Inquiry Paper Rebekah Reisner

Running Head: READING INSTRUCTION FOR INDIVIDUALS 1
Reading Instruction for Individuals with Severe Disabilities Focused on Comprehension
Rebekah Reisner
Inquiry Project
Vanderbilt University
November 14, 2017

READING INSTRUCTION FOR INDIVIDUALS 2
Table of Contents
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………...3
Characteristics of Reading Disabilities……………………………………………………......4
The reality
Categories of readers
Readers with autism
The labels
Purpose of Reading…………………………………………………………………………...7
Not one size fits all
Reading trends and initiatives
Setting goals
Important Skills for Instruction………………………………………………………………10
Importance of Comprehension………………………………………………………………..11
Comprehension defined
Role of comprehension in the reading process
Comprehension in the Classroom…………………………………………………………….14
Research-based instruction
Comprehension assessment
Accessing Text…………………………………………………………………………….....16
Teachers’ Attitudes………………………………………………………………………......18
Impact on Student’s Future………………………………………………………………......19
Emotional/social long-term effects
Impact on middle and high school students
Future employment/contribution to society
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….......22
References…………………………………………………………………………………...24
Introduction
When I decided to pursue a Bachelor’s degree in Special Education my senior year of
high school, a family friend, Susan1, reached out to me. She asked me if I would be willing to
work with her son, Peter2, who has Down syndrome. I had interacted with her son on more than
one occasion when our families got together, so I was more than willing to spend more time
learning with him and from him. What began that summer was not only a job that continued into
subsequent summers, but also an unforgettable friendship.
I typically worked with Peter at his home. We worked on a variety of skills from daily
living, unloading the dishwasher and grocery shopping, to educational activities, math and
reading. Not only did I gain valuable experience working with Peter (as far as problem solving
and capitalizing on strengths), but I also learned about being an advocate, specifically in the
school setting. Susan and I had countless conversations about her experiences with the education
system in our town. She talked about the victories and losses she experienced in conversations
with administrators and teachers. From these conversations, I realized the important role I have
as a future special education teacher to be an advocate for individuals with special needs to be
successful.
Peter was a great reader, but he struggled to comprehend what he read. During my first
summer with Peter, we went through a couple hundred flashcards with words on them every
week. We focused more on reading books the following summers. Whether it was reading
about the Avengers or the Muppets, Peter was a very skilled decoder. What he struggled with
was retelling me what he had just read. I began to wrestle with the question: What is the purpose
of reading? What was the purpose of Peter reading if he could not understand the words he said?
1
Names have been changed in consideration of individuals mentioned for the sake of this paper.
2
As I continued to wrestle with this question, I completed a year of student teaching in an
elementary special education classroom. One of my students, Brice3, was a first grade student
with Down syndrome who was also nonverbal. He had an electronic communication device, but
he could not use it proficiently to communicate his wants, needs, or opinions. One of Brice’s
strengths was his listening comprehension skills. After several weeks of teaching the letters
(graphemes) A, B, C, and D with their sounds (phonemes), Brice never could produce the correct
sounds when shown the grapheme. It was challenging to know where to even begin with his
reading instruction. I continued to ponder the purpose of reading. How should my mentor
teacher and I go about teaching Brice to read? Should we focus solely on sight word
recognition? Will he be a “successful reader” if we just get him to recognize words? I strongly
believe we read for understanding. If reading is for understanding, how do we teach readers with
severe special needs to read with the goal of comprehension, not just word recall? In
conjunction with my desire to be an advocate for this population of students, what does research
say about how this can be done most effectively?
Characteristics of Reading Disabilities
The reality. It is crucial that teachers have a realistic understanding of where students
with severe disabilities struggle with reading. It is also crucial that teachers are not discouraged
by the process of teaching these students. Karen Erikson and David Koppenhaver write that a
child with a severe disability has “at best a 30% chance of being able to read and write as well as
a child who can walk and talk but is otherwise just the same as you” (Erikson & Koppenhaver,
1995, p. 676). It is a sobering statistic; however, it cannot cause educators to write off these
students. Research has shown students with significant reading disabilities can learn and be
3
successful. The road will not be easy with these students, but the journey is necessary and worth
it.
To give one example of the research referenced above, a study by Erikson and
Koppenhaver shows how students with severe reading disabilities have been successful with
appropriate instruction (1995). One of the students in the study is Erica, a six year old with
cerebral palsy. She was nonverbal and had limited body movement because of the cerebral
palsy. Erica used the Touch Talker communication device. She caught on quickly, so the
teacher capitalized on that strength and taught Erica to use the device during the literacy
instruction time. Books were uploaded to the device where Erica would click on pictures and the
story would be read aloud. At first, a few pictures represented a sentence. The teacher continued
to challenge Erica as she progressed to use one picture for each word. The teacher reported Erica
was a regular, helpful contributor to their group literacy instruction time. With this
communication system and instruction from the teacher, Erica gained more in that short time
than she had in the three previous years combined (Erikson & Koppenhaver, 1995).
Categories of readers. Michael Coyne and Taylor Koriakin divide readers into four
categories based on characteristics exhibited by each group: (1) individuals lacking in code-
based and meaning-based skills, (2) individuals lacking only with code-based skills, (3)
individuals lacking only with meaning-based skills, and (4) readers who are proficient (Coyne
and Koriakin, 2017). In their article, Coyne and Koriakin go on to say that “it is important for
beginning teachers to remember that scaffolding is not a one-size-fits-all approach but should be
tailored to specific needs of individual students” (Coyne and Koriakin, 2017, p. 240). Even
though they divide readers into four categories, the labels are still very broad. A wide variety of
learners can be found in each category.

Readers with autism. An example of a more specific type of reader with a significant
disability is a student on the autism spectrum. Even within the autism spectrum, there are a
variety of characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses in individuals. One common characteristic
of autism is a deficit in the area of cognitive processing (Randi, Newman, & Grigorenko, 2010).
This can understandably have a negative impact on comprehension. A student with autism will
often struggle to understand a character’s emotions and/or motivations. Furthermore, making
abstract inferences is also challenging for students with autism. Randi, Newman, & Grigorenko
challenge teachers to look at what most people would see as a cognitive weaknesses and see how
it can actually be an opportunities on which to build strengths (2010). With inferencing, children
with autism are often strong at using inductive reasoning to make valid surface level inferences
(Randi, Newman, & Grigorenko, 2010). This is a strength that can be built on to develop more
abstract inferences.
The labels. More profiles of readers with significant disabilities could be included, but
they would never come close to the extensive variety of victories and setbacks these students
face. Each student is different, and the people who work closest with them will know them best.
Carlisle and Rice acknowledge that there is even confusion about defining what reading
disability a student might have and how people come to the conclusion of that definition (2002).
Some students who are poor comprehenders might not be identified as having a disability. When
looking at school populations, “most students (perhaps as many as 80%) who have learning
disabilities have significant problems in reading” (Carlisle & Rice, 2002, p. 32). What matters
when considering the characteristics of struggling readers in a classroom is not so much the
labels as it is knowing the instruction the students will benefit from based on their individual
strengths and weaknesses.

Purpose of Reading
Not one size fits all. Based on their research, different researchers have a variety of
opinions on the purpose and process of reading. Judi Randi, Tina Newman, and Elena
Grigorenko say the “ultimate goal” of reading is meaning-making (2010). They acknowledge
the importance of word-reading (decoding) skills to the reading process, but those are just steps
towards the goal of meaning (Randi, Newman, & Grigorenko, 2010). Ken Goodman bluntly
states that simple identifying words correctly does not make an effective reader. “Making sense
of print” is the characteristic of an effective reader that Goodman emphasizes (Goodman, 1994,
p. 2). A similar perspective on the purpose of reading, Sean Walmsley, professor at the State
University of New York, University of Albany, looks at reading comprehension as an
understanding of a text’s “big idea” (the overall theme or moral) (Walmsley, 2006). Based on
Walmsley’s conclusions from his research, understanding the big picture can actually give
context and support the students’ understandings of the smaller aspects, or mechanics, of
reading. Students who can understand the big ideas of what they read are better prepared to
engage in thoughtful discussions about big ideas in the world (Walmsley, 2006).
In 1946, E. A. Betts wrote that: “It has been established in the literature of the subject that
the purpose of reading governs rate and depth of comprehension” (Betts, 1946, p. 95). So, what
teachers believe the purpose of reading is directly impacts the comprehension level of their
students. Understanding the purpose of reading is a characteristic of a good reader. Because an
individual has strong comprehension skills and is aware of why they read, they can choose
strategies to help them create meaning during reading because they understand the purpose of the
activity (Blanton, Wood, & Moorman, 1990). If a characteristic of a good reader is reading with
purpose, the teacher needs to be clear about communicating the purpose of reading to students.
Reading trends and initiatives. Throughout the years, several initiatives have been
enacted based on research trends and discoveries in effective reading instruction. The history of
these trends often shows us what leaders in the reading field believe the purpose of reading is at
the time. Reading First was a program issued after the No Child Left Behind Act was delivered
in 2001. It was “a congressionally mandated evaluation of the federal government’s $1.0 billion-
per-year initiative to help all children read at or above grade level by the end of third grade”
(Gamse, B. et al., 2008, p. xv).
In 2008, the Department of Education published a report analyzing the effectiveness of
the Reading First Impact Study (Gamse, B. et al., 2008). In addition to observations of
implementation, first, second, and third grade students were given the Stanford Achievement
Test – 10 Reading Comprehension subtest to evaluate the effectiveness of the Reading First
instruction. First grade students were also given a decoding assessment. What the program
evaluators discovered from the first grade students’ results was how decoding was positively
impacted by the Reading First program. In fact, they recorded that “the impact was equivalent to
an effect size of 0.17 standard deviations” (Gamse, B. et al, 2008, p. xvi). Interestingly, there
was no statistically significant impact on students’ reading comprehension in any of the three
grades levels tested. The researchers did not explicitly test the following hypothesis, but they
realized:
There is a positive association between time spent on the five essential components of
reading instruction promoted by the program and reading comprehension measured by
the SAT 10, but these findings are sensitive to both model specification and the sample
used to estimate the relationship. (Gamse, B. et al., 2008, p. xvi).

The implementation by the teacher does play an important role in the effectiveness of the
implementation. The point of including this analysis of the Reading First program is to show
that each individual’s belief about the purpose of reading influences their interpretation of the
successfulness of a program. This is why knowing your personal approach to reading is
foundational for every teacher.
Setting goals. Teachers need to have an end goal for their literacy instruction. Reading
needs to have a purpose, and a teacher’s instruction should reflect that purpose. In Nonie
Lesaux, Emily Phillips Galloway, and Sky Marietta’s book on advanced literacy, they give a
helpful perspective on planning literacy goals (2016). Even though their book focuses largely on
linguistically diverse populations, what they say about goals is important for any diverse
classroom, linguistically or academically. Lesaux, Phillips Galloway, and Marietta urge teachers
to work strategically instead of simply striving to work harder (Lesaux, Phillips Galloway,
Marietta, 2016). When they looked at the No Child Left Behind Act and the response-to-
intervention structure, they concluded that “these reforms share the goal of promoting advanced
literacies for all students, regardless of disability/language status, family income, or race and
ethnicity” (Lesaux, Phillips Galloway, Marietta, 2016, p. 7). Throughout their book, they look
at advanced literacy with the goal of “improving literacy rates among all students” (Lesaux,
Phillips Galloway, Marietta, 2016, p. 7). Teachers need to model this same practice by
developing their reading instruction time around the goal of improving the literacy for all
students, regardless of abilities. It is from this idea of goal-setting that I am advocating for
reading instruction focused on comprehension for students with significant disabilities.

Important Skills for Instruction
Phonological skills are foundational skills in the reading process. These skills are
typically focused on in the early grades. Success or setbacks in the early grades directly impact
future reading outcomes. In fact, “students must be able to read to access content and
information across all subject areas; therefore, early reading proficiency is essential for later
learning success” (Coyne and Koriakin, 2017, p. 240). Dr. Peter Cowden says that students with
severe disabilities need “language experiences” to understand the purpose of reading and basic
foundational skills of reading such as phonemic awareness and concepts of print (Cowden,
2010). Joseph Torgeson, Ann Alexander, and several other researchers look specifically at the
importance of phonemic awareness for individuals with severe reading disabilities (2001). A
primary difficulty for students of this population is “weaknesses in their ability to process the
phonological features of language” (Torgeson et al., 2001, p. 35). Torgeson and his colleges
suggest explicit instruction in phonemic awareness taught in a systematic way. They
acknowledge there are many ways to teach phonemic awareness. In their study, the researchers
compare two instructional approaches that include phonemic awareness. One of the approaches
is more centrally focused on phonemic awareness compared to the other program with a greater
emphasis on phonics instruction. In the end, they conclude both instructional methods were
effective. Even though they vary on the level of growth in certain areas, both programs show
similar gains in the most important areas of reading. An important take-away with their research
is that instruction for individuals with severe disabilities should not be focused solely on
immediate gains. Careful instructional decisions should be made for growth to be maintained (or
ideally, increased) over time (Torgeson et al., 2001).

Success is possible for students with severe reading disabilities if the appropriate
instructional steps are taken. As mentioned above, phonemic awareness instruction is important.
Maureen Lovett, Léa Lacrenza, and Susan Borden also conducted a study on the importance of
phonemic awareness instruction for children with severe disabilities by evaluating the following
programs’ effectiveness: the Phonological Analysis and Blending/Decoding Instruction Program
(PHAB/DI) and Word Identification Strategy Training Program (WIST) (2000). The three
researchers came to several conclusions of which one was the following:
The phonological processing skills and letter-sound learning of severely disabled readers
could be improved with intensive remediation of this type [the PHAB/DI and WIST
programs], and that effects could be achieved even with later (e.g. Grades 5/6)
intervention and even for children with the most severe disabilities. (Lovett, Lacerenza,
& Borden, 2000, p. 461).
They also concluded that a program focused only on phonological instruction is not enough to
make the greatest reading gains. In addition to phonological instruction, these students also need
strategy instruction. Teaching strategies to students with reading disabilities in combination with
direct instruction is most effective for reading growth to be generalized to multiple reading
contexts (Lovett, Lacerenza, & Borden, 2000).
Importance of Comprehension
Comprehension defined. Comprehension is a challenging concept to describe in a
concise way. Kate Nation and Philip Angell from the University of Oxford give a helpful
definition for beginning to understand comprehension:
To understand text, words need to be recognized and their meanings accessed, relevant
background knowledge needs to be activated, and inferences must be generated as

information is integrated during the course of reading. In addition, control processes are
needed to monitor both ongoing comprehension and the internal consistency of text,
allowing the reader to initiate repair strategies (for example, re-reading) if comprehension
breakdown is detected (Nation & Angell, 2006, p. 77-78).
A little further into their discussion about comprehension, Nation and Angell recognize the two
components that are necessary for an individual to be able to comprehend: spoken language
comprehension and decoding print. They include this helpful diagram to guide the readers
understanding of the factors that impact comprehension:
Phonic sound spelling
Knowledge of Grammatical
Text
context knowledge
Word recognition and graphic

knowledge
(Nation & Angel, 2006, p. 78)
Nation and Angel give a helpful starting point for understanding what “comprehension” means.
Another helpful component is that comprehension is a concept to be taught, not just a
skill to be assessed (Marzola, 2011). As mentioned above with Maureen Lovett, Léa Lacrenza,
and Susan Borden, students need comprehension strategy instruction (Lovett, Lacerenza, &
Borden, 2000). If students are going to use the “repair strategies” Nation and Angell mentioned,
they need direct instruction on those strategies. Several studies have been conducted to describe
the differences between the skills of good and poor readers before, during, and after their
interaction with the text. By knowing the characteristics of these two kinds of readers, teachers
can explicitly teach poor readers the strategies good readers already have (and probably do
subconsciously). For example, good readers notice the structure of a text and use that knowledge
to support their comprehension. Poor readers do not see any significant organization to a text.
Direct instruction and modeling can be provided by the teacher to show the various ways
organization impacts how the reader approaches texts (Marzola, 2011). There are many
interpretations and facets to comprehension, but essentially, comprehension should be “used
purposefully and in different ways to solve a problem, complete a task, or even to engage in
more learning (Conley and Wise, 2011, p. 96).
Role of comprehension in the reading process. Mark Conley and Antoinette Wise talk
about the “not-so-simple view of reading” (2011). This perspective says that there is more to
reading than decoding and comprehension skills. It is reminiscent of the section earlier on the
theories about the purpose of reading. Conley and Wise go on to explain the factors involved in
their view of reading: vocabulary knowledge, background knowledge, and comprehension
strategies (ex. summarizing, questioning, predicting, etc.). Conley and Wise also point out that
“word recognition and comprehension can be taught side by side, and that one does not have to
wait for the other” (Conley & Wise, 2011, p. 94). This last point is especially important to
consider in my argument that children with severe special needs should be taught that reading is
meaning-making from the very beginning of their reading instruction. Students do not have to
master decoding before they can begin instruction on comprehension. Comprehension supports
the work of decoding and decoding supports comprehension. Both can and should be taught
during reading instruction.

Comprehension in the Classroom
Research-based instruction. There are many articles describing various research-based
comprehension strategies. I am going to mention several here in order to provide a starting
point. When making instructional decisions about what practices to use, each teacher should
consider the specific needs of students in their class. Even though the following suggestions are
based on research, they are not guaranteed to be successful with all learners. No two students
with severe reading disabilities are going to be exactly the same. Also, these strategies are not
limited to students with disabilities, so accommodations or modifications to implementation
might be necessary. Taking students’ needs into consideration, here are a variety of ideas for
teaching comprehension. First of all, summarizing and questioning are two research-based
strategies for increasing comprehension skills (Conley & Wise, 2011). Additionally, graphic
organizers, such as Venn diagrams or Know-Want-Learn (KWL) charts, assist readers’
comprehension. These strategies help students create a visual representation of the text
(Mahdavi & Tensfeldt, 2013). Vocabulary instruction has positively impacted comprehension.
Vocabulary can be taught through kinesthetic learning or with read-alouds focused on a few
important vocabulary words (Mahdavi & Tensfeldt, 2013). These are just a few of the research-
based practices that can be helpful for planning comprehension instruction for your classroom.
Comprehension assessment. If teaching comprehension strategies is important, teachers
also need to know how to assess comprehension. As mentioned above, summarizing and
questioning are two comprehension strategies to teach student to increase their comprehension.
Michael McKenna and Katherine Stahl explain how to assess students using these
comprehension strategies (2015). Types of questions vary from literal questions (where the
answers are found explicitly in the text) to inferential questions (factual answers that require
inferencing from the text) and critical questions (students have to make value judgements). Each
type a question gives different information to the teacher about the student’s level of
comprehension (McKenna & Stahl, 2015). Based on the abilities of the learners in the
classroom, students might need a variety of ways to respond to the questions to demonstrate
understanding including (but not limited to) oral responses.
As far as oral responses go, McKenna and Stahl do suggest giving students the option to
retell orally what they understood from the reading. The teacher keeps a checklist of the details
the student should recount. Based on the teacher’s goals for asking the student to give a
retelling, the teacher can ask probing questions to prompt the student. An important component
for this type of retellings is the student’s ability to express themselves orally. The results from
these assessments are informative for a teacher’s instructional decisions (McKenna & Stahl,
2015). There are many other ways to assess comprehension. Comprehension needs to be
assessed if it is going to be taught.
Mauren Aukerman, an assistant professor at Stanford University, draws attention to an
important consideration for teachers making decisions about assessing comprehension (2008).
She cautions teachers to be careful when choosing comprehension questions that they do not
hinder students from making sense of the text (because they are too afraid of being wrong).
Aukerman says:
Teaching comprehension-as-sense-making does not mean valorizing every textual
hypothesis without question. Rather, it involves offering opportunities for reading in
which developing readers not only engage in textual hypothesizing, but also can make
discoveries about the relationship between ways of textual hypothesizing and the
accomplishment of social purposes (Aukerman, 2008, p. 56).

Individuals often come to the text to make hypotheses with the influences of their prior
knowledge (Aukerman, 2008). Just because the child does not get the exact answer the teacher is
looking for does not mean they are not comprehending. The teacher may need to ask the child
further questions to clarify, or the child might need to be taught something that did not
previously know. No matter how old we get, we are always learning and reading new things.
Our ideas and beliefs are continually being shaped as we are progressing as life-long learners.
Comprehension should be assessed, but it should be done thoughtfully because it is a complex
process.
Accessing Text
Because I believe so strongly that comprehension is the purpose of reading and our
students with severe disabilities need to be taught reading on that foundation, I wanted to include
a section on accessing text. For students to build reading comprehension, they first need to be
able to read the text. Comprehension strategies are best taught and assessed in context. Coulter
and Lambert notice how “children with learning disabilities [have] limited access to general
education curriculum” (Coulter & Lambert, 2015, p. 255). So, what can teachers do to bridge
this gap in ability and text complexity? Hudson, Browder, & Wakeman, have a very helpful
article explaining a wide range of possible text adaptations teachers can make (2013). One
example they give is augmenting the text. Augmenting the text can be adding pictures to
increase comprehension. A single picture can be placed at the beginning to give the text context,
or several small pictures can be added over key vocabulary words. Another way Hudson,
Browder, & Wakeman suggest helping students access the text is by summarizing the grade level
text in a way that is closer to the student’s Lexile level (2013). Those are just two ways students
can be supported to access to the same texts their grade-level peers are reading.
The Common Core sets high expectations for students. Students with severe disabilities
are not exempt from high expectations. It has been the case over the years that “adolescents with
significant cognitive disabilities have historically lacked exposure to authentic, grade level text
in literacy instruction” (Roberts & Leko, 2013, p. 158). With the suggestions Hudson, Browder,
& Wakeman give in their article, there is no reason why students with severe disabilities should
not be given the opportunity to access grade-level texts. If the Common Core has high standards,
we as teachers also need to have high standards. It is not a question of if we will have high
expectations for our students, but rather, how will we support our students to reach those
standards (Robertson et al., 2014).
I want to briefly mention the students who might never be able to access the text no
matter how many supports the teacher provides. This does not mean the teacher decides what
the student is capable or not capable of before accommodating or modifying the text. Laura
Justice, Jessica Logan, and Joan Kaderavek followed up with a small group of 172 preschool
children with language impairments one year after they received print-focused read-alouds
(2017). Print-focused read-alouds are books read by the teacher to the whole class with explicit
instruction on the concepts of print for the text. The researchers wanted to observe whether the
students retained what they learned from the instruction a year after it was implemented. The
results were positive, and the students did retain much of what they learned. Interestingly,
students with language impairments and low nonverbal cognition especially benefited from the
instruction. The researchers acknowledged the limitations to their work especially in the areas
of: (1) generalizing the skills and (2) retaining the information for longer than a year so that it
impacts reading achievement positively (Justice, Logan, & Kaderavek, 2017). As a whole, the
study is helpful to remind teachers that being able to access texts is not the only standard. If a
student cannot access texts after receiving support because of their disability or some other
factor, they can still be taught other concepts of reading, such as concepts of print.
Teachers’ Attitudes
Erikson and Koppenhaver mention that teachers of students with severe disabilities often
assume the students are not “capable” of reading and writing, so the teachers do not give the
students the chance to read or write (Erikson & Koppenhaver, 1995). They go on in their article
to say that:
Even if you are fortunate enough to have teachers who view you as a capable learner and
see literacy as an important part of your instructional program, you are likely to engage
largely in word level skill-and-drill activities, seldom reading or listening to text and even
more rarely composing text. (Erikson & Koppenhaver, 1995, p. 676)
Based on their research studies, Coyne and Koriakin have found that “intensive reading
intervention provided by special educators is one of the most effective approaches for ensuring
that students with disabilities have the best chance of becoming successful readers” (Coyne &
Koriakin, 2017, p. 240). Dr. Peter Cowden reminds teachers to “embrace the fact that children
are active, constructive learners and everyone has the ability to learn, learning disabled or not”
(Cowden, 2010, p.163). Research has shown that these students can learn, so it is not a debate
on whether or not it is possible. The issue is twofold: (1) whether or not the teacher will believe
the student has the capability and (2) whether the teacher will teach the student in light of that
belief.
Author Jim Trelease, known for his multiple editions of The Read-Aloud Handbook, tells
the story of a young girl named Cushla (2013). When Cushla was born, the doctors gave her
parents the difficult news that their daughter had a chromosomal abnormality. Among other
things, she had limited vision and spasms that limited her ability to sleep to about two hours a
night. Despite the difficulties Cushla faced, her parents discovered early on that their daughter
loved to listen to books being read to her. Her parents would read about fourteen books a day to
their daughter, and it began to pay off. Trelease recounts in his handbook that Cushla taught
herself to read by the time she was five years old. The doctors said Cushla was “’mentally and
physically retarded’ and recommended that she be institutionalized”, but by five years old,
Cushla was “well above average in intelligence and a socially well-adjusted child” (Trelease,
2013, p.25). Not only is this story incredibly inspiring, it is also an important reminder to
believe our students with severe disabilities can learn; they just need advocates to challenge them
to reach their potential.
Impact on Student’s Future
Emotional/social long-term effects. Reading difficulties do not affect children only in
school. Other areas of their life are also impacted. In fact, “students who do not learn to read are
at risk for serious negative social and economic outcomes, whereas students who establish
positive reading trajectories are much more likely to experience long-term success” (Coyne and
Koriakin, 2017, p. 240). Several researchers from Australia, Smart, Youssef, Sanson, Prior,
Toumbourou, and Olsson, looked at the combination of reading difficulties and behavior
problems (2017). Those two characteristics often co-occur. For a child with these two
characteristics, they often experience academic setbacks and antisocial behavior. They also
might struggle with substance abuse. The characteristics that start in their childhood persist into
their adulthood. In adulthood, employment may be difficult to attain and/or sustain. The
researchers acknowledge the relationships and consequences of reading disabilities and behavior
problems are complicated (Smart, Youssef, Sanson, Prior, Toumbourou, & Olsson, 2017). The
take-away from their study is that reading failure impacts more than students’ report cards.
Impact on middle and high school students. If a young student’s reading disability
persists into their middle and high school years, there is a significant impact on their future
educational decisions. Ziolkowski and McDowell evaluated the effectiveness of a reading
intervention strategy for adolescent students with severe disabilities (2015). Their research was
motivated by the Common Core’s demand for college readiness and the statistics gathered from
the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The NAEP found that
“approximately 64% of eighth graders with disabilities scored below proficient on their ability to
comprehend grade level text compared to 18% of eighth graders without disabilities”
(Ziolkowski & McDowell, 2015, p.44). There are a significantly higher number of students with
disabilities who are below the benchmark.
Michael Hock, Irma Brasseur-Hock, and Donald Deshler looked at the same data
distributed by the NAEP, and they drew attention to the results of students performing below
grade-level expectations (2014). The result is students lacking the skills to comprehend the texts
in their basic grade-level classes. A further result is the 20% of the lowest readers that will not
complete their sophomore year of high school. Without a high school diploma, individuals will
battle unemployment and low salaries (Hock, Brasseur-Hock, & Deshler, 2014). To fight against
these outcomes that can too quickly spiral down from one failure to the next, teachers need to be
especially intentional about intervention for students in the elementary grades.
Future employment/contribution to society. The statistics above give a glimpse at how
reading impacts individuals’ lives after graduation based on their success in school. Teachers
must remember they are not just teaching students to be successful in their classroom during that
school year. Furthermore, teachers have to understand that they prepare students both for their
present success, and their future success (Conley & Wise, 2011). Conley and Wise draw
attention to the fact that “research over the past decade highlights the increasing dilemma about
helping postcollege 20-year-olds pursue active citizenship and belonging (Arnett, 2006)”
(Conley & Wise, 2011, p. 95). From this evidence, Conley and Wise connect the importance of
reading and good comprehension (leading to important thinking skills) with helping individuals
“thrive as a worker and an informed citizen” (Conley & Wise, 2011, p. 95). If teachers know the
importance of reading comprehension and the skills that are a part of it, they can better prepare
their students for future success by intentionally choosing research-based practices for the needs
of the individuals in their classrooms.
According to the United States Department of Labor’s report in 2016, 17.9% of
individuals with disabilities are unemployed (U.S. Department of Labor, 2017). The report
contrasts that statistic with the data that 65.3% of non-disabled individuals are unemployed (U.S.
Department of Labor, 2017). Being able to read may not guarantee an individual finds
employment, but it is certainly an important skill employers are seeking. Jennifer Mahdavi and
Lael Tensfeldt give a short list of reading ability needed for future success: “Reading is
necessary to get most jobs; to pass a test to get a coveted license to drive; to access menus,
contracts, transit schedules, and more” (Mahdavi & Tensfeldt, 2013, p. 77). It is not hard to see
that reading is an important skill for the future. In combination with the reality of unemployment
for individuals with disabilities, it is important that teachers take reading instruction seriously
with intentional, strategic, and research-based implementation.
Conclusion
Erikson and Koppenhaver give this challenge to teachers who have students with severe
disabilities:
Don’t equate differences in the children’s physical capabilities or means of
communication with differences in intelligence, interest or academic capabilities.
Stephen Hawking, the internationally famous physicist, uses a wheelchair for mobility
and talks and writes via a dedicated communication device. (Erikson & Koppenhaver,
1995, p. 683)
As evidenced throughout this paper, comprehension is a complex issue. Similarly, the
continuum of individuals with reading disabilities is also a complex issue. Extensive research
has been conducted on struggling readers. Research-based practices of text adaptations help
students of all abilities access the material assigned to their grade level. All students have the
potential to be positive contributors to society, and teachers have the privilege of working with
these diverse learners every day to support their journey as learners. A child with severe
disability does not have a set future of failures. Developing foundational skills (like phonemic
awareness) leads to lessons about comprehension strategies. Reading growth and success
impacts students’ futures. Reading is an important skill for a multitude of reasons.
I am thankful for my experiences with Peter, my conversations with Susan, and my
difficulties working with Brice. I am also incredibly thankful for my professors at the Peabody
College at Vanderbilt University who have equipped me and challenged me to combine research-
based practices and my passions to raise awareness and educate others. Christopher J. Lemons,
Jill H. Allor, Stephanie Al Otaiba, and Lauren M. LeJeune say: “We think big-picture visioning
is important even in the early elementary school years” (2016, p. 19). I completely agree and
that is why I am so passionate about teaching reading on the foundation of comprehension
instruction.to individuals with severe disabilities.

References
Aukerman, M. (2008). In praise of wiggle room: Locating comprehension in unlikely places,
Language Arts, 86(1), 52-60.
Betts, E. A. (1946). Foundations of reading instruction. New York: American Book
Company.
Blanton, W. E., Wood, K. D., & Moorman, G. B. (1990). The role of purpose in reading
instruction, Reading Teacher, 43(7), 486-493.
Carlisle, J. F. & Rice, M. S. (2002) Improving reading comprehension: Research-based
principles and practices. Baltimore, MD: York Press.
Conley, M. W., & Wise, A. (2011). Comprehension for what?: Preparing students for their
meaningful future. Theory into practice. 50(2), 93-97.
Coulter, G. A., & Lambert, M. C. (2015). Access to general education curriculum. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 38(4), 248-256. doi:10.1177/0731948715580438
Cowden, P. A. (2010). Reading strategies for students with severe disabilities. Reading
Improvement, 47(3). 162-165.
Coyne, M. D., & Koriakin, T. A. (2017) What do beginning special educators need to know
about intensive reading interventions?. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(4), 239-248.
doi:10.1177/0040059916688648
Erikson, K., & Koppenhaver, D. (1995). Developing a literacy program for children with severe
disabilities, The Reading Teacher, 48(8), 676-684.
Gamse, B., Jacob, R., Horst, M., Boulay, B., Unlu, F., Bozzi, L.,…Zhu, P. (2008). Reading first
impact study: Final report. U. S. Department of Education.
Goodman, K. S. (1994). Reading, writing, and written texts: A transactional

sociopsychololinguistic view. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell & H. Singer (Eds.),
Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 1093-1130). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Hock, M. F., Brasseur-Hock, I., & Deshler, D. D. (2014). Responding to the reading
comprehension needs of adolescents with severe reading disabilities. New England
Reading Association Journal, 49(2), 9-17,111-112. Retrieved from
http://login.proxy.library.vanderbilt.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-
com.proxy.library.vanderbilt.edu/docview/1541672307?accountid=14816
Hudson, M. E., Browder, D., & Wakeman, S. (2013). Helping students with moderate and severe
intellectual disability access grade-level text. Teaching Exceptional Children, 45(3), 14-
23.
Justice, L. M., Logan, J., & Kaderavek, J. N. (2017). Longitudinal impacts of print-focused read-
alouds for children with language impairment. American Journal of Speech-Language
Pathology, 26(2), 383-396. doi: 10.1044/2016_AJSLP-15-0200
Lemons, C. J., Allor, J.H., Al Otaiba, S., & LeJeune, L. M. (2016). 10 Research-based tips for
enhancing literacy instruction for students with intellectual disability. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 49(1), 18-30. doi: 10.1177/0040059916662202
Lesaux, N. K., Phillips Galloway, E., Marietta, S. H. (2016). Teaching advanced literacy skills:
A guide for leaders in linguistically diverse schools. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Lovett, M., Lacerenza, L., & Borden, S. (2000) Putting struggling readers on the PHAST track:
A program to integrate phonological and strategy-based remedial reading instruction and
maximize outcomes. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 33(5), 458-473.
Mahdavi, J. N., & Tensfeldt, L. (2013). Untangling reading comprehension strategy instruction:
Assisting struggling readers in the primary grade. Preventing School Failure, 57(2), 77-
92. doi:10.1080/1045988X.2012.668576
Marzola, E. S. (2011) Strategies to improve reading comprehension in the multisensory
classroom. In J. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (3rd ed.). (pp.
365-403). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
McKenna, M. C. & Stahl, K. A. (2015). Assessment for reading instruction (3rd ed.). New York,
NY: The Guilford Press.
Nation, K. & Angell, P. (2006). Learning to read and learning to comprehend. London Review of
Education, 4(1), 77–87.
Randi, J., Newman, T., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2010) Teaching children with autism to read for
meaning: Challenges and possibilities. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders,
40(7), 890-902. doi:10.1007/s10803-010-0938-6
Roberts, C. A., & Leko, M. M. (2013). Integrating functional and academic goals into literacy
instruction for adolescents with significant cognitive disabilities through shared story
reading. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38(3), 157-172.
doi:10.1177/154079691303800303
Smart, D., Youssef, G. J., Sanson, A., Prior, M., Toumbourou, J. W., & Olsson, C. A. (2017).
Consequences of childhood reading difficulties and behaviour problems for educational
achievement and employment in early adulthood. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 87(2), 288-308. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12150
Torgeson, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S., &
Conway, T. (2001) Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading
disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches.
Journal of Learning Disabilities. 34(1), 33-58. doi.org/10.1177/002221940103400104
Trelease, J. (2013). The read-aloud handbook (7th ed.). New York, NY: Penguin Group.
U.S. Department of Labor (2017). Persons with a disability: Labor force characteristics – 2016.
Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/disabl.nr0.htm
Walmsley, S. A. (2006). Getting the big idea: A neglected goal for reading comprehension.
Reading Teacher, 60(3), 281-285. doi:10.1598/RT.60.3.9
Ziolkowski, R. A. & McDowell, K. D. (2015). Effectiveness of a collaborative, multi-component
intervention for adolescent students with severe reading disabilities, The Open
Communication Journal, 9(1), 44-55. Doi:10.2174/1874916X01509010044

Inquiry Paper Rebekah Reisner

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Inquiry Paper Rebekah Reisner

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Running Head: READING INSTRUCTION FOR INDIVIDUALS 1

Reading Instruction for Individuals with Severe Disabilities Focused on Comprehension

November 14, 2017

When I decided to pursue a Bachelor’s degree in Special Education my senior year of

subsequent summers, but also an unforgettable friendship.

As I continued to wrestle with this question, I completed a year of student teaching in an

say about how this can be done most effectively?

Characteristics of Reading Disabilities

learners can be found in each category.

variety of characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses in individuals. One common characteristic

often struggle to understand a character’s emotions and/or motivations. Furthermore, making

strengths and weaknesses.

University of New York, University of Albany, looks at reading comprehension as an

students. Understanding the purpose of reading is a characteristic of a good reader. Because an

(Gamse, B. et al., 2008, p. xv).

In 2008, the Department of Education published a report analyzing the effectiveness of

reading instruction promoted by the program and reading comprehension measured by

used to estimate the relationship. (Gamse, B. et al., 2008, p. xvi).

successfulness of a program. This is why knowing your personal approach to reading is

foundational for every teacher.

reading instruction focused on comprehension for students with significant disabilities.

Important Skills for Instruction

suggest explicit instruction in phonemic awareness taught in a systematic way. They

ideally, increased) over time (Torgeson et al., 2001).

programs’ effectiveness: the Phonological Analysis and Blending/Decoding Instruction Program

researchers came to several conclusions of which one was the following:

& Borden, 2000, p. 461).

contexts (Lovett, Lacerenza, & Borden, 2000).

Comprehension defined. Comprehension is a challenging concept to describe in a

definition for beginning to understand comprehension:

background knowledge needs to be activated, and inferences must be generated as

breakdown is detected (Nation & Angell, 2006, p. 77-78).

understanding of the factors that impact comprehension:

Phonic sound spelling

Word recognition and graphic

(Nation & Angel, 2006, p. 78)

Another helpful component is that comprehension is a concept to be taught, not just a

interpretations and facets to comprehension, but essentially, comprehension should be “used

more learning (Conley and Wise, 2011, p. 96).

their view of reading: vocabulary knowledge, background knowledge, and comprehension

during reading instruction.

Comprehension in the Classroom

Research-based instruction. There are many articles describing various research-based

comprehension strategies. I am going to mention several here in order to provide a starting

limited to students with disabilities, so accommodations or modifications to implementation

organizers, such as Venn diagrams or Know-Want-Learn (KWL) charts, assist readers’

Comprehension assessment. If teaching comprehension strategies is important, teachers

understanding including (but not limited to) oral responses.

assessed if it is going to be taught.

Mauren Aukerman, an assistant professor at Stanford University, draws attention to an

Teaching comprehension-as-sense-making does not mean valorizing every textual

hypothesis without question. Rather, it involves offering opportunities for reading in

accomplishment of social purposes (Aukerman, 2008, p. 56).

Comprehension should be assessed, but it should be done thoughtfully because it is a complex

standards (Robertson et al., 2014).

more rarely composing text. (Erikson & Koppenhaver, 1995, p. 676)

to reach their potential.

Impact on Student’s Future

Emotional/social long-term effects. Reading difficulties do not affect children only in

educational decisions. Ziolkowski and McDowell evaluated the effectiveness of a reading

disabilities who are below the benchmark.

especially intentional about intervention for students in the elementary grades.

Future employment/contribution to society. The statistics above give a glimpse at how