JAASEP FALL 2006 Part 6 of 7
All series
- ADHD Series
- Assessment in Special Education Series
- Autism Spectrum Disorders Series
- Bullying of Children
- Classroom Management Series
- Diagnosis of Students with Disabilities and Disorders Series
- Discipline of Students in Special Education Series
- Early Intervention Series
- Genetics in Special Education Series
- How To Series
- IEP Components
- Inclusion Series
- JAASEP – Research Based Journal in Special Education
- LD Report
- Lesser Known Disorders
- NASET News Alert
- NASET Q & A Corner
- NASET Survival Guides
- Parent Teacher Conference Handouts
- Resolving Disputes with Parents Series
- RTI Roundtable
- Severe Disabilities Series
- Special Education: What Do the Latest Numbers Tell Us?
- Special Educator e-Journal – Latest and Archived Issues
- The Practical Teacher
- Treatment and Support for IEP Students with Disabilities
- Working with Paraprofessionals in Your School
According to the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) and the subsequent reauthorizations of this law, an individual’s learning disability is partially determined by a discrepancy between an individual’s potential and academic achievement in the areas of oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, and mathematical abilities (Mercer, 1997; Stewart & Kluwin, 2001). This criterion for the determination of a learning disability is more difficult to apply to individuals who are deaf since hearing loss predisposes the individual to difficulties in the acquisition of language and the academic progress of students (Stewart & Kluwin, 2001). However, students who are deaf should follow typical patterns of growth and achievement (Pollack, 1997). In addition, deafness is usually not accompanied by indicators of the processing problems that are characteristics of learning disabilities such as visual-perceptual problems, attention deficits, perceptual-motor difficulties, severe inability to learn vocabulary and English structures, consistent retention and memory problems, or consistent distractive behaviors or emotive factors (Berent, Samar, Parasnis, 2000; Elliot, Powers, & Funderberg, 1988; Pollack, 1997; Samar, 1999; Samar, Berent, Parasnis, 1998; Stewart, 2001).
Abstract
Research has identified many strategies that are effective in helping students to improve spelling performance. Among the strategies that are cited in a review of the literature are the multi-sensory approach and See/Cover/Write/Compare approach. Using a single-subject behavioral dynamics experimental design with replication across subjects, this study demonstrated the effectiveness of a multi-sensory, See/Cover/Write/Compare intervention procedure to improve written spelling performance in students who were Deaf with characteristics consistent with Learning Disabilities (DCLD). Three students received daily tutoring sessions incorporating a multi-sensory, See/Cover/Write/Compare intervention procedure. Dependent measures addressed the spelling performance of each participant, interobserver reliability, procedural integrity, and consumer satisfaction. Each participant was evaluated in the areas of formative spelling performance, summative spelling performance, and spelling retention. Results from the data demonstrated improvement in spelling for all three participants across all spelling lists.
