Scaling research on beginning reading: Consensus and conflict

Translating Theory and Research Into Educational Practice: Developments in Content Domains, Large-Scale Reform, and Intellectual Capacity

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 53-75

  Fletcher, Jack M ^a   Foorman, Barbara R ^a   Denton, Carolyn A ^b   Vaughn, Sharon ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920472369     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203726556     Document Type: Chapter

References (60)

1. Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Allington, R. A. (2001). Crafting state educational policy: The slippery role of research and researchers. Journal of Literacy Research, 31, 457-482.
3. Allington, R. A. (2002). Big brother and the national reading curriculum: How ideology trumped evidence. New York: Heinemann.
4. Anderson, K. (2000, June 18). The reading wars: Understanding the debate over how best to teach children to read. Los Angeles Times, p. 5.
5. Ballard, D. (1997, July 8). Still a chance to get Texas education on right track. Houston Chronicle, p. 23.
6. Brady, S. A., & Shankweiler, D. P. (1991). Phonological processes in literacy. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7. Brink, S. G., Basen-Engquist, K. M., O'Hara-Thompkins, K. M., Parcel, G. S., Gottlieb, H. H., & Lovato, C. Y. (1995). Diffusion of an effective tobacco prevention program. Part I: Evaluation of the dissemination phase. Health Education Research, 10, 283-295.
8. Carnine, D. (2000). Why education experts resist effective practices. Report of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.Washington, DC: Thomas B. FordhamFoundation. Clay, M. M. 1993. Reading Recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
9. Coles, G. (1998). Reading lessons: The debate over literacy. New York: Hill & Wang.
10. Cooper,R. (1998). Socio-cultural and within-school factors that affect the quality of implementation of school-wide programs (Tech. Rep. No. 28). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At-Risk.
11. Denton, C. A., Foorman, B. R., & Mathes, P. M. (2003). Schools that "beat theodds": Implications for reading instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 258-261.
12. Denton, C. A., Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. M. (2003). Bringing research to practice in reading intervention to scale. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 201-211.
13. D'Entremont, C. (1997, June 10). Distrust ofTexas teachers. Houston Chronicle, p. 35.
14. Donovan, M. S., & Cross, C. T. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
15. Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 117-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
16. Ellis, L. (1998).We'll eat the elephant one bite at a time: The continuing battle for control of literacy education inTexas. InK. Goodman (Ed.), In defense of good teaching: What teachers need to know about the reading wars (pp. 87-105).York, ME: Stenhouse.
17. Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 1-26.
18. Fuchs, D.,&Fuchs, L. S. (1998).Researchers and teachers working together to adapt instruction for diverse learners. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 126-137.
19. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.
20. Garner, D. (1998, June 17). Why students can't read: The approach is all wrong. Plano Star Courier, pp. 6A, 7A.
21. Gersten,R., Vaughn, S., Deshler, D.,&Schiller, E. (1997). What we know about using research findings: Implications for improving special education practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 466-476.
22. Goodman, R. M., Steckler, A., Hoover, S., & Schwartz, R. (1993). A critique of contemporary community health promotion approaches: Based on a qualitative review of six programs in Maine. American Journal of Health Promotion, 7, 208-220.
23. Hill, M. H. (1997, June 9). Alternative would mean less control of schools. Houston Chronicle, p. 23.
24. Hirsch, E. D. (1996). The schools we need and why we don't have them. New York: Doubleday.
25. Hoelscher, D. M., Kelder, S. H., Murray, N., Cribb, P. W., Conroy, J., & Parcel, G. S. (2001). Dissemination and adoption of the child and adolescent trial for cardiovascular health (CATCH): A case study in Texas. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 7, 90-100.
26. IDEA. (1997). IndividualsWith Disabilities in Education Act. Retrieved October 21, 2005, from http://www4.law.cornell.edu
27. Johnson, R. C. (1997, April 23). Texas standards flags hold up check to center. Education Week, p. 13.
28. Johnson, R. C. (1998, February 4). Pace is relentless for Texas school board chairman. Education Week, p. 11.
29. Kelder, S.H., Osganian, S. K., Feldman, H. A.,Webber, L. S., Parcel, G. S., Leupker,R.V., Wu, M. C., & Nader, P. R. (2002). Tracking of physical and physiological risk variables among ethnic subgroups from third to eighth grade: The child and adolescent trial for cardiovascular health cohort study. Preventive Medicine, 34, 324-333.
30. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Arguelles, M. E. (1999). Sustaining research-based practices in reading: A 3-year follow-up. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 263-274, 287.
31. Levin, H. M. (1988). Accelerated schools for at-risk students. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Policy Research in Education.
32. Liberman, A. M. (1997). How theories of speech affect research in reading and writing. In B. A. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early interventions (pp. 3-19). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Lindsay, D. (1997, November 12). Double standards. Education Week, 17, 33.
34. Lukatela, G.,&Turvey, M. T. (1998).Reading in two alphabets. American Psychologist, 53, 1057-1072.
35. Lyon, G. R., Fletcher, J. M., Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Torgesen, J. K.,Wood, F. B., Schulte, A.,&Olson,R. (2001).Rethinking learning disabilities. In C. E. Finn, Jr., R. A. J. Rotherham, & C. R. Hokanson, Jr. (Eds.), Rethinking special education for a new century (pp. 259-287). Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and Progressive Policy.
36. Institute. Manzo, K. K. (1997, June 18). Showdown on Texas curriculum standards cited. Education Week, p. 3.
37. McCardle, P.,&Chhabra, V. (Eds.) (2004). The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore:
38. Paul H. Brookes. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
39. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
40. President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education. (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Retrieved September 21, 2004, from http://www.ed.gov/inits/commissionsboards
41. Pressley, M. (1998). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: Guilford.
42. Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2002). How should reading be taught? Scientific American, 286, 84-91.
43. ReadingRecovery Council of North America 1998. (2001). Standards and guidelines of the Reading Recovery Council of North America (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Author.
44. Shavelson,R. J.,&Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education. NationalResearch Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
45. Sizer,T.R. (1984). Horace's compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
46. Slavin,R. E.,&Madden, N. A. (1999). Disseminating success for all: Lessons for policy and practice (Tech. Rep. No. 30). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At-Risk.
47. Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Dolan, L. J., & Wasik, B. A. (1996). Every child, every school: Success for all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
48. Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
49. Snow, C. E., Burns, S. M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
50. Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York: Guilford.
51. Stanovich, P. J., & Stanovich, K. E. (2003). Using research and reason in education: How teachers can use scientifically based research to make curricular decisions. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
52. Pierre, E. A. (2000). The call for intelligibility in postmodern education research. Educational Researcher, 29, 25-28.
53. Taylor, D. (1998). Beginning to read and the spin doctors of science: The political campaign to change America's mind about how children learn to read. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
54. Texas Parent-Teachers Association. (2000). Legislative resolutions. Austin, TX: Author.
55. Vaughn, S., & Dammann, J. E. (2001). Science and sanity in special education. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 21-29.
56. Walt, K. (1997a, July 11). Bitterly divided board approves new academic standards. Houston Chronicle, p. 1.
57. Walt, K. (1997b, July 12). Board divided on academic standards/Conservatives request changes, but lack votes to block approval. Houston Chronicle, p. 29.
58. Walt, K. (1997c, July 10). Fight over education standards to climax/Final curriculum debate set for today in Austin. Houston Chronicle, p. 29.
59. Walt, K. (1997d, May 9). Group nearly derails educational revisions. Houston Chronicle, p. 37.
60. Winnick, D. (1997, May). Data, not dogma. Paper presented at the conference on Critical balances: Early reading for lifelong literacy, Houston, TX.