Comprehending expository text: Promising strategies for struggling readers and students with reading disabilities?

2004 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leigh A. Hall
Keyword(s):  
Struggling Readers ◽  
Reading Disabilities ◽  
Expository Text

Systematic Instruction in Phoneme-Grapheme Correspondence for Students With Reading Disabilities

2016 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 262-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gentry A. Earle ◽  
Kristin L. Sayeski
Keyword(s):  
Struggling Readers ◽  
Reading Disabilities ◽  
Special Educators ◽  
Explicit Instruction ◽  
Strong Predictor ◽  
Reading Failure ◽  
Systematic Instruction ◽  
Alphabetic Principle ◽  
Letter Sound ◽  
Common Misconceptions

Letter-sound knowledge is a strong predictor of a student’s ability to decode words. Approximately 50% of English words can be decoded by following a sound-symbol correspondence rule alone and an additional 36% are spelled with only one error. Many students with reading disabilities or who struggle to learn to read have difficulty with phonology, an understanding of how sounds are organized within language. This can result in difficulty grasping the alphabetic principle, the knowledge of the relation between speech sounds and the letters/letter patterns that represent them. Research has demonstrated the benefits of intensive, explicit instruction for developing struggling readers’ capacity to identify phonemes and apply knowledge of phoneme-grapheme correspondence for decoding. In this article, common misconceptions and basic tenets of effective letter-sound instruction are provided to help special educators and reading interventionists plan for effective phoneme-grapheme correspondence instruction for students with reading disabilities or who are at risk for reading failure.

scholarly journals Practitioner Reading Survey

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noor Z. Al Dahaan ◽  
Laura Mesite ◽  
Melissa J. Feller ◽  
Joanna Christodoulou
Keyword(s):  
Struggling Readers ◽  
Reading Disabilities ◽  
Educational Experiences ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
School Age ◽  
Diagnostic Labels ◽  
Practitioner Training ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Current Practices

Accurate and timely identification of reading disabilities (RDs) is essential for providing appropriate and effective remediation for struggling readers. However, practices for identifying RDs lack sufficient documentation within and across educational and clinical settings. The wide range of possible practices intended to identify struggling readers can render the field vulnerable to inconsistencies in how the needs of struggling readers are recognized and supported. To better understand the range of current practices used to identify RDs in school-age children, we created and disseminated a survey nationally, and analyzed data from 965 practitioners. The findings indicate lengthy timelines to identify RDs; substantial variability in the composition of assessment teams, identification criteria, and diagnostic labels; and notable opportunities for enhancing practitioner training experiences. This study aims to promote cross-contextual dialogue about the identification of RDs and their implications for students’ educational experiences.

Identifying and discriminating expository text structures: An experiment with 4th and 5th grade struggling readers

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 2115-2145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hebert ◽  
Janet J. Bohaty ◽  
J. Ron Nelson ◽  
Matthew C. Lambert
Keyword(s):  
Struggling Readers ◽  
Expository Text ◽  
Text Structures ◽  
5Th Grade

scholarly journals Extending the Simple View of Reading to Account for Variation Within Readers and Across Texts: The Complete View of Reading (CVRi)

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 274-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Francis ◽  
Paulina A. Kulesz ◽  
Julia S. Benoit
Keyword(s):  
Struggling Readers ◽  
Reading Fluency ◽  
Oral Reading ◽  
Expository Text ◽  
Longitudinal Design ◽  
Phenotypic Characterization ◽  
Reading Research ◽  
Text Type ◽  
Simple View Of Reading ◽  
Simple View

This study leverages advances in multivariate cross-classified random effects models to extend the Simple View of Reading to account for variation within readers and across texts, allowing for both the personalization of the reading function and the integration of the component skills and text and discourse frameworks for reading research. We illustrate the Complete View of Reading (CVR i) using data from an intensive longitudinal design study with a large sample of typical ( N = 648) and struggling readers ( N = 865) in middle school and using oral reading fluency as a proxy for comprehension. To illustrate the utility of the CVR i, we present a model with cross-classified random intercepts for students and passages and random slopes for growth, Lexile difficulty, and expository text type at the student level. We highlight differences between typical and struggling readers and differences across students in different grades. The model illustrates that readers develop differently and approach the reading task differently, showing differential impact of text features on their fluency. To be complete, a model of reading must be able to reflect this heterogeneity at the person and passage level, and the CVR i is a step in that direction. Implications for reading interventions and 21st century reading research in the era of “Big Data” and interest in phenotypic characterization are discussed.

scholarly journals Identifying Reading Disabilities: A Survey of Practitioners

2021 ◽  
pp. 073194872199870
Author(s):  
Noor Z. Al Dahhan ◽  
Laura Mesite ◽  
Melissa J. Feller ◽  
Joanna A. Christodoulou
Keyword(s):  
Struggling Readers ◽  
Reading Disabilities ◽  
Educational Experiences ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
School Age ◽  
Diagnostic Labels ◽  
Practitioner Training ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Current Practices

Accurate and timely identification of reading disabilities (RDs) is essential for providing appropriate and effective remediation for struggling readers. However, practices for identifying RDs lack sufficient documentation within and across educational and clinical settings. The wide range of possible practices intended to identify struggling readers can render the field vulnerable to inconsistencies in how the needs of struggling readers are recognized and supported. To better understand the range of current practices used to identify RDs in school-age children, we created and disseminated a survey nationally, and analyzed data from 965 practitioners. The findings indicate lengthy timelines to identify RDs; substantial variability in the composition of assessment teams, identification criteria, and diagnostic labels; and notable opportunities for enhancing practitioner training experiences. This study aims to promote cross-contextual dialogue about the identification of RDs and their implications for students’ educational experiences.

Read, Understand, Learn, & Excel: Development and Testing of an Automated Reading Strategy Detection Algorithm for Postsecondary Students

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 1257-1267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priya Kucheria ◽  
McKay Moore Sohlberg ◽  
Jason Prideaux ◽  
Stephen Fickas
Keyword(s):  
Academic Success ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Expository Text ◽  
Reading Strategy ◽  
Detection Algorithm ◽  
Expository Texts ◽  
Human Observer ◽  
Behavioral Strategies ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Wide Range

PurposeAn important predictor of postsecondary academic success is an individual's reading comprehension skills. Postsecondary readers apply a wide range of behavioral strategies to process text for learning purposes. Currently, no tools exist to detect a reader's use of strategies. The primary aim of this study was to develop Read, Understand, Learn, & Excel, an automated tool designed to detect reading strategy use and explore its accuracy in detecting strategies when students read digital, expository text.MethodAn iterative design was used to develop the computer algorithm for detecting 9 reading strategies. Twelve undergraduate students read 2 expository texts that were equated for length and complexity. A human observer documented the strategies employed by each reader, whereas the computer used digital sequences to detect the same strategies. Data were then coded and analyzed to determine agreement between the 2 sources of strategy detection (i.e., the computer and the observer).ResultsAgreement between the computer- and human-coded strategies was 75% or higher for 6 out of the 9 strategies. Only 3 out of the 9 strategies–previewing content, evaluating amount of remaining text, and periodic review and/or iterative summarizing–had less than 60% agreement.ConclusionRead, Understand, Learn, & Excel provides proof of concept that a reader's approach to engaging with academic text can be objectively and automatically captured. Clinical implications and suggestions to improve the sensitivity of the code are discussed.Supplemental Materialhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.8204786

Text Comprehension: Graphic Organizers to the Rescue

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 82-89
Author(s):  
Janet L. Proly ◽  
Jessica Rivers ◽  
Jamie Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Text Comprehension ◽  
Graphic Organizers ◽  
Expository Text ◽  
Supporting Evidence

Abstract Graphic organizers are a research based strategy used for facilitating the reading comprehension of expository text. This strategy will be defined and the evolution and supporting evidence for the use of graphic organizers will be discussed. Various types of graphic organizers and resources for SLPs and other educators will also be discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document