Intervention for Dyslexia - The British Dyslexia Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Price, C.J. & McCory, E. (2005) Functional brain imaging studuies of skilled reading and developmental dyslexia. In M. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.) The Science of Reading: A Handbook. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 473-496. Puolakanaho, A., Ahonen, T. Aro, M. et al. (2007) Very early phonological and language skills estimating individual risk of reading disability. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48, 923-931. Rack, J.P. (2004) The theory and practice of specialist literacy teaching. In G. Reid & A. Fawcett (Eds.) Dyslexia in Context: Research, Policy and Practice. London: Whurr, pp. 120-131. Rack, J.P. and Hatcher, J. (2002) SPELLIT: A three-year national research project to investigate literacy difficulties in primary school children, to develop methods of assessment and to evaluate different methods of teaching including specialist teaching and home support programmes. Staines: The Dyslexia Institute. Rack, J.P., Snowling, M.J., Hulme, C & Gibbs, S. (2007) No evidence that an exercisebased treatment programme (DDAT) has specific benefits for children with reading difficulties. Dyslexia, 13, 97-104. Rack, J.P. & Walker, J. (1994) Does Dyslexia Institute teaching work? Dyslexia Review, 6(2), 12-17. Ramus, F. (2003) Developmental dyslexia: specific phonological deficit or general sensorimotor dysfunction? Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13, 212–218. Ramus, F., Pidgeon, E., & Frith, U. (2003) The relationship between motor control and phonology in dyslexic children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 712–722. Ramus, F., Rosen, S., Dakin, S.C., Day, B.L., Castellote, J.M., White, S. & Frith, U. (2003) Theories of developmental dyslexia: insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain, 126, 841–865. Rashotte, C.A., MacPhee, K., & Torgesen, J.K. (2001) The effectiveness of a group reading instruction program with poor readers in multiple grades. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 119-134. Rasinski, T. (1995). On the effects of Reading Recovery: A response to Pinnell, Lyons, DeFord, Bryk, and Seltzer. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 264-270. Raskind, M.H. & Higgins, E.L. (1999) Speaking to read: The effect of speech recognition technology on the reading and speaking performance of children with learning disabilities. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 251-281. Rawson, M.B. (1968) Developmental language disability. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Raymond, J.E. & Sorensen, R. (1998) Visual motion perception in children with dyslexia: normal detection but abnormal integration. Visual Cognition, 5, 389-404. Rayner, K., Foorman, B.R., Perfetti, C.A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M.S. 2001. How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2, 31-73. 146 Intervention for Dyslexia
Reason, R. & Boote, R. (1994) Helping children with reading and spelling: A special needs manual. London: Routledge. Reid, G. (2003) Dyslexia: A practitioner’s handbook (3 rd edition). Chichester: Wiley. Reinking, D. & Bridwell-Bowles, L. (1991) Computers in reading and writing. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal and P.D. Pearson (Eds) Handbook of Reading Research, Volume 2. New York: Longman, pp. 310–340. Reitsma, P. (1988) Reading practice for beginners: Effects of guided reading, readingwhile listening, and independent reading with computer based speech feedback. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 219–235. Reynolds, M. & Wheldall, K (2007) Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54, 199-223. Riddick, B., Farmer, M. & Sterling, C. (1997) Students and dyslexia: Growing up with a specific learning difficulty. London: Whurr. Robinson, G.L. & Foreman, P.J. (1999) Scotopic sensitivity/Irlen Syndrome and the use of coloured filters: A long-term placebo-controlled and masked study of reading achievement and perception of ability. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, 35–52. Rochelle, K.S.H. & Talcott, J.B. (2006) Impaired balance in developmental dyslexia? A meta-analysis of the contending evidence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 1159-1166. Rooms, M. (2000) Information and communication technology and dyslexia. In J. Townend & M. Turner (Eds.) Dyslexia in Practice: A guide for teachers. London: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 263-272. Rose, J. (2006) Independent review of the teaching of early reading: Final report. London: Department for Education and Skills. Roth, S.F. and Beck, I.L. (1987) Theoretical and instructional implications of the assessment of two microcomputer word recognition programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 197–218. Rowe, K. (1995) Factors affecting children’s progress in reading: key findings from a longitudinal study. Literacy teaching and learning, 1 (2). Rutter, M. & Yule, W. (1975) The concept of specific reading retardation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 16, 181-197. Ryder, J.F., Tunmer, W.E. & Greaney, K.T. (2008) Explicit instruction in phonemic awareness and phonologically-based decoding skills as an intervention strategy for struggling readers in whole language classrooms. Reading and Writing, 21, 349-369. Santa, C. & Høien, T. (1999) An assessment of Early Steps: A program for early intervention of reading problems. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 54-79. Satz, P. & Fletcher, J. M. (1979). Early screening tests: Some uses and abuses. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 43-50. Intervention for Dyslexia 147
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 and 144: Marks, A. & Burden, B. (2005) How U
Page 145: Olofsson, Å (1992) Synthetic speec
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?