Intervention for Dyslexia - The British Dyslexia Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Tijms, J. (2004) A process-oriented evaluation of a computerized treatment for dyslexia. Educational Psychology, 24, 767-791. Tijms, J. & Hoeks, J. (2005) A computerized treatment of dyslexia: benefits from treating lexico-phonological processing problems. Dyslexia, 11, 22-40. Tijms, J., Hoeks, J., Paulussen-Hoogeboom, M.C. & Smolenaars, A.J. (2003) Long-term effects of a psycholinguistic treatment for dyslexia. Journal of Research in Reading, 26, 121-140. Tønnessen, F.E. (1997) How best can we define dyslexia? Dyslexia, 3, 78-92. Topping, K.J. & Lindsay, G.A. (1992) Paired reading: A review of the literature. Research Papers in Education, 7, 199-246. Torgerson, C.J., Brooks, G. and Hall, J. (2006) A Systematic Review of the Research Literature on the Use of Phonics in the Teaching of Reading and Spelling. (DfES Research Report 711.) London: Department for Education and Skills. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR711_.pdf Torgerson, C. & Elbourne, D. (2002) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of information and communication technology (ICT) on the teaching of spelling. Journal of Research in Reading, 25, 129-143. Torgerson, C. & Zhu, D. (2003) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of ICT on literacy learning in English, 5– 16. Series: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI Centre, Social Sciences Research Unit, Institute of education. Torgesen, J.K. (1998) Catch them before they fall: Identification and assessment to prevent reading failure in young children. American Educator, Spring/Summer 1998, 32- 39. www.fcrr.org/science/sciencePublicationsTorgesen.htm Torgesen, J.K. (2000) Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 55-64. Torgesen, J.K. (2002) The prevention of reading difficulties. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 7-26. Torgesen, J.K. (2005a) Remedial interventions for students with dyslexia: National goals and current accomplishments. In S. Richardson & J. Gilger (Eds) Research-based Education and Intervention: What we need to know. Boston: International Dyslexia Association, pp. 103-124. Torgesen, J.K. (2005b) Recent discoveries from research on remedial interventions for children with dyslexia. In M. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds) The Science of Reading: A Handbook. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 521-537. Torgesen, J.K., Alexander, A. W., Alexander, J., Voeller, K., Conway, T., Wagner, R.K. & Rashotte, C.A. (2004). Accuracy oriented vs. Accuracy plus fluency interventions: A study of intensive instruction with older students with severe reading disabilities. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Center for Reading Research. 152 Intervention for Dyslexia
Torgesen, J.K., Alexander, A.W., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Voeller, K.K.S & Conway, T. (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, 78. Torgesen, J.K., Foorman, B.R. & Wagner, R.K. (2007) Dyslexia: A Brief for Educators, Parents, and Legislators in Florida. Technical Report #8, University of Florida Center for Reading Research. Torgesen, J.K. & Hudson, R. (2006). Reading fluency: critical issues for struggling readers. In S.J. Samuels and A. Farstrup (Eds) Reading fluency: The forgotten dimension of reading success. Newark, DE: International Reading Association Torgesen, J.K., Rashotte, C.A., Alexander, A. (2001). Principles of fluency instruction in reading: Relationships with established empirical outcomes. In M. Wolf (Ed) Dyslexia, Fluency, and the Brain. Parkton, MD: York Press Torgesen, J.K., Rashotte, C.A., Alexander, A., Alexander, J., & MacPhee, K. (2003). Progress towards understanding the instructional conditions necessary for remediating reading difficulties in older children. In B. Foorman (Ed) Preventing and Remediating Reading Difficulties: Bringing Science to Scale.(pp. 275-298). Parkton, MD: York Press. Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R.K. & Rashotte, C.A. (1997) Prevention and remediation of severe reading disabilities: Keeping the end in mind. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 217-234. Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Rose, E., Lindamood, P. & Conway, T. (1999) Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 579–593. Townend, J. (2000) Phonological awareness and other foundation skills of literacy. In J. Townend & M. Turner (Eds.) Dyslexia in Practice: A guide for teachers. London: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 1-29. Townend, J. & Turner, M. (Eds.) (2000) Dyslexia in Practice: A guide for teachers. London: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Troia, G.A. (1999) Phonological intervention research: A critical review of the methodology. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 28-52. Truch, S. (2003) Comparing remedial outcomes using LIPS and Phono-Graphix: An indepth look from a clinical perspective. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: The Reading Foundation. Tunmer, W. E. & Chapman, J.W. (2002) The relation of beginning readers’ reported word identification strategies to reading achievement, reading-related skills, and academic self-perception. Reading and Writing, 15, 341-358. Tunmer, W. E. & Chapman, J.W. (2003) The Reading Recovery approach to preventive early intervention: As good as it gets? Reading Psychology, 24, 337-360. Intervention for Dyslexia 153
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 and 146: Olofsson, Å (1992) Synthetic speec
Page 147 and 148: Reason, R. & Boote, R. (1994) Helpi
Page 149 and 150: Singleton, C.H. (1977) Dyslexia or
Page 151: Speece, D.L., Case, L.P. & Molloy,
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?