Learning Disabilities Research & Practice最新文献

Eliciting student thinking during mathematics instruction allows teachers to choose tasks with high cognitive demand while also engaging students to use productive struggle to solve mathematical problems, thus increasing their conceptual understanding. Often, students who require intensive intervention in mathematics, in particular, students who are English learners, are not able to participate in discourse opportunities within core instruction in mathematics because they lack the confidence or the necessary skills. This includes students with mathematics difficulties as well as students with identified mathematics disabilities. Discourse provides multiple opportunities to practice using and listening to content-specific language, which is critical to developing academic language and accessing higher-level mathematics. This article summarizes the research supporting discourse in mathematics interventions as well as appropriate scaffolds to support discourse within intensive intervention for English learners, ultimately improving student understanding and performance.

This exploratory study determined the relationship between math instructional activities in Wave (year) 1 and English language learner (ELL) children's math problem-solving performance in Wave (year) 2. The math performance of ELL children (N = 291) in Grades 1, 2, and 3 was tested in two testing waves. Two major findings emerged. First, strategy instruction, peer interaction, and explicit instruction in Wave 1 uniquely predicted English problem-solving scores in Wave 2 independent of grade level, vocabulary, calculation, and problem-solving at Wave 1. Second, the frequency of explicit instruction and peer interactions was significantly related to the odds of predicting ELL children at risk for math disabilities. The results are discussed within the context-specific instructional activities that were positively related to later math outcomes.

Reading nonfiction texts with understanding is important to school success, yet many students struggle to do so. This randomized controlled trial extends previous research by contrasting an earlier iteration of a comprehension tutoring program (Comp) against a variant with strategies for transferring learning (Comp+Transfer). Participants were 189 fourth and fifth graders with weak reading comprehension. To evaluate their efficacy, we used commercially developed far-transfer measures and experimenter-made near- and mid-transfer measures of reading comprehension. In contrast to controls, students in both programs significantly improved their understanding of near-transfer passages. Additionally, students in Comp+Transfer improved performance on mid-transfer passages. These findings suggest the value of teaching for transfer and the importance of measuring program efficacy with researcher-made tests alongside commercial tests.

For some students, online learning, particularly as it relates to the COVID-19 pandemic, can have negative implications for self-efficacy, fatigue, and burnout. One way to combat these negative outcomes is for institutions to support students’ basic psychological needs (BPNs) of autonomy, relatedness, and competence. However, online learning may also frustrate students’ BPNs, particularly if they have a learning disability (LD). The purpose of the current study was to investigate the satisfaction and frustration of BPNs in relation to self-efficacy, fatigue, and burnout for students with and without LD. We surveyed postsecondary students about their courses online and examined differences between students with LD and their typical peers. We also examined BPN satisfaction and frustration as predictors of self-efficacy, fatigue, and burnout. Recommendations are provided from a universal design for learning perspective. Moreover, limitations and future research directions are discussed.

The first purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of risk for comorbid reading and mathematics disabilities (RMD) at start of first grade, when measured in a representative sample of 3,062 students with first-grade fluency measures (word reading; computation). The second purpose was to examine the utility of these measures for predicting RMD status within a sample of 577 students when RMD status was assessed at the end of second grade in terms of reading and math accuracy. When set at or below the 16th percentile, first-grade risk for RMD was two times more common than chance; at or below the 7th percentile, it was five times more common. Logistic regression showed that the two first-grade fluency measures accurately distinguished students with and without RMD in second grade; however, when cut scores were set to capture 85% of students with RMD, false positives were high. Overall, the results provide support for the use of fluency measures as an initial gating procedure in first grade, but additional gating steps appear necessary in the screening process to reduce false positives.

This study examined the co-occurrence of word reading difficulty in Chinese (L1) and English as a second language (L2) and tested language and executive functioning (EF) skills as correlates. Thirty-nine poor readers in Chinese (PC), 39 poor readers in English (PE), and 26 poor readers of both languages (PB) were compared to 39 average readers who served as controls (C). The co-occurrence rate of L1–L2 difficulty was 40%. Moreover, PC, PE, and PB performed less well than C on all language and EF skills; PB performed less well than PC, PE, and C on L1 and L2 phonological awareness, L2 morphological awareness, rapid naming, and EF. Findings highlight the role of language and EF skills in L1 and L2 reading development.