Journal of Learning Disabilities最新文献

Preschool-age children identified as at risk for later reading difficulties can benefit from supplemental, small-group emergent literacy intervention. As such interventions become commercially available and marketed to preschool programs, it is important to understand their impacts when implemented by intended end users under routine conditions. In this study, we examined the effects of the Nemours BrightStart! (NBS!) intervention on children's emergent literacy skills when implemented by teachers and community aides in authentic preschool classrooms. We randomly assigned 98 classrooms to one of three conditions (NBS! teacher-implemented, NBS! community aide-implemented, or control). Children enrolled in these classrooms who met eligibility criteria and were identified as at risk via an early literacy screener (n = 281) completed pretest and posttest emergent literacy assessments; those assigned to NBS! conditions received intervention from their classroom teacher or a community aide affiliated with a local kindergarten-readiness initiative. Intent-to-treat analyses showed no significant impacts of NBS! on any outcome, and an instrumental variable, as-treated approach showed one significant intervention effect on letter writing. Consequently, we did not replicate results of prior highly controlled efficacy trials. Findings have implications for revising the NBS! theory of change, conducting dosage and as-treated analyses, and moving research-based interventions toward scale-up.

Students with disabilities (SWD) who are Black or Hispanic have been reported to be more likely to be placed primarily outside of general education classrooms while attending U.S. schools. Federal law and regulation require monitoring of special education placement based on race or ethnicity. Yet, whether and to what extent racial or ethnic disparities in placement are explained by bias or by other explanatory factors is currently unclear. We evaluated for racial and ethnic bias in special education placement by analyzing longitudinal data from two independent samples of SWD (N values range 590-1,130) attending U.S. elementary schools. We statistically controlled for plausibly exogenous sociodemographic, academic, and behavioral risk factors measured in kindergarten in analyses of the students as they attended first, third, and fifth grades between the 1999-2000 and 2015-2016 school years. Of the resulting 12 Black or Hispanic grade-year-specific tests, 11 (i.e., 92%) indicated that controls for kindergarten explanatory factors-particularly significant academic difficulties-fully explained the risk initially attributable to race or ethnicity. We observed little evidence that bias explains racial or ethnic disparities in special education placement in U.S. elementary schools.

Seventy-six general education and 67 special education teachers working in the same 66 elementary schools were surveyed about their beliefs about writing. Each teacher taught writing to one or more fourth-grade students receiving special education services, including students with learning disabilities. Survey findings indicated that general education teachers believed that they were better prepared to teach writing than special education teachers, and they were more positive about their own efforts to learn to teach writing. General education teachers also held more positive attitudes about teaching writing and their own capabilities as a writer than their special education counterparts. Furthermore, general educators were more likely than special educators to indicate that writing developed through effort and process, and less likely to think that writing knowledge came from experts. Beliefs about adequacy of preparation to teach writing predicted teachers' beliefs about their level of knowledge to teach writing, efficacy to overcome students' writing difficulties, and attitudes toward teaching writing. Recommendations for future research and implications for practice are presented.

Exposure to stigma and stereotype threat is detrimental for numerous marginalized groups. Research has demonstrated that individuals with specific learning disabilities (SLDs) are vulnerable to stigmatization. The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize the studies investigating associations between SLD-related stigma and stereotype threat and psychological and academic outcomes in individuals with SLDs, as well as examine the overall effect size of these associations across studies. A total of 16 studies met inclusion criteria-12 studies (52 effect sizes) examined SLD stigma with psychological adjustment or academic outcomes, and six studies (eight effect sizes) examined SLD stereotype threat. Greater SLD stigma scores had a medium-sized and significant correlation with less self-esteem across nine effect sizes (r = -.39, p = .002). Other outcomes were not powered enough for meta-analyses, although studies generally showed that greater SLD stigma and stereotype threat was related to less optimal psychological adjustment. These results suggest that these negative experiences should be a target of intervention and support efforts for individuals with SLDs. The associations between SLD stigma and stereotype threat and academic performance outcomes were comparatively more heterogeneous and less robust. These findings highlight the need for more research on SLD-related stigma and stereotype threat.

Learning disabilities (LD) may affect a range of academic skills but are most often observed in reading. Researchers and policymakers increasingly recommend addressing reading difficulties encountered by students with LD using evidence-based practices, or interventions validated through multiple, high-quality research studies. A valuable tool in identifying evidence-based practices is the meta-analysis, which entails statistically aggregating the results obtained through primary studies. Specific methods used in meta-analyses have the potential to influence their findings, with ramifications for research and practice. This review assessed the methodological features of the systematic reviews and analytic procedures featured in meta-analyses of reading intervention studies that included students with LD written between 2000 and 2020. Identified articles (N = 23) suggest that meta-analyses have become more prevalent and transparent over time, notwithstanding issues related to publication bias and the opacity of coding procedures. A discussion of implications follows a description of results.

This study investigated the relationship between mathematics difficulties and psychopathology in a large community sample (N = 881) of youth (8-18 years of age) in the United States. The primary aims of the study were to (a) test the associations between mathematics difficulties and specific components of internalizing, externalizing, attention, and social problems; (b) examine potential age and gender differences; and (c) investigate the longitudinal relationship between mathematics and psychopathology using 5-year follow-up data. Results indicated that individuals with mathematics difficulties exhibited elevations in most dimensions of psychopathology, including anxiety, depression, externalizing behaviors, attention problems, and social problems. Furthermore, mathematics impairment was associated with internalizing problems, rule-breaking behaviors, inattention, and social problems even after controlling for comorbid reading difficulties. Results suggested that the associations between mathematics and psychopathology are generally similar in males and females. Finally, preliminary longitudinal evidence suggested that initial mathematics difficulties predicted elevations of conduct disorder, rule-breaking behavior, inattention, hyperactivity, and social problems at follow-up, with several of these associations remaining significant even after controlling for initial reading. In contrast, there was no significant association between initial mathematics ability and internalizing symptoms at follow-up, demonstrating some amelioration of internalizing symptoms over time.

In intervention studies, high rates of implementation fidelity are important markers of a study's success; however, the definition of implementation fidelity is both complex and dynamic. In this synthesis, we examined the dimensions of implementation fidelity measured and reported in 99 studies in which researchers utilized a mathematics intervention for elementary students (i.e., Grades 1-5). We examined implementation fidelity following recommendations made by Dane and Schneider (1998), O'Donnell (2008), and DeFouw et al. (2009) to capture a comprehensive representation of the implementation fidelity data collected and reported within mathematics intervention studies. We organized our conceptualization of implementation fidelity into four overarching categories and nine dimensions within those categories: intervention design (i.e., theories of change and logistics), fidelity of implementor (i.e., adherence, quality of delivery, dosage, and implementor knowledge or experience), student engagement, and treatment analysis (i.e., treatment differentiation and analysis of implementation fidelity). Overall, findings indicate many author teams reported adherence data and dosage data, but significantly fewer studies reported quality of delivery data, student engagement data, or treatment differentiation data. In addition, author teams were more likely to report at least one form of logistics, such as implementor support, than theories of change. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

The adoption and sustainability of evidence-based Tier 1 literacy practices in secondary content-area classes is important to improve reading success for students with learning disabilities. We conducted an exploratory multiple-case study investigating teachers' adoption and sustained use of evidence-based Tier 1 literacy practices that benefit students with learning disabilities. The study was conducted within the context of an adolescent literacy model demonstration project funded by the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs (i.e., Promoting Adolescents' Comprehension of Text [PACT] Plus). Interviews were conducted with two administrators and seven teachers who sustained implementation of the PACT practices beyond 1 year of researcher support. Analyses revealed practice and school-level factors that influenced teachers' sustained use of the practices. We used findings from this study to propose a model of sustainability of Tier 1 evidence-based literacy practices used to improve outcomes for students with learning disabilities. Limitations and implications for future research are provided.

We examined to what extent subgroups of students identified with learning disabilities (LDs; N = 630) in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998 to 1999 (ECLS-K): 1998 national longitudinal study displayed heterogeneity in longitudinal profiles of reading and mathematics achievement from first to eighth grades. Multivariate growth mixture modeling yielded four classes of combined reading and mathematics trajectories for students with LD. The largest class of students with LD (Class 2, 54.3%) showed mean T-scores for both achievement domains that averaged about 1 SD below the mean, with modest decline over time. Almost a quarter of the sample (Class 1, 22.3%) displayed mean T-scores in both achievement areas near the peer-normed average; these students were mostly White, from higher socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds, and had experienced earlier identification as having an LD as well as shorter duration of LD service. Classifying heterogeneity in longitudinal trajectories of both achievement areas shows promise to better understand the educational needs of students identified with an LD.

The purpose of the study was to validate a writing motivation questionnaire that consists of four scales for first-year college writers-students with low writing skills in basic writing classes and students in typical first-year composition (FYC)-to investigate differences between these two groups and to examine the relationship of motivational constructs with writing quality. Participants were 371 college students (142 in basic writing classes and 229 in FYC). Students completed a 49-item motivation questionnaire with scales for goal-orientation, self-efficacy, beliefs, and affect about writing and wrote an argumentative essay. Confirmatory factor analysis provided evidence for the structural construct validity of all scales for both groups. Statistically significant differences between basic writers and FYC students were found on self-efficacy for grammar and strategies and on beliefs about the importance of substance and mechanics. Structural equation modeling found statistically significant positive relationships of essay quality with all three self-efficacy scales and belief about the importance of substance to good writing, as well as negative relationships with avoidance goal orientation and belief in the importance of mechanics. Limitations and implications for motivation and instruction of basic writing students and of adults with learning disabilities are discussed.