Contextual effects on predicting risk for reading difficulties in first and second grade

Reading and Writing

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 371-394

  Foorman, Barbara R ^a   York, Mary ^b   Santi, Kristi L ^c   Francis, David ^b  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON   (United States)

^c Santi Group LLC   (United States)

Author keywords

Early reading; Early reading assessment; Identification of reading problems; Prevention of reading difficulties; Prevention of reading disabilities; Risk prevention in reading

Indexed keywords

EID: 43049105755     PISSN: 09224777     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11145-007-9079-5     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 414-431.
2. Anthony, J. L., Lonigan, C. J., Driscoll, K., Phillips, B. M., & Burgess, S. R. (2003). Phonological sensitivity: A quasi-parallel progression of word structure units and cognitive operations. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 470-487.
3. Ballou, D. (1996). Do public schools hire the best applicants? Journal of Economics, 111, 97-134.
4. Clay, M. M. (1993). Reading Recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
5. Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B., & Thorenson, A. (2001). Does teacher certification matter? Evaluating the evidence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(1), 57-77.
6. Denton, C. A., Ciancio, D. J., & Fletcher, J. M. (2006). Validity, reliability, and utility of the observation survey of early literacy achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 8-34.
7. Desimone, L., Smith, T., & Frisvold, D. (in press). Has NCLB improved teacher and teaching quality for disadvantaged students. In A. Gamoran (Ed.), Standards-based reform and the poverty gap: lessons for 'no child left behind' Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
8. Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 49/Thursday, March 13, 2003/Notices, pp. 12029. Retrieved March 15, 2007 from http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/governance/ notices/iegs/IEGsHistorical.htm.
9. 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(2), 304-331.
10. Fletcher, J. M., Foorman, B. R., Boudousquie, A., Barnes, M., Schatschneider, C., & Francis, D. J. (2002). Assessment of reading and learning disabilities: A research-based, treatment-oriented approach. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 27-63.
11. 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(3), 506-522.
12. Foorman B. R. (Ed.) (2003). Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale. Austin, TX: Pro Ed.
13. Foorman, B. R., & Ciancio, D. J. (2005). Screening for secondary intervention: Concept and context. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 494-499.
14. Foorman, B. R., Fletcher, J. M., & Francis, D. J. (2004). Early reading assessment. In W. M. Evers, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Testing student learning, evaluating teaching effectiveness (pp. 81-125). Stanford, CA: The Hoover Institution.
15. Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification status and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(2), 129-145.
16. Good, R. H., & Kaminiski, R. A. (2002). DIBELS Oral reading fluency passages for first through third grades (Technical Report No. 10). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
17. Good, R. H., Simmons, D. S., Kame'euni, E. J., Kaminski, R. A., & Wallin, J. (2002). Summary of decision rules for intensive, strategic, and benchmark instructional recommendations in kindergarten through third grade (Technical Report No. 11). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
18. Hale, J. B., Naglieri, J. A., Kaufman, A. S., & Kavale, K. A. (2004). Specific learning disability classification in the new Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: The danger of good ideas. The School Psychologist, 29, 6-13.
19. Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., O'Brien, D. M., & Rivkin, S. G. (2005). The market for teacher quality. (Working paper 11154). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
20. Harcourt (1996). Stanford-9 Achievement Test. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Brace & Company.
21. Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2005). Oral reading fluency: 90 years of measurement (Technical Report No. 33). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
22. Hedges, L. V., & Hedberg, E. C. (2006). Interaclass correlation values for planning group randomized trials in education. Retrieved November 13, 2006, from http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/research.html.
23. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA), Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat 614, (2004).
24. Invernizzi, M., Meier, J. D., Swank, L., & Juel, C. (2002). Phonological awareness literacy screening (PALS). Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.
25. Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (2005). Qualitative Reading Inventory-4. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
26. ® for mixed models (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
27. Mathes, P., Denton, C., Fletcher, J., Anthony, J., Francis, D., & Schatschneider, C. (2005). The effects of theoretically different instruction and student characteristics on the skills of struggling readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 142-147.
28. McCardle, P., & Chhabra, V. (2004). The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD: Brooks Publishing Co.
29. McMaster, K. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2005). Responding to nonresponders: An experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods. Exceptional Children, 71, 445-463.
30. Molfese, V. J., Modglin, A. A., Beswick, J. L., Neamon, J. D., Berg, S. A., Berg, C. J., & Molnar, A. (2006). Letter knowledge, phonological processing, and print knowledge: Skill development in nonreading preschool children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 296-305.
31. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000). National Reading Panel-Teaching children to read: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Pub. No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.
32. National Research Council (1998). Preventing reading difficulties young children. In C. E. Snow, M. S. Burns, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Committee on the prevention of reading difficulties young children, commission on behavioral and social science and education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. No Child Left Behind Act of (2001). Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat.1425.
34. Rayner, K., Foorman, B., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2, 31-74.
35. Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97-110). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
36. Schatschneider, C., Francis, D. J., Foorman, B. R., Fletcher, J. M., & Mehta P. (1999). The dimensionality of phonological awareness: An application of item response theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 439-449.
37. Sinclair, C. (2003). Mentoring online about mentoring: Possibilities and practice. Mentoring and Tutoring, 11(1), 79-94.
38. Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI; 2006-2008). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
39. Torgesen, J. K. (2002). The prevention of reading difficulties. Journal of School Psychology, 40(1), 7-26.
40. Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69, 391-409.
41. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denckla, M. B. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early interventions as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601-638.
42. Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S., & Fanuele, D. P. (2006). Response to intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities: Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first-grade interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 157-169.
43. Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (in press). Research-based implications from intensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review.
44. Wenglinski, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between education technology and student achievement in math. Princeton, NJ: ETS.
45. ® -III Complete. San Antonio, TX: The Riverside Publishing Company.