# data[].attributes.body
The link has been reset to expand access. If you still have issues, please email Ivy (ivy.coburn@sreb.org).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SREB Dyslexia Work Group (2023 Products)

# data[].attributes.body
One Note Notebook Overview Video (10 min.)

# data[].attributes.headline
1st Working Draft of Parent Dyslexia Handbook

# data[].attributes.subject
1st Working Draft of Parent Dyslexia Handbook

# data[].attributes.body
First draft. This handbook is based on the work of Decoding Dyslexia Ontario, who published this book in December 2022. They have granted us permission to use it as a skeleton for our own work.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
DYSLEXIA Task Force_1st Working Draft_1_2023

# data[].attributes.headline
NJ Dyslexia Handbook (Parent & Educator)

# data[].attributes.subject
NJ Dyslexia Handbook (Parent & Educator)

# data[].attributes.headline
March 3, 2023 Meeting Zoom Recording Link

# data[].attributes.subject
March 3, 2023 Meeting Zoom Recording Link

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IDA Dyslexia Handbook: What Every Family Should Know - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In addition to offering valuable information about dyslexia and its characteristics, this handbook provides information on assessments, effective teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dyslexia Working Group Intervention_ Outline

# data[].attributes.body
IDEA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GaDOE Dyslexia Task Force IDEA Committee Notes (1)

# data[].attributes.headline
EL Working Group Draft Outline and Questions for Feedback

# data[].attributes.subject
EL Working Group Draft Outline and Questions for Feedback

# data[].attributes.body
We look forward to hearing from our colleagues on Friday!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Draft Proposed Outline of Topics in Updated Dyslexia Informational Handbook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
MTSS Work Group Update and Questions 01.27.2023

# data[].attributes.body
Directions for adding posts and comments to our padlet.

# data[].attributes.body
Join Zoom Meeting
https://sreb-org.zoom.us/j/86856277805?from=addon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dyslexia Task Force Meeting_March 3 2023-ic

# data[].attributes.body
To upload resources to the padlet, please click on the + under the section header that you are supporting. From there you will see a window that provides an opportunity for you to name your resource, upload a link or file from your computer and share guiding comments for others. This column will be used to support communication across the Task Force. Please add questions and comments for other members by posting below.

# data[].attributes.headline
Foundational Research: The Simple View of Reading Model

# data[].attributes.subject
Foundational Research: The Simple View of Reading Model

# data[].attributes.body
This "simple" view of reading model provides the basic framework for designing interventions to improve reading comprehension. Students need word recognition skills and language comprehension skills to be proficient comprehenders of text.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Aouad, J. and Savage, R. (2009). The component structure of preliteracy skills: Further evidence for the simple view of reading. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 24 (2), 183-200.

Catts, H., Adlof, S., and Weismer, S. (2006). Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 278-293.

Gough, P., Hoover, W., and Patterson, C. (1996). Some observations on a simple view of reading. In C. Cornoldi and J. Oakhill (eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention (pp. 1-13). Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

*Gough, P. and Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6-10.

Hoover, W. and Gough, P. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127-160.

*Kamhi, A. (2007). Knowledge deficits: the true crisis in education. ASHA Leader, 12 (7), 28-29.

*These articles are short and easy to read.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Simple View of Reading is a formula demonstrating the widely accepted view that reading has two basic components: word recognition (decoding) and language comprehension. Research studies show that a student's reading comprehension score can be predicted if decoding skills and language comprehension abilities are known.

# data[].attributes.headline
Foundational Research: The Reading Rope Model

# data[].attributes.subject
Foundational Research: The Reading Rope Model

# data[].attributes.body
The Reading Rope model expands on The Simple View of Reading model and identifies specific skill areas that build word recognition skills and language comprehension skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share This:

Hollis Scarborough-creator of the famous Reading Rope and senior scientist at Haskins Laboratories-is a leading researcher of early language development and its connection to later literacy.

Dr. Scarborough's association with the International Dyslexia Association (IDA) goes back to 1994 when she served as associate editor of the Annals of Dyslexia until 2002. In 2009, she received IDA's highest honor, the Samuel Torrey Orton Award. Dr. Scarborough continues her IDA affiliation as a member of both IDA's Council of Advisors and IDA's Scientific Advisory Board. Her contributions on a national level (e.g., the Research Council, Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, and the Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children) have positively influenced the reading instruction in the United States.

The genesis of the Reading Rope dates back to Scarborough's lectures for parents on the complexities involved in learning to read. Originally, she spoke of skilled reading as resembling the "strands" of a rope, using pipe cleaners to illustrate the interconnectedness and interdependence of all the components.

The Reading Rope consists of lower and upper strands. The word-recognition strands (phonological awareness, decoding, and sight recognition of familiar words) work together as the reader becomes accurate, fluent, and increasingly automatic with repetition and practice. Concurrently, the language-comprehension strands (background knowledge, vocabulary, language structures, verbal reasoning, and literacy knowledge) reinforce one another and then weave together with the word-recognition strands to produce a skilled reader. This does not happen overnight; it requires instruction and practice over time.

For many children, learning to read is a challenging undertaking. The Reading Rope, created by Dr. Hollis Scarborough, captures the essence of this task.
Copyright © 2018 International Dyslexia Association (IDA). Opinions expressed in The Examiner and/or via links do not necessarily reflect those of IDA. We encourage sharing of Examiner articles. If portions are cited, please make appropriate reference. Articles may not be printed for the purpose of resale. Permissionto republish this artilce is available from info@dyslexiaida.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scarborough's Reading Rope: A Groundbreaking Infographic - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hollis Scarborough-creator of the famous Reading Rope and senior scientist at Haskins Laboratories-is a leading researcher of early language development and

# data[].attributes.headline
Foundational Research: The National Reading Panel Report Summary

# data[].attributes.subject
Foundational Research: The National Reading Panel Report Summary

# data[].attributes.body
In 1997, congress established a National Reading Panel (NRP) that evaluated existing research and evidence to find the best ways to teach children to read. The panel reviewed over 100,000 studies, determined the most effective evidence-based methods for teaching reading, described which methods are ready for classroom use, and made suggestions for additional research. The big ideas that emerged are important for three reasons: they are predictive of future reading achievement, the idea is teachable, and when taught, outcomes improve for students.

The Big Ideas: Teach students...
1. Phonemic Awareness
2. Phonics
3. Fluency
4. Vocabulary
5. Comprehension

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teaching Children to Read

Findings and Determinations of the National Reading Panel by Topic Areas

Alphabetics
Phonemic Awareness Instruction

Phonemes are the smallest units composing spoken language. For example, the words "go" and "she" each consist of two sounds or phonemes. Phonemes are different from letters that represent phonemes in the spellings of words. Instruction in phonemic awareness (PA) involves teaching children to focus on and manipulate phonemes in spoken syllables and words. PA instruction is frequently confused with phonics instruction, which entails teaching students how to use letter-sound relations to read or spell words. PA instruction qualifies as phonics instruction when it involves teaching children to blend or segment the sounds in words using letters. However, children may be taught to manipulate sounds in speech without any letters as well; this does not qualify as phonics instruction. PA is also frequently confused with auditory discrimination, which refers to the ability to recognize whether two spoken words are the same or different. These distinctions are explained in detail in the section devoted to phonemic awareness instruction in the Report of the National Reading Panel: Reports of the Subgroups.

There are several reasons why the NRP selected PA instruction for review and analysis. First, correlational studies have identified PA and letter knowledge as the two best school-entry predictors of how well children will learn to read during the first 2 years of instruction. Such evidence suggests the potential importance of PA training in the development of reading skills. Second, many experimental studies have been carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of PA training in facilitating reading acquisition. Third, there is currently much interest in PA training programs among teachers, principals, parents, and publishers because of claims about their value in improving children's ability to learn to read.

The initial literature search for studies relevant to PA instruction and training identified 1,962 citations. Following initial review, the Panel identified and further reviewed 78 studies that met the general NRP research methodology criteria. However, on detailed examination, only 52 studies satisfied the more specific NRP research methodology criteria. From these 52 studies, 96 comparisons of treatment and control groups were derived. Data from these comparisons were then entered into a meta-analysis to determine treatment effect sizes.

Findings and Determinations

The results of the meta-analysis were impressive. Overall, the findings showed that teaching children to manipulate phonemes in words was highly effective under a variety of teaching conditions with a variety of learners across a range of grade and age levels and that teaching phonemic awareness to children significantly improves their reading more than instruction that lacks any attention to PA.

Specifically, the results of the experimental studies led the Panel to conclude that PA training was the cause of improvement in students' phonemic awareness, reading, and spelling following training. The findings were replicated repeatedly across multiple experiments and thus provide converging evidence for causal claims. While PA training exerted strong and significant effects on reading and spelling development, it did not have an impact on children's performance on math tests. This indicates that halo/Hawthorne (novelty) effects did not explain the findings and that indeed the training effects were directly connected with and limited to the targeted domain under study. Importantly, the effects of PA instruction on reading lasted well beyond the end of training. Children of varying abilities improved their PA and their reading skills as a function of PA training.

PA instruction also helped normally achieving children learn to spell, and the effects lasted well beyond the end of training. However, the instruction was not effective for improving spelling in disabled readers. This is consistent with other research showing that disabled readers have difficulty learning how to spell.

Programs in all of the studies provided explicit instruction in phonemic awareness. Specifically, the characteristics of PA training found to be most effective in enhancing PA, reading, and spelling skills included explicitly and systematically teaching children to manipulate phonemes with letters, focusing the instruction on one or two types of phoneme manipulations rather than multiple types, and teaching children in small groups.

PA instruction is ready for implementation in the classroom, but teachers should keep in mind several cautions. First, PA training does not constitute a complete reading program. Rather, it provides children with essential foundational knowledge in the alphabetic system. It is one necessary instructional component within a complete and integrated reading program. Several additional competencies must be acquired as well to ensure that children will learn to read and write. Second, there are many ways to teach PA effectively. In implementing PA instruction, teachers need to evaluate the methods they use against measured success in their own students. Third, the motivation of both students and their teachers is a critical ingredient of success. Research has not specifically focused on this.

Phonics Instructional Approaches

Analogy Phonics- Teaching students unfamiliar words by analogy to known words (e.g., recognizing that the rime segment of an unfamiliar word is identical to that of a familiar word, and then blending the known rime with the new word onset, such as reading brick by recognizing that -ick is contained in the known word kick, or reading stump by analogy to jump).

Analytic Phonics- Teaching students to analyze lettersound relations in previously learned words to avoid pronouncing sounds in isolation.

Embedded Phonics- Teaching students phonics skills by embedding phonics instruction in text reading, a more implicit approach that relies to some extent on incidental learning.

Phonics through Spelling- Teaching students to segment words into phonemes and to select letters for those phonemes (i.e., teaching students to spell words phonemically).

Synthetic Phonics- Teaching students explicitly to convert letters into sounds (phonemes) and then blend the sounds to form recognizable words.

Phonics Instruction

Phonics instruction is a way of teaching reading that stresses the acquisition of letter-sound correspondences and their use in reading and spelling. The primary focus of phonics instruction is to help beginning readers understand how letters are linked to sounds (phonemes) to form letter-sound correspondences and spelling patterns and to help them learn how to apply this knowledge in their reading. Phonics instruction may be provided systematically or incidentally. The hallmark of a systematic phonics approach or program is that a sequential set of phonics elements is delineated and these elements are taught along a dimension of explicitness depending on the type of phonics method employed. Conversely, with incidental phonics instruction, the teacher does not follow a planned sequence of phonics elements to guide instruction but highlights particular elements opportunistically when they appear in text.

Types of Phonics Instructional Methods and Approaches

The sidebar depicts several different types of phonics instructional approaches that vary according to the unit of analysis or how letter-sound combinations are represented to the student. For example, in synthetic phonics approaches, students are taught to link an individual letter or letter combination with its appropriate sound and then blend the sounds to form words. In analytic phonics, students are first taught whole word units followed by systematic instruction linking the specific letters in the word with their respective sounds. Phonics instruction can also vary with respect to the explicitness by which the phonic elements are taught and practiced in the reading of text. For example, many synthetic phonics approaches use direct instruction in teaching phonics components and provide opportunities for applying these skills in decodable text formats characterized by a controlled vocabulary. On the other hand, embedded phonics approaches are typically less explicit and use decodable text for practice less frequently, although the phonics concepts to be learned can still be presented systematically. These distinctions are addressed in detail in the Phonics subgroup report.

Questions Guiding the NRP Analysis of Phonics Instruction

The NRP examined the research literature concerning phonics instruction to answer the following questions: Does phonics instruction enhance children's success in learning to read? Is phonics instruction more effective at some grade levels than others? Is it beneficial for children who are having difficulties learning to read? Does phonics instruction improve all aspects of reading or just decoding and word-level reading skills? Are some types of phonics instruction more effective than others and for which children? Does phonics instruction have an impact on children's spelling?

To address these questions the NRP performed a literature search to identify studies published since 1970 that compared phonics instruction to other forms of instruction for their impact on reading ability. The initial electronic and manual searches identified 1,373 studies that appeared relevant to phonics instruction. Evaluation of these studies to determine adherence to the general and specific NRP research methodology criteria identified 38 studies from which 66 treatment-control group comparisons were derived. Data from these studies were used in a meta-analysis, including the calculation of effect sizes.

The meta-analysis indicated that systematic phonics instruction enhances children's success in learning to read and that systematic phonics instruction is significantly more effective than instruction that teaches little or no phonics.

Findings and Determinations

The meta-analysis revealed that systematic phonics instruction produces significant benefits for students in kindergarten through 6th grade and for children having difficulty learning to read. The ability to read and spell words was enhanced in kindergartners who received systematic beginning phonics instruction. First graders who were taught phonics systematically were better able to decode and spell, and they showed significant improvement in their ability to comprehend text. Older children receiving phonics instruction were better able to decode and spell words and to read text orally, but their comprehension of text was not significantly improved.

Systematic synthetic phonics instruction (see sidebar for definition) had a positive and significant effect on disabled readers' reading skills. These children improved substantially in their ability to read words and showed significant, albeit small, gains in their ability to process text as a result of systematic synthetic phonics instruction. This type of phonics instruction benefits both students with learning disabilities and low-achieving students who are not disabled. Moreover, systematic synthetic phonics instruction was significantly more effective in improving low socioeconomic status (SES) children's alphabetic knowledge and word reading skills than instructional approaches that were less focused on these initial reading skills.

Across all grade levels, systematic phonics instruction improved the ability of good readers to spell. The impact was strongest for kindergartners and decreased in later grades. For poor readers, the impact of phonics instruction on spelling was small, perhaps reflecting the consistent finding that disabled readers have trouble learning to spell.

Although conventional wisdom has suggested that kindergarten students might not be ready for phonics instruction, this assumption was not supported by the data. The effects of systematic early phonics instruction were significant and substantial in kindergarten and the 1st grade, indicating that systematic phonics programs should be implemented at those age and grade levels.

The NRP analysis indicated that systematic phonics instruction is ready for implementation in the classroom. Findings of the Panel regarding the effectiveness of explicit, systematic phonics instruction were derived from studies conducted in many classrooms with typical classroom teachers and typical American or English-speaking students from a variety of backgrounds and socioeconomic levels. Thus, the results of the analysis are indicative of what can be accomplished when explicit, systematic phonics programs are implemented in today's classrooms. Systematic phonics instruction has been used widely over a long period of time with positive results, and a variety of systematic phonics programs have proven effective with children of different ages, abilities, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

These facts and findings provide converging evidence that explicit, systematic phonics instruction is a valuable and essential part of a successful classroom reading program. However, there is a need to be cautious in giving a blanket endorsement of all kinds of phonics instruction.

It is important to recognize that the goals of phonics instruction are to provide children with key knowledge and skills and to ensure that they know how to apply that knowledge in their reading and writing. In other words, phonics teaching is a means to an end. To be able to make use of letter-sound information, children need phonemic awareness. That is, they need to be able to blend sounds together to decode words, and they need to break spoken words into their constituent sounds to write words. Programs that focus too much on the teaching of letter-sound relations and not enough on putting them to use are unlikely to be very effective. In implementing systematic phonics instruction, educators must keep the end in mind and ensure that children understand the purpose of learning letter sounds and that they are able to apply these skills accurately and fluently in their daily reading and writing activities.

Of additional concern is the often-heard call for "intensive, systematic" phonics instruction. Usually the term "intensive" is not defined. How much is required to be considered intensive? In addition, it is not clear how many months or years a phonics program should continue. If phonics has been systematically taught in kindergarten and 1st grade, should it continue to be emphasized in 2nd grade and beyond? How long should single instruction sessions last? How much ground should be covered in a program? Specifically, how many letter-sound relations should be taught, and how many different ways of using these relations to read and write words should be practiced for the benefits of phonics to be maximized? These questions remain for future research.

Another important area is the role of the teacher. Some phonics programs showing large effect sizes require teachers to follow a set of specific instructions provided by the publisher; while this may standardize the instructional sequence, it also may reduce teacher interest and motivation. Thus, one concern is how to maintain consistency of instruction while still encouraging the unique contributions of teachers. Other programs require a sophisticated knowledge of spelling, structural linguistics, or word etymology. In view of the evidence showing the effectiveness of systematic phonics instruction, it is important to ensure that the issue of how best to prepare teachers to carry out this teaching effectively and creatively is given high priority.

Knowing that all phonics programs are not the same brings with it the implication that teachers must themselves be educated about how to evaluate different programs to determine which ones are based on strong evidence and how they can most effectively use these programs in their own classrooms. It is therefore important that teachers be provided with evidence-based preservice training and ongoing inservice training to select (or develop) and implement the most appropriate phonics instruction effectively.

A common question with any instructional program is whether "one size fits all." Teachers may be able to use a particular program in the classroom but may find that it suits some students better than others. At all grade levels, but particularly in kindergarten and the early grades, children are known to vary greatly in the skills they bring to school. Some children will already know letter-sound correspondences, and some will even be able to decode words, while others will have little or no letter knowledge. Teachers should be able to assess the needs of the individual students and tailor instruction to meet specific needs. However, it is more common for phonics programs to present a fixed sequence of lessons scheduled from the beginning to the end of the school year. In light of this, teachers need to be flexible in their phonics instruction in order to adapt it to individual student needs.

Children who have already developed phonics skills and can apply them appropriately in the reading process do not require the same level and intensity of phonics instruction provided to children at the initial phases of reading acquisition. Thus, it will also be critical to determine objectively the ways in which systematic phonics instruction can be optimally incorporated and integrated in complete and balanced programs of reading instruction. Part of this effort should be directed at preservice and inservice education to provide teachers with decisionmaking frameworks to guide their selection, integration, and implementation of phonics instruction within a complete reading program.

Teachers must understand that systematic phonics instruction is only one component-albeit a necessary component-of a total reading program; systematic phonics instruction should be integrated with other reading instruction in phonemic awareness, fluency, and comprehension strategies to create a complete reading program. While most teachers and educational decisionmakers recognize this, there may be a tendency in some classrooms, particularly in 1st grade, to allow phonics to become the dominant component, not only in the time devoted to it, but also in the significance attached. It is important not to judge children's reading competence solely on the basis of their phonics skills and not to devalue their interest in books because they cannot decode with complete accuracy. It is also critical for teachers to understand that systematic phonics instruction can be provided in an entertaining, vibrant, and creative manner.

Systematic phonics instruction is designed to increase accuracy in decoding and word recognition skills, which in turn facilitate comprehension. However, it is again important to note that fluent and automatic application of phonics skills to text is another critical skill that must be taught and learned to maximize oral reading and reading comprehension. This issue again underscores the need for teachers to understand that while phonics skills are necessary in order to learn to read, they are not sufficient in their own right. Phonics skills must be integrated with the development of phonemic awareness, fluency, and text reading comprehension skills.

Fluency

Fluent readers are able to read orally with speed, accuracy, and proper expression. Fluency is one of several critical factors necessary for reading comprehension. Despite its importance as a component of skilled reading, fluency is often neglected in the classroom. This is unfortunate. If text is read in a laborious and inefficient manner, it will be difficult for the child to remember what has been read and to relate the ideas expressed in the text to his or her background knowledge. Recent research on the efficacy of certain approaches to teaching fluency has led to increased recognition of its importance in the classroom and to changes in instructional practices.

Reading practice is generally recognized as an important contributor to fluency. Two instructional approaches, each of which has several variations, have typically been used to teach reading fluency. One, guided repeated oral reading, encourages students to read passages orally with systematic and explicit guidance and feedback from the teacher. The other, independent silent reading, encourages students to read silently on their own, inside and outside the classroom, with minimal guidance or feedback.

Guided Oral Reading

The NRP conducted an initial series of electronic literature searches and identified 364 studies potentially relevant to the effects of guided oral reading instructional practices. Of these, 16 studies met the NRP research methodology criteria and were included in a meta-analysis, and 21 additional studies met the criteria but could not be included in the meta-analysis-although they were used in the qualitative interpretation of the efficacy of these instructional methods.

Findings and Determinations

On the basis of a detailed analysis of the available research that met NRP methodological criteria, the Panel concluded that guided repeated oral reading procedures that included guidance from teachers, peers, or parents had a significant and positive impact on word recognition, fluency, and comprehension across a range of grade levels. These studies were conducted in a variety of classrooms in both regular and special education settings with teachers using widely available instructional materials. This suggests the classroom readiness of guided oral reading and repeated reading procedures. These results also apply to all students-good readers as well as those experiencing reading difficulties. Nevertheless, there were important gaps in the research. In particular, the Panel could find no multiyear studies providing information on the relationship between guided oral reading and the emergence of fluency.

Independent Silent Reading

There has been widespread agreement in the literature that encouraging students to engage in wide, independent, silent reading increases reading achievement. Literally hundreds of correlational studies find that the best readers read the most and that poor readers read the least. These correlational studies suggest that the more that children read, the better their fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. However, these findings are correlational in nature, and correlation does not imply causation. No doubt, it could be that the more that children read, the more their reading skills improve, but it is also possible that better readers simply choose to read more.

In order to address this issue of causation, the panel examined the specific impact that encouraging students to read more has on fluency, vocabulary development, and reading comprehension. The studies that were identified that address this issue were characterized by three major features. First, the studies emphasized silent reading procedures with students reading on their own with little or no specific feedback. Second, the studies did not directly assess fluency or the actual increase in the amount of reading due to the instructional procedures. Rather, only changes in vocabulary and/or comprehension were typically measured as outcomes rather than increases in fluency that could be expected from the increased reading practice. Third, very few studies that examined the effect of independent silent reading on reading achievement could meet the NRP research review methodology criteria (n = 14), and these studies varied widely in their methodological quality and the reading outcome variables measured. Thus, a meta-analysis could not be conducted. Rather, the 14 studies were examined individually and in detail to identify converging trends and findings in the data.

Findings and Determinations

With regard to the efficacy of having students engage in independent silent reading with minimal guidance or feedback, the Panel was unable to find a positive relationship between programs and instruction that encourage large amounts of independent reading and improvements in reading achievement, including fluency. In other words, even though encouraging students to read more is intuitively appealing, there is still not sufficient research evidence obtained from studies of high methodological quality to support the idea that such efforts reliably increase how much students read or that such programs result in improved reading skills. Given the extensive use of these techniques, it is important that such research be conducted.

It should be made clear that these findings do not negate the positive influence that independent silent reading may have on reading fluency, nor do the findings negate the possibility that wide independent reading significantly influences vocabulary development and reading comprehension. Rather, there are simply not sufficient data from well-designed studies capable of testing questions of causation to substantiate causal claims. The available data do suggest that independent silent reading is not an effective practice when used as the only type of reading instruction to develop fluency and other reading skills, particularly with students who have not yet developed critical alphabetic and word reading skills. In sum, methodologically rigorous research designed to assess the specific influences that independent silent reading practices have on reading fluency and other reading skills and the motivation to read has not yet been conducted.

Comprehension

Comprehension is critically important to the development of children's reading skills and therefore to the ability to obtain an education. Indeed, reading comprehension has come to be the "essence of reading" (Durkin, 1993), essential not only to academic learning in all subject areas but to lifelong learning as well. In carrying out its analysis of the extant research in reading comprehension, the NRP noted three predominant themes in the research on the development of reading comprehension skills. First, reading comprehension is a complex cognitive process that cannot be understood without a clear description of the role that vocabulary development and vocabulary instruction play in the understanding of what has been read. Second, comprehension is an active process that requires an intentional and thoughtful interaction between the reader and the text. Third, the preparation of teachers to better equip students to develop and apply reading comprehension strategies to enhance understanding is intimately linked to students' achievement in this area. Because these three themes serve as the foundation for understanding how best to help teachers develop students' comprehension abilities, the extant research relevant to vocabulary instruction, to text comprehension instruction, and to the preparation of teachers to teach reading comprehension strategies was examined in detail by the NRP. The major findings and determinations of the Panel for each of these three subareas are provided next.

Vocabulary Instruction

The importance of vocabulary knowledge has long been recognized in the development of reading skills. As early as 1924, researchers noted that growth in reading power means continuous growth in word knowledge (Whipple, 1925). Vocabulary is critically important in oral reading instruction. There are two types of vocabulary-oral and print. A reader who encounters a strange word in print can decode the word to speech. If it is in the reader's oral vocabulary, the reader will be able to understand it. If the word is not in the reader's oral vocabulary, the reader will have to determine the meaning by other means, if possible. Consequently, the larger the reader's vocabulary (either oral or print), the easier it is to make sense of the text.

To determine how vocabulary can best be taught and related to the reading comprehension process, the NRP examined more than 20,000 research citations identified through electronic and manual literature searches. From this set, citations were removed if they did not meet prespecified criteria: if they were not reports of research, if they were not reporting experimental or quasi-experimental studies, if they were not published in English, or if they dealt exclusively with learning disabled or other special populations, including second-language learners. Comprehensive review of the remaining set of studies according to the NRP review criteria identified 50 studies for further evaluation. Further analysis and coding of these studies indicated that a formal meta-analysis could not be conducted because there was a small number of research studies in vocabulary instruction dealing with a relatively large number of variables. There are recent published meta-analyses for some selected variables, and it was decided not to duplicate those efforts. Also, a substantial amount of published research on vocabulary instruction did not meet NRP research methodology criteria. Because the Panel wanted to glean as much information as possible from the studies identified in the searches, the vocabulary instruction database was reviewed for trends across studies, even though formal meta-analyses could not be conducted. Fifty studies dating from 1979 to the present were reviewed in detail. There were 21 different methods represented in these studies.

Findings and Determinations

The studies reviewed suggest that vocabulary instruction does lead to gains in comprehension, but that methods must be appropriate to the age and ability of the reader. The use of computers in vocabulary instruction was found to be more effective than some traditional methods in a few studies. It is clearly emerging as a potentially valuable aid to classroom teachers in the area of vocabulary instruction. Vocabulary also can be learned incidentally in the context of storybook reading or in listening to others. Learning words before reading a text also is helpful. Techniques such as task restructuring and repeated exposure (including having the student encounter words in various contexts) appear to enhance vocabulary development. In addition, substituting easy words for more difficult words can assist low-achieving students.

The findings on vocabulary yielded several specific implications for teaching reading. First, vocabulary should be taught both directly and indirectly. Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items are important. Learning in rich contexts, incidental learning, and use of computer technology all enhance the acquisition of vocabulary. Direct instruction should include task restructuring as necessary and should actively engage the student. Finally, dependence on a single vocabulary instruction method will not result in optimal learning.

While much is known about the importance of vocabulary to success in reading, there is little research on the best methods or combinations of methods of vocabulary instruction and the measurement of vocabulary growth and its relation to instruction methods.

Text Comprehension Instruction

Comprehension is defined as "intentional thinking during which meaning is constructed through interactions between text and reader" (Harris & Hodges, 1995). Thus, readers derive meaning from text when they engage in intentional, problem solving thinking processes. The data suggest that text comprehension is enhanced when readers actively relate the ideas represented in print to their own knowledge and experiences and construct mental representations in memory.

The rationale for the explicit teaching of comprehension skills is that comprehension can be improved by teaching students to use specific cognitive strategies or to reason strategically when they encounter barriers to understanding what they are reading. Readers acquire these strategies informally to some extent, but explicit or formal instruction in the application of comprehension strategies has been shown to be highly effective in enhancing understanding. The teacher generally demonstrates such strategies for students until the students are able to carry them out independently.

The literature search identified 453 studies that addressed issues and topics relevant to text comprehension since 1980. Studies published between 1970 and 1979 were added if they were of particular relevance, resulting in 481 studies that were initially reviewed. Of these, 205 studies met the general NRP methodological criteria and were then classified into instructional categories based on the kind of instruction used. Application of the more specific review criteria precluded formal meta-analyses because of the large variation in methodologies and implementations used. The Panel found few research studies that met all NRP research methodology criteria. Nevertheless, the Panel employed the NRP criteria to the maximum extent possible in its examination of this body of literature. (See the Comprehension section of the Report of the National Reading Panel: Reports of the Subgroups.)

In its review, the Panel identified 16 categories of text comprehension instruction of which 7 appear to have a solid scientific basis for concluding that these types of instruction improve comprehension in non-impaired readers. Some of these types of instruction are helpful when used alone, but many are more effective when used as part of a multiple-strategy method. The types of instruction are:

Comprehension monitoring, where readers learn how to be aware of their understanding of the material;

Cooperative learning, where students learn reading strategies together;

Use of graphic and semantic organizers (including story maps), where readers make graphic representations of the material to assist comprehension;

Question answering, where readers answer questions posed by the teacher and receive immediate feedback;

Question generation, where readers ask themselves questions about various aspects of the story;

Story structure, where students are taught to use the structure of the story as a means of helping them recall story content in order to answer questions about what they have read; and

Summarization, where readers are taught to integrate ideas and generalize from the text information.

Findings and Determinations

In general, the evidence suggests that teaching a combination of reading comprehension techniques is the most effective. When students use them appropriately, they assist in recall, question answering, question generation, and summarization of texts. When used in combination, these techniques can improve results in standardized comprehension tests.

Nevertheless, some questions remain unanswered. More information is needed on ways to teach teachers how to use such proven comprehension strategies. The literature also suggests that teaching comprehension in the context of specific academic areas-for example, social studies-can be effective. If this is true of other subject areas, then it might be efficient to teach comprehension as a skill in content areas.

Questions remain as to which strategies are most effective for which age groups. More research is necessary to determine whether the techniques apply to all types of text genres, including narrative and expository texts, and whether the level of difficulty of the texts has an impact on the effectiveness of the strategies. Finally, it is critically important to know what teacher characteristics influence successful instruction of reading comprehension.

Teacher Preparation and Comprehension Strategies Instruction

Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students at all grade levels is complex. Teachers not only must have a firm grasp of the content presented in text, but also must have substantial knowledge of the strategies themselves, of which strategies are most effective for different students and types of content and of how best to teach and model strategy use.

Research on comprehension strategies has evolved dramatically over the last 2 decades. Initially, investigators focused on teaching one strategy at a time; later studies examined the effectiveness of teaching several strategies in combination. However, implementation of this promising approach has been problematic. Teachers must be skillful in their instruction and be able to respond flexibly and opportunistically to students' needs for instructive feedback as they read.

The initial NRP search for studies relevant to the preparation of teachers for comprehension strategy instruction provided 635 citations. Of these, only four studies met the NRP research methodology criteria. Hence, the number of studies eligible for further analysis precluded meta-analysis of the data derived from these investigations. However, because there were only four studies, the NRP was able to review them in detail. The studies investigate two major approaches: Direct Explanation and Transactional Strategy Instruction.

The Direct Explanation approach focuses on the teacher's ability to explain explicitly the reasoning and mental processes involved in successful reading comprehension. Rather than teach specific strategies, teachers help students (1) to view reading as a problem solving task that necessitates the use of strategic thinking, and (2) to learn to think strategically about solving comprehension problems. For example, teachers are taught that they could teach students the skill of finding the main idea by casting it as a problemsolving task and reasoning about it strategically.

Transactional Strategy Instruction also emphasizes the teacher's ability to provide explicit explanations of thinking processes. Further, it emphasizes the ability of teachers to facilitate student discussions in which students collaborate to form joint interpretations of text and acquire a deeper understanding of the mental and cognitive processes involved in comprehension.

Findings and Determinations

The four studies (two studies for each approach) demonstrated that teachers could be instructed in these methods. Teachers required instruction in explaining what they are teaching, modeling their thinking processes, encouraging student inquiry, and keeping students engaged. Data from all four studies indicated clearly that in order for teachers to use strategies effectively, extensive formal instruction in reading comprehension is necessary, preferably beginning as early as preservice.

More research is needed to address the following questions. Which components of teacher preparation are most effective? Can reading comprehension strategies be successfully incorporated into content area instruction? How can the effectiveness of strategies be measured in an optimal manner? Can strategies be taught as early as grades 1 and 2, when children also are trying to master phonics, word recognition, and fluency? How can teachers be taught to provide the most optimal instruction?

Teacher Education and Reading Instruction

Recent developments such as class size reduction and the writing of standards suggest the growing importance of teacher education on learning outcomes. In addition, the National Reading Panel decided to focus on this area because during its regional meetings speakers expressed intense interest in the quality and importance of teacher education. In teacher education programs, preservice teachers generally acquire knowledge through supervised teaching and through coursework in theory and methods. Continuing education for practicing teachers comes from professional development, also called inservice education. The NRP analysis on this topic was guided by three primary questions: How are teachers taught to teach reading? What does research show about the effectiveness of this instruction? How can research be applied to improve teacher development? The initial literature search by the Panel identified more than 300 articles. A total of 32 studies met the methodological NRP criteria: 11 preservice and 21 inservice. No meta-analysis was conducted because the range of variables and theoretical positions was too large for the limited number of studies.

Findings and Determinations

As indicated by the NRP's examination of the literature, only a small number of experimental studies have been published about the effectiveness of preservice and inservice teacher education. For conclusions to be drawn about the effectiveness of teacher education, information on both teacher and student outcomes must be reported. Preservice research, however, only measured teacher outcomes, whereas ideally both short- and long-term teacher and student outcomes should be observed. With respect to research on inservice education, only about one-half measured student outcomes as well as teacher outcomes.

Generally the results indicated that inservice professional development produced significantly higher student achievement. There were few studies of the long-term maintenance of the gains. While there were only a small number of studies, almost all of them showed positive effects on teaching. However, there were too few studies on specific variables to allow the Panel to draw specific conclusions about the content of preservice education.

More information is needed in several areas. What is the optimal combination of preservice and inservice education, and what are the effects of preservice experience on inservice performance? What is the appropriate length of inservice and preservice education? What are the best ways to assess the effectiveness of teacher education and professional development? How can teachers optimally be supported over the long term to ensure sustained implementation of new methods and to ensure student achievement? The relationship between the development of standards and teacher education is also an important gap in current knowledge.

Computer Technology and Reading Instruction

Until recently, computers were not considered capable of delivering reading instruction effectively. They could not comprehend oral reading and judge its accuracy. They also were unable to accept free-form responses to comprehension questions, so their use had to rely primarily on multiple-choice formats. Today, the situation is much improved. New computers have speech recognition capabilities as well as many multimedia presentation functions. Developments in the Internet, with possibilities of linking schools and instruction, have further increased interest in technology as a teaching device. Computer technology is different from other areas the NRP analyzed. It cannot be studied independently of instructional content and is not an instructional method in itself. Thus, computer technology must be examined for its ability to deliver instruction, for example, in vocabulary or in phonemic awareness.

Because this is a relatively new field, the number of studies published in this area is small. Only 21 studies met the NRP research methodology criteria.

Findings and Determinations

Although it is difficult to draw conclusions from these studies, it is possible to make some general statements. First, all the studies report positive results, suggesting that it is possible to use computer technology for reading instruction. The seven studies that reviewed the addition of speech to computer-presented text indicate that this may be a promising use of technology in reading instruction.

Two other trends show promise. The use of hypertext (highlighted text that links to underlying definitions or supporting or related text, almost like an electronic footnote), while technically not reading instruction, may have an instructional advantage. Second, the use of computers as word processors may be very useful, given that reading instruction is most effective when combined with writing instruction.

Striking in its absence is research on the incorporation of Internet applications to reading instruction.

Research also is needed on the value of speech recognition as a technology and the use of multimedia presentations in reading instruction.

In sum, the Panel is encouraged by the reported successes in the use of computer technology for reading instruction, but relatively few specific instructional applications can be gleaned from the research. Many questions still need to be addressed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teaching Children to Read Phonemes are the smallest units composing spoken language. For example, the words "go" and "she" each consist of two sounds or phonemes. Phonemes are different from letters that represent phonemes in the spellings of words. Instruction in phonemic awareness (PA) involves teaching children to focus on and manipulate phonemes in spoken syllables and words.

# data[].attributes.headline
Word Recognition Scope & Sequence (Moats)

# data[].attributes.subject
Word Recognition Scope & Sequence (Moats)

# data[].attributes.headline
Word Recognition Scope & Sequence (Stollar)

# data[].attributes.subject
Word Recognition Scope & Sequence (Stollar)

# data[].attributes.headline
Pearson 2019 Information on Dyslexia and ELLs

# data[].attributes.subject
Pearson 2019 Information on Dyslexia and ELLs

# data[].attributes.body
Contributed by Meg Baker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
October 2022 - We are pleased to launch our new tool kit designed by parents for parents. Here you'll find information and resources, written in plain language, to help you support your dyslexic child at school and at home.

Changes to Ontario's language curriculum and related student supports are expected to change rapidly in 2022-23. This document will be updated to reflect these changes.

Read or download our free tool kit here:

Watch and share our slideshow

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
October 2022 - We are pleased to launch our new tool kit designed by parents for parents. Here you'll find information and resources, written in plain language, to help you support your dyslexic child at school and at home. Changes to Ontario's language curriculum and related student supports are expected to change rapidly in 2022-23....

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mancilla‐Martinez - Assessment Selection for Multilingual Learners  Reading Development (2)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colorado Read Act Literacy Dialogue Tool 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Update and Inquiry_ MTSS Section of Dyslexia Handbook 03.03.2023

# data[].attributes.headline
DDGA Screen to Intervene: Whitepapers, Research and Interviews on the basis of screening for characteristics of dyslexia and intervention. 

# data[].attributes.subject
DDGA Screen to Intervene: Whitepapers, Research and Interviews on the basis of screening for characteristics of dyslexia and intervention. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Print-to-Speech and Speech-to-Print: Mapping Early Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this overview, learn how early literacy benefits from both print-to-speech and speech-to-print instruction, creating connections in the brain that link new knowledge about the alphabet to what children already know and are continuously learning about words.

# data[].attributes.body
You may be asked to enter the email associated with the link.  Please enter your email that you have been using with the Dyslexia Task Force communication (Jennifer's list).

# data[].attributes.body
This tome was approved last week by the Idaho Department of Education and was primarily written by Louisa Moats.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Idaho Dyslexia Handbook with appendices_Adopted 12-21-22

# data[].attributes.headline
Fairfax County Public Schools: English Learners and Dyslexia

# data[].attributes.subject
Fairfax County Public Schools: English Learners and Dyslexia

# data[].attributes.body
Contributed by Meg Baker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dyslexia is neurobiological in nature.

Dyslexia tends to run in families.

Dyslexia presents in different ways depending on the language written or spoken.

Dyslexia will present in an English learner's home language, not just in English.

EARLY READING DIFFICULTIES ARE EXPECTED, NOT NECESSARILY DYSLEXIA

Students learning to read in a language other than their native language are likely to exhibit poor reading skills for some period of time while learning the second language (Everatt et al., 2010; Youman, 2012).

When English learners are acquiring English they lack both vocabulary knowledge, phonological awareness and phonics skills. This is a normal stage of English language development.

Students developing language in a bilingual setting may often fall behind their monolingual peers for a time.

Students literate in their home language may experience interference from that language as they learn English; this is not dyslexia.

HOME LANGUAGE MATTERS

A writing system is a set of symbols that can represent individual phonemes or sounds (alphabets) or syllables (syllabaries). There are also writing systems, such as Chinese and Japanese, which use symbols to represent both sound and meaning (semanto-phonetic). There are also languages such as American Sign Language that do not have a corresponding written system. In fact, only about one-third of the world's 6,912 languages have writing systems.

The characteristics demonstrating dyslexia may be different depending on the type of language the student speaks. Some languages are written with syllabic representation rather than letters (such as Japanese Kana) and others may be logographic, meaning the symbol looks like the object it represents (such as Chinese).Languages with a phonemic orthography (such as Spanish, Italian, Turkish, Finnish, Czech and Polish) have a close correlation of letters to sounds.

In English there are over 250 possible letter combinations (called graphemes) to represent 44 sounds (called phonemes). (Moats, 2005). For example, the long /a/ sound can be spelled in at least six different ways: a, ai, ei, ay, ey, and a-e. One reason for this variety of graphemes is that English has been influenced by several languages, primarily Anglo-Saxon, French, Latin, and Greek (Moats, 2005). An English Learner may require more instruction in spelling than he or she may have required in his or her home language: spelling challenges may be expected and may not constitute a sign of dyslexia.

QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER

Has instruction in English been appropriate?

What is the student's current English language proficiency level and have they made progress over time?

Determining if an English Learner has dyslexia

Characteristics of dyslexia will appear in both the student's native language and in English; assessments done in both languages will help distinguish English learning difficulties from dyslexia.

Conferences with the family will help to determine the student's history in home language development. Ask when the student learned to speak and if they had any difficulties learning to read and write in the home language.)

Testing in the student's native language for skills such as phonemic awareness will be most beneficial.

In FCPS the Dual Language Assessment and Consultation team provides services to assist school teams seeking solutions for English Learners who are experiencing ongoing or significant academic difficulties. Services are provided through a consultation and when appropriate, through a dual language assessment.

A WORD OF CAUTION

The definition of dyslexia indicates that the difficulties are "often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction."

In the case of English Learners, difficulties are not unexpected, and the difficulties with the phonological component of language are often accompanied by difficulties in oral language comprehension as well. Thus, the characteristics of dyslexia are often not truly recognizable until English oral language comprehension skills have been developed and begin to outpace the skill development in the phonological component of language.

There are 7 integral factors that should also be considered when determining whether or not an English Learner indeed has a disability. These are: learning environment factors, personal and family factors, academic achievement and instructional factors, previous schooling factors, cross cultural factors, physical and psychological factors, and oral language and literacy factors.
Characteristics of second language acquisition can look like dyslexia. We must be careful not to diagnose early in the student's acquisition of English. It is important to ensure that appropriate English language development instruction and scaffolds are in place for the student.
For books, articles and websites about English Learners and Dyslexia, see " Dyslexia Resources."

REFERENCES
Everatt, J., Ovampo, D., Veii, K., Nenopoulou S., Smythe I., al Mannai, H., & Elbeheri G. (2010). Dyslexia in biscriptal readers. In N. Brunswick, S. McDougall, & P. de Mornay Davies (Eds.), Reading and dyslexia in different orthographies (pp. 221-245). Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press.

Moats, L. C. (2005). How spelling supports reading: And why it is more regular and predictable than you think. American Educator, Winter 2005/06, 12-22, 42-43.
Youman, M. (2012). Dyslexia in different languages and English language learners. In N. Mather & B. J. Wendling, Essentials of dyslexia: Assessment and intervention (pp, 223-240). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dyslexia is neurobiological in nature. Dyslexia tends to run in families. Dyslexia presents in different ways depending on the language written or spoken. Dyslexia will present in an English learner's home language, not just in English.

# data[].attributes.headline
WIDA 2017 Identifying ELLs with Specific Learning Disabilities

# data[].attributes.subject
WIDA 2017 Identifying ELLs with Specific Learning Disabilities

# data[].attributes.body
Contributed by Meg Baker

# data[].attributes.headline
Dyslexia and the English Learner Dilemma

# data[].attributes.subject
Dyslexia and the English Learner Dilemma

# data[].attributes.body
Dr. Kelli Sandman-Hurley (2015) Language Magazine,  Contributed by Meg Baker

# data[].attributes.headline
Learning Difficulties in English Language Learners (2014 IDA Perspectives on Language and Literacy)

# data[].attributes.subject
Learning Difficulties in English Language Learners (2014 IDA Perspectives on Language and Literacy)

# data[].attributes.body
Somewhat dated, but still relevant to the conversation today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Perspectives Language Literacy - English Learners - Fall2014

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
***DRAFT DOCUMENT for consideration*** Reading & Language Difficulties Risk Level Checklist with ELL Considerations

# data[].attributes.headline
Reading & Language Difficulties Risk Level Checklist with ELL Considerations

# data[].attributes.subject
Reading & Language Difficulties Risk Level Checklist with ELL Considerations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading & Language Difficulties Risk Level Checklist with ELL Considerations

# data[].attributes.headline
Evidence-Based Practices in the Treatment of Reading Disabilities among English Learners - IDA 2020 Perspectives on Language and Literacy

# data[].attributes.subject
Evidence-Based Practices in the Treatment of Reading Disabilities among English Learners - IDA 2020 Perspectives on Language and Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Evidence-Based Practices in the Treatment of Reading Disabilities Among English Learners by Philip Capin, Colby Hall, and Sharon Vaughn A s a first-year teacher, Patricia Gonzalez was looking for-ward to teaching her class of second-grade students-most of whom were acquiring English proficiency at the same time they were learning to read. Ms. Gonzalez learned to read in both English and Spanish and did so readily with few challeng-es. She was excited about fostering her love of reading in the students in her class. Working in an inner-city school in San Antonio, Texas, with many students growing up in low-income homes, she quickly realized that several of her students experi-enced challenges acquiring reading proficiency, particularly with word reading and spelling. Because these students were also English learners (ELs), she was unclear as to whether their challenges learning to read were related to acquiring proficien-cy in English, to serious reading problems like dyslexia, or perhaps to both. ELs in the U.S., like those in Ms. Gonzalez's class, are vul-nerable to reading problems for several reasons. First, ELs encounter the linguistic and cognitive demands associated with learning two languages, demands which likely fluctuate across development and level of language proficiency (Lesaux & Geva, 2006). In addition, ELs in the U.S. experience dispropor-tionately high levels of poverty and often attend poorly resourced, low-performing schools (Capps et al., 2005). As a result, ELs in the U.S. may have fewer opportunities to access instruction, texts, and literacy experiences that contribute to successful literacy acquisition. Finally, like native English speakers, ELs may demonstrate dyslexia as a result of complex interactions between neurobiological and environmental fac-tors that impact neural systems related to learning and reading (Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, & Barnes, 2019). Collectively, these fac-tors place many EL students at risk for experiencing problems with reading and English language knowledge in school. Until recently, there was little high-quality research to inform teachers, like Ms. Gonzalez, who are responsible for supporting ELs with reading difficulties. To assist teachers who work diligently to help ELs confront these challenges, educa-tional researchers have conducted substantial research over the last 15 years, which has yielded several important findings. First, it is now well recognized that ELs represent a heteroge-nous population of students with a broad variety of strengths and needs, including varying degrees of academic skills, sub-ject matter knowledge, and proficiency in their native language and English, which ought to be considered when designing instruction (Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, & Christian, 2006). Second, intervention research shows treatments for ELs should not be delayed until students possess a certain degree of English proficiency (Richards-Tutor, Baker, Gersten, Baker, & Smith, 2016). Third, although ELs with reading diffi-culties present particular underperformance in vocabulary knowledge and linguistic processes relative to their native speaking peers due to their status as second language learners, many ELs with reading difficulties also demonstrate difficulties in word reading, which require targeted intervention (e.g., Cho, Capin, Roberts, Roberts, & Vaughn, 2019; Vaughn et al., 2019). Finally, there is a growing body of research identifying features of effective treatments for ELs with reading difficulties, which suggests: a) many of the evidence-based practices for teaching foundational reading skills (e.g., explicit phonics instruction) and reading comprehension (e.g., comprehension strategy instruction) considered effective for native English speakers with reading difficulties are also effective for ELs with reading difficulties; and b) instructional practices that target academic language (e.g., explicit vocabulary instruction and structured opportunities for discussion) are particularly effective for this subgroup. By providing both the evidence and practical implications, we aimed to help teachers identify the most efficacious approaches to improving reading and writing outcomes for English learners with reading difficulties. Thus, the purpose of this article is two-fold. First, this article summarizes the findings from four syntheses reporting on the effects of academic language and/or reading interventions on language and reading outcomes for ELs who have or are at risk for learning difficulties (August & Siegel, 2006; Klingner, Artiles, & Barletta, 2006; Richards-Tutor et al., 2016; Rivera, Moughamian, Lesaux, & Francis, 2008). While these syntheses vary somewhat in their interpretation of the extant research, together they provide a compelling set of research studies addressing instructional practices for this understudied popula-tion. We highlight key findings from these studies in Table 1. Second, this article provides recommendations for instruction Continued on page 28 Abbreviations CSR: Collaborative Strategic Reading EL: English learners MTSS: Multi-tiered Systems of Support PALS: Peer-assisted Learning Strategies RTI: Response to Intervention 26 Perspectives on Language and Literacy Spring 2020 International Dyslexia Association

Issue Articles

Philip Capin, Colby Hall, and Sharon Vaughn

Visit Article.

Issue List

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Perspectives on Language Spring 2020 Page26

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Evidence-Based Practices in the Treatment of Reading Disabilities Among English Learners by Philip Capin, Colby Hall, and Sharon Vaughn A s a first-year teacher, Patricia Gonzalez was looking for-ward to teaching her class of second-grade students-most of whom were acquiring English proficiency at the same time they were learning to read.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
​​​​​​The Student Support Team (SST) is a problem-solving process in every Georgia school. Its purpose is to find ways around roadblocks to success for any student referred to it. A number of recent events and decisions both national and state have placed markedly increased importance on the SST pro…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As part of a Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS), all schools will maintain an Educational Support Team (EST). 16 V.S.A. § 2902. There may be a tendency to confound the EST with a tiered system or VTmtss; VTmtss is a framework that defines an entire educational system while EST is one element of that educational system. The EST is a team that follows processes to support students and to enhance the VTmtss Framework.

With the passage of Act 173 in 2018, ESTs have become a prominent feature in implementing the Act. The AOE has created a document to outline preliminary technical guidance around the role of EST in relationship to Act 173. The AOE collects data around the usage and efficacy of EST within the VTmtss Survey, submitted annually from each school in Vermont.

Read Act 173 Technical Guidance: Educational Support Teams in School District Systems.

Team Membership

This Educational Support Team may include:

an administrator

teachers (appropriate PK-12 grade level related to student needs)

special educator

other staff with behavioral and academic expertise

school counselors

a school psychologist and/or social worker

family and student (when possible)

other non-school supports/advocates

Team Process

EST members engage in collaborative problem-solving to determine whether additional supports are needed for a student to make appropriate progress, and to monitor that progress. This may include academics, attendance, behavior, or enrichment activities. The team can offer suggestions for student supports that may not have been considered in previous planning efforts.

An EST has standing members and meets regularly, typically weekly or bi-weekly. EST meetings result in assigned action steps. The EST has an effective method of documenting meetings and decisions.

Use of Data

When data indicate that a student needs support beyond that which can be provided or sustained through universal instruction, a referral to the school's EST should be considered. Referrals include information about all accommodations, interventions, and services that have already been in place along with supporting data. If it is determined that the student will receive targeted supports, the EST monitors the student's progress while receiving the supports and makes determinations regarding entry and exit criteria. The EST may also use available screening data to identify students who would benefit from additional supports.

Besides data about specific students, the EST keeps information about the overall utilization and success of various academic and behavioral practices. This data can be used by the school leadership team to help evaluate current systems, plan professional learning and allocate resources.
Learn More: Educational Support Teams - A Deeper Look
Educational Support Teams: Making Connections with VTmtss
District-level EST Oversight Educational Support Team Plan Forms Educational Support Team (EST): Practice Profile
Watch VTmtss Office Hour on Educational Support Teams (December 2019)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As part of a Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS), all schools will maintain an Educational Support Team (EST). 16 V.S.A. § 2902. There may be a tendency to confound the EST with a tiered system or VTmtss; VTmtss is a framework that defines an entire educational system while EST is one element of that educational system.

# data[].attributes.headline
Literacy skills seem to fuel literacy enjoyment, rather than vice versa

# data[].attributes.subject
Literacy skills seem to fuel literacy enjoyment, rather than vice versa

# data[].attributes.headline
Classification Accuracy of Early Literacy Assessments: Linking Preschool and Kindergarten Performance

# data[].attributes.subject
Classification Accuracy of Early Literacy Assessments: Linking Preschool and Kindergarten Performance

# data[].attributes.headline
Development of Language & Reading Skills (DOLRS) - Parent Questionnaire

# data[].attributes.subject
Development of Language & Reading Skills (DOLRS) - Parent Questionnaire

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Development of Language & Reading Skills (DOLRS) - Parent Questionnaire

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A review of dyslexia in dyslexia across different languages, the characteristics that distinguish these students with dyslexia from ELLs without dyslexia and t...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share This: `

This fact sheet provides information about important considerations when evaluating English learners for dyslexia. Classroom teachers may find it helpful as they observe students for possible referral for further assessment. It also includes guidelines for assessment specialists who may provide screening and assessment support.

Why Focus on English Learners?

Five million English learners attend public schools in the United States. Because these students represent 10% of the school population, it is important to understand the issues surrounding early identification of dyslexia and other reading disabilities among English learners. This fact sheet addresses those issues and offers some recommendations for the identification process.

When discussing English learners and dyslexia, keep in mind that although 400 different native languages are represented within the English learner (EL) population of students, 75% of these students speak Spanish in the home. Therefore, much of what we know about English learners comes from research involving Spanish-speaking English learners.

Importance of Early Identification

Early identification of reading disabilities in all students is very important. When it comes to students whose first language is not English, however, researchers have found that non-native speakers with dyslexia are sometimes less likely to be identified, while at other times, they are over-identified.

In a recent study, English learners with dyslexia and African American learners were less likely to be identified with reading disabilities than other students. This finding was true not only in schools with small numbers of English learners, but also in schools with a higher percentage of EL students. Another study found that EL students might be less likely to be identified with dyslexia early on, but later might be over-identified as having dyslexia. In this case, the study found that the proportion of non-native, English-speaking students who were identified with dyslexia in kindergarten and first grade was lower than expected. Yet by third grade, the proportion of non-native, English-speaking students identified with dyslexia was higher than expected.

Why might this happen? Schools may fail to identify dyslexia by attributing any English reading and writing difficulties to their status as English learners, even if those students also exhibit characteristics of dyslexia. On the other hand, a student with limited opportunities for developing English oral language proficiency and English literacy (Hispanic English learners in particular) might be increasingly likely to be misidentified with dyslexia as they progress in school, when the issue might actually be limited skills due to lack of exposure to English. There is clearly a need to define the important factors to keep in mind when identifying reading disabilities, such as dyslexia, among English learners.

General Considerations for Early Identification of Dyslexia Among English Learners

In 2002 the International Dyslexia Association (IDA) adopted the following definition of dyslexia: " a specific learning disability that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience that can impede growth of vocabulary and background knowledge."

Screening and assessments for dyslexia must include an evaluation of the primary characteristics of dyslexia: phonological awareness, decoding, fluent word recognition, and spelling. It is also important to determine the resulting impact these difficulties can have on measures such as reading comprehension, vocabulary, and background knowledge.

To identify English learners with dyslexia, consider the following variables during screening and assessment:

1. Determine the number of years of high-quality, native language instruction in reading and writing, as well as instruction in English language and literacy, to ensure that the difficulty is not due to a lack of instruction.

2. Examine the variables that may be causing any difficulties with reading and writing in English. A lack of proficiency in spoken English will affect the ability to learn to read and write English. In addition, assess the student's ability to read and write in the native language. If a student has difficulty in their native language, that might point toward dyslexia. However, if a student seems to have literacy skills in their native language but struggles with English, the issue might be related to limited exposure to high-quality instruction in English. Teasing apart these two factors is important for an accurate identification of dyslexia.

3. Review the family history. Because dyslexia is hereditary, a family history of dyslexia-or symptoms that might point to dyslexia or other related conditions-should be documented.

4. Note that when comparing literacy skills across languages, students with dyslexia may appear to be within normal limits for decoding skills when they are reading and writing in transparent languages (those with reliable and stable letter-sound correspondences, such as Spanish) due to the regular and reliable patterns of the language. As a result, when screening or assessing in transparent languages, reading fluency and spelling skills may be better indicators of dyslexia.

5. Consider performance, during the screening and assessment process, in relation to peers with similar native languages and background experiences. This comparison is especially important if the available tests do not include a significant number of English learners in the sample used to determine what is expected for the population (the normative sample). This data is another piece of information that can help with the process of teasing apart any possible effects of dyslexia from the effects of being an English learner.

6. Collect samples of the student's work (for instance, written spelling assessment, written expression, and oral reading with error analysis) and evaluate that work along with the results of progress monitoring and other tests to determine the rate of progress achieved and to document any history of limited progress.

7. Review specific error patterns and ensure that they are not a result of overgeneralization from the student's native language to English. Determine if the errors are typical or unusual when compared to other English learners who are native speakers of the same language.

8. Work with the student's parents, caregivers, and educators to determine if any educational, environmental, or personal factors may be related to learning to read. The more data gathered to develop an understanding of the student, the more accurate the assessment and decision-making process is likely to be.

9. Keep in mind that outcomes may vary depending on a number of factors, including the student's first language and the language of instruction (whether English or another language), the type and quality of language and literacy instruction received thus far, and the consistency of its implementation. These variables need to be considered as the student is evaluated for possible dyslexia.

10. Create a team of experts who understand language and reading development among English learners so they may review the data and make decisions regarding the necessary type of instruction and level of intensity.

What to Look for During Screening

A screening is a brief measurement of a set of current skills. Screening tools provide information as to whether students are at the expected level of performance and may also help identify students who are at risk for later skill development.

Dyslexia screening in the early years, such as at the end of kindergarten, typically includes measures of phoneme awareness, rapid naming of letters, and both letter-sound and sound-letter knowledge. For English learners, assessment of oral language proficiency levels is also necessary. By first and second grade, typical screenings may include measures of phoneme awareness, word recognition, reading fluency, oral language, reading comprehension, and spelling. However, for English learners it will be important to monitor progress in each of these areas more frequently than twice per year.

Another important consideration is the language of instruction. Some English learners receive language instruction in their native language. Screening measures should therefore be conducted in that same language to ensure alignment with the language of instruction. Other English learners may participate in English as a Second Language classrooms. They will be screened in English, but it is important to keep in mind that these students will be developing their proficiency in spoken English at the same time they are developing English literacy skills. If proficiency in spoken English is impeded, it will affect the student's ability to progress with reading and writing.

For these reasons and more, it is important to pay particular attention to English learners' progress in English as well as their native language and to compare their progress to their peers who are also English learners. If a student is not making expected progress in English, compare the development of those same skills in the native language and evaluate the results based upon the language of instruction (which is often English). If skills are below the expected level in both the native language and English, further testing should be conducted to determine if the student is exhibiting a reading disability such as dyslexia. The need for further testing should be determined based upon the factors discussed above, including the type of language instruction the student is receiving and the recommendations of teachers, parents, and others involved in the education of the student.

Essential Aspects of Assessment of an English Learner for Dyslexia

An assessment for dyslexia is a more thorough analysis of student performance and is intended to dig deeper than a screening. An assessment will include measures for each of the components of reading and writing. The assessment should be conducted by an individual who is knowledgeable in testing and measurement and understands first and second language and literacy development.

Specific components to assess include the following:

The student's understanding and use of language in general, aligned to the language of instruction

Phoneme awareness

Rapid naming, which can include letters, numbers, or pictures

Word reading skills, including reading of real words and pseudo-words

Word reading fluency, including accuracy and rate

Sentence reading fluency, including accuracy, prosody, and rate

Paragraph reading fluency, including accuracy, prosody, and rate

Reading comprehension at the sentence and paragraph level

Written language skills to include word-level spelling as well as writing composition (narrative and informational) at the sentence and paragraph levels

Factors to Consider When Evaluating Assessment Results for English Learners

To determine the presence or absence of dyslexia in English learners, it is essential to separate the effects of second language acquisition from effects that would result from dyslexia. Therefore, when evaluating the results of standardized tests, a student's literacy levels and environmental and schooling factors for the native language should be compared to their performance in English or any other second language. A list of recommendations follows below:

1. Identify whether diverse populations are included in the normative sample of any test. As an examiner, you must review the characteristics of the population that were used to determine the expected result to establish whether English learners were included in that population.

2. Observe the language or vocabulary that is used within the test directions. Determine if some of the vocabulary will be difficult for the English learner to understand. Review the test manual for any recommendations for testing English learners.

3. Determine if the test items reflect cultural bias. Will some of the test items be irrelevant to the individual student's world experiences?

4. Remember that at the early stages of second language or literacy acquisition, the reading level of an English learner may not be as strong as their monolingual English-speaking peers. However, as the English learner becomes more proficient in language and literacy, the second language skills can be expected to become comparable to the performance of native English-speaking peers.

5. Use multiple measures and formats for testing.

6. Consider the specific context of learning opportunities in both native and second languages. The key to an accurate diagnosis of dyslexia for an English learner is ensuring that the difficulty exists in both the native and second language.

Next Steps
The number of English learners attending schools in the U.S. is continuing to grow. Early identification of dyslexia in English learners is important and can be achieved by understanding some essential considerations for identification. These considerations include a thorough developmental history, a review of the language in which the student is being taught, and the specific approach to literacy instruction that is being used, along with other environmental factors. The tests used to screen and assess must also be valid and reliable for English learners: check to see that English learners have been included in the normative sample and compare the student's progress to that of other English learners. Failure to consider all of these factors is likely to result in over- or under-identification of a reading disability among English learners.

A comprehensive and collaborative team approach can assist in the early identification of dyslexia. Once identified, English learners can benefit from structured literacy instruction with accommodations for language proficiency and, wherever possible, cross-language instructional techniques that capitalize on the similarities of the native language.

It is certainly possible for English learners with dyslexia to learn and achieve second language literacy. Accurate identification is the first step toward this goal.

References

Catts, H., & Petscher, Y. (2018). Early identification of dyslexia: Current advancements and
future directions. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 44, 33-36.

Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D. Fuchs, L. S., & Bryant, J. D. (2010). Selecting at-risk readers in first
grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and
procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 394.

Francis, D. J., Santi, K. L., Khalaf, S., Bunta, F., Rojas, R. Gusewski, S., & Heibert, L. (2020). Identification of disabilities in Spanish-speaking children in English-speaking contexts. In Grigorenko, E., McCardle, P., & Shtryrov, Y. (Eds.), All about language: Science, theory, and practice (pp. 155-170). Brookes.

International Dyslexia Association (2002). The dyslexia definition project. Retrieved from
https://dyslexiaida.wpengine.com/definition-of-dyslexia/

Klinger, J. K., Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E., Harry, B, Zion, S., Tate, W., Duran, G. Z., & Riley, D,
(2005). Addressing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education through culturally responsive educational systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(38).

McFarland, J., Hussar, B., de Brey, C., Snyder, T., Wang, X., Wilkinson-Flicker, S.,
Gebrekristos, S., Zhang, J., Rathbun, A., Barmer, A., Bullock Mann, F., & Hinz, S.
(2017). The condition of education:2017 (NCES) 2017144). Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Statistics.

Odegard, T. N., Frarris, E. A., Middleton, A. E., Oslund, E., & Rimrodt-Frierson, S. (2020). The characteristics of students identified with dyslexia within the context of state legislation. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(5), 366-379.

Petscher, Y., Fien, H., Stanley, C., Gearin, B., Gaab, N., Fletcher, J. M., & Johnson, E. (2019). Screening for Dyslexia. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Improving Literacy. Retrieved from improvingliteracy.org

Samson, J. F., & Lesaux, N. K. (2009). Language-minority learners in special education: Rates and predictors of identification for services. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(2), 142-162.
The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) thanks Elsa Cárdenas-Hagan, Ed.D., for her assistance in the preparation of this fact sheet.
The International Dyslexia Association (IDA). IDA encourages the reproduction and distribution of this fact sheet.
If portions of the text are cited, appropriate reference must be made. Fact sheets may not be reprinted for the purpose of resale. © Copyright 20223. The International Dyslexia Association (IDA). For copyright information, please click here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
English Learners and Dyslexia - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.headline
Essentials of Dyslexia Assessment and Intervention

# data[].attributes.subject
Essentials of Dyslexia Assessment and Intervention

# data[].attributes.body
It includes definition of dyslexia in different countries.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We're sorry. This preview is not currently available on this browser. In the meantime, you can read on one of these supported web browsers:

Google Chrome 20+

Download

Mozilla Firefox 10+

Download

Safari 5+

Download

Internet Explorer 10+

Download

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Essentials of Dyslexia Assessment and Intervention (Essentials of Psychological Assessment Book 89)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We're sorry. This preview is not currently available on this browser. In the meantime, you can read on one of these supported web browsers: Google Chrome 20+ Download Mozilla Firefox 10+ Download Safari 5+ Download Internet Explorer 10+ Download

# data[].attributes.headline
This article is behind a paywall but may yield some meaningful information in case someone has open access. 

# data[].attributes.subject
This article is behind a paywall but may yield some meaningful information in case someone has open access. 

# data[].attributes.body
Dr. Stephanie Stollar worked on developing the rubric to determine whether or not a program should be approved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You are here

Approved Programs

The READ Act requires the department to identify evidence-based instructional programs and professional development programs for use by local education agencies. This page includes links to providers and programs that have been identified and approved for the use of READ Act per pupil funds through the READ Act Instructional Programming Review Process. Districts choosing to use READ Act per pupil funds to purchase these instructional programs and professional development related to these programs will submit the request through the annual READ Budget Submission.

The Advisory List of Instructional Programming was updated on May 2, 2022.

The next instructional programming review will be conducted during the 2023-2024 school year.

Questions & Rubric Requests

Completed rubrics for any reviewed program will be made available upon request. Please contact READAct@cde.state.co.us with all rubric requests and questions related to instructional program review.​

This page includes information and resources for selecting scientifically and evidence-based instructional materials.
Jump to a Section: Download READ Act Instructional Programming Advisory List Information Spreadsheet (XLXS)

Core Programming

Core Instruction is instruction provided to all students, and is typically guided by a comprehensive core reading program. Part of core instruction is typically provided to the class as a whole, and part is provided during the small group, differentiated instruction period. Although instruction is differentiated by student need during the small group period, materials and lesson procedures from the core program can frequently be used to provide reteaching, or additional teaching to students according to their needs.

Approved for Grades Kindergarten Through Third

Benchmark Education- Benchmark Adelante (2022) Spanish program

Houghton Mifflin- Arriba la Lectura (2020) Spanish program

McGraw Hill- Maravillas (2020) Spanish program

Spalding - The Writing Road to Reading (2012)

Approved for Grades Kindergarten Through Second

Approved for First through Third Grade

Supplemental Programming

Supplemental Instruction is instruction that goes beyond that provided by the comprehensive core program because the core program does not provide enough instruction or practice in a key area to meet the needs of the students in a particular classroom or school. For example, teachers in a school may observe that their comprehensive core program does not provide enough instruction in vocabulary or phonics to adequately meet the needs of the majority of their students. Selection and implementation of a supplemental program in these areas can strengthen the initial instruction and practice provided to all students.

95 Percent Group - 95 Phonics Core Program, First Edition

American Reading Company - Foundational Skills Toolkits (2020)

Benchmark Education Company - Benchmark Phonics

Carnegie Learning - Mondo Bookshop Phonics 1st Edition

Curriculum Associates - iReady

Curriculum Associates - Magnetic Reading

Edgenuity - MyPath

Imagine Learning - Language and Literacy

Istation - Istation Early Reading

Istation- Istation Espanol Lectura Temprana Spanish program

Lexia - Core 5 Reading

Literacy Resources - Heggerty Phonemic Awareness Curriculum

Open Up Resources - EL Education Foundational Skills Block, First Edition

Reading Horizons - Reading Horizons Discovery

Reading Simplified - Reading Simplified Academy

Really Great Reading - Blast

Savvas Learning Company -Savvas Essentials: Foundational Reading

Spalding - The Writing Road to Reading

Step By Step Learning - Small Group Automation Tool

Vista Higher Learning - Discover Phonics, 1st edition

William Sadlier - From Phonics to Reading

Wilson - Fundations

Zaner-Bloser - Superkids Phonemic Awareness Daily Lessons and Intervention

Zaner Bloser - The Superkids Foundational Skills Kit

Supplemental Programming - Approved by Specific Grade and Literacy Component

American Reading Company - ENIL Toolkits Spanish program
Kindergarten, First Grade, Second Grade for Phonological & Phonemic Awareness, Phonics & Word Study, and Text Reading Fluency

Center on Teaching and Learning- ECRI
Kindergarten (Phonological & Phonemic Awareness and Phonics & Word Study), First Grade (Phonological & Phonemic Awareness, Phonics & Word Study, and Text Reading Fluency), and Second Grade (Phonics & Word Study, and Text Reading Fluency). This program must be used in combination with Wonders 2017.

Waterford - Waterford Reading Academy

Kindergarten and First Grade - Phonological & Phonemic Awareness, Phonics & Word Study, Vocabulary, and Text Reading Fluency

Kindergarten - Listening Comprehension

Intervention Programming

Intervention is the practice of providing scientifically-based, high-quality instruction and progress monitoring to students who are below proficient in reading. Intervention is provided withintensity that is matched to student need. This involves more time daily, above and beyond 90+ minutes of universal (Tier 1 or core) instruction, which is focused on the specific needs of the student as identified by a diagnostic measure. Instruction can be intensified in three ways: (1) more time, (2) more targeted instruction, and (3) smaller group size.

95 Percent Group - Teaching Blending, Phonics Screeners for Intervention, Phonics Chip Kit, Phonics Lesson Library, Multisyllable Routine Cards

95 Percent Group - Phonological Awareness, Screener for Intervention, Phonological Awareness PA Lessons Deluxe Kit

95 Percent Group - Vocabulary Surge: Unleashing the Power of Word Parts (Level A & B)

Benchmark Education Company - Benchmark Phonics Intervention (Level 1, Level 2)

Cengage - Reach into Phonics Foundations

Center for Collaborative Classroom - SIPPS

Curriculum Associates -Ready Reading

Edgenuity - MyPath

Imagine Learning - Language and Literacy

Istation- Istation Espanol Lectura Temprana Spanish program

McGraw Hill - Corrective Reading

McGraw Hill - Reading Mastery Signature Edition

McGraw Hill - WonderWorks (2022)

McGraw Hill - Wonder Works

Reading Simplified - Reading Simplified Academy

Really Great Reading Company - HD Word, First Edition

Really Great Reading - Blast

Step By Step Learning - Small Group Automation Tool

Valley Speech - Esperanza Spanish program

Intervention Programming - Approved by Specific Literacy Component

Center on Teaching and Learning- ECRI
Kindergarten, First Grade and Second Grade for Phonological and Phonemic Awareness, Phonics and Word Study, and Text Reading Fluency. This program must be used in combination with Wonders 2017.

Learning By Design - Spell-Links
Phonological & Phonemic Awareness (basic & advanced levels), Phonics & Word Study, and Text Reading Fluency

Valley Speech and Learning Center - WELLS 2 Spanish program
Phonological & Phonological Awareness, Phonics & Word Study, Vocabulary and Text Reading Fluency

*Programs marked with an asterisk must be teacher directed in combination with the online component for approval in the budget planning survey.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Advisory List of Instructional Programming

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The READ Act requires the department to identify evidence-based instructional programs and professional development programs for use by local education agencies. This page includes links to providers and programs that have been identified and approved for the use of READ Act per pupil funds through the READ Act Instructional Programming Review Process.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Qualitative Feedback from MCS District Dyslexia Pilot Committee Members

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading and Dyslexia in Different Orthographies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Developmental Dyslexia in Different Languages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For example, when Dr. Martha Youman first began her career as a second grade teacher, she knew that some of her students simply couldn't read but she didn't know what to do about it: "I kept them busy. Truly, there were interventions they needed, I just didn't know how to help them," says Youman, who now treats kids with dyslexia. "I had a master's in teaching, and didn't know how to deal with these students."

Often the diagnosis of dyslexia comes after months or years of exhausting frustration and failure for students, parents, and teachers. It's common for dyslexic children to avoid reading and become angry or upset in class or when it's time to do homework or read aloud in front of others. Sometimes these students are seen as smart but lacking motivation or not working hard enough. To make things more complicated, dyslexic children often have another developmental disorder like ADHD alongside their reading challenges.

The key to preventing reading failure is early detection.

WHAT DOES DYSLEXIA LOOK LIKE?

Though dyslexia can take on many forms, two common areas where differences can be clearly seen and heard are slow reading and difficulty with handwriting and spelling.

Also, in some cases, certain speech patterns can be an early indicator of dyslexia, like mispronouncing familiar words or using "baby talk."

In the following video, a fourth grader with dyslexia reads from Rosie Revere, Engineer, and then writes what she's looking forward to when she gets to fifth grade (see picture below). At the time when this video was taken, she had already had 1.5 years of targeted Wilson dyslexia tutoring, and her reading had improved significantly.

WHAT'S IT LIKE TO READ WITH DYSLEXIA?

For kids who are entering school, according to the Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity, signs of dyslexia in kindergarten and elementary school children include:

* Difficulty sounding out simple words like cap, map, nap
* Difficulty associating letters with sounds, and can't break words apart
* Talks about how hard reading is and/or resists reading
* Family history of reading difficulties
* Difficulty speaking In second grade and up, signs of dyslexia might include:
* Avoids reading out loud
* Exhibits slow and awkward reading, and difficulty in acquiring new reading skills
* Makes wild guesses when sounding out a word
* Has no strategy for sounding out unfamiliar words
* Relies on vague language when searching for a word, like "things" or "stuff"
* Mispronounces long or unfamiliar words
* Uses lots of pauses, hesitation, and "umm's" when speaking
* Seems to need extra time to answer questions
* Has extreme difficulty learning a foreign language
* Has messy handwriting

For more signs of dyslexia in younger children and adults, including particular dyslexic strengths, visit the Yale Center's Signs of Dyslexia page.

DYSLEXIA IN ENGLISH LEARNERS: EXTRA HURDLES

According to Pew Research Center, there are about 5 million English Language learners in American public schools, or nearly 10 percent of the school population. While the vast majority (77 percent) of American English learners' first language is Spanish, the top five are rounded out by Arabic, Chinese, Vietnamese and Somali. Among states, California has the highest number of English learners, with more than 20 percent of school children speaking a different language at home.

For schools, teachers and parents, diagnosing dyslexia in English learners can present an extra set of hurdles.

Dr. Kelli Sandman-Hurley, co-founder of the Dyslexia Training Institute in San Diego, California, says dyslexics learning English can sometimes be overlooked for two reasons: first, there's not a lot of research on the topic and often educators don't know what to look for, and second, reading difficulties can often be attributed to learning a new language.

ENGLISH LEARNERS AND RECOGNIZING DYSLEXIA: INSIGHTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM TWO EXPERTS

According to Sandman-Hurley, students who have trouble with phonemic awareness in their first language will also find learning letters and sounds in English difficult. But if it's not possible to screen kids' phonemic awareness in their first language, educators can look for other clues that children are struggling.

Sandman-Hurley says it's often important to check and see if English learners are having trouble in other subjects-that is, if a child learns math quickly and relatively easily, then a reading disability might be at play.

Sandman-Hurley makes two recommendations to educators trying to spot reading difficulties in English learners:

1. If possible, provide screening in the child's native language

2. Dig into what's going on at home-since dyslexia tends to run in families, find out if other family members also had difficulties with reading, or if children had displayed some of the early warning signs, like an inability to rhyme words or learn the alphabet.

Speech-language pathologist Dr. Elsa Cardenas-Hagan has spent 25 years working with biliterate and bilingual students at the Valley Speech Language and Learning Center in Brownsville, Texas, and says that educators should look to see if the English learner has trouble learning the English alphabet or has trouble with writing. Even if they're still learning English as a new language, those should be considered warning signs.

"We want to give English learners plenty of listening, speaking, reading and writing opportunities. To do any writing you have to be aware of sounds, so if a child is having trouble being able to sound out a word and write it, that should be a red flag."

Cardenas-Hagan also agrees that looking into family history can help teachers who don't speak the child's first language. Because dyslexia tends to run in families, asking if anyone else in the family had troubles with reading and writing when they were growing up might provide indicators.

She says it's also helpful to ask about when the child developed language. "Did the child speak on time? Did they start using words on time, did they produce the words with clarity and precision? We watch those kids very carefully, because if you have trouble hearing and speaking sounds in whatever language you learned, you're going to have that same trouble reading and writing," she says.

DETECTION/ASSESSMENT TOOLS

Universal Screening. Requirements vary wildly between states and even between districts. Beginning in kindergarten many schools use universal screeners like the RAN/RAS (Rapid Automatized Naming) test and the PAR (Predictive Assessment of Reading/Rapid Alternating Stimulus) to assess children's knowledge of phonemes, letter recognition, and vocabulary.

However, not all screeners are created equal and often do not provide a complete picture of a child's talents and deficiencies, according to Drs. Brock and Fernette Eide at Dyslexic Advantage. For a more complete picture, students whoaren't reading at grade level most often need a full evaluation by a school psychologist in order for parents and the school to implement the proper intervention.

Find out each state's approved reading assessment tools, courtesy of Dyslexic Advantage.

To learn more about screening standards and what to look for in high-quality assessments and screeners, read Literate Nation's white paper on how to select screening instruments.

RTI-Response to Intervention. Another way for teachers to recognize reading trouble is through the Response to Intervention (RTI), a multi-tier reading program designed in the 1990s to determine whether a child has a Specific Learning Disability (SLD) like dyslexia. RTI has been mandated in 14 states and is widely used among others. The program aims to identify who is at risk for reading failure and to provide targeted instruction to those students through different tiers:

* Tier 1 interventions involve a blend of high-quality classroom instruction, adequate screening and group interventions that typically last around 8 weeks.

* Tier 2 Students who don't make adequate progress in Tier 1 move to Tier 2, where intervention is more targeted and intensive, where instruction can last up to a grading period.

* Tier 3 When students don't progress in Tier 2 they are moved to Tier 3, where they receive one-on-one targeted and intensive instruction and often a full evaluation to determine whether they qualify for special education services.

Curriculum and instruction aren't uniform but designed by schools or districts individually.

Due to the varying quality of programs, response to RTI has been mixed. A comprehensive 2015 RTI evaluation by the National Center of Education Evaluation found that first graders who participated in the RTI program did worse than those who didn't receive any targeted assistance.

"RTI is thoughtful, logical, well-designed program. It has only one flaw: it has to be implemented in real-world environments that are often inhospitable," Seidenberg writes in Language at the Speed of Sight that "How well the RTI program works depends on how well it's implemented, which is left to the school districts or system to decide."

Full Evaluation. Even when schools provide universal screeners and assessments to identify at-risk students, if reading doesn't progress, students need more complete evaluations to determine the cause of the reading failure and then a way forward. In most cases, that means an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for special reading services.

THE CHALLENGE OF ASSESSMENT: DYSLEXIA TERMINOLOGY

Most schools offer an evaluation through the school psychologist, but these evaluations can be complicated for several reasons.

First, school psychologists are often overworked and backlogged, so testing and a full evaluation can often involve long wait times. This is often why families with the financial means to do so will take their child to a private psychologist to be evaluated and speed up intervention.

Next, complete evaluations can be complicated and difficult to understand, because different states, districts and psychologists use more than one term to describe reading difficulties. Terms like 'Specific Learning Disability' (SLD), 'reading deficit,' or 'language learning deficit' are often used interchangeably with other terms, like 'dyslexia.'

But according to dyslexia expert Nancy Mather, professor emeritus in the Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies at the University of Arizona, the different labels create undue confusion for parents and students, since more than 80 percent of reading disabilities are in fact dyslexia.

"It creates confusion," she says. "The parents are told their child has an 'SLD' but they don't realize their child has dyslexia."

But using the right terminology means that the student is much more likely to get the right kind of help, because dyslexics need a very specific kind of reading intervention and a specially trained teacher in order to read.

For that reason, some families have their children evaluated outside the school, like a university or private testing center, where the cost of testing can be very high. Universities sometimes offer free or low-cost testing, but families might spend six to nine months on a waitlist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Recognize Dyslexia in Children, Including English Language Learners - MindShift

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For example, when Dr. Martha Youman first began her career as a second grade teacher, she knew that some of her students simply couldn't read but she didn't know what to do about it: "I kept them busy. Truly, there were interventions they needed, I just didn't know how to help them," says Youman, who now treats kids with dyslexia.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dyslexia, Bilingualism, and Learning a Second Language

# data[].attributes.subject
Dyslexia, Bilingualism, and Learning a Second Language

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) defines dyslexia as a brain-based type of learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read (see here). The British National Health Service (NHS) gives a fuller definition: it is a common learning difficulty that can cause problems with reading, writing, and spelling. The NHS also lists a number of problems that people with dyslexia have: they read and write very slowly, confuse the letters of words, put letters the wrong way round, have poor or inconsistent spelling, have difficulty with information that is written down, etc. (see here).

Dyslexia is the most common learning disability and has been the object of much research published in books, chapters, and articles. Psychology Today has also reported on this work through its bloggers such as Dr. J. Richard Gentry (see here for an example). Unfortunately, we know much less about dyslexia in bilinguals, in second language learners, or in students schooled in a second language. The latter can be in immersion or bilingual school programs or can come from minority language groups being educated in the majority language. Dr. Fred Genesee, Professor Emeritus at McGill University, is one of the leading experts on this topic and he has very kindly agreed to answer a few of our questions. We thank him wholeheartedly.
Are there more dyslexics among bilinguals than among monolinguals?
There is no evidence that dyslexia is more common among bilinguals than among monolinguals.
Does being bilingual cause dyslexia or increase the probability of becoming dyslexic?
Again, there is no evidence that bilingualism causes dyslexia. Dyslexia is linked to neurocognitive factors that are inherited. It is thought that children with dyslexia have an inherited impairment processing the sounds of language. This means that children born with the genetic profile that is linked to dyslexia will have difficulty learning to read whether they are bilingual or monolingual.
When talking about dyslexia in children, shouldn't one insist on something that you have put forward in your writings-the distinction between reading impairment and difficulty learning to read?
Yes, this crucial. Reading impairment is due to underlying neurocognitive factors mentioned in my previous answer whereas difficulty learning to read is linked to other factors, such as the child's learning environment, motivation, quality of instruction, or general health. For example, some children have difficulty learning to read in school because the quality of instruction they receive is not always optimal; because they have an undetected visual impairment which makes it difficult to see and process written language; or because they are uninterested in learning to read because they find the reading materials in school boring. These children's difficulties are not genetic in nature and are not true dyslexia.
Concerning children who are in the process of learning a second language, can they be at greater risk for difficulty learning to read than children learning through their first language?
Yes, this may be the case because they are still learning the language which is being used to teach reading in school and some teachers may not have modified instruction to take this into account. Second language learners might also have greater difficulty than monolingual students learning to read because the cultural content of the reading material is unfamiliar, or because the teacher's cultural expectations of how they should behave in class is foreign or even difficult for them.

Unfortunately, tests that assess progress in learning to read can make it appear that bilingual children have an impairment because they do not consider the linguistic level of the children. But, none of these factors are symptomatic of reading impairment or dyslexia per se.
Going back to actual dyslexia, what are the difficulties faced by second language learners who are dyslexic?
The core difficulties faced by second language learners who are dyslexic are the same as those of monolingual children with dyslexia. The core problem for these children is difficulty learning to decode written words accurately and fluently so that they can make sense of them and understand written text. If children's word reading skills are impaired, then their comprehension of written text will also be impaired because they cannot read the individual words accurately and fluently enough to create meaningful text.

In addition, second language learners with dyslexia face the challenges encountered by all second language learners-limited vocabulary and grammatical competence and lack of familiarity with the cultural or social context of the text. In this respect, their challenges are different from monolingual children.
Can the effects of dyslexia in bilinguals be stronger in one language than in the other?
Dyslexia in bilinguals is evident in both languages. This is the case because the impairment that underlies dyslexia is part of the learner's genetic profile and, thus, its effects will influence the child's ability to learn to read in any language. Of course, since many bilinguals are more proficient in one language than the other, the magnitude of their impairment will be more evident in their weaker language.

A bilingual child who has a reading problem in only one of his/her languages does not have dyslexia. This child has difficulty learning to read in one of his/her languages that is due to other factors, as we discussed earlier.
It is often recommended that the parents of children who are thought to be dyslexic stop using the home language on the assumption that this will make it easier for their child to overcome their dyslexia. What is your opinion on this?
There is no evidence to support this assumption. If the child is from a minority language community where the language is important for communication with parents, extended family members, or others in the community, parents should continue to use the home language. There are many reasons for this. First, proficiency in the home language is important if the child is to become an engaged and well-adjusted member of his family and community. In addition, parents of minority language children are often more proficient in the home language and, thus, they are better able to assume their full parental responsibilities if they interact with their child in that language.
What are the other reasons?
Encouraging parents who speak a minority language to use it in the home also allows them to enrich their child's home language experiences and competence. We know that strong skills in the home language prepares children to learn a second language and to do well in school because there are significant positive effects of the home language on second language learning.

This means that parents who continue to use the minority/home language can facilitate their child's chances of becoming proficient second language learners. This is particularly true if they use the home language in literacy-related activities where the cross-linguistic correlations are strongest.
What about parents who wish to put their dyslexic child in a bilingual program? Should they avoid doing so?
There is no evidence that children with reading impairment or even difficulty learning to read cannot benefit from participation in a bilingual program. This is true for both children from minority language homes and children from majority of language homes. To the contrary, there is considerable research now that shows that educating minority language children in school programs that use both the home language and the majority language results in higher levels of achievement than programs that use only the majority language.

If parents are concerned that their child has a reading or other learning disability, they should pay special attention to whether the school has the know-how and resources to provide their child with the additional support they need in both languages.
When children being schooled in a second language start showing reading difficulties, should one have a wait-and-see attitude whilst they are making progress in their new language, or should one intervene immediately?
If children who are being educated entirely or partially through a second language appear to have difficulty learning to read, then it is best to start giving them additional support as soon as possible. This is recommended whether the child simply has difficulty learning to read or has clinically-identified dyslexia. Research shows that additional support that is early and individualized to meet each student's needs is the most effective way to alleviating long term problems.
More generally, how does one know if a child's problems are due to dyslexia or simply to the fact that she is in the process of learning a second language?
It is not always easy to tell if a second language learner who is struggling to learn how to read has an underlying reading impairment or simply needs more time to learn to read like other students of the same age. To make a more definitive decision that a child is struggling to read because he/she has a reading impairment, it is necessary to rule out other possible contributing factors that are not indicative of dyslexia. For example, does the student have health-related problems; has he/she experienced recent trauma or emotional upset related to family or immigration issues; does he/she have normal intellectual and sensory-motor abilities; and so on. If an individual child's difficulties can be linked to these other kinds of factors, then his/her difficulties are probably not due to reading impairment.
What kind of help and support can be given to dyslexic children being schooled in a second language?
Students being educated in a second language who are struggling readers can benefit from the same kinds of support that are used to help struggling monolingual students. At the same time, it is important to provide support that incorporates adaptations that are suitable for students who are still learning the language and who may be from a different cultural group; for example, provide lots of scaffolding, support vocabulary development, and use culturally familiar and appropriate materials at an appropriate linguistic level.
Should the intervention take place in both languages or just in one? What should professionals be aware of?
Support should be provided in whichever language is the primary language of instruction or in both languages if the instruction is bilingual. Professionals providing support for struggling readers should understand the nature of bilingual development and they should consider similarities and differences in the written and oral conventions of the two languages when they provide support.

Knowledge of these aspects of second language learning can ensure that they will make appropriate adjustments when they provide additional support. Professionals also need to know their student's individual capabilities and challenges so you can individualize support and build on each child's strengths.
Do you have any final words?
Scientific studies have shown that the fears about raising or educating children are largely unfounded. To the contrary, we now know that children have the capacity to learn two languages as naturally and as easily as one in the home or in school. Meeting the learning challenges of struggling second language learners calls for educators, professionals, and parents who can create learning environments that allow them to achieve their full capacity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dyslexia, Bilingualism, and Learning a Second Language

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) defines dyslexia as a brain-based type of learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read (see here). The British National Health Service (NHS) gives a fuller definition: it is a common learning difficulty that can cause problems with reading, writing, and spelling.

# data[].attributes.headline
Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction:Dyslexia Guidance:Implementing MTSS for Literacy

# data[].attributes.subject
Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction:Dyslexia Guidance:Implementing MTSS for Literacy

# data[].attributes.headline
I was asked today by Dana Rickman of Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education to make sure that both handbooks make note of the challenges associated with Twice Exceptional students who are gifted with dyslexia. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I was asked today by Dana Rickman of Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education to make sure that both handbooks make note of the challenges associated with Twice Exceptional students who are gifted with dyslexia. 

# data[].attributes.headline
I have attached a pdf of the file that Tina referenced earlier for those who would like to view it. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I have attached a pdf of the file that Tina referenced earlier for those who would like to view it. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dyslexia - 2021 - Sadusky - Methods used by psychologists for identifying dyslexia  A systematic review

# data[].attributes.headline
The Reading League is hosting a summit on ELL students which should be very fruitful. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The Reading League is hosting a summit on ELL students which should be very fruitful. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In a world full of disagreement, we invite you to experience the refreshing and affirming opportunity of listening to experts respectfully share their expertise, and from that - gain knowledge that will accomplish a goal we all share: helping children to achieve academic success.

Join us in Las Vegas, NV, on March 25, 2023, for our first annual summit - English Learners and Emergent Bilingual Students: What Do We Know and What Can We Learn?

Discounted Hotel Block: Caesars Palace, 3570 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Las Vegas, NV 89109

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In a world full of disagreement, we invite you to experience the refreshing and affirming opportunity of listening to experts respectfully share their expertise, and from that - gain knowledge that will accomplish a goal we all share: helping children to achieve academic success.

# data[].attributes.body
The science is unsettled on multisensory language instruction. I propose removing the activities that are listed on p. 24.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Structured Literacy Instruction_Farrell & White

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GaDOE Dyslexia Task Force AGENDA meeting 1.27.23

# data[].attributes.headline
Outcomes Driven Model for MTSS and Intervention

# data[].attributes.subject
Outcomes Driven Model for MTSS and Intervention

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Duration: 1 hour

Intended Audience: Early Learning Teachers (Birth-5 yrs), Elementary Teachers, ESOL Teachers, School Leaders, Special Education Teachers, Special Student Services Staff, Teacher Leaders

Unraveling Dyslexia: A Closer Look at the GaDOE Dyslexia Video Series

The International Dyslexia Association Georgia, The Reading League Georgia, and the Georgia Department of Education have partnered to bring you this live webinar series.

The four-part GaDOE Dyslexia Video Series was developed through a partnership between the Georgia Department of Education and the Mary Frances Early College of Education at the University of Georgia. Presenters "unravel" the content presented in each video, answer questions to clarify the information, and provide guidance on how to best support students with dyslexia in the school setting.

Session 1: "What is Dyslexia?" This video provides an overview of commonly used definitions of dyslexia and delineates characteristics that may be present from early childhood through the upper elementary grades. In addition, dyslexia-related myths are dispelled along with a peek inside the reading brain. (October 26)

Session 2: "Reading Development & Dyslexia" This video examines the relationship between reading development and dyslexia. Three questions are addressed: How do individuals learn to read? What is the relationship between instruction and students' reading outcomes? And why do some students experience persistent difficulty in learning to read? (November 16)

Session 3: "Dyslexia & the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA)" This video explores the relationship between dyslexia and services offered under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The video is organized around common questions that arise when discussing dyslexia and the law. (December 7)

Session 4: "Structured Literacy & Dyslexia" This video explains what is meant by a structured literacy approach to reading instruction and what this means for students with dyslexia. First, the features of explicit, systematic, and cumulative instruction are described, followed by an explanation of how these features can be applied within the delivery of effective reading instruction. Next, the content elements of a structured literacy approach are reviewed, which include decoding, spelling, writing, and comprehension. Finally, the features of instruction specifically for students with dyslexia are delineated. (January 4)

To report an issue with the event link, please email the event contact.

DOE Office: Teaching & Learning

Topics: Assessment, Policy/Legal, Reading/Literacy, Special Education, Special Student Services, Whole Child Supports

Event Type: Event - Multiday

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Unraveling Dyslexia: A Closer Look Series - GaDOE Community

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Duration: 1 hour Intended Audience: Early Learning Teachers (Birth-5 yrs), Elementary Teachers, ESOL Teachers, School Leaders, Special Education Teachers, Special Student Services Staff, Teacher Leaders Unraveling Dyslexia: A Closer Look at the GaDOE Dyslexia Video Series The International Dyslexia Association Georgia, The Reading League Georgia, and the Georgia Department of Education have partnered to bring you this live webinar series.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GaDOE Dyslexia Pilot District Panel - GaDOE Community

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Explore all

Educators

Find tools and resources to support general and special education teachers, interventionists, school psychologists, school counselors, and other school-based personnel working with students with intensive academic and behavioral needs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore all Find tools and resources to support general and special education teachers, interventionists, school psychologists, school counselors, and other school-based personnel working with students with intensive academic and behavioral needs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mancilla‐Martinez - Assessment Selection for Multilingual Learners  Reading Development (2)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learn Disabil Res Pract - 2022 - Solari - Effectiveness of Interventions for English Learners with Word Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learn Disabil Res Pract - 2022 - Solari - Effectiveness of Interventions for English Learners with Word Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Colorado Department of Education Dyslexia Handbook is designed to provide online access to information and resources to Colorado schools and families as they support students with literacy challenges, including dyslexia. This handbook reflects a department wide commitment to ensure that students' needs are met as a result of collective responsibility and collaboration across general and special education contexts.

If you have questions about the contents of the Colorado Department of Education Dyslexia Handbook please contact Ellen Hunter at Hunter_E@cde.state.co.us or 303-866-6244.

Having trouble with this webpage?

If you have problems with broken links or accessing the content on this page, please contact the Exceptional Student Services Unit at ESSU@cde.state.co.us. Please copy the URL link for this page into the email when referencing the problem you are experiencing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Colorado Department of Education Dyslexia Handbook is designed to provide online access to information and resources to Colorado schools and families as they support students with literacy challenges, including dyslexia. This handbook reflects a department wide commitment to ensure that students' needs are met as a result of collective responsibility and collaboration across general and special education contexts.

# data[].attributes.headline
From IDA_GA and The Reading League Georgia's presentation with Anita Archer

# data[].attributes.subject
From IDA_GA and The Reading League Georgia's presentation with Anita Archer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Guidance to FCPS schools and families alike as they identify and provide services to students with dyslexia

The FCPS online dyslexia handbook provides information and resources to FCPS schools and families alike as they support students with dyslexia. The handbook reflects a division-wide commitment to ensure that these students' needs are met as a result of collective responsibility and collaboration across general and special education contexts.

The handbook itself is organized to reflect dyslexia at three levels:

In addition, the Appendices include a glossary of handbook terms, dyslexia resources, signs of dyslexia, and family guides to dyslexia for elementary and secondary schools.

Throughout this handbook, the term "students with dyslexia" has been used in lieu of the term, "dyslexic." The decision to use person-first language is to serve as a constant reminder that these students are more than their dyslexia (National Center on Disability and Journalism, 2017, retrieved from http://ncdj.org/style-guide/ on 3/7/17).

Defining students as dyslexic prevents us from crafting a fuller profile of them as students who struggle with decoding and spelling and do well in many other academic and nonacademic pursuits.

Our FCPS website is designed to be accessible to a variety of users with differing needs and is compatible with screen reading software.

© 2017 Fairfax County School Board. All rights reserved. This material may not be reproduced, displayed, modified or distributed without the express prior written permission of the copyright holder. For permission, contact the FCPS Department of Special Services, Office of Special Education Instruction, Willow Oaks Corporate Center, 8270 Willow Oaks Corporate Drive, Fairfax, VA 22031.
This site requires JavaScript to be enabled in order to run.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guidance to FCPS schools and families alike as they identify and provide services to students with dyslexia

# data[].attributes.headline
Indiana guidance on recommended instructional approaches for dyslexia

# data[].attributes.subject
Indiana guidance on recommended instructional approaches for dyslexia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
District Level Screening Process Flowchart.docx