Maximizing Literacy Learning Among Children With Mild to Moderate Mental Retardation
Project Maximize, funded in 2005 by the Office of Special Education Projects (OSEP) in the U.S. Department of Education, was a 4-year longitudinal study examining methods for teaching reading to students with severe reading difficulties including students with intellectual disabilities (mental retardation) and autism. Instruction began in the fall of 2005 in an urban school district with 137 children. Half of the students were assigned to treatment or control groups; those in treatment received daily instruction in reading in small groups of 2-4 students or in some cases, one-on-one instruction. The data collection process was completed in 2010 and follow-up analyses are currently being conducted.
Purpose
The current state of research for reading instruction for students with intellectual disabilities (ID) beyond identifying sight words is minimal, but what does exist is very promising. It has been well established that systematic instruction can lead students with ID to learn to recognize a list of sight words (Browder & Xin, 1998; Browder, Wakeman, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, & Algozzine, 2006), yet the research demonstrating effective instruction of phonics of phonemic awareness (PA) for students with ID is less conclusive. The Office of Special Education Programs recognized the importance of this issue and recently funded three national centers to explore methods for teaching students with ID to read. As one of these nationally funded centers, we sought to determine the effectiveness of a comprehensive, phonics-based reading program in teaching students with ID to fully process print and meaning of connected text.
Procedures
This study was conducted as a randomized trial with two groups. One group of students received a special education program that represented current best practices, which were provided by the Ft. Worth Independent School District. The second group of students received the Early Interventions in Reading intervention from highly trained teachers. Students met daily either one-on-one or in groups of 2 or 3 for 40-55 minute sessions. Instruction included Early Interventions in Reading and supplemental language instruction.
To determine the impact of reading instruction as compared to "current best practice", the study collected measures of multiple dimensions of reading, language, and intellect, including measures pretest/posttest and continuous progressive measures collected every 2 to 4 weeks across all 4 years. Further, we observed during experimental and contrast instruction and measured level of fidelity of the intervention at multiple points each year. Last, we collected student IEP records and conducted teacher and parent interviews to allow us to determine if our interventions facilitated access to the general education curriculum.
Findings
This study is both a clear demonstration of the potential of students with low IQs to achieve meaningful literacy goals and a clear demonstration of the persistence and intensity it takes to help children with low IQs learn to read. This longitudinal study provides solid empirical support for educators to provide intensive, comprehensive, research-based reading instruction to all students, including those with mild or moderate intellectual disabilities. It points to the need for future research to determine how to streamline and intensify instruction for this population of students, as well as more sensitively measure progress, particularly in the earliest stages of reading development.
Our findings have several important implications for serving students with low IQs in general and special education settings. First and foremost, students with low IQs, including those with ID and those with IQs in the borderline range (i.e. 70-80), should be provided with evidence-based reading instruction. Although it might seem unsurprising to some that these students made meaningful progress, our study provides strong empirical evidence of reading progress across several academic years with a relatively large sample of students with low IQs who participated in a randomized control trial in which the treatment was delivered by highly trained interventionists. Specifically, our data indicate what is possible for students with low IQs if they are given access to evidence-based reading instruction. The curriculum is very explicit and systematic and was delivered with fidelity, providing very consistent explicit and repetitive routines, focusing on key skills, and delivering clear and explicit modeling. Thus, students with low IQs do benefit from comprehensive reading programs that were designed for struggling readers and readers with LD, but progress is slower. Second, even though students made significantly stronger growth in the treatment condition, many took two to four years to make a year’s progress in the curriculum. Third, even though we used the same instructional techniques for all students within the study, individualization was required, as is consistent with traditional special education instruction. However, this study is a call for boldness and the redoubling of our efforts to truly teach all children to read.
Allor, J. H., Mathes, P., Roberts, K., Cheatham, J. P., & Al Otaiba, S. (in press). Is scientifically-based reading instruction effective for students with Below-Average IQs? Exceptional Children.
Presentations
Presentations (PDFs) describing aspects of Project Maximize are attached.
2011 CEC Presentation: Teaching Students with Intellectual Disabilities to Transfer Early Reading Skills to Text
2010 CEC Presentation: Maximizing Literacy Outcomes for Students with Intellectual Disabilities: Research Study Findings from a Longitudinal Intervention Study. Audio presentation available here. (Please note, you will need to create an account and log on, select Strand L, Session 1)
2010 DADD Poster Presentation: Teaching Students with Intellectual Disabilities to Transfer Early Reading Skills to Connected Text
2010 DADD Presentation: Methods for Increasing the Intensity of Reading Instruction for Students with Intellectual Disabilities
2009 CEC Presentation: Response to Reading intervention by Students with Low IQs
2008 CEC Presentation: Results from a Longitudinal Reading Intervention Student with Students with Cognitive Disabilities
2008 Paper presented at AERA: Teaching Students with Moderate Intellectual Disabilities to Read: An Experimental Examination of Comprehensive Reading Intervention
2007 CEC Presentation: Second-Year Progress Results: Maximizing Literacy Outcomes for Students with Cognitive Disabilities: Findings from the First Two Years of a Longitudinal Intervention Study
2006 Children with Mental Retardation Can Learn to Read: Setting and Achieving Goals.
Publications
Allor, J. H., Mathes, P., Roberts, K., Cheatham, J. P, & Al Otaiba, S. (in review). Is scientifically-based reading instruction effective for students with Below-Average IQs? Exceptional Children.
Allor, J. H., Champlin, T. M., Gifford, D. B., & Mathes, P. G. (2010). Methods for increasing the intensity of reading instruction for students with intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45, 500-511.
Allor, J. H., Mathes, P. G., Roberts, J. K., Cheatham, J. P, & Champlin, T. M. (2010). Comprehensive reading instruction for students with intellectual disabilities: Findings from the first three years of a longitudinal study. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 445-466.
Allor, J. H., Mathes, P. G., Jones, F. G., Champlin, T. M., & Cheatham, J. P. (2010). Individualized research-based reading instruction for students with intellectual disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 42, 6-12.
Allor, J. H., Mathes, P. G., Roberts, J. K., Jones, F. G., & Champlin, T. M. (2010). Teaching students with moderate intellectual disabilities to read: An experimental examination of a comprehensive reading intervention. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45, 3-22.
Allor, J. H., Mathes, P. G., Champlin, T. M., & Cheatham, J. P. (2009). Research-based techniques for teaching early reading skills to students with intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44, 356-366.
Blog and Video Clips
Low IQ students learn to read at 1st-grade level after persistent, intensive instruction
(SMU Research, May 2014)
Curriculum Information/Materials
Level K: Early Interventions in Reading through SRA
The foundation level of the curriculum teaches kindergarten-level reading skills including print awareness, concepts about print, phonemic awareness, letter-sound correspondence, and oral language. Like all levels of the intervention, the Foundation level is designed to be implemented with small groups of children. Trade books, letter-sound correspondence cards, and a puppet are included in the lessons for the Foundation level.
Level One: Early Interventions in Reading through SRA
The first level of the curriculum teaches first grade level reading skills and has been found to be effective through several research studies (link) and is available for purchase from SRA. The curriculum is designed to maximize the level of student engagement and to provide students with optimum success in each lesson. The lessons proceed quickly, keeping student engagement high and providing maximum opportunities for each student to practice skills. Level One focuses on letter and word work, fluency practice, teacher-supported reading, basic comprehension strategies, and regular assessment of progress.
Level Two. Early Interventions in Reading through SRA
The second level of the curriculum teaches second through fourth grade reading skills. Building on the skills and strategies learned in Level One, Level Two reviews foundational skills while focusing more on vocabulary and comprehension. Students spend significant time engaged in reading texts and using vocabulary in context. Concepts maps and other comprehension activities strengthen understanding, while repeated readings increase fluency. By the end of Level Two students are successful, fluent readers who can read texts with understanding.
Stop and Go Game. Early Interventions in Reading through SRA
This game is played individually with students and teaches children to blend sounds to make words. Students practice segmenting spoken words into individual phonemes and blending individual phonemes into spoken words. The game provides practice in letter-sound correspondence, decoding, segmenting, and blending, while focusing on phonemic awareness.
Home Component. pre-publication
The home component supplements Level One and consists of activity pages students can do on their own at home. The home component provides students with additional practice reading target words and sentences in fun formats including cross-word puzzles, scrambled words, and other game-like activities. There are different home component activities for different units within each level.
Press Links (PDFs)
Research Team Hopes to Hone Skills of Retarded Youth
(Dallas Morning News, March 2005)
Dallas Cowboy Celebrities Read with Kids
http://smu.edu/education/news/footballcelebritiesreadwithkids.asp
Useful Websites
Reading Rockets
This project provides information and resources to teachers and parents about reading instruction to young children. www.ReadingRockets.org
SRA Publishing
Makes available direct-instruction curricula that have proven to be effective in teaching reading to struggling students. www.mheonline.com
Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities
This division of the CEC provides specific support to those working with students with cognitive disabilities, autism, and other related disabilities. www.daddcec.com
DIBELS
These assessments were used to monitor the student's progress on key reading skills. The website also provides links to good curricular activities to support reading. dibels.uoregon.edu
Council for Exceptional Children
This professional organization is dedicated to improving educational outcomes for individuals with exceptionalities, students with disabilities, and/or the gifted. It provides information and resources for parents and teachers on issues related to policy, advocacy, and professional development. www.cec.sped.org
Resource Literature
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kameenui, E. J., & Tarver, S. G. (2004). Direct Instruction Reading. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
O'Connor, R.E. (2007). Teaching Word Recognition: Effective Strategies for Students with Learning Difficulties. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Klingner, J.K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2007). Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students with Learning Difficulties. New York, NY: The Guildford Press.
Bear, R.D., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnson, F. (2008) Words Their Way: Word Study for Phonics, Vocabulary, and Spelling Instruction (4e). Upper Saddle, NY: Pearson Merril Prentice Hall.
To learn more, contact:
Jill Allor (jallor@smu.edu)