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.     

Doors to diversity: The first amendment implications of telephone company video options under the telecommunications act of 1996

Video market entry options available to telephone companies under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 have First Amendment implications that will affect the constitutional value of telephone video. These entry options impose regulatory constraints upon providers and differ in potentials for provider speech, speaker access, and content diversity. The author concludes that the Act's open video system option best advances First Amendment interests in increased diversity of and access to speech.     

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.     

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.     

An Examination and Validation of an Adapted Youth Experience Scale for University Sport

Limited tools assess positive development through university sport. Such a tool was validated in this investigation using two independent samples of Canadian university athletes. In Study 1, 605 athletes completed 99 survey items drawn from the Youth Experience Scale (YES 2.0), and separate a priori measurement models were evaluated (i.e., 99 items, YES 2.0, YES for Sport [YES-S]). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) results indicated issues with model fit. Post-hoc modifications improved fit, resulting in a 46-item, 9-factor model with five positive and four negative dimensions. In Study 2, 511 athletes completed the same items. The resultant model was confirmed using both CFA (comparative fit index [CFI] = .911, standardized root mean square residual [SRMR] = .056, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = .040) and ESEM (CFI = .956, SRMR = .023, RMSEA = .034). The resultant University Sport Experience Survey provides a reliable and factorially valid instrument for measuring development in university sport.