Literacy proficiency and science for students with learning disabilities

Reading and Writing Quarterly

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 105-125

  Cawley, John F ^a   Parmar, Rene S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b ST JOHN'S UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008843522     PISSN: 10573569     EISSN: 15210693     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/105735601300007589     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Atwood, R. K, & Oldham, B. R. (1985). Teacher's perceptions of mainstreaming students in an inquiry oriented science program. Science Education, 69(5), 619-624.
2. Bay, M., Staver, J., Bryan, T., & Hale, J. (1992). Science instruction for the mildly handicapped: Direct instruction versus discovery teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6),555-570.
3. Bergerud, D., Lovitt, T., & Horton, S. (1988). The effectiveness of textbook adaptations in life science for high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(2), 70-76.
4. Bredderman, T. (1982). The effects of activity-based science in elementary schools. In M. Rowe & W. Higuchi (Eds.), Education in the 80's (pp. 63-75). Washington, DC: National Education Association.
5. Bruner, J. (1963). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Cawley, J., Kahn, H., & Tedesco, A. (1989). Vocational education and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2, 630-634.
7. Cawley, J., Miller, J., & Carr, S. (1990). An examination of the reading performance of students with mild educational handicaps or learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 284-290.
8. Cawley, J., & Vitello, S. (1972). Model of arithmetical programming for handicapped children. Exceptional Children, 39,101-111.
9. Darch, C., & Carnine, D. (1986). Teaching content area material to learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 53, 240-246.
10. DeLuca, C. (1993). The performance of students with learning disabilities when presented science vocabulary in an oral versus written format. Unpublished manuscript.
11. Dena, S. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 53, 219-232.
12. Donohoe, K., & Zigmond, N. (1988, April). High school grades of urban LD students and low achieving peers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
13. Driscoll, M., Mahanz, M., Dick, W., & Kirby, E. (1994). How does the textbook contribute to learning in a middle school science class? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 79-100.
14. Eggen, P., & Main, J. (1990). Developing critical thinking through science. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
15. Gregory, J., Shanahan, T., & Walberg, H. (1985). Learning disabled 10th graders in mainstreamed settings: A descriptive analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 6, 25-133.
16. Harnisch, D., & Wilkinson, I. (1989). Cognitive return of schooling for the handicapped: Preliminary findings from high school and beyond. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
17. Horton, S., & Lovitt, T. (1989). Using study guides with three classifications of secondary students. Journal of Special Education, 22, 447-462.
18. IDEA (1999).Final regulations: IDEA amendments of 1997. Federal Register, 64, 12406.
19. Janczak, T. (1993a). A comparison between students with mental retardation, learning disabilities, and emotional disturbance on the Regents Science Competency Test. Unpublished manuscript.
20. Janczak, T. (1993b). An examination of the performance of students with disabilities on the Regents Science Competency Test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo.
21. Lovitt, T., Horton, S., & Bergerud, D. (1987). Matching students with textbooks: An alternative to readability formulas and standardized tests. British Columbia Journal of Special Education, 2, 49-55.
22. Lovitt, T., Rudsit, J., Jenkins, J., Pious, C., & Benedetti, D. (1985). Adapting science materials for regular and learning disabled seventh graders. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 31-39.
23. Mastropieri, M., & Scruggs, T. (1992). A program to guide science for students with disabilities. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.
24. McFarland, J., & Shepard, T. (1995). Oral and written composition of students with mild disabilities in the content area of science. Learning Disabilities: A Multidieciplinary Journal, 6, 13-18.
25. National Research Council. (1994). National science standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26. Nolet, V., & Tindal, G. (1994). Curriculwn based collaboration. Focus on Exceptional Children, 27, 1-12.
27. Parmar, R, & Cawley, J. (1993). Analysis of science recommendations in school textbooks. Exceptional Children, 59, 518-531.
28. Parmar, R. S., DeLuca, C., & Janczak, T. (1994). Investigations into the relationship between science and language abilities of students with mild disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 117-126.
29. Raizen, S. (1988). Increasing educational productivity through improving the science curriculum. Washington, DC: The National Center for Improving Science Education.
30. Riley, N. (1989). Piagetian cognitive functioning in students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 444-451.
31. Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. (1994). The construction of scientific knowledge by students with mild disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 28, 307-321.
32. Scruggs, T., Mastropieri, M., Bakken, J., & Brigham, F. (1993). Reading versus doing: The relative effects of textbook-based and inquiry-oriented approaches to science learning in special education classrooms. Journal of Special Education, 27, 1-15.
33. Shepard, J, & Adjogah, S. (1994). Science performance of students with learning disabilities on language-based measures. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9,219-225.
34. Shymansky, J., Kyle, W., & Alport, J. (1982). How effective were the hands-on science programs of yesterday? Science and Children, 20, 14-15.
35. Staver, J. R, & Bay, M. (1989). Analysis of the conceptual structures and reasoning demands of elementary science texts at the primary level. Journal of Research in Science Technology, 26, 329-349.
36. Wheatley, G. H. (1991). Constructivist perspective on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75,9-2l.
37. Wood, T., & Wood, W. (1988). Assessing potential difficulties in comprehending fourth-grade science textbooks. Science Education, 72, 561-574.