首页 > 最新文献

Journal of Learning Disabilities最新文献

英文 中文
What Environments Support Reading Growth Among Current Compared With Former Reading Intervention Recipients? A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Their Schools. 与以前的阅读干预接受者相比,现在的阅读干预接受者在哪些环境下阅读能力有所提高?对学生及其学校的多层次分析。
IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-02 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241236164
Garret J Hall, Peter M Nelson, David C Parker

School context can shape relative intervention response in myriad ways due to factors, such as instructional quality, resource allocation, peer effects, and correlations between the school context and characteristics of enrolled students (e.g., higher-poverty students attending higher-poverty schools). In the current study, we used data from 16,000 U.S. Grade 3 students in a community-based supplemental reading intervention program to investigate the degree to which school context factors (percentage eligible for free/reduced-price lunch [FRPL], school-level achievement) relate to the differences in triannual reading fluency growth rates between students actively receiving supplemental intervention (active recipients) and those that formerly received intervention (and therefore only received general class instruction at this time; former recipients). Using Bayesian multilevel modeling, our findings indicate that school-level FRPL eligibility played a more prominent factor in growth rate differences between these two groups than school-level reading achievement. However, school-level reading achievement was much more strongly related to reading fluency differences between active and former intervention recipients at the beginning of the school year (when controlling for FRPL). Implications for investigating school-level heterogeneity in intervention response and sustainability are discussed.

由于教学质量、资源分配、同伴效应以及学校环境与入学学生特征之间的相关性(例如,贫困程度较高的学生就读于贫困程度较高的学校)等因素,学校环境会以多种方式影响相对的干预反应。在当前的研究中,我们使用了一个基于社区的补充阅读干预项目中 16,000 名三年级学生的数据,以调查学校环境因素(符合免费/减价午餐[FRPL]条件的百分比、学校层面的成就)与积极接受补充干预的学生(积极接受者)和以前接受干预的学生(因此此时只接受普通班教学;以前接受者)之间三年阅读流利度增长率的差异的相关程度。利用贝叶斯多层次模型,我们的研究结果表明,与学校层面的阅读成绩相比,学校层面的 FRPL 资格对这两组学生之间的增长率差异起到了更显著的作用。然而,在学年开始时,学校层面的阅读成绩与积极干预者和前干预者之间的阅读流利程度差异的关系更为密切(在控制 FRPL 的情况下)。本文讨论了调查干预反应中学校层面的异质性和可持续性的意义。
{"title":"What Environments Support Reading Growth Among Current Compared With Former Reading Intervention Recipients? A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Their Schools.","authors":"Garret J Hall, Peter M Nelson, David C Parker","doi":"10.1177/00222194241236164","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241236164","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>School context can shape relative intervention response in myriad ways due to factors, such as instructional quality, resource allocation, peer effects, and correlations between the school context and characteristics of enrolled students (e.g., higher-poverty students attending higher-poverty schools). In the current study, we used data from 16,000 U.S. Grade 3 students in a community-based supplemental reading intervention program to investigate the degree to which school context factors (percentage eligible for free/reduced-price lunch [FRPL], school-level achievement) relate to the differences in triannual reading fluency growth rates between students actively receiving supplemental intervention (active recipients) and those that formerly received intervention (and therefore only received general class instruction at this time; former recipients). Using Bayesian multilevel modeling, our findings indicate that school-level FRPL eligibility played a more prominent factor in growth rate differences between these two groups than school-level reading achievement. However, school-level reading achievement was much more strongly related to reading fluency differences between active and former intervention recipients at the beginning of the school year (when controlling for FRPL). Implications for investigating school-level heterogeneity in intervention response and sustainability are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"46-61"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140337283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Derivational Morphology Training in French-Speaking 9- to 14- Year-Old Children and Adolescents With Developmental Dyslexia: Does It Improve Morphological Awareness, Reading, and Spelling Outcome Measures? 对患有发育性阅读障碍的 9-14 岁法语儿童和青少年进行派生词词形训练:它能提高语法认知能力、阅读能力和拼写能力吗?
IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI: 10.1177/00222194231223526
Estelle Ardanouy, Pascal Zesiger, Hélène Delage

Children with developmental dyslexia (DD) display partially preserved morphology skills which they rely upon for reading and spelling. Therefore, we conducted explicit and intensive training of derivational morphology in French and Swiss individuals with DD, ages 9 to 14 years, in order to assess its effect on: morphological awareness, reading (speed and accuracy), and spelling. Our pre-posttest design included a group trained in derivational morphology and a group of children who continued their business-as-usual rehabilitation program with their speech-language therapist. Results showed effects on morphological awareness and on the spelling of complex words, with a large between-group effect size for trained items and a large to moderate effect size for untrained items. All these gains tended to be maintained over time on the delayed posttest, 2 months later. For reading, the results were more contrasted, with large between-group effect sizes for accuracy and speed for trained items, reducing to a small effect for accuracy on the delayed posttest. For untrained items, small effects were observed on accuracy (at both posttests) but not on speed. These results are very promising and argue in favor of using derivational morphology as a medium to improve literacy skills in French-speaking children and adolescents with DD.

患有发展性阅读障碍(DD)的儿童在阅读和拼写时会依赖部分保留的形态学技能。因此,我们对 9 至 14 岁的发育性阅读障碍儿童进行了明确的派生词形态学强化训练,以评估其对形态学意识、阅读(速度和准确性)和拼写的影响。我们的前测-后测设计包括一组接受了派生词形态学训练的儿童和一组继续在语言治疗师指导下按部就班进行康复训练的儿童。结果显示,对形态认知和复杂单词的拼写产生了影响,训练项目的组间效应大,未训练项目的组间效应大到适中。在 2 个月后进行的延迟后测中,所有这些进步都趋于长期保持。在阅读方面,结果对比更为明显,训练过的项目在准确性和速度方面的组间效应大,而在延迟后测试中,准确性的组间效应减小到很小。对于未经训练的项目,在准确性(两次后测)上都观察到了小的效应,但在速度上却没有。这些结果很有希望,并支持使用派生词形态学作为提高法语残疾儿童和青少年读写能力的媒介。
{"title":"Derivational Morphology Training in French-Speaking 9- to 14- Year-Old Children and Adolescents With Developmental Dyslexia: Does It Improve Morphological Awareness, Reading, and Spelling Outcome Measures?","authors":"Estelle Ardanouy, Pascal Zesiger, Hélène Delage","doi":"10.1177/00222194231223526","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194231223526","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Children with developmental dyslexia (DD) display partially preserved morphology skills which they rely upon for reading and spelling. Therefore, we conducted explicit and intensive training of derivational morphology in French and Swiss individuals with DD, ages 9 to 14 years, in order to assess its effect on: morphological awareness, reading (speed and accuracy), and spelling. Our pre-posttest design included a group trained in derivational morphology and a group of children who continued their business-as-usual rehabilitation program with their speech-language therapist. Results showed effects on morphological awareness and on the spelling of complex words, with a large between-group effect size for trained items and a large to moderate effect size for untrained items. All these gains tended to be maintained over time on the delayed posttest, 2 months later. For reading, the results were more contrasted, with large between-group effect sizes for accuracy and speed for trained items, reducing to a small effect for accuracy on the delayed posttest. For untrained items, small effects were observed on accuracy (at both posttests) but not on speed. These results are very promising and argue in favor of using derivational morphology as a medium to improve literacy skills in French-speaking children and adolescents with DD.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"62-77"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636023/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139698717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Ongoing Teacher Support for Data-Based Individualization: A Meta-Analysis and Synthesis. 教师对基于数据的个性化教学的持续支持:元分析与综合。
IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-05 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241271335
Emma Shanahan, Seohyeon Choi, Jechun An, Bess Casey-Wilke, Seyma Birinci, Caroline Roberts, Emily Reno

Although data-based individualization (DBI) has positive effects on learning outcomes for students with learning difficulties, this framework can be difficult for teachers to implement due to its complexity and contextual barriers. The first aim of this synthesis was to investigate the effects of ongoing professional development (PD) support for DBI on teachers' DBI knowledge, skills, beliefs, and fidelity and the achievement of preschool to Grade 12 students with academic difficulties. The second aim was to report on characteristics of this support and explore whether features were associated with effects. We identified 26 studies, 16 and 22 of which examined teacher and student outcomes, respectively. Meta-analyses indicated that the weighted mean effect size for DBI with ongoing support for teachers was g = 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.43, 1.28], p < .001, I2 = 83.74%, k = 46) and g = 0.31 for students (95% CI = [0.19, 0.42], p < .001, I2 = 61.38%, k = 103). We did not identify moderators of treatment effects. However, subset effects were descriptively larger for ongoing support that targeted data-based instructional changes or included collaborative problem-solving. Researchers may improve future DBI PD by focusing on support for teachers' instructional changes, describing support practices in greater detail, and advancing technological supports.

尽管基于数据的个性化教学(DBI)对学习困难学生的学习成果有积极影响,但由于其复杂性和环境障碍,教师可能很难实施这一框架。本综述的第一个目的是调查持续的数据化个别化专业发展(PD)支持对教师的数据化个别化知识、技能、信念和忠诚度的影响,以及对学前班至十二年级有学习困难的学生的成绩的影响。第二个目的是报告这种支持的特点,并探讨这些特点是否与效果相关。我们确定了 26 项研究,其中 16 项和 22 项分别考察了教师和学生的成果。元分析表明,教师持续支持 DBI 的加权平均效应大小为 g = 0.86(95% 置信区间 [CI] = [0.43, 1.28],p < .001,I2 = 83.74%,k = 46),学生的效应大小为 g = 0.31(95% 置信区间 [CI] = [0.19, 0.42],p < .001,I2 = 61.38%,k = 103)。我们没有发现治疗效果的调节因素。然而,对于以基于数据的教学变革为目标或包括合作解决问题的持续支持而言,子集效应在描述上更大。研究人员可以通过关注对教师教学变革的支持、更详细地描述支持实践以及推进技术支持来改进未来的 DBI PD。
{"title":"Ongoing Teacher Support for Data-Based Individualization: A Meta-Analysis and Synthesis.","authors":"Emma Shanahan, Seohyeon Choi, Jechun An, Bess Casey-Wilke, Seyma Birinci, Caroline Roberts, Emily Reno","doi":"10.1177/00222194241271335","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241271335","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although data-based individualization (DBI) has positive effects on learning outcomes for students with learning difficulties, this framework can be difficult for teachers to implement due to its complexity and contextual barriers. The first aim of this synthesis was to investigate the effects of ongoing professional development (PD) support for DBI on teachers' DBI knowledge, skills, beliefs, and fidelity and the achievement of preschool to Grade 12 students with academic difficulties. The second aim was to report on characteristics of this support and explore whether features were associated with effects. We identified 26 studies, 16 and 22 of which examined teacher and student outcomes, respectively. Meta-analyses indicated that the weighted mean effect size for DBI with ongoing support for teachers was <i>g</i> = 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.43, 1.28], <i>p</i> < .001, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 83.74%, <i>k</i> = 46) and <i>g</i> = 0.31 for students (95% CI = [0.19, 0.42], <i>p</i> < .001, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 61.38%, <i>k</i> = 103). We did not identify moderators of treatment effects. However, subset effects were descriptively larger for ongoing support that targeted data-based instructional changes or included collaborative problem-solving. Researchers may improve future DBI PD by focusing on support for teachers' instructional changes, describing support practices in greater detail, and advancing technological supports.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"3-18"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636021/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142141367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Graph Out Loud: Pre-Service Teachers' Data Decisions and Interpretations of CBM Progress Graphs. 大声画图:职前教师的数据决策和对 CBM 进度图表的解读。
IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-27 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241231768
Jessica R Toste, Marissa J Filderman, Nathan H Clemens, Erica Fry

Data-based instruction (DBI) is a process in which teachers use progress data to make ongoing instructional decisions for students with learning disabilities. Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a common form of progress monitoring, and CBM data are placed on a graph to guide decision-making. Despite the central role that graph interpretation plays in the successful implementation of DBI, relatively little attention has been devoted to investigating this skill among special education teachers. In the present study, we examined the data decisions of 32 U.S. pre-service special education teachers (29 females and 3 males). Participants viewed data presented sequentially on CBM progress graphs and used a think-aloud procedure to explain their reasoning each time they indicated they would make instructional changes. We also asked participants to make the same type of decisions in response to static CBM progress graphs depicting 10 weeks of data. Overall, there was inconsistency in pre-service teachers' responses related to when or why they would make an instructional change. Decisions were often influenced by graph-related features, such as variability in the data. Furthermore, responses suggested misunderstandings that led to premature instructional change decisions and reliance on individual data points.

基于数据的教学(DBI)是教师利用进度数据对有学习障碍的学生做出持续教学决策的过程。基于课程的测量(CBM)是一种常见的进度监控形式,CBM 数据被放置在图表上以指导决策。尽管图表解读在成功实施 DBI 过程中起着核心作用,但对特殊教育教师这一技能的研究却相对较少。在本研究中,我们考察了 32 名职前特殊教育教师(29 名女性和 3 名男性)的数据决策。参与者观看了 CBM 进度图上依次显示的数据,并在每次表示要做出教学改变时使用思考-朗读程序来解释他们的理由。我们还要求参与者针对描述了 10 周数据的静态 CBM 进度图做出相同类型的决定。总体而言,职前教师对何时或为何要进行教学改革的回答并不一致。教师的决定往往受到图表相关特征的影响,如数据的可变性。此外,他们的回答还显示出一些误解,这些误解导致他们过早地做出教学改革决定,并依赖于个别数据点。
{"title":"Graph Out Loud: Pre-Service Teachers' Data Decisions and Interpretations of CBM Progress Graphs.","authors":"Jessica R Toste, Marissa J Filderman, Nathan H Clemens, Erica Fry","doi":"10.1177/00222194241231768","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241231768","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Data-based instruction (DBI) is a process in which teachers use progress data to make ongoing instructional decisions for students with learning disabilities. Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a common form of progress monitoring, and CBM data are placed on a graph to guide decision-making. Despite the central role that graph interpretation plays in the successful implementation of DBI, relatively little attention has been devoted to investigating this skill among special education teachers. In the present study, we examined the data decisions of 32 U.S. pre-service special education teachers (29 females and 3 males). Participants viewed data presented sequentially on CBM progress graphs and used a think-aloud procedure to explain their reasoning each time they indicated they would make instructional changes. We also asked participants to make the same type of decisions in response to static CBM progress graphs depicting 10 weeks of data. Overall, there was inconsistency in pre-service teachers' responses related to <i>when</i> or <i>why</i> they would make an instructional change. Decisions were often influenced by graph-related features, such as variability in the data. Furthermore, responses suggested misunderstandings that led to premature instructional change decisions and reliance on individual data points.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"33-45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636013/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139984228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act: Clarifying the Relationship Between Free Appropriate Public Education and Least Restrictive Environment
IF 3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2024-12-21 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241305352
Mitchell Louis Yell, M. Renee Bradley
In 2025, the Individuals with Disabilities Education (IDEA) will have been the primary law driving the field of special education for 50 years. A contentious area of disagreement has been the relationship between two primary mandates of the law: the obligation of schools to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to eligible students with disabilities and the obligation to place these students in the least restrictive environment (LRE) appropriate to each student’s individual needs. The conflict over LRE can be traced throughout the history of IDEA, in debates referenced as “mainstreaming,” “regular education initiative,” “inclusion,” and “full inclusion.” In this case, we draw on (a) Congressional intent as shown in the writings of a co-sponsor of the law, (b) the language of the law and regulations, (c) special education rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court and other U.S. Courts of Appeals addressing FAPE and LRE, and (d) policy guidance from the U.S. Department of Education. We argue that there is no basis for believing that FAPE and LRE are in conflict. Rather, the FAPE requirement of the IDEA is the primary obligation of school districts, and it sets the parameters for determining the LRE. To believe otherwise represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. We describe how for students eligible under the category of learning disabilities, this perceived conflict has been especially challenging. Historically, the IDEA has made a distinction between high-incidence disabilities, those that occur more frequently, and low-incidence disabilities, those that occur less frequently. At some point, these distinctions morphed into a belief that high-incidence disabilities required less-intensive interventions and were more suited to regular class placement than those students with low-incidence disabilities. This distinction is incorrect. For each student identified as eligible for special education services, the determination of LRE should be an individualized decision based on student needs and where those needs can be best met. This discussion is a critical one for students with learning disabilities and all students with disabilities who may require intensive individualized supports, regardless of prior conceptions of low- and high-disability categories.
2025 年,《残障人士教育法》(IDEA)将成为推动特殊教育领域发展 50 年的主要法律。该法的两个主要任务之间的关系一直存在争议:一是学校有义务为符合条件的残疾学生提供免费的适当的公共教育(FAPE),二是有义务将这些学生安置在适合每个学生个人需求的限制性最小的环境(LRE)中。关于 LRE 的冲突可以追溯到整个 IDEA 的历史,在辩论中被称为 "主流化"、"常规教育倡议"、"全纳 "和 "全纳"。在本案中,我们借鉴了:(a) 该法共同提案人的著作中显示的国会意图;(b) 法律和法规的措辞;(c) 美国最高法院和其他美国上诉法院关于 FAPE 和 LRE 的特殊教育裁决;(d) 美国教育部的政策指导。我们认为,没有理由认为 FAPE 和 LRE 相冲突。相反,IDEA 的 FAPE 要求是学区的首要义务,它为确定 LRE 设定了参数。否则就是对法律的根本误解。我们描述了对于符合学习障碍类别的学生而言,这种被认为的冲突是如何具有挑战性的。从历史上看,IDEA 对高发残疾和低发残疾进行了区分,前者是指发生频率较高的残疾,后者是指发生频率较低的残疾。在某些时候,这些区别演变成了一种信念,即高发残疾需要的干预强度较低,与低发残疾学生相比,更适合常规班级安置。这种区分是不正确的。对于每一个被认定有资格接受特殊教育服务的学生而言,确定 LRE 应该是一个基于学生需求和最能满足这些需求的地方的个性化决定。对于有学习障碍的学生和所有可能需要强化个性化支持的残疾学生来说,无论以前对低残疾和高残疾类别的概念如何,这一讨论都是至关重要的。
{"title":"The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act: Clarifying the Relationship Between Free Appropriate Public Education and Least Restrictive Environment","authors":"Mitchell Louis Yell, M. Renee Bradley","doi":"10.1177/00222194241305352","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241305352","url":null,"abstract":"In 2025, the Individuals with Disabilities Education (IDEA) will have been the primary law driving the field of special education for 50 years. A contentious area of disagreement has been the relationship between two primary mandates of the law: the obligation of schools to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to eligible students with disabilities and the obligation to place these students in the least restrictive environment (LRE) appropriate to each student’s individual needs. The conflict over LRE can be traced throughout the history of IDEA, in debates referenced as “mainstreaming,” “regular education initiative,” “inclusion,” and “full inclusion.” In this case, we draw on (a) Congressional intent as shown in the writings of a co-sponsor of the law, (b) the language of the law and regulations, (c) special education rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court and other U.S. Courts of Appeals addressing FAPE and LRE, and (d) policy guidance from the U.S. Department of Education. We argue that there is no basis for believing that FAPE and LRE are in conflict. Rather, the FAPE requirement of the IDEA is the primary obligation of school districts, and it sets the parameters for determining the LRE. To believe otherwise represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. We describe how for students eligible under the category of learning disabilities, this perceived conflict has been especially challenging. Historically, the IDEA has made a distinction between high-incidence disabilities, those that occur more frequently, and low-incidence disabilities, those that occur less frequently. At some point, these distinctions morphed into a belief that high-incidence disabilities required less-intensive interventions and were more suited to regular class placement than those students with low-incidence disabilities. This distinction is incorrect. For each student identified as eligible for special education services, the determination of LRE should be an individualized decision based on student needs and where those needs can be best met. This discussion is a critical one for students with learning disabilities and all students with disabilities who may require intensive individualized supports, regardless of prior conceptions of low- and high-disability categories.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142869895","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Why Do Parenting Styles Matter? The Relation Between Parenting Styles, Cyberbullying, and Problematic Internet Use Among Children With and Without SLD/ADHD
IF 3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2024-12-14 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241301051
Sigal Eden, Hila Tal
This study focuses on the pervasive issues of cyberbullying and problematic internet use (PIU) among youth, particularly in children with disabilities. To elucidate the role of parents in mitigating these challenges, the study examines the prevalence of three parenting styles (permissive/authoritarian/authoritative), and their correlation with cyberbullying and PIU among children with or without specific learning disorder (SLD) or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD). The study comprised of 300 participants: 150 children—9 to 12 years old, matched with their 150 parents, divided into two groups—SLD/ADHD and those with typical-development. Comparative analysis revealed that the SLD/ADHD group scored higher in the authoritarian style compared with the typical-development group. Furthermore, authoritative parenting style correlated with lower incidences of cyberbullying and PIU, and foster a more positive parent–child relationship, which in turn contributed to reduced cyberbullying and PIU. These findings underscore the importance of adopting an authoritative parenting style among parents, particularly among parents of children with SLD/ADHD.
{"title":"Why Do Parenting Styles Matter? The Relation Between Parenting Styles, Cyberbullying, and Problematic Internet Use Among Children With and Without SLD/ADHD","authors":"Sigal Eden, Hila Tal","doi":"10.1177/00222194241301051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241301051","url":null,"abstract":"This study focuses on the pervasive issues of cyberbullying and problematic internet use (PIU) among youth, particularly in children with disabilities. To elucidate the role of parents in mitigating these challenges, the study examines the prevalence of three parenting styles (permissive/authoritarian/authoritative), and their correlation with cyberbullying and PIU among children with or without specific learning disorder (SLD) or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD). The study comprised of 300 participants: 150 children—9 to 12 years old, matched with their 150 parents, divided into two groups—SLD/ADHD and those with typical-development. Comparative analysis revealed that the SLD/ADHD group scored higher in the authoritarian style compared with the typical-development group. Furthermore, authoritative parenting style correlated with lower incidences of cyberbullying and PIU, and foster a more positive parent–child relationship, which in turn contributed to reduced cyberbullying and PIU. These findings underscore the importance of adopting an authoritative parenting style among parents, particularly among parents of children with SLD/ADHD.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142823165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Supporting Teachers' Data-Based Individualization of Early Writing Instruction: An Efficacy Trial.
IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2024-12-08 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241300324
Kristen L McMaster, Erica S Lembke, Emma Shanahan, Seohyeon Choi, Jechun An, Christopher Schatschneider, McKinzie D Duesenberg-Marshall, Seyma Birinci, Elizabeth McCollom, Carol Garman, Kim Moore

In a multiyear, multisite, randomized control trial, we examined the effects of comprehensive professional development designed to support teachers' data-based instruction (DBI) for students with intensive early writing needs. Teachers (N = 154; primarily special educators or intervention specialists) were assigned randomly to a treatment group (n = 76), in which they received tools, learning, and coaching to support their DBI implementation over 20 weeks, or to a control group (n = 78). Students either received DBI in early writing (n = 155) from treatment teachers or their usual writing instruction (n = 154) from control teachers. Treatment teachers outperformed controls on measures of DBI knowledge and skills (d = 1.57) and self-efficacy for writing instruction (d = .94), and treatment students outperformed controls on proximal and distal writing outcomes (ds = .14-.29). Student characteristics (grade, special education status, English learner status, and race/ethnicity) did not moderate intervention effects. We discuss findings in terms of the importance of supporting students with intensive learning needs, the efficacy and feasibility of implementing DBI-TLC, and implications for pre- and in-service teacher training and support.

{"title":"Supporting Teachers' Data-Based Individualization of Early Writing Instruction: An Efficacy Trial.","authors":"Kristen L McMaster, Erica S Lembke, Emma Shanahan, Seohyeon Choi, Jechun An, Christopher Schatschneider, McKinzie D Duesenberg-Marshall, Seyma Birinci, Elizabeth McCollom, Carol Garman, Kim Moore","doi":"10.1177/00222194241300324","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241300324","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a multiyear, multisite, randomized control trial, we examined the effects of comprehensive professional development designed to support teachers' data-based instruction (DBI) for students with intensive early writing needs. Teachers (<i>N</i> = 154; primarily special educators or intervention specialists) were assigned randomly to a treatment group (<i>n</i> = 76), in which they received tools, learning, and coaching to support their DBI implementation over 20 weeks, or to a control group (<i>n</i> = 78). Students either received DBI in early writing (<i>n</i> = 155) from treatment teachers or their usual writing instruction (<i>n</i> = 154) from control teachers. Treatment teachers outperformed controls on measures of DBI knowledge and skills (<i>d</i> = 1.57) and self-efficacy for writing instruction (<i>d</i> = .94), and treatment students outperformed controls on proximal and distal writing outcomes (<i>d</i>s = .14-.29). Student characteristics (grade, special education status, English learner status, and race/ethnicity) did not moderate intervention effects. We discuss findings in terms of the importance of supporting students with intensive learning needs, the efficacy and feasibility of implementing DBI-TLC, and implications for pre- and in-service teacher training and support.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"222194241300324"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142796165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Efficacy of Small Group Reading Intervention for Grade 2 and 3 Children With Reading Difficulties: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial 针对二、三年级阅读困难儿童的小组阅读干预的效果:分组随机对照试验
IF 3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2024-11-11 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241297058
Kristy Dunn, George K. Georgiou, Robert Savage, Rauno Parrila
We examined whether Phonics + Set for Variability (S fV) reading intervention would lead to better irregular word reading compared to Phonics + Morphology within a cluster randomized control trial (RCT) design with a follow-up measurement. The participants were 273 Grade 2 and 3 students with reading difficulties (139 in the Phonics + S fV and 134 in the Phonics + Morphology) who received intervention in small groups (2–4 children), 4 times a week, 30 minutes each time, for 15 weeks. Results of hierarchical linear modeling showed that there was a significant effect of intervention on all reading outcomes (e.g., from pre- to posttest the effect sizes for Phonics + S fV ranged from g = 0.74 to 1.54 and for Phonics + Morphology from g = 0.75 to 1.49). Unexpectedly, there were no differences between the intervention conditions in any of the outcome variables, including irregular word reading and morphological awareness that the interventions partly focused on.
我们研究了在分组随机对照试验(RCT)设计中,Phonics + Set for Variability(S fV)阅读干预与Phonics + Morphology相比,是否能提高不规则词的阅读效果,并进行了跟踪测量。参与者为 273 名有阅读困难的二年级和三年级学生(139 人参加 Phonics + S fV,134 人参加 Phonics + Morphology),他们以小组(2-4 名儿童)形式接受干预,每周 4 次,每次 30 分钟,为期 15 周。分层线性模型的结果显示,干预对所有阅读结果都有显著影响(例如,从测试前到测试后,Phonics + S fV 的效应大小从 g = 0.74 到 1.54 不等,Phonics + Morphology 的效应大小从 g = 0.75 到 1.49 不等)。出乎意料的是,干预条件之间在任何结果变量上都没有差异,包括干预部分侧重于的不规则单词阅读和形态意识。
{"title":"Efficacy of Small Group Reading Intervention for Grade 2 and 3 Children With Reading Difficulties: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Kristy Dunn, George K. Georgiou, Robert Savage, Rauno Parrila","doi":"10.1177/00222194241297058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241297058","url":null,"abstract":"We examined whether Phonics + Set for Variability (S fV) reading intervention would lead to better irregular word reading compared to Phonics + Morphology within a cluster randomized control trial (RCT) design with a follow-up measurement. The participants were 273 Grade 2 and 3 students with reading difficulties (139 in the Phonics + S fV and 134 in the Phonics + Morphology) who received intervention in small groups (2–4 children), 4 times a week, 30 minutes each time, for 15 weeks. Results of hierarchical linear modeling showed that there was a significant effect of intervention on all reading outcomes (e.g., from pre- to posttest the effect sizes for Phonics + S fV ranged from g = 0.74 to 1.54 and for Phonics + Morphology from g = 0.75 to 1.49). Unexpectedly, there were no differences between the intervention conditions in any of the outcome variables, including irregular word reading and morphological awareness that the interventions partly focused on.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142597921","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Vulnerability to Achievement Stressors: More Evidence That Students With Learning Disabilities Require Intensive Intervention 容易受到成绩压力的影响:有学习障碍的学生需要强化干预的更多证据
IF 3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2024-11-11 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241297051
Jessica M. Namkung, Lynn S. Fuchs
In this article, we introduce the term vulnerability to achievement stressors, which refers to differentially low achievement when shifts in the educational environment “stress” or threaten the capacity of an individual or a group of individuals to make academic progress. We also introduce a methodological framework for assessing vulnerability to achievement stressors. Vulnerability to achievement stressors in students with learning disabilities (LD), relative to students without disabilities, is illustrated with two achievement stressors: (a) the shift in learning standards codified in Common Core State Standards, specifically the increase in complexity of the fourth-grade fractions curriculum, and (b) the COVID-19 pandemic, which decreased instructional structure by disrupting in-person teaching. Because these illustrations were embedded within randomized controlled trials, each with an inclusive instruction condition and an intensive intervention condition, they also provide the basis for concluding that intensive intervention is more effective than inclusive instruction for addressing students with LD’s vulnerability to achievement stressors and for narrowing their persistently severe achievement gaps.
在本文中,我们介绍了 "易受成绩压力因素影响 "这一术语,它指的是当教育环境的变化 "压力 "或威胁到一个人或一群人取得学业进步的能力时,他们的成绩就会不同程度地下降。我们还介绍了评估易受成绩压力影响程度的方法框架。与非残疾学生相比,有学习障碍(LD)的学生容易受到成绩压力因素的影响,我们用两个成绩压力因素来说明:(a)《共同核心州立标准》中学习标准的转变,特别是四年级分数课程复杂性的增加;(b)COVID-19 大流行病,它扰乱了面授教学,从而减少了教学结构。由于这些例子都包含在随机对照试验中,每个试验都有一个全纳教学条件和一个强化干预条件,因此它们也为得出以下结论提供了依据,即强化干预比全纳教学更有效,更能解决有学习障碍的学生易受成绩压力影响的问题,也更能缩小他们持续存在的严重成绩差距。
{"title":"Vulnerability to Achievement Stressors: More Evidence That Students With Learning Disabilities Require Intensive Intervention","authors":"Jessica M. Namkung, Lynn S. Fuchs","doi":"10.1177/00222194241297051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241297051","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we introduce the term vulnerability to achievement stressors, which refers to differentially low achievement when shifts in the educational environment “stress” or threaten the capacity of an individual or a group of individuals to make academic progress. We also introduce a methodological framework for assessing vulnerability to achievement stressors. Vulnerability to achievement stressors in students with learning disabilities (LD), relative to students without disabilities, is illustrated with two achievement stressors: (a) the shift in learning standards codified in Common Core State Standards, specifically the increase in complexity of the fourth-grade fractions curriculum, and (b) the COVID-19 pandemic, which decreased instructional structure by disrupting in-person teaching. Because these illustrations were embedded within randomized controlled trials, each with an inclusive instruction condition and an intensive intervention condition, they also provide the basis for concluding that intensive intervention is more effective than inclusive instruction for addressing students with LD’s vulnerability to achievement stressors and for narrowing their persistently severe achievement gaps.","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142597920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Considerations for Intensifying Word-Problem Interventions for Students With MD: A Qualitative Umbrella Review of Relevant Meta-Analyses. 加强对患有 MD 的学生进行单词问题干预的考虑因素:相关 Meta 分析的定性总回顾。
IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI: 10.1177/00222194241281293
Jonte A Myers, Tessa L Arsenault, Sarah R Powell, Bradley S Witzel, Emily Tanner, Terri D Pigott

Word problem-solving (WPS) poses a significant challenge for many students, particularly those with mathematics difficulties (MD), hindering their overall mathematical development. To improve WPS proficiency, providing individualized and intensive interventions is critical. This umbrella review examined 11 medium- to high-quality meta-analyses to identify intervention and participant characteristics, informed by the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity (TII) framework, that consistently moderate WPS outcomes for students with MD. Our analysis identified four characteristics with consistent moderating effects: intervention model, number of treatment sessions, group size, and academic risk area. This result suggests that these variables are potential considerations when customizing and intensifying WPS interventions to maximize their effectiveness for students with MD. We discuss the implications of these findings for practice and research and acknowledge the limitations of our review.

文字解题(WPS)对许多学生,尤其是数学困难学生(MD)构成了巨大的挑战,阻碍了他们的整体数学发展。要提高 WPS 能力,提供个性化的强化干预措施至关重要。本综述对 11 项中高级荟萃分析进行了研究,以确定干预强度分类法(TII)框架下的干预和参与者特征,这些特征对有数学障碍的学生的 WPS 结果具有持续的调节作用。我们的分析确定了四个具有一致调节作用的特征:干预模式、治疗次数、小组规模和学业风险领域。这一结果表明,在定制和强化 WPS 干预措施以最大限度地提高其对患有 MD 的学生的有效性时,这些变量是潜在的考虑因素。我们讨论了这些发现对实践和研究的影响,并承认我们的综述存在局限性。
{"title":"Considerations for Intensifying Word-Problem Interventions for Students With MD: A Qualitative Umbrella Review of Relevant Meta-Analyses.","authors":"Jonte A Myers, Tessa L Arsenault, Sarah R Powell, Bradley S Witzel, Emily Tanner, Terri D Pigott","doi":"10.1177/00222194241281293","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00222194241281293","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Word problem-solving (WPS) poses a significant challenge for many students, particularly those with mathematics difficulties (MD), hindering their overall mathematical development. To improve WPS proficiency, providing individualized and intensive interventions is critical. This umbrella review examined 11 medium- to high-quality meta-analyses to identify intervention and participant characteristics, informed by the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity (TII) framework, that consistently moderate WPS outcomes for students with MD. Our analysis identified four characteristics with consistent moderating effects: intervention model, number of treatment sessions, group size, and academic risk area. This result suggests that these variables are potential considerations when customizing and intensifying WPS interventions to maximize their effectiveness for students with MD. We discuss the implications of these findings for practice and research and acknowledge the limitations of our review.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"222194241281293"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142592095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Journal of Learning Disabilities
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1