Pub Date : 2022-08-24DOI: 10.1177/07319487221119365
Susan De La Paz, Cameron M. Butler, D. Levin, Mark Felton
Writing in science can be challenging for all learners, and it is especially so for students with cognitive or language-based learning difficulties. We examined the effects of a cognitive apprenticeship on student disciplinary writing skills as well as near and far transfer of learning outcomes. This instructional approach included a gradual release of responsibility for learning through four, 3-day investigations that included authentic scientific experiments, small- and whole-group discussions, and the construction and revision of scientific arguments. Intervention students showed significant gains for both near (effect size = 1.08) and far (effect size = 0.76) transfer disciplinary writing outcomes. These results held true even when compared with a nonequivalent control group (effect size = 1.95). Students with disabilities demonstrated similar rates of growth as peers without disabilities, especially with respect to the quality of their claims and ability to provide scientific evidence. This study provides additional data on the value of cognitive apprenticeships in middle school science classrooms, and the results indicate the importance of discussion in helping students to think and write more like scientists.
{"title":"Effects of a Cognitive Apprenticeship on Transfer of Argumentative Writing in Middle School Science","authors":"Susan De La Paz, Cameron M. Butler, D. Levin, Mark Felton","doi":"10.1177/07319487221119365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221119365","url":null,"abstract":"Writing in science can be challenging for all learners, and it is especially so for students with cognitive or language-based learning difficulties. We examined the effects of a cognitive apprenticeship on student disciplinary writing skills as well as near and far transfer of learning outcomes. This instructional approach included a gradual release of responsibility for learning through four, 3-day investigations that included authentic scientific experiments, small- and whole-group discussions, and the construction and revision of scientific arguments. Intervention students showed significant gains for both near (effect size = 1.08) and far (effect size = 0.76) transfer disciplinary writing outcomes. These results held true even when compared with a nonequivalent control group (effect size = 1.95). Students with disabilities demonstrated similar rates of growth as peers without disabilities, especially with respect to the quality of their claims and ability to provide scientific evidence. This study provides additional data on the value of cognitive apprenticeships in middle school science classrooms, and the results indicate the importance of discussion in helping students to think and write more like scientists.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44765251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-11DOI: 10.1177/07319487221115172
D. Hunter, Michael J. Boneshefski, Joseph F. Kovaleski, Timothy J. Runge
There are still many unanswered questions regarding the application of response to intervention (RTI) to making eligibility decisions for specific learning disabilities (SLD). Both U.S. federal regulations and research support that students identified with SLD using RTI should be deficient in both level of academic functioning and rate of growth in response to scientifically based instruction. To date, there is little research examining whether these eligibility criteria are predictive in identifying students with SLD by evaluation teams in schools. Two studies conducted in different U.S. states examined if level of academic performance and rate of improvement (ROI) using curriculum-based measurement in reading (CBM-R) predicted student eligibility for special education. Logistic regression results indicated that level of performance predicted special education eligibility across sites and that ROI did not. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
{"title":"Examining the Impact of Federal Specific Learning Disability Inclusionary Criteria on Multidisciplinary Team Decision Making When Using Response to Intervention","authors":"D. Hunter, Michael J. Boneshefski, Joseph F. Kovaleski, Timothy J. Runge","doi":"10.1177/07319487221115172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221115172","url":null,"abstract":"There are still many unanswered questions regarding the application of response to intervention (RTI) to making eligibility decisions for specific learning disabilities (SLD). Both U.S. federal regulations and research support that students identified with SLD using RTI should be deficient in both level of academic functioning and rate of growth in response to scientifically based instruction. To date, there is little research examining whether these eligibility criteria are predictive in identifying students with SLD by evaluation teams in schools. Two studies conducted in different U.S. states examined if level of academic performance and rate of improvement (ROI) using curriculum-based measurement in reading (CBM-R) predicted student eligibility for special education. Logistic regression results indicated that level of performance predicted special education eligibility across sites and that ROI did not. Implications for research and practice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42364963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-22DOI: 10.1177/07319487221111099
Debi Gartland, Roberta Strosnider
The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) affirms the importance of transition as a critical component of successfully progressing from secondary school to college or university for students with learning disabilities. Although NJCLD has addressed secondary to postsecondary education transition planning in a previous paper, several challenges remain. This NJCLD position paper includes information about the laws that affect students with learning disabilities at each level, documentation required, key participants, and programs and resources to assist in the transition process.
{"title":"Considerations for Transition From High School to Postsecondary Education","authors":"Debi Gartland, Roberta Strosnider","doi":"10.1177/07319487221111099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221111099","url":null,"abstract":"The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) affirms the importance of transition as a critical component of successfully progressing from secondary school to college or university for students with learning disabilities. Although NJCLD has addressed secondary to postsecondary education transition planning in a previous paper, several challenges remain. This NJCLD position paper includes information about the laws that affect students with learning disabilities at each level, documentation required, key participants, and programs and resources to assist in the transition process.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47225001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-22DOI: 10.1177/07319487221113026
M. Burns, Helen L. Young, Elizabeth M. McCollom, Mallory A Stevens, Jared T Izumi
A skill-by-treatment interaction (STI) isolates skill deficits and manipulates conditions to match them to student needs. Based on the learning hierarchy, preintervention scores can help predict which intervention will be most successful for an individual student. This study compared the efficacy of a modeling and practice-based decoding intervention for 29 kindergarten and first-grade students. Results suggested that grade was not a significant predictor of which intervention was more effective, but preintervention accuracy in nonsense word fluency was a significant predictor of the more effective intervention, accounted for 68% of the variance, and correctly identified the more effective intervention 88% of the time.
{"title":"Predicting Intervention Effects With Preintervention Measures of Decoding: Evidence for a Skill-by-Treatment Interaction With Kindergarten and First-Grade Students","authors":"M. Burns, Helen L. Young, Elizabeth M. McCollom, Mallory A Stevens, Jared T Izumi","doi":"10.1177/07319487221113026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221113026","url":null,"abstract":"A skill-by-treatment interaction (STI) isolates skill deficits and manipulates conditions to match them to student needs. Based on the learning hierarchy, preintervention scores can help predict which intervention will be most successful for an individual student. This study compared the efficacy of a modeling and practice-based decoding intervention for 29 kindergarten and first-grade students. Results suggested that grade was not a significant predictor of which intervention was more effective, but preintervention accuracy in nonsense word fluency was a significant predictor of the more effective intervention, accounted for 68% of the variance, and correctly identified the more effective intervention 88% of the time.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43495875","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-07DOI: 10.1177/07319487221107890
Wen Zeng, Song Ju, Casey Hord
This qualitative study explored perspectives of college students with learning disabilities (LD) regarding their self-determination and parental influences on student self-determination during students’ transition from high school to postsecondary education. Data were collected from in-depth interviews with 12 college students with LD. Qualitative analyses were conducted to examine students’ participation in secondary transition, self-determination behaviors, and parental influences on students’ self-determination. The findings identified five important self-determination behaviors (i.e., postsecondary education goal setting and attainment, self-advocacy, being autonomous, self-awareness, and decision-making) students demonstrated in secondary transition. Four themes pertain to parental influences on student self-determination, including encouraging students to be advocates, fostering students’ academic competency, showing moral support and high expectations, and providing opportunities for students to make decisions. Recommendations for engaging parents to promote student self-determination are provided.
{"title":"Parental Influences on Student Self-Determination: Perspectives of College Students With Learning Disabilities","authors":"Wen Zeng, Song Ju, Casey Hord","doi":"10.1177/07319487221107890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221107890","url":null,"abstract":"This qualitative study explored perspectives of college students with learning disabilities (LD) regarding their self-determination and parental influences on student self-determination during students’ transition from high school to postsecondary education. Data were collected from in-depth interviews with 12 college students with LD. Qualitative analyses were conducted to examine students’ participation in secondary transition, self-determination behaviors, and parental influences on students’ self-determination. The findings identified five important self-determination behaviors (i.e., postsecondary education goal setting and attainment, self-advocacy, being autonomous, self-awareness, and decision-making) students demonstrated in secondary transition. Four themes pertain to parental influences on student self-determination, including encouraging students to be advocates, fostering students’ academic competency, showing moral support and high expectations, and providing opportunities for students to make decisions. Recommendations for engaging parents to promote student self-determination are provided.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42846916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-22DOI: 10.1177/07319487221103838
Margaret M. Flores, Vanessa M. Hinton, Erin Noelle Blanton
State standards include fluent use of standard computational algorithms. However, learning and using them require conceptual understanding of numbers and operations. Previous research using the concrete–representational–abstract (CRA) sequence has been effective in teaching computational algorithms to students at risk of and students with learning disabilities by emphasizing conceptual understanding. However, all the research was face-to-face and few captured the impact of the intervention on students’ conceptual understanding. The current study occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, so researchers modified CRA for remote instruction. This study investigated the effects of modified CRA on the fluency and accuracy of three sixth-grade students with learning disabilities. They also included an assessment of conceptual understanding. The researchers used a multiple probe across participants design, demonstrating a functional relation between CRA and students’ fluency and accuracy. Researchers assessed conceptual understanding with informal measures that required application of their conceptual understanding. The results and implications are discussed.
{"title":"Remote Teaching of Multidigit Multiplication for Students With Learning Disabilities","authors":"Margaret M. Flores, Vanessa M. Hinton, Erin Noelle Blanton","doi":"10.1177/07319487221103838","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221103838","url":null,"abstract":"State standards include fluent use of standard computational algorithms. However, learning and using them require conceptual understanding of numbers and operations. Previous research using the concrete–representational–abstract (CRA) sequence has been effective in teaching computational algorithms to students at risk of and students with learning disabilities by emphasizing conceptual understanding. However, all the research was face-to-face and few captured the impact of the intervention on students’ conceptual understanding. The current study occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, so researchers modified CRA for remote instruction. This study investigated the effects of modified CRA on the fluency and accuracy of three sixth-grade students with learning disabilities. They also included an assessment of conceptual understanding. The researchers used a multiple probe across participants design, demonstrating a functional relation between CRA and students’ fluency and accuracy. Researchers assessed conceptual understanding with informal measures that required application of their conceptual understanding. The results and implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41711357","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-03DOI: 10.1177/07319487221096684
M. Burns, A. Vanderheyden, McKinzie D. Duesenberg‐Marshall, Monica E. Romero, Mallory A Stevens, Jared T Izumi, Elizabeth M. McCollom
Students with dyslexia demonstrate reading difficulty in early literacy skills (e.g., phonemic awareness, word recognition, decoding), and administering screeners is a necessary step to implement effective intervention. There are several commonly used reading screeners, but the decision accuracy and predictive value between them varies. In the current study, scores on two different reading screeners, the Shaywitz DyslexiaScreen (SDS) and Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills Next (DIBELS Next) were compared for 115 U.S. Grades K–3 students with specific reading deficits using the Phonological Awareness Composite of the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing as the criterion. Tests of sensitivity, specificity, and post-test probabilities were used to evaluate the decision accuracy of the data. Results suggested that the decision accuracy for DIBELS Next (78%) was better than SDS (45%), and both sensitivity (DIBELS Next = 90%, SDS = 35%) and positive post-test probability (DIBELS Next = 71%, SDS = 42%) favored DIBELS Next. Thus, the DIBELS Next measures demonstrated acceptable decision accuracy in identifying students with low phonological awareness, but the SDS did not.
{"title":"Decision Accuracy of Commonly Used Dyslexia Screeners Among Students Who Are Potentially at Risk for Reading Difficulties","authors":"M. Burns, A. Vanderheyden, McKinzie D. Duesenberg‐Marshall, Monica E. Romero, Mallory A Stevens, Jared T Izumi, Elizabeth M. McCollom","doi":"10.1177/07319487221096684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221096684","url":null,"abstract":"Students with dyslexia demonstrate reading difficulty in early literacy skills (e.g., phonemic awareness, word recognition, decoding), and administering screeners is a necessary step to implement effective intervention. There are several commonly used reading screeners, but the decision accuracy and predictive value between them varies. In the current study, scores on two different reading screeners, the Shaywitz DyslexiaScreen (SDS) and Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills Next (DIBELS Next) were compared for 115 U.S. Grades K–3 students with specific reading deficits using the Phonological Awareness Composite of the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing as the criterion. Tests of sensitivity, specificity, and post-test probabilities were used to evaluate the decision accuracy of the data. Results suggested that the decision accuracy for DIBELS Next (78%) was better than SDS (45%), and both sensitivity (DIBELS Next = 90%, SDS = 35%) and positive post-test probability (DIBELS Next = 71%, SDS = 42%) favored DIBELS Next. Thus, the DIBELS Next measures demonstrated acceptable decision accuracy in identifying students with low phonological awareness, but the SDS did not.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42575941","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-22DOI: 10.1177/07319487221092277
D. Bryant, Sam Choo
In this issue, we present seven papers with a range of topics. Allen and Lembke focus on “The Effect of a Morphological Awareness Intervention on Early Writing Outcomes that offers readers with pertinent information regarding early writing. Simply put, morphology focuses on word formations where morphemes are the smallest meaningful units in language. Allen and Lembke’s paper offers readers insights about an intervention that teaches writers how to improve their writing skills by tapping into the study of morphology. The next paper, “Implicit Theories, Social Support, and Hope as Serial Mediators for Predicting Academic SelfEfficacy Among Higher Education Students” by Mana, Saka, Dahan, Ben-Simon, and Margalit provides insights about mediators for predicting academic self-efficacy, which appear to be critical for higher education students. The self-efficacy theory holds that individuals participate in tasks in which they think of themselves as being competent. In essence, self-efficacy is an understanding of one’s effectiveness in performing tasks. Johnson, King-Sears, and Miller’s paper, “High School Co-Teaching Partners’ Self-Efficacy, Personal Compatibility, and Active Involvement in Instruction” furthers information about self-efficacy along with other factors as they pertain to instruction and academic success. O’Connor, Sanchez, Jones, Suchilt, Youkhana, and Beach provide their paper, “Continuing CHAAOS: Vocabulary Intervention for Students With Disabilities in Eighth Grade Who Are Also English Learners (ELL).” Certainly, vocabulary instruction is important for all students and in particular those who are ELL. “Prior Academic Achievement as a Predictor of NonCognitive Variables and Teacher and Parent Expectations in Students with Learning Disabilities,” by Núñez, Rodríguez, Tuero, Fernández, and Cerezo draws our attention to the role of prior academic achievement as it relates to students with learning disabilities and the expectations of their teachers and parents. Certainly these role groups are a contributory factor to the role of academic achiement. We move on to Deng, Cai, Zhou, and Leung’s scholarly work about the role of “Executive Function and Planning Features of Students with Different Types of Learning Difficulties in Chinese Junior Middle School.” This paper can assist readers in a better understanding of how students operationalize these features and their outcome for junior middle school students. Finally, the Smith and Lembke paper, “Technical Adequacy of a Spelling Curriculum Based Measure for English Language Learners in the First Through Third Grade,” provides readers with a topic that does not garner sufficient attention: spelling, ELL, and primary grades students. We hope readers will find helpful information in all of these papers as they plan their research and intervention strategies for students with LD.
{"title":"LDQ Editorial 45.2","authors":"D. Bryant, Sam Choo","doi":"10.1177/07319487221092277","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221092277","url":null,"abstract":"In this issue, we present seven papers with a range of topics. Allen and Lembke focus on “The Effect of a Morphological Awareness Intervention on Early Writing Outcomes that offers readers with pertinent information regarding early writing. Simply put, morphology focuses on word formations where morphemes are the smallest meaningful units in language. Allen and Lembke’s paper offers readers insights about an intervention that teaches writers how to improve their writing skills by tapping into the study of morphology. The next paper, “Implicit Theories, Social Support, and Hope as Serial Mediators for Predicting Academic SelfEfficacy Among Higher Education Students” by Mana, Saka, Dahan, Ben-Simon, and Margalit provides insights about mediators for predicting academic self-efficacy, which appear to be critical for higher education students. The self-efficacy theory holds that individuals participate in tasks in which they think of themselves as being competent. In essence, self-efficacy is an understanding of one’s effectiveness in performing tasks. Johnson, King-Sears, and Miller’s paper, “High School Co-Teaching Partners’ Self-Efficacy, Personal Compatibility, and Active Involvement in Instruction” furthers information about self-efficacy along with other factors as they pertain to instruction and academic success. O’Connor, Sanchez, Jones, Suchilt, Youkhana, and Beach provide their paper, “Continuing CHAAOS: Vocabulary Intervention for Students With Disabilities in Eighth Grade Who Are Also English Learners (ELL).” Certainly, vocabulary instruction is important for all students and in particular those who are ELL. “Prior Academic Achievement as a Predictor of NonCognitive Variables and Teacher and Parent Expectations in Students with Learning Disabilities,” by Núñez, Rodríguez, Tuero, Fernández, and Cerezo draws our attention to the role of prior academic achievement as it relates to students with learning disabilities and the expectations of their teachers and parents. Certainly these role groups are a contributory factor to the role of academic achiement. We move on to Deng, Cai, Zhou, and Leung’s scholarly work about the role of “Executive Function and Planning Features of Students with Different Types of Learning Difficulties in Chinese Junior Middle School.” This paper can assist readers in a better understanding of how students operationalize these features and their outcome for junior middle school students. Finally, the Smith and Lembke paper, “Technical Adequacy of a Spelling Curriculum Based Measure for English Language Learners in the First Through Third Grade,” provides readers with a topic that does not garner sufficient attention: spelling, ELL, and primary grades students. We hope readers will find helpful information in all of these papers as they plan their research and intervention strategies for students with LD.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47322243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-18DOI: 10.1177/07319487221089616
Brittany L. Hott, Margaret M. Flores, Stephanie Morano, Kathleen M. Randolph, Corey Peltier
This article, part of the Learning Disability Quarterly special series dedicated to single-case research design (SCRD), summarizes the review process and outlines how to provide high-quality SCRD study manuscript reviews. We offer recommendations for the entirety of the review process, including accepting the role of reviewer, evaluating quality of SCRD studies, and, finally, adhering to reporting standards with focused attention on the applied nature of the engaging work that encompasses research in learning disabilities. In addition, we discuss (a) participant and setting description, (b) implementation of particular designs, (c) measurement procedures for dependent variable(s), (d) providing evidence of reliability, (e) graphic display of time-series data, (f) descriptions of results, and (g) acknowledgment of design limitations. We describe the challenges facing SCRD researchers and reviewers engaging in learning disabilities research within applied settings, identify fatal flaws that authors cannot address, and point out omissions that researchers can address through the revision process. Implications for practice, resources, and future directions are shared.
{"title":"Reviewing Manuscripts Reporting Findings From Single-Case Research Design Studies","authors":"Brittany L. Hott, Margaret M. Flores, Stephanie Morano, Kathleen M. Randolph, Corey Peltier","doi":"10.1177/07319487221089616","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221089616","url":null,"abstract":"This article, part of the Learning Disability Quarterly special series dedicated to single-case research design (SCRD), summarizes the review process and outlines how to provide high-quality SCRD study manuscript reviews. We offer recommendations for the entirety of the review process, including accepting the role of reviewer, evaluating quality of SCRD studies, and, finally, adhering to reporting standards with focused attention on the applied nature of the engaging work that encompasses research in learning disabilities. In addition, we discuss (a) participant and setting description, (b) implementation of particular designs, (c) measurement procedures for dependent variable(s), (d) providing evidence of reliability, (e) graphic display of time-series data, (f) descriptions of results, and (g) acknowledgment of design limitations. We describe the challenges facing SCRD researchers and reviewers engaging in learning disabilities research within applied settings, identify fatal flaws that authors cannot address, and point out omissions that researchers can address through the revision process. Implications for practice, resources, and future directions are shared.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42102655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-11DOI: 10.1177/07319487221096256
{"title":"Corrigendum to Differential Effects of the Targeted Reading Intervention for Students With Low Phonological Awareness and/or Vocabulary","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/07319487221096256","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487221096256","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43320414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：