (1995) Dyslexia is more than a phonological disability. Dyslexia, 1, 19–37. Nicolson, R.I. & Fawcett, A.J. (1996) The Dyslexia Early Screening Test. London: The Psychological Corporation. Nicolson, R.I. & Fawcett, A.J. (1999) Developmental Dyslexia: The Role of the Cerebellum. Dyslexia, 5, 155-177. Nicolson, R.I., Fawcett, A.J., Moss, H., Nicolson, M.K. & Reason, R. (1999) Early reading intervention can be effective and cost-effective. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 47-62. Nicolson, R.I., Fawcett, A.J. & Nicolson, M.K. (2000) Evaluation of a computer-based reading intervention in infant and junior schools. Journal of Research in Reading, 23, 194–209. Norgate, R. & Bentote, P. (2005) An evaluation of the SIDNEY intervention programme. Winchester: Hampshire Educational Psychology Service Lifelong Learning Team. Northway, N. (2003) Predicting the continued use of overlays in school children – a comparison of the Developmental Eye Movement test and the Rate of Reading test. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 23, 457-464. Nysaeter, R. and Helland, T. (2008) Early cognitive markers of dyslexia. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference of the British Dyslexia Association, Harrogate, March 2008. O’Connor, J. & Wilson, B. (1995) Effectiveness of the Wilson Reading System used in Public School Training. In C. McIntyre & J. Pickering (Eds). Clinical studies of Multisensory Structured Language Education. Salem, OR: International Multisensory Structured Language Education Council. 144 Intervention for Dyslexia
Olofsson, Å (1992) Synthetic speech and computer-aided reading for reading disabled children. Reading and Writing, 4, 165–178. Olofsson, Ǻ. & Neidersøen, J. (1999) Early language development and kindergarten phonological awareness as predictors of reading problems. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 464-472. Olsen, J.B. (1990) Applying computerized adaptive testing in schools. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 23, 31-38. Olson, R.K. and Wise, B.W. (1992) Reading on the computer with orthographic and speech feedback. An overview of the Colorado remediation project. Reading and Writing, 4, 107–144. Ottley, P. & Bennett, L. (1997) Launch into Reading Success. London: The Psychological Corporation. Paris, S.G. (2005) Reinterpreting the development of reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 184-202. Pennington, B.F. & Olson, R.K. (2005) Genetics of dyslexia. In M. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.) The Science of Reading: A Handbook. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 453-472. Pickering, S.J. & Gathercole, S.E. (2004). Distinctive working memory profiles in children with special educational needs. Educational Psychology, 24, 393-408. Pinnell, G.S., Lyons, C.A., & DeFord, D.E. (1988). Reading Recovery: Early intervention for at-risk first graders. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Pinnell, G.S., Lyons, C.A., DeFord, D.E., Bryk, A.S., & Seltzer, M. (1994). Comparing instructional models for the literacy education of high-risk first graders. Reading Research Quarterly, 29(1), 9-38. Plewis, I. (2000). Evaluating educational interventions using multilevel growth curves: The case of Reading Recovery. Educational Research and Evaluation, 6, 83–101. Pollock, J.S. (1996) Final evaluation report: Reading Recovery program 1995-96. Columbus, OH: Department of Program Evaluation. Potter, T. (2004). Reading Recovery evaluation. Madison, WI: Planning, Research and Evaluation, Madison Metropolitan School District. Potton, A., (1983). Screening. London: Macmillan. Prance, J. (1992) Reading Recovery: early intervention for at-risk six year old children. Addlestone: Runnymede Centre. Prance, J. & Wright, A. (1992) The Reading Recovery programme in Surrey Education Authority. Support for Learning, 7, 103-128. Pressley, M. (1998) Reading instruction that works: the case for balanced teaching. New York: Guildford Press. Intervention for Dyslexia 145
Page 1 and 2:
Intervention for Dyslexia A review
Page 3 and 4:
Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........
Page 5 and 6:
4.3.4 Computer-based screening test
Page 7 and 8:
presuppose any neurological link be
Page 9 and 10:
(0.56 for reading accuracy, 0.91 fo
Page 11 and 12:
instruction in phonics, it cannot b
Page 13 and 14:
Acknowledgements I would like to ex
Page 15 and 16:
The remit calls for conclusions to
Page 17 and 18:
Co-occurring difficulties may be se
Page 19 and 20:
Teacher Status (ATS). In general, c
Page 21 and 22:
Table 1. Why use multisensory teach
Page 23 and 24:
pupils are going to be identified a
Page 25 and 26:
coloured overlay as the criterion f
Page 27 and 28:
have reported standard scores; unfo
Page 29 and 30:
2 Intervention studies in the US an
Page 31 and 32:
progressing normally (36 boys and 2
Page 33 and 34:
training in phonological awareness,
Page 35 and 36:
subtest. All these children were in
Page 37 and 38:
intervention identified by Vaughn a
Page 39 and 40:
Vaughn & Linan-Thompson, 2003). Ove
Page 41 and 42:
1. Lindamood Auditory Discriminatio
Page 43 and 44:
and writing. Students were taught i
Page 45 and 46:
evised as the Lindamood Phoneme Seq
Page 47 and 48:
2.5.10 Torgesen et al. (2004) Torge
Page 49 and 50:
period 1995-2003 were identified, a
Page 51 and 52:
“The actual reading impairment a
Page 53 and 54:
from multisyllabic words. Instructi
Page 55 and 56:
3 UK intervention studies 3.1 Stage
Page 57 and 58:
and effect sizes of 0.55 for readin
Page 59 and 60:
used Lexia for 10 weeks, after whic
Page 61 and 62:
structured phonologically-based sec
Page 63 and 64:
3.3.9 SIDNEY Norgate and Bentote (2
Page 65 and 66:
Table 6. Summary of results of UK i
Page 67 and 68:
Table 6 (continued). Summary of res
Page 69 and 70:
Table 6 (continued). Summary of res
Page 71 and 72:
3.4 Studies in UK specialist dyslex
Page 73 and 74:
Rack and Walker (1994) presented an
Page 75 and 76:
probably require some 1:1 teaching
Page 77 and 78:
& Baker, 2008; Frost et al., 2005;
Page 79 and 80:
Unlike traditional learning disabil
Page 81 and 82:
According to Wolfendale and Bryans
Page 83 and 84:
cases). Glascoe and Byrne (1993) ar
Page 85 and 86:
Between 1.0 and 1.4: moderate dysle
Page 87 and 88:
provided by a study reported in Faw
Page 89 and 90:
Against the many advantages of comp
Page 91 and 92:
Peer, 1998). A high overall level o
Page 93 and 94: Recently Singleton and Henderson (2
Page 95 and 96: 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 Scope 5 Read
Page 97 and 98: 5.1.4 Reading Recovery and the teac
Page 99 and 100: writing. To be able to work on word
Page 101 and 102: success of the programme appears to
Page 103 and 104: in a meta-analysis. However, the av
Page 105 and 106: 5.3.2 Every Child a Reader (ECaR) I
Page 107 and 108: phonological awareness compared wit
Page 109 and 110: (accuracy or comprehension or both)
Page 111 and 112: 5.5.2 Key Stage 1 results of Readin
Page 113 and 114: 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2
Page 115 and 116: ‘accelerated progress’ children
Page 117 and 118: It is not until Level 2b that child
Page 119 and 120: Reading Recovery specifically benef
Page 121 and 122: 6 Computer technology and support o
Page 123 and 124: 6.2.1 The advantages of computer as
Page 125 and 126: and Olson, 2000). Software designed
Page 127 and 128: new phonic principle was introduced
Page 129 and 130: impact on reading and spelling, par
Page 131 and 132: Berninger, V.W., & Hidi, S. (2006)
Page 133 and 134: Clay, M.M. (1993a) Observation Surv
Page 135 and 136: www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/primary/p
Page 137 and 138: Frost, J. & Sørensen, P.M. (2007)
Page 139 and 140: Hatcher, P.J. (2003) Reading Interv
Page 141 and 142: Kuhn, M.R. & Stahl, S.A. (2003) Flu
Page 143: Marks, A. & Burden, B. (2005) How U
Page 147 and 148: Reason, R. & Boote, R. (1994) Helpi
Page 149 and 150: Singleton, C.H. (1977) Dyslexia or
Page 151 and 152: Speece, D.L., Case, L.P. & Molloy,
Page 153 and 154: Torgesen, J.K., Alexander, A.W., Wa
Page 155 and 156: Vaughn, S. & Roberts, G. (2007) Sec
Page 157: Wilson, J. & Frederickson, N. (1995
show all

Intervention for Dyslexia - The British Dyslexia Association

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?