Integrated Reading and Writing Interventions for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Review of the Literature

In this systematic review of literature that spans 1975–2015, integrated reading and writing interventions for students with learning disabilities (LD) or students with academic difficulties were evaluated to understand the extant research, identify encouraging practices, and guide future research. Ten studies met inclusion criteria and each study was evaluated according to the relevant What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) design standards. Eight of the 10 investigations were conducted with students in grades 4–8. While only 4 of the 10 studies met WWC design with or without reservations, results from these studies are encouraging. Study findings suggest several areas for immediate future research relating to methodological and treatment variables and considerations for classroom instruction in order to respond to advanced expectations for the successful integration of reading and writing across subjects. In addition to employing stronger experimental designs and additional replications of encouraging studies, future research should explore the utility of integrated reading and writing interventions with secondary students with who have academic difficulties.     

Post-qualitative research

This article maintains that all research involves crossing (i.e., researching across difference) and then explores how scholars have approached issues of cross-group feminist research. The article is divided into three major sections. The first section explores issues of women?s diversity and their meaning for cross-group feminist research. The second investigates concerns raised with regard to contradictions inherent in this type of research. The third section reviews and discusses a number of strategies feminist and other scholars of qualitative research have used to address problematic issues and contradictions involved in cross-group research.     

Teachers' and At‐Risk Students' Stimulated Recall of Instruction

Abstract

Using the stimulated recall of instruction methodology, we interviewed teachers and students at risk for referral to special education about their perceptions, judgments, and decision making during the course of instruction. The results of the teacher interviews suggest that teachers respond to complex collections of student cues in their decision making about students. Teachers described themselves as more frequently monitoring the at‐risk students, although their attempts to modify instruction consisted primarily of attempts to motivate these students. The at‐risk students indicated awareness that they are experiencing difficulty in class, had somewhat less understanding of how teachers attempt to help them, and responded with anger and frustration to their learning problems.     

Evaluating Growth for ELL Students: Implications for Accountability Policies

In recent years, many U.S. states have introduced growth models as part of their educational accountability systems. Although the validity of growth‐based accountability models has been evaluated for the general population, the impact of those models for English language learner (ELL) students, a growing segment of the student population, has not received sufficient attention. We evaluated three commonly used growth models: value tables or transition matrices, projection models, and student growth percentiles (SGP). The value table model identified more ELL students as on track to proficiency, but with lower accuracy for ELL students. The projection and SGP models were more accurate overall, but classified the fewest ELL students as on track and were less likely to identify ELL students who would later be proficient. We found that each model had significant trade‐offs in terms of the decisions made for ELL students. These findings should be replicated in additional state contexts and considered in the development of future growth‐based accountability policies.     

Critically reflexive dialogue and praxis: Academic/practitioner reflections throughout a formative evaluation of Circles® USA

Reflections about the use of critically reflexive praxis by academic/practitioners are offered based on a case study of a formative evaluation of Circles^® USA, a nonprofit organization coordinating initiatives across the U.S. working to move families out of poverty. Critically reflexive praxis is theorized as featuring several themes including acknowledging different levels of context, critical dialogue with collaborators, engaging cultural difference and intersectionalities, problematizing power relations and relationships among researchers and collaborators, and occurring throughout the research project. Examples of critical dialogic reflexivity and navigating common tensions that emerge throughout such community engagement projects are detailed during three phases: planning and design; fieldwork and interviews; and outcomes, applications, and implications.     

Prejudices Unshelved: Variation in Attitudes toward Controversial Public Library Materials in the General Social Survey, 1972–2014

Using the General Social Survey from 1972–2014, we examine variation in attitudes toward retaining controversial materials in libraries. Previously controversial topics have become much more widely accepted. We find that other controversies remain, showing how global conflicts become intertwined in local cultural controversies, and how the perceived threat from particular groups informs public concern with disseminating information from those groups. We find that more frequent library users are somewhat less likely to want to remove controversial books from the shelves, although some of these relationships are explained by variation in the respondent’s age, race, and other characteristics.