Assignment #2: Research Articles Dana Walt 94141827 November 20, 2010

Why did I choose the topic? My first assignment concerned the use of the literacy program "SMILE", which uses a "bottom up" approach to teaching students to decode text. I was curious about whether students with autism who have successfully learned to decode may face predictable obstacles in developing functional literacy. Therefore, I narrowed the topic of literacy to "reading comprehension".

Wahlberg, T., & Magliano, J. (2004). The ability of high function individuals with autism to comprehend written discourse. Discourse Processes, 38, 119-144. Purpose This was a study to ascertain whether high functioning readers with autism are able to draw on prior knowledge to understand ambiguous text. Description of the participants Twelve high-functioning readers with autism and 60 readers without autism participated. The readers with autism met the DSM-IV criteria for the condition and had IQs of 85 or higher, with an educational background ranging from high school to graduate student. Ten were male and two were female, all between 18 and 53 years of age. Each received $5 each for their participation. Readers without autism were volunteers from a Northern Illinois University Introduction to Psychology course. Research design and procedures Participants read four passages describing well-known historical events, one paragraph at a time from a computer screen. Researchers manipulated whether the passage had an informative title (e.g. "Columbus Discovers America") or an uninformative title (e.g. "Peaks and Valleys"). They also manipulated whether a primer text, a short encyclopedia article describing a corresponding ambiguous passage, was provided in advance. Therefore, it was a 2 (population) x 2 (title) x 2 (primer) design. Participants were instructed to write down everything they remembered about the passages on forms containing the first line of each passage. Readers with autism were matched to typical readers based on IQ scores, and responses were rated according to a specific protocol.

Results or Findings Both groups of readers recalled more when both an informative title and primer were present relative to when there were not cues present. The presence of only an informative title also increased the likelihood that both populations would activate relevant background knowledge. The presence of a primer text did increase the likelihood that readers without autism produced more integrated ideas. However, readers with autism were not influenced by the presence of a primer text. The results suggest that readers with autism have trouble dealing with ambiguities compared to readers without autism. Conclusions or recommendations It was concluded that readers with autism often make incorrect interpretations of a text because they are unable to effectively use relevant background knowledge to interpret what they read. The authors recommend that readers with autism be taught ways to map new information to prior learned information, and be provided with explicit cues to activate and connect background knowledge. Critique The article provided detailed descriptions of methods, testing tools, materials, coding and results, and overall, the study design appeared sound. There were some limitations. We must be cautious generalizing these results because the sample size was small (12 participants) and there is wide variability in ability and challenges among people on the autism spectrum. Further, as most of the participants were male, we should not assume that female readers with autism would respond in exactly the same ways. I also surmise whether the subjects without autism were

representative of the greater population of typical readers, as they were all volunteers from a college level first-year psychology class. Participants were asked to read from a computer screen and write down what they remembered about the articles. As many individuals are not comfortable reading this way, and because many individuals with autism have difficulty expressing themselves in writing, these requirements may have skewed the results. Finally, there was no mention about whether participants with autism were made comfortable with the testing requirements, location and/or the researchers, and whether heightened anxiety caused by the text conditions could have affected the results.

O'Connor, I., & Klein, P. (2004). Exploration of Strategies for Facilitating the Reading Comprehension of High-Functioning Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 115-127. Purpose of the Study The goal of this study was to investigate whether procedural facilitation (i.e. supporting students by prompting their thinking) improved the reading comprehension of students with autism. Description of Participants Participants were drawn from a large-scale longitudinal study concerning the development of 72 students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). For this study, twenty participants who showed moderate to high level of decoding and lower levels of reading comprehension were selected. Ten had been assessed by DSM-IV for autism, six met criteria for Asperger's Disorder and four met criteria for PDD-NOS. Their mean age was 15.11 years. Nineteen were male, one was female. Four of the students attended segregated classrooms, six attended regular classrooms with support and ten attended partially integrated classrooms. Research Design and Procedures Using a within-subjects design, the authors tested the effect of three methods of procedural facilitation on reading comprehension, compared to a control situation where none was provided. The three methods were: 1) verbally asking pre-reading questions to prime prior knowledge, 2) prompting students to relate pronouns with antecedent nouns (anaphoric cuing) and 3) assigning a cloze task, which required students to make use of information in the text to make predictions as they read.

Five stories were adapted from a grade 6 level reading series. Participants were asked to read each story aloud. After each passage, the researcher posed questions verbally and noted the students' verbal responses. Students did not have access to the passage when answering the questions. As each of the students was already part of a long term study, they were accustomed to these kinds of assessment sessions. Results or Findings Anaphoric cuing exercises increased students comprehension and appeared to substantially benefit more than half of the students. Asking pre-reading questions and completing cloze exercises had no statistical effect. Moreover, asking pre-reading questions often resulted in readers making connections that were erroneous, irrelevant or fantasy-based. Conclusions or recommendations Teachers could encourage students with ASD to check the antecedents of pronouns as they read. This could be done with the help of computer software where students must click on the antecedent referent before proceeding. Students could also be taught to check antecedents as an independent strategy. Brief critique of the article This study also provided detailed information about the procedures, analysis and results, and the study seemed soundly constructed. There was a comprehensive review and discussion of the recent literature and research. The researchers described several measures taken to help make the participants feel comfortable with the conditions and the process, so one can be confident the participants had an opportunity to fully express themselves.

The limited number (20) and the narrow age range (14 to 16 years of age) of the participants is a concern. We must be cautious about making generalizations about the results to others on the autism spectrum, and to older people on the spectrum in particular. Further, because there was only one female participant, we should not assume that all female readers on the spectrum would respond the same way.

Analysis
Important ways articles are the same In both studies it was noted that people with Autism Spectrum Disorder often demonstrate a paradoxical combination of good word identification with poor reading comprehension. The researchers agree that little is known about how identified instructional methods for general education classroom practice relate to reading comprehension instruction for students with autism. Both studies tested a group of high functioning readers with autism comprised mostly of male participants. Most importantly, studies hypothesized that high functioning readers with autism may have difficulty activating prior knowledge to support reading comprehension. Both studies also have an important limitation: both have a small number of participants, which reduces statistical validity and reliability. Important ways in which they are different The design of the two studies is quite different. O'Connor & Klein used a withinsubjects design to compare high functioning readers with autism to each other and to a control group, testing three different reading support strategies. Wahlberg & Magliano used a 2 x 2 x 2 design comparing the reading performance of a group of people with autism to a group of first year college students, in the presence or absence of two different factors (informative/uninformative titles, primer texts.) The profiles of the participants are quite different. Wahlberg & Magliano tested twelve participants with a range of ages and educational background. O'Connor & Klein tested twenty participants about the same age attending secondary school. The studies used different methods to stimulate background knowledge: Wahlberg & Magliano used "primer" texts relying highly on the ability of participants to express 8

themselves in writing, and O'Connor & Klein used a series of pre-reading questions that were presented verbally. The authors reach different conclusions about how high-functioning readers with autism could be supported. Wahlberg & Magliano recommended that readers with autism be provided with explicit cues to activate knowledge and indicate how that knowledge is relevant to ideas in a text. O'Connor & Klein predicted that readers with autism will be confused by anaphora (i.e. places where a text refers back to itself).They recommended that readers be supported in their ability to accurately identify pronouns by clarifying antecedent nouns. Are they in agreement or in conflict, and how? The authors are in agreement that readers with autism often need support to resolve ambiguity as they read but they reached quite different conclusions with respect to use of background knowledge. O'Connor & Klein found that questioning readers with autism about their background knowledge often interfered with reading comprehension. Wahlberg & Magliano found that readers with autism were unable to draw from background knowledge to resolve ambiguity, and so suggested that they be cued directly with what they need to know. Nonetheless, the support strategies both studies recommended could be applied together without conflict or interference.

How I can apply this information to my teaching? As a teacher, I should not assume that because a student with autism is a skilled reader at the word and sentence level, that they are equally skilled at comprehending what they read. I will be attuned to potential pitfalls that readers with autism might face and will preview texts to identify potential ambiguities. Where ambiguity exists, I can take measures to mitigate it: I can provide direct instruction to clarify what background knowledge is related to a particular text, I can ensure that there are opportunities to verify accurate understanding along the way, and I can teach strategies individuals with autism can use to monitor their own understanding (e.g. verifying the antecedent nouns of pronouns). Results: future research It would be useful to ascertain whether gender plays a role with respect to levels of reading comprehension. Assuming a sufficient number of high functioning, female readers with autism could be found, we could test whether there are gender differences in reading abilities, strategies and patterns among individuals on the autism spectrum. Whalberg & Magliano said that it was difficult to know precisely if the problems for readers with autism were a result of encoding or retrieval deficits. This could be explored further by manipulating the presence or absence of ambiguous sentences within the passages, examining the reading times, and providing cued recall tasks. It would also be helpful to test the recommendations of O'Connor and Klein by designing and testing computer software to check the antecedent nouns of pronouns. The software would require readers to identify the pronoun before being permitted to proceed from one paragraph to the next. One could then ascertain whether students' reading comprehension increased as a result. 10