Reading

o•z.

Mrs. Btvwn is the special educationteacher for the third grade team atCasey Elementary School. Recently, theteam realized that some of their stu-dents had problems with reading com-prehension. As a part of their responseto intervention (RTI) program, the teamassesses students' reading fluency every2 months using Dynamic Indicators ofBasic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS;Good & Kaminski, 2002) to ensure stu-dents are improving and meeting dis-trict benchmarks. The team noticed thatthe majority of the third graders weremeeting their fluency benchmarks andcould decode at grade level, thus meet-ing their instructional goals. However,they also noticed that a few studentswere well behind their peers in readingcomprehension skills despite the factthat their fluency was at or above dis-trict benchmarks. This came as a sur-prise to the team because they hadalways thought comprehension of textautomatically followed fluent reading.They knew they had to address thisissue immediately so these studentswouldn't fall behind their peers; how-ever, they weren't sure how to improvethe comprehension skills of these stu-dents. Mrs. Brown suggested teachingthe students a reading comprehensionstrategy. She suggested that they lookfor a simple and flexible comprehensionstrategy. They needed a strategy thatcould be taught individually or in smallgroups in the general education class-room or resource room. The strategyshould also be one that students canmaster quickly. In addition, Mrs. Brownsuggested teaching the strategy usingthe self-regukued strategy development(SRSD; Harris & Graham, 1996) modelbecause she knew that how a strategy istaught is a critical factor in its successor failure (Reid & Lienetnann, 2006).

The "RAPon Reading

ComprehensionJessica L. Hagaman | Kati Luschen | Robert Reid

Many teachers have encountered simi-lar issues with reading comprehensionin their classrooms. In fact, readingproblems are one of the most frequentreasons students are referred for spe-cial education services (Miller, 1993)and the disparity between studentswith reading difficulties and those whoread successfully appears to be increas-ing (U.S. Department of Education,2003). As a result, there is now anemphasis on early intervention pro-grams such as RTL In many cases,early intervention in reading instruc-tion focuses primarily on foundationalreading skills, such as decoding. Thesefoundational skills allow the reader toread fluently (i.e., with speed andaccuracy; National Reading Panel,2000). However, with much of thefocus on fluency, reading comprehen-sion may be overlooked. It's true thatreading fluency is necessary for com-prehension. Students who are able todecode and recognize words effortless-ly are able to devote more of their cog-nitive resources to reading comprehen-sion. As a result, readers who are flu-ent are more likely to have better com-prehension skills (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp,& Jenkins, 2001). This link between

fluency and comprehension can leadteachers to assume that if students canread fluently they should also be ableto comprehend what they read.

For many students, this assumptionis correct; however, there are studentswho are fluent readers who experiencedifficulties with reading comprehen-sion. Up to 10% of students are fluentreaders who struggle to understandwhat they read (Meisinger, Bradley,Schwanenflugel, Kuhn, & Morris, 2009;Shankweiler, Lundquist, Dreyer, &Dickinson, 1996). These students areable to successfully decode text in spe-cific content areas, such as sciencesand social studies, but are unable toprocess and comprehend what theyread (Caccamise & Snyder, 2005). Oneway to improve these students' com-prehension skills is by teaching themeffective comprehension strategies.Research shows that explicit instructionof reading comprehension strategiescan significantly improve students'comprehension skills (Gajria, Jitendra,Sood, & Sacks, 2007; Pressley, Brown,El-Dinary, & Allferbach, 1995). Unfor-tunately, research also shows that com-prehension instruction is often rudi-mentary and instruction in actual com-

22 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

}.

prehension strategies (i.e., speciflc pro-cedures students can use to increasetheir comprehension) is rare (Vaughn,Levy, Coleman, & Bos, 2002). As aresult many students do not improvetheir ability to comprehend text. Inaddition, few teachers are knowledge-able about how to effectively teach astrategy (Reid & Lienemann, 2006)—and unless all the critical instructionalelements are included, students areunlikely to beneflt from a strategy.

How can special educators imple-ment an effective reading comprehen-sion strategy with young students whoexhibit reading comprehension prob-lems? We taught the RAP strategy(Read-Ask-Paraphrase; Schumaker,Demon, & Deshler, 1984) to Gary,Betty, and Jean, third-graders withreading comprehension problems. Theresults of our Tier II intervention(Hagaman, Casey, & Reid, in press)demonstrate that teaching young stu-dents such a strategy can markedlyimprove their reading comprehension.

Hie RAPSfrofegyRAP (Schumaker et al., 1984) is a sim-ple strategy that is easily incorporatedinto existing curriculum without taking

time away from critical content instruc-tion. This three-step strategy (see Fig-ure 1 ) can improve the reading com-prehension of students with and with-out disabilities and is extremely flexi-ble. It can be used for elementary, mid-dle, and high school students acrossmany different content areas (Hagaman& Reid, 2008).

The strategy requires students toengage in reading materials throughquestioning and paraphrasing toincrease their comprehension of thematerial. From the questioning andparaphrasing, students process infor-mation for better understanding ofwhat they read. Studies using the RAPstrategy (Schumaker et al., 1984) have

Figure 1 . RAP Strategy Cue Card

shown it to be effective (e.g., Haga-man, Casey, & Reid, in press; Hagaman& Reid, 2008; Katims & Harris, 1997).Results from these studies showedmarked improvement in reading com-prehension across multiple age groups(e.g., elementary through high school),and for students with and without dis-abilities (e.g., learning disabilities). Inshort, the RAP strategy can easily beincorporated into existing curriculumas a support for a variety of readerswho struggle with comprehension.

Ihe Seif-Reguicited StrategyDevelopment ModelEffective strategy instruction requiresteachers to explicitly teach students the

The RAP Strategy!

Read a paragraph.

Ask yourself, "What was the main idea and two details?"

Put information into your own words.

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN SEPT/OCT 2010 23

Table 1 . SRSD Stages in RAP Strategy

SRSD Stage

Develop background knowledge

Discuss the strategy

Model the strategy

Memorize the strategy

Support the strategy

Independent performance

RAP Activity

Make sure student knows what main ideas and supporting details are in a paragraph.

Sell the RAP strategy as a "trick" to help with reading comprehension.Discuss current level of performance with the student.Discuss the different steps of the RAP strategy.Obtain a commitment to learn and use the strategy.

Model the use of the RAP strategy using a think-aloud, demonstrating the "hows" and "whys"for each step.

Student memorizes the strategy steps. Automaticity and fluency of strategy steps frees attentionfor understanding of text.

Teacher supports the strategy through scaffolding.Responsibility for strategy use is gradually transferred to the student.

Student can use strategy independently.Teacher monitors performance.

Note. SRSD = self-regulated strategy development model (Harris & Graham, 1996); RAP = Read-Ask-Paraphrase reading strategy(Schumaker, Dentón, & Deshler, 1984).

use of the strategy, model the strategy,cue students to use the strategy, andscaffold instruction to gradually allowthe student to become an independentstrategy user (Reid & Lienemann,2006). We used the SRSD model toteach the RAP strategy (Schumaker etal., 1984) because SRSD is a well-vali-dated model with over 20 years ofresearch support that incorporates allthe vital components of strategyinstruction in the reading process(Harris & Graham, 1996). The SRSDmodel uses six stages for teachingstrategies to ensure student mastet7and generalization:

1. Development of backgroundknowledge.

2. Discussion of the strategy steps.3. Strategy modeling.4. Memorization.5. Support of the strategy.6. Independent performance.

The stages are flexible and may becombined or reordered. Lessons typi-cally involve activities from multiplestages; for example, memorizing astrategy is incorporated into all the les-sons. Table 1 lists RAP strategy activi-ties for each stage of the SRSD model.

Each of these stages contributes tostudents' eventual mastery of the strat-egy. Note that instruction is mastery-

based: Students do not move to thefinal stage until they can use the strate-gy fluently and without teacher assis-tance. Fluent use of a strategy is criti-cal because it allows students to usethe strategy without taxing their work-ing memory. Struggling students oftenhave difficulty because their workingmemory is overloaded and informationis not processed properly (e.g.. Gather-cole, Alloway, Willis, & Adams, 2006;Swanson, Howard, & Saez, 2007). Thisin turn can translate into problemssuch as difficulty storing and retrievinginformation. Strategy instruction teach-es students how to do each step of thestrategy and why each of those stepsare important to accomplish their task(e.g., remembering what you read).Strategy instruction also entails teach-ing students metacognitive informationabout the strategy (e.g., the "hows"and "whys" of a strategy), because use

Teaching the RAP Strategy

Develop and ActivateBackground Kno>vledgeIn this stage, the instructor identifies ifthe student has the necessary skills toperform the chosen strategy. In mostcases, the instructor will already knowthis information from working with thestudent on a regular basis; otherwise atask analysis can be performed. Thisanalysis identifies and defines the skillsnecessary to use the strategy and thendetermines whether the student hasthe necessary skills. Direct observationof the student or curriculum-basedmeasures can work well for this analy-sis. For the RAP strategy (Schumaker etal., 1984), the instructor might assesswhether the student is a fluent reader,as proficient fluency can influencewhether students understand whatthey read (National Reading Panel,

Instruction is mastery-hased: Students do not move to the final stageuntil they can use the strategy fluently and without teacher assistance.

of a strategy requires much more thanrote knowledge of steps. Instruction isscaffolded (i.e., responsibility for strate-gy use is gradually shifted from theteacher to the student) to allow stu-dents to become independent strategyusers.

2000). In addition, the instructor willwant to ensure that students under-stand what a paragraph is and whatmain ideas and details are in a para-graph. After the instructor has deter-mined that students have the necessaryprerequisite skills and background

24 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Figure 2. Sample Goal-Setting CbartProgress Monitoring

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

100

90

80

MET!

An

50

40

30

20

10

GOAL1

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

GOAL2

100

MET!

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

GOAL2

100

MET!

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

GOAL3

BASELINE Lesson 3 Lesson 4 Lesson 5 Lesson 6

knowledge to use the strategy, the stu-dents can learn the speciflc steps of thestrategy.

When we taught the RAP strategy(Schuniaker et al., 1984) to three third-graders, Gary, Betty, and Jean, we firstdetermined whether the students wereable to read fluently at grade levelusing DIBELS middle-of-the-yearbenchmark probes (Good & Kaminski,2002). We then asked the students toread a short paragraph aloud and iden-tify the main idea and two details. Asthe students identifled each element,we wrote down their responses. Thisassessment helped us determinewhether the students understood thecomponents of a paragraph (i.e., themain idea and details).

Discuss the Strategyhi the second stage of the SRSD model(Hdtris & Graham, 1996), the instructorshould help the student continue tounderstand the uses for the strategy.The instructor should introduce thestrategy to the student and activate

his/her background knowledge on thetopic. For example, the instructor mayask the student to brainstorm whatmakes a good reader or why reading isimportant (e.g., good readers under-stand what they read, enjoy reading).At this time, the mnemonic device"RAP" should be presented to the stu-dent and discussed. The instructorshould explain each step of the strate-gy in the reading process (see Figure1); the use of a cue card or graphicorganizer can help students rememberthe steps of the strategy. The instructorshould present the strategy as a "trick"to help students remember what theyread.

An important component of thisstage is obtaining student "buy-in."Getting a student to buy in to using thestrategy is extremely important. If stu-dents are not committed to learningand using a strategy, it is unlikely thatthey will use the strategy independent-ly, which is one of the goals of SRSD(Harris & Graham, 1996) instruction.For the RAP strategy (Schumaker et al..

1984), student buy-in can be accom-plished by reviewing previous meas-ures of reading comprehension (e.g.,curriculum-based measures, unit tests).This information should be graphed sostudents can clearly see a need toimprove their reading comprehension(see Figure 2).

After discussing with the studenthow using the RAP strategy (Schu-maker et al., 1984) can improve read-ing comprehension, the instructorshould work with the student to set aperformance goal (see Table 2). Graphsare often an effective way to illustratestudent progress towards their self-determined goals. For example, theinstructor may ask the student to graphcurrent reading performance (e.g., per-centage or number correct on a cur-riculum-based measure) over time toshow improvement. Students can com-pare the current graph with their previ-ous baseline performance. Graphingand goal setting also serve as self-regu-lation strategies, and feedback servesto reinforce performance. Note that

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN [ SEPT/OCT 2010 25

Table 2 . Effective Goal Setting

E f f e c t i v e g o a l s s h o u l d b e . . .

Specific

Proximal

Challenging

Goals must he specific so students know exactly what they hope toaccomplish and they will know when they accomplish the goal. Forexample, "Get 75% on the weekly History quiz" is specific, where-as "Improve my score on the weekly History quiz." is too vague.

Goals that can be met in the near future are more effective thanthose set farther in the future. Students feel a sense of accomplish-ment when they reach a goal, which motivates them to keepimproving their performance.

You can set long-term goals by using a series of short-term goals.

Goals that are too easy do not enhance student effort; those thatare too difficult can be discouraging. Goals that are challenging arethose that are attainable, hut require effort. Take care when settinggoals, because students often will propose goals that are too easyor too difficult.

goal setting and graphing also can behighly motivating to students.

For goal setting, we showed Gary,Betty, and Jean a graph of their previ-ous performance gathered during base-line, and discussed how they eachmight improve their performance byusing the RAP strategy (Schumaker etal., 1984). The students then set indi-vidual goals related to how muchinformation they could recall fromgiven text. We worked with the stu-dents to ensure they set realistic goalsdirectly related to their current per-formance (e.g., if a student recalled17% of text in baseline, an appropriategoal might be 40%). The studentswould record their future scores on agraph to self-monitor progress towardtheir self-determined goal. Initial goalsfor Gary, Betty, and Jean were 35%,40%, and 50% respectively. When stu-dents met a self-determined goal, weworked with them to set a new goal.

We also encouraged the students toself-monitor their use of the strategy.We taught them to develop a plan tomake sure they were following eachstep of the strategy as they read a pas-sage. Most students monitored theiruse of the strategy by taking notes ormaking tally marks while they read apassage to indicate they had completeda step of the strategy. For example,after reading a paragraph, Gary wouldunderline the main idea of a para-graph, circle the details, and brieflyorally summarize what was read.

Model the StrategyFor strategy instruction to be effective,students must have a strong under-standing of why they use a strategy,how the strategy can help them, andthe reasons behind the steps of thestrategy. This information is critical ifthe students are to see the benefit inusing the strategy. To provide thisinformation, the instructor shouldmodel the use of the strategy. System-atic modeling is a critical component ofeffective strategy instruction, muchmore than simply going through thesteps of a strategy; good modelingallows the student to see the thoughtprocesses of a skilled learner as s/heuses the strategy. This modeling pro-vides critical information on using theRAP strategy (Schumaker et al., 1984),such as why steps are performed andhow the steps help them to become abetter reader. Modeling helps strugglinglearners understand that using a strate-gy is not a passive process, butrequires active thought and effort. Theprocedure used to model a strategy isreferred to as a think-aloud. In thisprocedure the instructor demonstratesthe use of the strategy while verbaliz-ing his or her thought processes (seebox, "Think-Aloud for the RAPStrategy").

When teaching strategies like RAP(Schumaker et al., 1984), it is impor-tant to explicitly teach and model boththe strategy and the self-regulation

components of the strategy. The SRSDmodel (Hards & Graham, 1996) isdesigned to include self-regulationstrategies such as self-instructions. Inour example think-aloud, we haveincluded self-instructions that help stu-dents to literally talk themselvesthrough the strategy and readingprocess. As part of leaming the RAPstrategy, students should be taught andshown that specific self-statements andself-instruction can help them copewith negative thoughts and get throughthe strategy. For example, statetnentssuch as "If I use my strategy and tryhard, I know I can understand whatI'm reading" or "1 can do this" couldbe included in the think-aloud.

Support the StrotegyThe support stage of teaching a strate-gy is a collaboration between theinstructor and student. At this stage,students should know the steps of thestrategy; however, they will still requirepractice in using the strategy beforemastering it. This stage uses scaffoldedinstruction to help the student learn touse the strategy independently. Duringthis stage the instructor and studentpractice using the strategy. At first, theinstructor should support the studentthrough all the steps of the strategy. Asthe student becomes more comfortablewith the strategy, instructor support issystematically reduced. Progressthrough this stage of the SRSD model(Harris & Grahatn, 1996) is dependentupon the length of time needed by theindividual student. The instructorshould decrease support and give stu-dents more responsibility for the strate-gy as they are ready. The end result ofthis stage should be independent useof the strategy.

Scaffolding can occur at any stagein the SRSD process. For example, inStage 1, we provided the students witha strategy prompt sheet to help remetn-ber the steps of the RAP strategy. Otherscaffolding activities occur duringinstruction and practice activities. Forexample, scaffolding instruction couldbegin with reading a story aloud to thestudent. Students should be allowedand encouraged to perform any stepsof the strategy independently; similarly.

26 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Think-Aloud for the RAP StrategyWhat am I being asked to do? Mrs. Tuttle said 1 am going to practice using theRAP strategy to read two paragraphs. I need to understand and remember what Iread and Mrs. Tliltle said this strategy is going to help me.

Now, Step 1 of RAP says to Read a paragraph. Easy enough—I know how toread and this paragraph only has five sentences! OK. I did Step 1. This strategyis easy so far!

Okay, now for Step 2: Ask ttiyself "what was the main idea atid two impor-tatit details?" Uh-oh, this step seems kind of difficult. I know that at this step 1have to get ready to paraphrase what 1 just read. If I take my time and look backat the paragraph I just read, I should be able to identify the main idea....Hmmm. I foel like Mrs. Tlittle told me that the main idea is often found in thefirst sentence of a paragraph. Let me see . . . "There are two types of elephants". . . OK! I think this paragraph is deflnitely about elephants. Now for two impor-tant details . . . "The two kinds of elephants are Asian and African. African ele-phants are much larger than Asian elephants." OK, I'm feeling pretty good aboutthis.

Now on to Step 3: Paraphrase or Put the paragraph into my own words. Thisis a big step, and very important. This is how I will know if I understood what Iread or not. I know that paraphrasing means 1 have to summarize what I read inmy own words. OK, here I go . . ..

I'm reading about elephants, and I remember that there are two kinds: Asianand African. Asian elephants are smaller than African elephants. Wow! I can'tbelieve I remembered all that! Mrs. llittle was right about this strategy beinghelpful! But what do I do now?

Hmm. I have one more paragraph to read before 1 am done reading this story.I guess that means 1 am going to be doing the RAP strategy again!

All right, here I go again. First, Read a paragraph. Easy. Here I go . . . . Done!Ok, Ask myself about the tnain idea atid details. "Elephants can be found in thewild or in zoos" . . . OK, so Tm still reading about elephants, but what were thedetails 1 read about? "In the wild, elephants live in families called herds. Afemale elephant is usually the leader of a herd and called the matriarch."

OK! 1 think I'm already read for the third step, paraphrase'. Elephants caneither live in the wild or in a zoo. Elephants live in herds and a fetnale elephantis in charge of the herd.

Wow! I learned a lot about elephants and it wasn't even that hard! 1 just usedmy RAP strategy and I could remember what I read. I bet when I take my teston this reading I'm going to do really well. Mrs. Tuttle said if I used the strategyI would get better scores in reading . . . . I can't wait to flnd out if I met my goal!

instructors should support students asneeded in any areas of the strategy. Atthis stage, supports such as graphicorganizers can help students rememberthe steps of the strategy, although bothprompts and graphic organizers shouldbe faded as students gain fluency withthe strategy. After reading the storyaloud, ask the student to identify themain idea and details in each para-graph by underlining, highlighting, orsaying them aloud. After this step, theinstructor should encourage the stu-dent to determine whether his or hergoal (identified in Stage 2) was metand to graph the results. The instructor

should also encourage the student toreflect on how the strategy improvedhis or her reading comprehension. Forfurther examples of scaffolding, seeTable 3.

Independent PerformanceIn this stage, the student should beready to use the strategy without assis-tance from the instructor. At this stage,the purpose should be to monitor thestudent's performance and ensureproper and consistent use of the strate-gy. Monitoring academic performanceis critical: The goal of strategy instruc-tion is increased academic perform-

ance. The student's work should showa marked and consistent improvement.There are a number of ways to monitorperformance that are simple and effec-tive, such as unit tests or retells.Teachers should also watch to see ifstudents distort the strategy or skipsteps when using it independently. If astudent modifies a strategy but per-formance remains high, there is nocause for concern; many students willadapt the strategy to meet their needs.Changes are acceptable as long as thestudent performance remains high. Onthe other hand, if a student is perform-ing the strategy correctly and consis-tently but a high level of performanceis not attained (or maintained) thenreteaching the strategy or considering adifferent strategy is probably in orderWhen using the RAP strategy (Schu-maker et al., 1984), the independentperformance stage is reached whenthe student is able to read a multiple-paragraph selection while correctlyparaphrasing each paragraph with noassistance from the instructor.

Motivation and emotion are impor-tant factors in strategy instructionusing SRSD (Harris & Graham, 1996).Changing a student's attitude toward atask and success are important goals ofstrategy instruction. In our case, weobserved whether the students' atti-tudes toward reading and confidence intheir abilities improved. We alsochecked to see if the students wereusing the strategy outside the class-room. We observed one student teach-ing her classmates the RAP strategy.The use of open-ended questions suchas "What do good readers do?" or"What do you say to yourself beforeyou read something?" can help teach-ers determine if a strategy changed stu-dents' perception of a task. However,teachers should remember that somechanges (such as attitude improve-ments) take more time than others toobtain.

Final IlioughtsThe RAP strategy (Schumaker et al.,1984)—when correctly taught using aneffective model of strategy instructionsuch as SRSD (Harris & Graham,1996)—can be extremely effective for

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN | SEPT/OCT 2010 27

table 3. Scaffolding Exampies

lype of Scaffolding

Content scaffolding

Task scaffolding

Material scaffolding

Explanation

Instructor uses material at an easy reading level(e.g., text below the student's grade level).Instructor uses content of interest to the studentto teach the strategy.Instructor teaches the student easier steps of thestrategy first, then more difficult steps.In initial practice sessions the student performsthe easy steps; the instructor models the moredifficult steps.

Ownership of the strategy Is gradually transferredfrom instructor to student by letting the studentperform more and more of the strategy steps.

Prompts, graphic organizers, and cues are used tohelp the student use the strategy. Typically, theseare faded over time.

RAP Example

The student is allowed to read one paragraph, a shorterstory, or a story written at a lower grade level.The student reads stories on topic (s) that they knowabout or that interests them.The instructor teaches the student the R and A in RAPfirst, then how to paraphrase.

Phase 1: The instructor asks the student to namethe strategy step that should be performed, then theinstructor describes the step and performs it.Phase 2: The teacher asks the student to name the stepand describe the step; the instructor performs the steps.Phase 3: The student names, describes, and performsthe step.

The student is given a graphic organizer or cue card.As the student gains mastery of the strategy, theprompts should be faded.

Note. RAP = Read-Ask-Paraphrase reading strategy (Schumaker, Dentón, & Deshler, 1984).

improving reading comprehension.This strategy is extremely flexible and

an effective means of improving stu-dents' reading comprehension.

This strategy is extremely flexible and can beused for elementary, middle, and bigb scbool students

across many different content areas.

can be used for elementary, middle,and high school students across manydifferent content areas (Hagaman &Reid, 2008). Effective strategy instruc-tion requires using speciflc techniques(e.g., modehng, scaffolding). Teachersshould also remember that strategyinstruction should be customized tothe student. Instruction should contin-ue until the student has mastered theuse of the strategy (i.e., using the strat-egy correctly and consistently). Thenumber of lessons depends on howquickly the student is able to masterthe strategy. Luckily, most students canmaster the RAP strategy quickly, typi-cally in four or flve lessons of 20 to 30minutes. Gary, Betty, and Jean mas-tered the RAP strategy in four, three,and flve lessons, respectively, that wereroughly 20 minutes in length (for les-son plans, see University of Nebraska-Lincoln, n.d.). In sum, the RAP strate-gy, when taught using an effectivemodel for strategy instruction, can be

ReferencesCaccamise, D., & Snyder, L. (2005). Theory

and pedagogical practices of text com-prehension. Topics in LanguageDisorders, 25, 5-20.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D. F., Hosp, M. K., &Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading flu-ency as an indicator of reading compe-tence: A theoretical, empirical, and his-torical analysis. Scientific Studies ofReading, 5, 239-256.

Gajria, M., Jitendra, A. K., Sood, S., &Sacks, G. (2007). Improving comprehen-sion of expository text in students withLD: A research synthesis. Joumai ofLeaming Disabilities, 40, 210-225.

Gathercole, S. E., Alloway, T. P., Willis, C ,& Adams, A. (2006). Working memory inchildren with reading disabilities. Joumaiof Experimental Psychology. 93, 265-281.

Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (2002).Dynamic indicators of basic early literacyskills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute forthe Development of Education Achieve-ment.

Hagaman, J. L., Casey, K. J., & Reid, R. (inpress). The effects of the paraphrasingstrategy on the reading comprehensionof young students. Remedial and SpecialEducation.

Hagaman, J. L., & Reid, R. (2008). Theeffects of the paraphrasing strategy onthe reading comprehension of middleschool students at risk for failure in read-ing. Remedial ami Special Education, 29,222-234.

Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1996). t^akingthe writing process work: Strategies forcomposition and self-regulation. Cam-bridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Katims, D. S., & Harris, S. (1997).Improving the reading comprehension ofmiddle school students in inclusive class-rooms. Joumai of Adolescent and AdultLiteracy, 41, 116-123.

Meisinger, E. B., Bradley, B. A., Schwanen-flugel, P. J., Kuhn, M. R., & Morris, R. D.(2009). Myth and reality of the wordcaller: The relation between teachernominations and prevalence among ele-mentary school children. SchoolPsychology Quarterly, 24, 147-159.

Miller, W. H. (1993). Complete reading dis-abilities handbook: Ready-to-use tech-niques for teaching reading disabled stu-dents. New york, N\: Center for AppliedResearch in Education.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teachingchildren to read: An evidence-basedassessment of the scientific research litera-ture on reading and its implications forreading instruction. Washington. DC:National Institute of Child Health andHuman Development and U.S. Depart-ment of Education.

Pressley, M., Brown, R., El-Dinary, P. B., &Allferbach, P. (1995). The comprehensioninstruction that students need: Instruc-tion fostering constructively responsivereading. Learning Disabilities Research &Practice, 10, 215-224.

28 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Reid, R., & Lienemann, T. O. (2006).Strategy instruction for children withleamitig disabilities. New York, NY:Guilford.

Schumaker, J. B., Dentón, P. H., & Deshler,D, D. (1984). The paraphrasing strategy.Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.

Shankweiler, D., Lundquist, E., Dreyer, L.G., & Dickinson, G. G. (1996). Readingand spelling difficulties in high schoolstudents: Gauses and consequences.Readitig and Writing: An InterdisciplinaryJournal, 8, 267-294.

Swanson, H. L., Howard, G. B., & Saez, L.(2007). Reading comprehension andworking memory in children with learn-ing disabilities in reading, hi K. Gain & J.Oakhill (Eds.), Children's comprehensionproblems in oral and written language: Acognitive perspective (pp. 157-185). NewYork, NY: Guilford.

University of Nebraska-Lincoln, (n.d.)Cogtiitive strategy instmction. Retrievedfrom http://www.unl.edu/csi/

U.S. Department of Education. (2003).National assessment of educationalprogress (NAEP). Washington, DG:Author.

Vaughn, S., Levy, S., Goleman, M., & Bos,G. (2002). Reading instruction for stu-dents with LD and EBD: A synthesis ofobservation studies. The Journal ofSpecial Education, 36. 2-13.

GET YOUR NEW EDITIONOF THE NASCO SPECIALEDUCATION CATALOG.

• Sensory Stimulation • Asslstlve Technology• Language, Communication, & Reading• Basic Math, Money & Time • Life Skills

• Arts & Crafts • Resources•Therapy Supplies • And More!

1-800-558-9595Shop online at

www.eNasco.com/SpecialEducation

Jessica L. Hagaman (Wisconsin CEC),Assistant Professor, Department of SpecialEducation, Utiiversity of Wisconsin-Whitewater Kati Luschen (NebraskaCEC), Doctoral Student; and Robert Reid(Nebraska CEC). Professor, Departmentof Special Education & CommunicationDisorders, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Correspondence conceming this articleshould be addressed to Jessica L Hagaman,University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Depart-ment of Special Education, 800 Main Street,Whitewater, WI 53190 (e-mail: hagamanj®uww.edu).

TEAGHING Exceptional Ghildren, Vol. 43,No. 1, pp. 22-29.

Copyright 2010 CEC.

Ad IndexAtomic Learning, 14Attainment, cover 2, 1The Baddour Center, 48CEC, 29, 30, 39, 49, 50, 73, 75The Conover Company, 76,cover 3Crisis Prevention Institute, 51Inspiration Software, 15Landscape Structures, 31The Master Teacher, cover 4NASCO, 29N2Y, Inc., 5Pearson, 59

They are athletes, scholars, performers, employees, and activists.

they are an

i " oto US all.

Councjl forExceptionalChildren

Nominate your outstandingchild or student for a 2011

V^s/Can/AwardVisit www.cec.sped.org for moreinformation, including eligibilityguidelines and nomination forms.

mNominations must bepostmarked by October 22, 2010.

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN | SEPT/OCT 2010 29

Copyright of Teaching Exceptional Children is the property of Council for Exceptional Children and its contentmay not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's expresswritten permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.