I.
Course Number: EDRD 4420
Course Title: Teaching Adolescents with Disabilities in Literacy
College: Bagwell College of Education
Semester: Fall 2010
II.
Instructor:
Phone:
E-mail:
Office Hours:
III.
Class Meetings:
Day and Times:
Building and Room:
IV.
Required Text and Reading:
Bursuck & Damer (2006) Literacy Instruction for Special Education/At-risk Students. Boston: MA.
Allyn & Bacon.
VI.
Course Description:
This course prepares prospective content teachers to increase the literacy of students with disabilities in inclusive
classrooms. Teacher candidates will learn to: (a) recognize various types of reading and writing disabilities; (b)
effectively implement Response to Instruction; (c) develop inclusive, multi-level lesson plans embed
accommodations and modifications; (d) identify appropriate roles for parents in fostering literacy in students with
disabilities; and (f) work collaboratively with special education teachers. EDRD 3320 is the pre-requisite.
VII.
Purpose and Rationale:
Mastery of literacy skills is essential to successful learning in every school subject at every grade level. The
reading concentration of the middle grades program will facilitate teacher acquisition of skills and competencies
needed to help students read, write, and understand a wide variety of materials. It will also aid teachers in
identifying reading problems, providing required interventions, and assisting all students in improving skills in
reading and writing. The reading concentration will prepare teachers to work with other content area teachers to
support the literacy needs of students within content area classrooms.
The purpose of this course is to prepare prospective content teachers with the knowledge, skills and dispositions
to increase the literacy of students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms. With the re-authorization of IDEA
(2004) classroom teachers are required to employ scientific, research-based intervention and to monitor the
progress of students who are struggling in reading prior to their entry to special education. To that end, IDEA
requires all classroom teachers to educate students with a variety of disabilities and increases the need for
collaboration for content teachers to effectively collaborate with special education teachers (Smartt & Reschley,
2007). Finally, this course was developed as part of a unified response to the SREB’s (2009) call to: (a) build the
capacity of middle and high school teachers to increase literacy in adolescents in Georgia; and (b) close the
achievement gaps of sub-populations of students based upon ability, race and/or income.
Conceptual Framework Statement
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing
expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability,
intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based
1
practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU
fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to
expert and leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued
development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that
teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all
students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the
teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values and demonstrates collaborative practices
across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large. Through this collaboration
with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the
PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
Knowledge Base: Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases:
preservice, induction, in-service, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes
that the concept of expertise is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process, the teacher education faculty at
KSU believes that the concept of expertise is central to preparing effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders.
Researchers describe how during the continuum phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive
in classrooms toward becoming Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998),
believe that expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
The knowledge base for this course is acquired from books, articles, current periodicals, media and other sources
grounded in sociological, philosophical and historical foundations of education. Course content will also be
derived from the world of current practice and learned societies.
Use of Technology Statement: Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards
Commission. Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher
preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and meet
Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities
to explore and use instructional media, especially microcomputers, to assist teaching. They will master use of
productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia
instructional materials, create WWW resources, and develop an electronic learning portfolio.
Diversity Statement: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of
the different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an
understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and assessment within
multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural
issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations
influence decisions in employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are
age, disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion,
sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a
background for the consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled
under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of
services are available to support students with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make
arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443)
and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware that there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that
address each of the multicultural variables outlined above.
Professional Portfolio Narrative Statement: A required element in each portfolio for TOSS, Student Teaching,
and the Graduate Program is the portfolio narrative. The purpose of the portfolio narrative is to ensure that every
2
candidate reflects on each of the proficiencies on the CPI (see attached) with regard to what evidence the
candidate has selected for his/her portfolio. Although none of the assignments for this course are “required” for
your portfolio, for this course you will need to complete a brief grid narrative in which you reflect upon the
proficiencies and how you make the case that the evidence you have selected supports a particular proficiency.
School-Based Activities Statement: As a teacher candidate, you are encouraged to be involved in a variety of
school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Activities may include, but are not
limited to, tutoring students, assisting teachers or other school personnel, attending school board meetings, and
participating in education-related community events. As you continue your teacher candidate experiences, you are
encouraged to explore every opportunity to learn by doing.
VII.
COURSE GOALS/OBJECTIVES:
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) prepares learning facilitators who understand their disciplines and
principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these understandings to making instructional
decisions that foster the success of all learners. As a result of the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of this
course, the student will...
Course Objectives
Candidate
Performance
Instrument (CPI)/
NCATE
IRA Reading
Standards/
PSC Reading
Standards*
CPI Proficiency
Understand and articulate the
roles of cultural differences
and language development in
the acquisition of reading and
writing as well as disabilities
in those areas.
1.2, 1.3, 2.1
NCATE
PSC 1
Standard 1: Knowledge,
Skills, & Dispositions
Standard 4: Diversity
Develop a multi-level unit of
instruction that addresses
GPS in content areas, IEP
goals for SWD as well as
accommodations and
modifications, and
appropriate roles for parents.
1.2, 1.3., 2.1, 2.4
NCATE
IRA
2.2, 3.2, 3.3
PSC 2, 3, 4
Standard 1: Knowledge,
Skills, & Dispositions
Standard 4: Diversity
1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 3.2, 3.2
IRA
4.1, 4.2, 5.1, 5.3,
5.4
NCATE
PSC 2, 4
CPI Proficiency
Standard 1: Knowledge,
Skills, & Dispositions
Standard 4: Diversity
Evidence
CEC
IRA 1.1, 4.1
CPI Proficiency
Understand and articulate
research-based, pre-referral
intervention strategies for
adolescents with disabilities
in literacy who struggle in
content area classes.
CEC Standards
CC5K8
CC6K2
GC6K1-2
CC9S6
CC9S8
CEC
CC8K3
GC4K4-5
CC7 S 13
CC8K 1-3, 5
CC8S 4, 6, 8, 9
GC8K 2, 4
GC8S 3
GC10K3
CEC
GC4K 5
GC4K 7
GC4S 1, 3-4, 1011, 13-16
CC5S 1, 4
GC6S 1-3
CC7S 1, 3, 7, 10
CC7K 3 2-3, 4
CC8K 5
CC9K 2
CC9S 2, 5, 6, 8,
10
CC10K 3, 4
GC10K 2, 4

Read, Review, Respond
& Present

Multi-level Unit

Readings on RTI and
interview

Read, Review, Respond
& Present

Multi-level Unit
3
Course Objectives
Candidate
Performance
Instrument (CPI)/
NCATE
IRA Reading
Standards/
PSC Reading
Standards*
CEC Standards
Evidence
CPI Proficiency
Identify community and online resources as well as
professional organizations
that support students with
disabilities in literacy and
share this information with
multiple audiences.
Successfully collaborate with
professional partners in other
disciplines by sharing
information learned in this
course.
1.2, 3.1, 3.2., 3.3
NCATE
IRA
2.3, 3.1, 4.3
PSC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Standard 1: Knowledge,
Skills, & Dispositions
Standard 4: Diversity
CPI Proficiency
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
IRA 4.3
NCATE
CEC
GC4K1
GC4S8
CC6S2
CC7S8
GC7S4

Read, Review, Respond
& Present

Readings on RTI and
interview
CEC

Read, Review, Respond
& Present
CC10S 6
CC10S 9

Readings on RTI and
interview
CEC

CC5S 4
CC9 S 5


Read, Review, Respond
& Present
Multi-level Unit
Readings on RTI and
interview
Standard 1: Knowledge,
Skills, & Dispositions
Standard 4: Diversity
CPI Proficiency
Hold high expectations for all
students with disabilities,
particularly as it relates to
their ability to learn complex
content.
2.4, 2.1, 3.3
NCATE
Standard 1: Knowledge,
Skills, & Dispositions
Standard 4: Diversity
IRA
4.1, 4.2, 4.3
PSC 5
Academic Integrity:
Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as published in the
Undergraduate and Graduate Catalogs. Section II of the Student Code of Conduct addresses the University's policy on
academic honesty, including provisions regarding plagiarism and cheating, unauthorized access to University
materials, misrepresentation and/or falsification of University records or academic work, malicious removal,
retention, or destruction of library materials, malicious/intentional misuse of computer facilities and/or services, and
misuse of student identification cards. Incidents of alleged academic misconduct will be handled through the
established procedures of the University Judiciary Program, which includes either and "informal" resolution by a
faculty member, resulting in a grade adjustment, or a formal hearing procedure, which may subject a student to the
Code of Conduct's minimum one semester suspension requirement.
IX.
Course Requirements and Assignments - All assignments should be typed and double-spaced in an appropriate
font style and size (12pt.), double-spaced, with no spelling or grammatical errors. Effective communication skills are
expected. Assignments
turned in after the due date will be penalized. No assignments will be accepted one week
after the due date.
1. Research/Review/Respond & Present: Working in teams, candidates will read peer-reviewed journal article
from one of the categories of the literature review provided in this syllabus, e.g., approaches to teaching,
collaboration with families, differentiation and multi-level curriculum, issues of language and literacy, etc. Each
team will construct a booklet of “helpful hints” as well as a ppt in increasing literacy of students with disabilities
in inclusive classrooms. They will present this information to their peers and faculty. (75 pts.)
2. Readings on RTI and Interview: Candidates will read article on RTI. Candidate will interview M.Ed.
candidate (adolescent education or inclusive education) who has experience with RTI. (75 points)
4
3. Multi-level Unit: Candidates will work in interdisciplinary teams to develop a multi-level unit that addresses the
GPS in one or more content areas (e.g., math, science, language arts, social studies) and will address GPS as well
as IEP goals for students with reading and/or writing disabilities. Note: This unit must be differentiated in terms
of assessment, content, process, product (including homework assignments) and must describe appropriate
supports for students with disabilities, including accommodations, modifications, positive behavior support and
appropriate roles for parents. (100 points)
4. Professionalism/In-class Participation/Attendance/Punctuality: (30 points) It has been noted that when teacher
candidates are not successful in their advanced field experiences (TOSS and student teaching), the area often cited
as the focus of concern is that of professionalism. Behaviors that indicate professional skill may be demonstrated
in a teacher candidate’s approach to participating in and completing the requirements for any particular course,
such as this one. Professional behavior will be monitored in this course. Should concerns arise regarding an
individual teacher candidate; the instructor of this course will communicate these concerns to the teacher
candidate with the purpose of drawing attention to deficiencies so that they may be remedied before further field
placements. Indicators of professionalism that will be monitored are addressed in the questions below. Does the
teacher candidate:












Model high standards and expectations for him/herself?
Display a commitment to becoming a teacher and to the profession of helping students learn?
Enjoy learning and indicate enthusiasm toward working with students to facilitate their learning?
Regularly reflect on and assess his/her performance and effectiveness for self-improvement?
Learn from experiences and show improvement over time?
Manage interpersonal relationships effectively?
Demonstrate courtesy, respect, and civility in interactions with others? (If appropriate, the instructor should
include descriptions and/or copies of emails from and/or conversations with the teacher candidate that may be
judged unprofessional.)
Work collaboratively with professional colleagues and faculty?
Demonstrate punctuality and timely completion of responsibilities? The expectations for attending class are
in accordance with the Undergraduate Catalogue. All students are expected to attend classes in accordance
with the scheduled time of the course. Should you be absent, you are responsible for making up the work
missed. In-class activities and presentations may not be made up. Please provide prior notice if you are to be
absent as this is a sign of professionalism. If you miss more than 3 class periods, professionalism may be
called into question.
Accept responsibility for actions and non-actions, placing the locus of control upon him or herself rather than
shifting blame or claiming inability to control outside factors?
Maintain appropriate attire and appearance?
Promote and model standards of academic honesty?
Professionalism. Future teachers are expected to conduct themselves with professional behavior that includes
effective and respectful collaboration and communication with colleagues, prompt attendance of all meetings and
classes, moral behavior and actions, appropriate communication with the cooperating teacher and university
supervisor, professional dress (even on “casual days”), etc. Please note that “meeting” expectations for teachers is
usually what others consider to be “exceeding” expectations. Teacher candidates are entering a profession of
extremely high standards that they are expected to live up to daily. The way a candidate interacts with peers and
faculty on campus is strongly indicative of how he or she will deal with future students, colleagues, and
administrators. Assumptions may be made about your professionalism in the schools based on professional
behavior on campus.
IF, AT ANY TIME, A CANDIDATE’S ACTIONS OR ATTITUDES ARE JUDGED TO BE LESS THAN
PROFESSIONAL BY A UNIVERSITY SUPERVISOR, COOPERATING TEACHER, PRINCIPAL, OR
OTHER SCHOOL PERSONNEL, APPROPRIATE REMEDIAL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. SUCH
ACTION MAY INCLUDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A REMEDIATION PLAN AND/OR THE
REMOVAL OF THE CANDIDATE FROM THE PROGRAM.
5
When teacher candidates are not successful in their advanced field experiences (TOSS and student teaching), the
area of concern is often that of professionalism. Behaviors that indicate professional skills may be demonstrated
in a candidate’s approach to participating in and completing the requirements for any particular course.
Professional behavior will be monitored in this course. Should concerns arise regarding an individual candidate,
the instructor will communicate these concerns to the candidate and to the appropriate program coordinator so that
he or she may be remediate the problem before further field placements. Indicators of professionalism that will be
monitored are addressed in the statements below.
The teacher candidate shows acceptable professional ability to:




X.
Assess, reflect upon, and improve professional performance.
Work collaboratively with colleagues, supervisors, students, parents, and community members.
Show regard for human dignity in all relationships.
Assume responsibility for professional and ethical behavior
Evaluation and Grading:
Grading A (90-100)
Scale:
XI.
C (70-79)
D (60-69)
F (0-59)
Topics of Discussion/Course Calendar
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
XII.
B (80-89)
Reading and Writing Disabilities
Factors Associated with Disabilities in Literacy
Case Studies of Middle School Students with Dyslexia
IDEA and NCLB: Calls for Response to Intervention (RTI)
Georgia RTI Model for Increasing Student Achievement in Reading and Writing
Differentiation and the Standards-Based Classroom
Using the INCLUDE Strategy (Friend, 2006) to Foster Literacy
Accommodations and Modifications to Support Literacy
Adaptive Strategies for Classroom-based and Large-Scale Assessments
Grading Students with Disabilities: Issues and Practices Related to Literacy
Specific Content-Related Strategies for Students with Disabilities
Specific Strategies to Increase Literacy in Second Language Learners in Inclusive Classrooms
Fostering Appropriate Roles, and Increasing Communication, with Parents
Collaboration with Professional Partners
Supervising Paraprofessionals: Strategies to Support Literacy in Content Classes
Course Bibliography
Approaches for Teaching Adolescents with Disabilities
Archer, A, Gleason, M., & Vachon, V. (2003). Decoding and fluency: Foundation skills for struggling older readers.
Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 26, 89-101.
Boyle, J. & Weishaar, M. (2001). The effects of strategic notetaking on the recall and comprehension of lecture
information for high school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 16,
133-144.
Caldwell, J. & Leslie, L. (2003-2004). Does proficiency in middle school reading assure proficiency in high school
reading? The possible role of think-alouds. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 47, 324-335.
Cawley, J. & Parmar, R. (2001). Literacy proficiency and science for students with learning disabilities. Reading and
Writing Quarterly, 17, 105-125.
Erickson, B. (1996). Read-alouds reluctant readers relish. Journal of Adolescent& Adult Literacy, 40, 212-214.
Fisher, D. & Frey, N. (2003). Writing instruction for struggling adolescent readers: A gradual release model. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46, 396-405.
6
Fontana, J., Scruggs, T., & Mastropieri, M. (2007). Mnemonic strategy instruction in inclusive secondary social studies
classes. Remedial and Special Education, 28(6), 345-355.
Gertent, R., L., Williams, J. & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning
disabilities: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279-320.
Giangreco, M., Edelman, S., Luiselli, T., & MacFarland, S. (1997). Helping or hovering? Effects of instructional assistant
proximity on students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 64, 7-18.
Guastello, E., Beasely, T., & Sinatra, R. (2000). Concept mapping effects on science content comprehension of low
achieving inner city seventh graders. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 356-365.
Guerrero, M. (2004). Acquiring academic English in one year: An unlikely proposition for English Language Learners.
Urban Education, 39, 172-199.
Hennesy, N., Rosenbert, D. & Tramaglini, S. (2003). A high school model for students with dyslexia: Remediation to
accommodations. Perspectives: The International Dyslexia Association, 29(2), 38-40.
Ives, B., & Hoy, C. (2003). Graphic organizers applied to higher-level secondary mathematics. Learning Disabilities:
Research and Practice. 18, 36-51.
Janish, C. & Johnson, M. (2003). Effecive literacy practices and challenging curriculum for at-risk learners: Great
expectations. (Electronic version). Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8, 295-308.
Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., & Spencer, V., & Fontana, J. (2003). Promoting success in high school world history: Peer
tutoring vs. guided notes. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 18, 52-65.
Mastropieri, M., Leinart, A., & Scruggs, T. (1999). Strategies to increase reading fluency. Intervention in School and
Clinic.
McCormick, S. (1994). A nonreader becomes a reader: A case study of literacy acquisition by a severely disabled reader.
Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 156-177.
Smartt, S., Reschly, D. (2007). Barriers to the preparation of highly qualified teachers in reading. National Center for
Teacher Quality. Washington:DC.
Swanson, H., & Deschler, D. (2003). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities: Converting a meta-analysis to
practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 124-135.
Taylor, S. & Nesheim, D. (2000-2001). Making literacy real for “high risk” adolescent emerging readers: An innovative
application of readers’ workshop. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44, 308-318.
Uberti, H., Scruggs, T., & Mastropieri, M. (2003). Keywords make a difference! Mnemonic instruction in inclusive
classrooms, Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(5), 56-61.
Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Kouzekanani, K., Bryant, D., Dickson, S., & Blozis, S., (2003). Reading instructional
grouping for students with reading difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 301-315.
Vaughn, S., Gersten, R. & Chard, D. (2000). The underlying message in LD intervention research: Findings from research
synthesis. Exceptional Children, 67, 99-114.
Weir, C. (1998). Using embedded questions to jump-start meta-cognition in middle school remedial readers. Journal of
Adolescent and Adult Literacy. 41, 458-467.
Collaboration with Families and Professional Partners
Bean, R. (2004). The reading specialist: Leadership for the classroom, school and community. New York: NY. Guilford
Press.
Blue-Banning, M. , Summers, J., Frankland, H., Nelson, L. & Beegle, G. (2004). Dimensions of family and professional
partnerships: Constructive guidelines for collaboration. Exceptional Children, 70, 167-184.
Carroll, D. (2001). Considering paraeducator training, roles, and responsibilities. Teaching Exceptional Children,
34(2),60-65.
Chopra, R., Sandoval-Lucero, E., Aragon, L., Bernal, C., DeBalderas, H., & Carroll, D. (2004). The para-professional role
of connector. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 219-232.
Dieker, L. (2001). What are the characteristics of “effective” middle and high school co-taught teams for students with
disabilities? Preventing School Failure, 46(1), 14-23.
Dunst, c. (2002). Family-centered practices: Birth through high school, Journal of Special Education, 36, 139-147.
Epstein, M., Polloway, E., Buck, G, Bursuck, W. & Wissinger, L, Whitehouse, f. & Jayanthi, M. (1997). Homeworkrelated communication problems: Perspectives of general education teachers. Learning Disabilities Research and
Practices, 12, 221-227.
7
Friend, M. (2000). Perspective: Myths and misunderstandings about professional collaboration. Remedial and Special
Education, 21, 130-132, 160.
Hedrick, W., & Pearish, A. (1999). Good reading is more important than who provides the instruction and where it takes
place. The Reading Teacher, 52, 716-726.
Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., Graetz, J., Norland, J. (2005). Case Studies in Co-Teaching in the Content Areas: Successes,
Failures and Challenges. Intervention in School and Clinic.
Differentiation, Multi-Level Instruction, Accommodations, Modifications and Adaptations
Curry, C. (2003). Universal design: Accessibility for all learners. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 55-60.
Elbaum, B., Moody, S., & Schumm, J. (1999). Mixed-ability grouping for reading: What students think. Learning
Disabilities Research & Practices. 14, 61-66.
Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. (2002). Providing new access to the general education curriculum:
Universal design for learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35 (2), 8-17.
Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., Norland, J., Berkeley, S., McDurrie, K., Tornquist, E., & Conners, N. (2005). Case studies
in co-teaching in the content areas: Successes, failures and challenges. Intervention in School and Clinic.
Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart from the start: The promise of universal design for learning.
Silva, M., Munk, D., & Bursuck, W., (2006). Grading adaptations for students with disabilities. Intervention in School and
Clinic.
Tomlinson, C. (2000). Reconcilable differences? Standards-based teaching and differentiation. Educational Leadership,
58 (1), 6-1l.
Dyslexia
Barenger, V.W. (2000). Dyslexia: The invisible, treatable disorder: The story of Einstein’s Ninja Turtles. Learning
Disabilities Quarterly, 23, 175-195.
Ehri, L. C. (2000). Learning to reading and learning to spell: Two sides of a coin. Topics in Language Disorders, 20, 1936.
Lyon, G.R. (2003). Reading disabilities: What can be done about it? Perspectives: The International Dyslexia
Association, 29(2), 17-19.
Morris, d., Ervin, C. & Conrad, K. (1996). A case study of middle school reading disability. The Reading Teacher, 55,
368-377.
Wood, F. & Ggorenko, E. (2001). Emerging issues in the genetics of dyslexia: A methodological review. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 34, 503-511.
Pre-referral Intervention Strategies (RTI)
Georgia Department of Education (Oct., 2008). Response to Intervention: The Georgia Student Achievement Pyramid of
Intervention. Atlanta, GA.
Fletcher, J., Coulter, W., Reschly, D. & Vaughn., S. (2004). Alternative approaches to the definition and identifying of
learning disabilities. Some questions and answers. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(2), 304-321.
Vaughn, S. & Fuchs, L. (2003). Refining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and
potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 137-146.
Hosp, J. & Reschley, D. (2003). Referral rates for intervention or assessment: A meta-analysis of racial differences.
Journal of Special Education, 37, 67-80.
Hosp, J. & Reschley, D. (2004). Disporportionate representation of minority students in special education: Academic,
demographic, and economic indicators. Exceptional Children, 70, 185-200.
Lane, K., Mahdavi, J., & Borthwick-Duffy, S. (2003). Teacher perceptions of the pre-referral process: A call for
assistance for school-based intervention. Preventing School Failure, 47, 148-155.
8
Issues Related to Second Language Learners
McCardle, P., Mele-McCarthy, J., & Leos, K. (2005). English Language Learners & Learning Disabilities: Research
Agenda & Implications for Practice. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. 20(1) 68-78.
Ortiz, A. (1997). Learning disabilities occurring concomitantly with linguistic differences. Journal of Learning
Disabiliteis, 30, 221-232.
Vaughn, S., Mathes, P., Linan-Thompson, S. & Francis, D. (2005). Teaching English Language Learners at-risk for
reading disabilities to read: Putting research into practice. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. 20 (a), 5867.
Recommended Journals







Educational Leadership
Exceptional Children
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy
Journal of Education for Student Placed At-risk
Journal of Learning Disabilities
Journal of Special Education
Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice







Preventing School Failure
Reading Research Quarterly
Remedial and Special Education
Teaching Exceptional Children
The Middle School Journal
The New Advocate
Voices from the Middle
9