ARTIFACT #2: DYSLEXIA OVERVIEW

Artifact #2 is part of a research paper completed for SPED 637. It is a section that includes general
information about dyslexia. The section is rather lengthy with the information are scattered
throughout, so highlights/comments have been added to help with locating pertinent passages.

******************************************************************************************************************
(excerpt from: Topical Investigation for Spelling (SPED637)

Objective
The objective of this topical investigation is to come up with a better plan for spelling in my
first-grade inclusion class. As a special education teacher who used to pull students out to a
resource room, I have had regular opportunities to pop into general education homerooms and see
how different teachers present spelling. My observations agree with those by Weiser & Mathes
(2011) who describe spelling in early grades as usually treated as a separate subject, with little or no
attention to the structure of how words word beyond memorization of a common pattern found in
words in a weekly word list. The differences I have seen between classes are largely cosmetic,
having to do with appearance and which specific words are on the lists. The basic process is
essentially the same: students have a week to learn ten words, mainly accomplished by writing the
words repeatedly in some fashion (over and over, in a sentence, on a crossword, with playdoh, with
stamps, etc). I have observed teachers spending time teaching behavior expectations for using the
playdoh or stamps, and modeling what the end product should look like, but I dont think I have
actually seen anyone teach spelling. Spelling practice is used as time for the teacher to attend to
other things, as students may be left to form letter strings on their own. The consistent result was
that some students 100% every test without a bump, some score varyingly but decently, and some
bomb it week after week.

Screening through resources for information on how to help students with dyslexia with
spelling has been very enlightening about the spelling process as a whole. I have organized my
findings in a manner that helps me to understand what to do about my spelling lessons for students
with dyslexia: Comment [Office1]: This project focuses on understanding
why spelling interventions are needed for dyslexia, and what
Objective kinds of strategies might be of help.

Scope and impact of dyslexia

Why intervene early?
What is spelling?
Why intervene for spelling?
Interventions for spelling
 Are we still missing something?
A plan for spelling
Continuing questions
Glossary
References
Appendix

Scope and impact of dyslexia Comment [Office2]: Scope and impact of dyslexia upon and
following high-school graduation.
The following statistics illustrate how pervasive dyslexia is:
It is estimated that dyslexia affects 20% of the US population in general.
80% of those with a learning disability are dyslexic.
30% of the population has difficulty noticing phonemes (Shaywitz & Shaywitz, 2008).

Many special education students impacted by dyslexia end up in the category known as SLD,
or specific learning disability. With 80% of LD affected by dyslexia, and given the current struggle in
schools to deal effectively with the issue, I think it is reasonable to infer that the impact of dyslexia is
reflected in graduation rates. For class of 2011:
Of the total number of students in special education, 40.7% were SLD.
Of those SLD, 68% graduated with a regular high-school diploma, 12% graduated with
alternate qualifications, and 19% dropped out (Cortiella, 2013).

The impact of dyslexia continues after graduation. In 1998 Snow, Burns, & Griffin warned that
the literacy level required in adulthood has increased in complexity, especially with the advent of
technology in todays jobs. This continues to prove true as technology has continued to advance
and change the scape of entry-level jobs. Cortiella (2013) points out a need to examine alternate
forms of high-school diplomas, as these are often created without input from stakeholders---namely, Comment [Office3]: Completing high-school without
earning a diploma significantly impacts a graduates ability
student, family, business owners, post high school education (college, career specific), and any other to qualify for work, training programs, and enlistment into
the military. Cortiella is advocating for alternative forms of
entities who need to deal with graduates wielding certificates of varying credentials. She also points high-school diplomas that may be helpful to students who
cannot qualify for a regular diploma. As there is a reported
out that the unemployment rate of those who hold less than a high-school diploma is 12%, double 80% incidence of dyslexia among students with learning
disabilities (next paragraph down), this would help many
that of workers who have confirmation of they have completed some sequence of education (high graduates with dyslexia graduate with more helpful
credentials.
school through PhD).
Dyslexia may not be the sole culprit for low graduation rates and post-graduation difficulties,
but with an incidence of 80% LD and 20% general population surely it is a significant factor. This
means that improvements in addressing dyslexia would result in better outcomes for many, many
students. Research does indicate that earlier interventions result with better outcomes.

Why intervene early?

Hart & Risley (1995) describe the long term effects that poverty has on childrens vocabulary
acquisition, resulting in a huge gap when compounded over the years. A child of 3-years has been
awake about 100-hours per week, which totals to about 15,000-hours. There are differences in the
quantity and content of the talking that the children experience in those 15,000-hours. These
differences do have a correlation to income brackets. Generally speaking, the higher the income, the
more conversation happens that is beyond functional directions/corrections (e.g., stop that, sit
here, time to eat). In a video-taped interview (Reading Rockets, 2014), Risley shared the following:
A child in a professional family:
has heard 30-million words
has a working vocabulary of 1100 words
A child in a working-class family:
has heard 20-million words
has a working vocabulary of 700 words
A child in a welfare family:
has heard less than 10-million words
has a working vocabulary of 500 words

I wonder if this study parallels what happens to students with unaddressed dyslexia. If I think
of readiness for decoding skills as a measure of skills wealth for beginning readers, then having
dyslexia simulates an impoverished state. Dyslexia would have a similar effect as poverty because
the condition demarks a level of decoding income that is significantly below that of non-disabled
students. An observation along the same line of thought was made in an article by Spear-Sterling &
Stemberg (2001), who found students affected by dyslexia to be in a sub-class even amongst low-
performing students.
I think that dyslexia parallels the state of poverty in another crucial way: the ratio of
encouraging-to-discouraging experiences swings markedly towards the discouraging. Hart & Risley
(1995) found that in impoverished environments, there is also a marked difference what children
experiences: Comment [Office4]: Postulating on a parallel between the
long term effects of vocabulary that is impoverished due to
A child in a professional family hears: finances and vocabulary that is severely limited due to
dyslexia.
32 affirmatives and 5 prohibitions per hour
 which is a ratio of 6 encouraging experiences to 1 discouraging experience
A child in a working-class family hears:
12 affirmatives and 7 prohibitions per hour
a ratio of 2 encouraging experiences to 1 discouraging experience
A child in a welfare family hears:
5 affirmatives and 11 prohibitions per hour
a ratio of 1 encouraging experience to 2 discouraging experiences

Does this not sound very much like what a student with dyslexia experiences? Because
phonemes and phonics are the standard go-to methods in toddler board-books, on Sesame Street
and other childrens shows, for digital educational games, in preschool, and with anyone who sits
down to read a bedtime story, these students may have been banging their head against phonics for
YEARS by the time they enter Kindergarten---upon which they are immersed all day in phonics with
peers who DO get it. And what is the recommended intervention route? MORE INTENSIVE work
with the very things they find so difficult---were talking trying to change neuro-pathways! I think if
someone were to measure it, their rates of encouraging-to-discouraging experiences with reading
and writing would be a lot more dismal than 1:2. No wonder they are very much in need for some Comment [Office5]: Postulating on the high number of
negative messages that students with dyslexia experience in
kind of encouragement! It makes sense to me that Apel & Masterson recommend that intervention the early years of school.

plans include a component emphasizing self-regulation and self-esteem (2001). Its not just
assistance with the techniques for achieving literacy that educators need to intervene for. We also
need to intervene as soon as possible with explanations for reading difficulties, and assure
bewildered children that they ARE smart and capable of mastering text.
Many research articles regarding intervention agree on beginning at an early age. As the
condition of dyslexia is believed to spring from innate structures and processes of the brain, children
Comment [Office6]: Kids with a dyslexic profile include
those who are very bright but just cant decode---it would be
reassuring to explain that their difficulties with reading are
not a reflection of how smart they are, and to establish a
growth mindset towards reading/writing/math.

with dyslexia are at a phonological disadvantage from birth and the cumulative effect upon reading
and writing become clearly apparent by first-grade (Reading Rockets, Spelling, 2014). If dyslexia is
not addressed early, effects will linger through elementary grades and into adulthood (Amtmann,
Abbott, & Berninger 2008). There are many sources that offer whole lists and entire programs of
recommended interventions for dyslexia, but which would apply particularly to spelling?

What is spelling?
Spelling is a linguistic skill that entails:
phoneme-to-grapheme correspondence
orthographic knowledge
phonological knowledge
 morphological knowledge (Wanzek, Vaughn, Wexler, Swanson, Edmonds, & Kim,2015).
developing a repertoire of basic-to-sophisticated strategies for each of the areas listed
above, and developing the ability to select the appropriate strategy needed for any
particular word (Apel & Masterson, 2001).
unique neural signatures for each of the listed areas;
exercising any of the neural pathways will stimulate crossover effects upon the other
areas, so intervention of one area also improves other areas (Nagy, Berninger, &
Abbott, 2006).
a genetic hallmark that is as strong as that for decoding (Reading Rockets, Spelling,
2014).

In a language arts program that is phonics based, the first way children are taught to spell
words is by sound. They begin by writing the letter of just the initial sound of words. Once they are
fairly adept at identifying and writing just the first sound of words, then emphasis is placed on noticing
the last sound. Once the first and last sounds are present in writing, then emphasis is placed on
sounding out the middle of the word. Per Louisa Moat (Reading Rockets, Spelling, 2014):
Inventive spelling is beneficial for young children 4 to 5 years old, who have not yet
entered into formal instruction.
From Kindergarten and on, children should be explicitly taught how to write high-
frequency words and common patterns of phonological and orthographical
representation

With respect to Dr. Moats, my experiences are such that I find her timeline a bit ambitious! At
the school I work at, some students arrive in Kindergarten ready to start working on words, but most
children are not at this stage yet. Many have never attended preschool and come from homes where
literacy was not an emphasis, so we are starting with an introduction to the alphabet and how to hold
pencils---not exaggerating! Not bitter, either---jus sharin the reality! Even with children who arrive
with the alphabet mastered, most parents are not aware of the sound-spelling stage and need to be
coached on this. So usually, at best we are starting on high-frequency words from the 3rd-quarter of
Kindergarten---it is not unusual that a teacher will decide to delay even as far as 4th-quarter if the
class is simply not ready.
I found it interesting that Moats recommends using inventive spelling as a diagnostic tool:
When students reach the point when a reader can make sense of what they wrote, then
the students are somewhat out-of-the-woods
 Continued, consistent errors become sign of trouble though teachers/families need to
keep in mind that there is a very wide range of aptitude for spelling and that there are
many bright people who cannot spell.
The chronic symptoms of dyslexia will begin to emerge from 1st-grade where students
may present any or all of the following, in varying degree:
-cannot remember high-frequency words
-continue to spell words in a discorrespondent way
-difficulty of speech sounds
-lack of strategies for thinking about words
-the genetic hallmark for spelling is as strong as that for reading/decoding, so a
familial history of difficulties with reading may become apparent Comment [Office7]:
In first-grade, these are signs to watch for that may indicate
dyslexia.

Amtmann, et al. (2008) explained that assessing some of the skills spelling entails can provide
predictions for student performance in a number of areas:
Performance in the following areas predicts response to reading instruction:
-phonological awareness
Comment [Office8]: Dyslexia presents itself uniquely in
each person who is affected. This breakdown of specific
performance benchmarks is the type of reference I would
need to have on hand in order to identify not just problematic
areas, but also what route would access students strengths.

-phonological working memory

-accurate phonological decoding

Performance in the following predicts individual response / growth curve:

-phonological awareness
-orthographic awareness
-rapid automatic naming (RAN)

Performance in the following predicts response to spelling instruction:

-impaired in handwriting
-impaired in phoneme-to-grapheme correlation

Performance in the following predicts response to composition instruction:

-handwriting automaticity
-grapho-motor planning for sequential finger movements

The overall impact is that just as fluency with decoding lowers the cognitive load and must be
in place in order to read whole passages fluidly & with comprehension, fluency with spelling must in
place to similarly enable writing to happen in whole flowing passages. Spelling is one of the most
common difficulties for students with LD (Wanzek, Vaughn, Wexler, Swanson, Edmonds, & Kim,
(2015). A common theme amongst these research studies, educational professionals, dyslexia
specialists, neuroscientists, and advocates is that formal instruction with spelling is needed. Comment [Office9]: Spelling provides fluency with written
expression. Formal instruction in spelling is needed for
students with dyslexia.

Why intervene for spelling? Comment [Office10]: Continuing with the impact of
spelling, and the importance of early intervention.
Intervention for spelling is desirable because:
Those who spell are more likely to write longer and better structured compositions.
Spelling knowledge is linked to reading comprehension (Reading Rockets, Spelling,
2014).
Spelling helps with development of vocabulary because spelling:
-becomes linked to pronunciation and meaning
-influences phonemic and syllabic segmentation of words
-enhances memory for pseudo-words
-and impacts detection of oral rhyming words (Ehri & Rosenthal, 2007).
Handwriting and spelling are related to composing in grades 1-6 (Puranik & AlOtaiba,
2012).
Spelling is an integral part of the writing process. One way to describe the writing process is
that it occurs in three steps. Puranik & AlOtaiba (2012) reports on the work of Hayes & Flower (1997)
and Beringer, Yates, Cartwright, Rutber, Remy, & Abbott (1992):
Three steps of a mature writing process are planning, translating, and reviewing/editing
(Hayes, et al. 1997).
Spelling is the what happens during the translating step.
Spelling is the bridge from thought to writing.
Translating involves two sub-processes: (1) text-generation by mentally shifting
thoughts into mental representations of words, sentences, and discourse, and (2)
transcription by changing mental representations into written symbols (Beringer, et al.,
1992).

When there is a lack of adequate translation skills, considerable cognitive load is given to
forming letters, spelling words and much less cognitive attention available for composing fluid text.
This is why automatic letter writing is a very good predictor of both text length and text quality.
Fluency with phoneme-to-grapheme correlation reduces the processing and production demands of
transcribing thoughts to paper, and this has a positive influence on the quality and amount of written
text children produce. In this manner, handwriting and spelling directly and significantly impact writing
composition in the first through sixth grades (Puranik & AlOtaiba, 2012).

Which interventions address spelling?

I jumped into the recommended readings/viewings of this course, thinking ah, here lie the
answers! Then I read Snow, Burns, & Griffin (1998) claim there is little evidence that children
experiencing difficulties need something radically different in terms of supports than children at low
risk. . . They do need more more intensive levels [of instruction]. . .excellent instruction is the best
intervention. At first I thought, really? I ran into that opinion again and again---in research studies,
at dyslexia conference, in videos, from advocates, in resources ranging from 1990s through 2014---
so, now I think, REALLY?!? I am painfully aware that I have left non-readers who came through my
rooms malingering in the gap called Teacher Efficacy, so I wont argue about my instruction needing
excellence. I realize that all I have experienced is less than a drop in the Dyslexia Bucket that holds
20% of the US populace and 80% of LD. Research is based on the masses, so I will be open to
whats recommended even though I never dreamed it would be more of the same objectives, along
the same cognitive route. Dr. Narkon attests that it works, so what I need to do is sift out what makes Comment [Office11]: A part of my research findings was
being so surprised, and truly disappointed, to find that the
instruction in phonics excellent for students who do not appear to inherently think that way. most common recommendation for students experiencing
difficulties was for teachers to intensify instruction (i.e., do
Santoro, Coyne, & Simmons (2006) states that spelling instruction that is carefully and MORE of the same thing) rather than find a different
cognitive route. I am wishing to utilize strategies that work
intentionally integrated into a beginning reading program can help students improve both spelling and with students strengths rather than only pound on things that
are inherently difficult for them . . .
reading skills. Spelling is described as application of phonological awareness, morphological
awareness, semantic knowledge, and orthographic knowledge, so interventions would need to
address these areas---interventions found throughout the resources reviewed for this assignment are
sorted by area of concern in the green shaded table below. Per Santoro, et al., there are three
general principles of effective instruction for students at risk of reading disability:
conspicuous instruction
-direct and explicit
-brings to light the strategies that peers seem to figure out for themselves
-utilizes extensive teacher modeling

instructional scaffolding
-scaffold external support: intensive in initial stages, gradual release as skills increase
-scaffold materials used: specialist equipment used to support explicit instruction are
matured to regular classroom materials

opportunities for practice with high-quality feedback

 -multiple opportunities with immediate high-quality feedback
-small interactive groups are good for this
-provisions for immediate error correction

Wanzek, Vaughn, Wexler, Swanson, Edmonds, & Kim (2015) concur with the above, with a few
additions:
limiting the number of words learned consecutively to 3
computer-assisted instruction (CAI)
systematic study and word practice procedures
reciprocal peer tutoring in the following manner

Are we still missing something?

The Tier3 intervention described by Weiser & Mathes (2011) specifies that 75% of [lang arts]
instructional time was used to provide instruction on encoding. This is a LOT of time! I dont think we
would be able to do that without pulling out to a resource room, or getting stuck in stations mode in
the inclusion rooms. I am not arguing that the kids dont need the time. I am wondering if utilizing
some of the right-brain strategies would help to cut down on the time? I think one reason this takes
so long is that we are insisting the kids develop a cognitive route that is not their natural one. . .since
the goal is to achieve automaticity with phonics---why not utilize their natural route to memorization
that methods like those of Davis and Craft? Yes, eventually they will need decoding to make their
way through life but for at least the alphabet, word families, beginner morphemes, and sight-words?
Apel & Masterson (2001) and The Understood Team (2014) state that it is very important to
boost self-esteem and self-advocacy. I think it is inherently difficult to convince kids that this
awkward, clumsy phonics cognitive path they struggle everyday with is NOT an indicator of how
smart they are---kids KNOW when they feel awkward and clumsy and cannot dance. I am not
rejecting the research that says MSL works. I just think would be beneficial to incorporate some of
the methods that actually honor the kids natural cognitive processes. I think learning to read while
incorporating their natural way of thinking is why the Davis client feedback includes words like
happy, smiling, confident, and loves to read! Those clients arent cured---they just feel smart
and capable because of what they can do with their dyslexia. I think utilizing something of alternative Comment [Office12]: Boosting self-esteem and self-
advocacy, and establishing a growth mindset are particularly
cognitive routes will inherently provide the kids something authentic to celebrate. important to students with dyslexia.

I have not come across yet a study that compares Davis / Craft techniques to MSL. There are
too many successes with the right-brain strategies for these to be crock. I am glad that The
Understood Team (2014) explains that research can change, can be corrected and updated. For
instance, they also commented about the need to see an object from different perspectives (a chair
from different viewpoints) in order to recognize the object---this skill becomes an impediment w/letters
because a reader cannot shift viewpoints for letters. This is what Davis has been saying---I am
wondering if its his words that are being repeated? or, is another source coming to same
conclusions?
Older kids & adults may prefer the Davis/Craft methods that can jump right into whole sight
words. Things would be out of order, actually, but it could be done. I have tried some of the Craft
silly-story flashcards with some 1st-grade students who could not make any sound-symbol
correlations. Even at 1st-grade, it took some convincing till they trusted that the strategy worked! And
it didnt make them reject phonics work---if anything, they were more tolerant and wanted to
participate in regular spelling tests even though it was just a few words of the list that they were able
to do. They were listening for those words and trying in-between.
Honoring the pathways of dyslexia is not just being warm fuzzy nice. Marazzi (2011) states
that the 20% of population affected by dyslexia are overrepresented amongst corporate executives.
In 2002, Fortune magazine interviewed dyslexic achievers who attest that SLD is in fact a virtue, a
talent that schools and institutions---the dominant language system---are unable to understand and
value. . .dyslexic managers maintain that their professional success is not due to nominally effective
processes of therapeutic normalization (that is, in spite of their SLD) but [is directly due] to the fact
that their gift could be put to use thanks to the specific nature and functioning of the new economy..
. What was considered a linguistic handicap and a pathology less than a generation ago is potentially
a competitive advantage for digital capitalism. Comment [Office13]: The dyslexics different way of
thinking is credited as an asset by a growing population of
The impact of dyslexia does indeed continue after graduation. Perhaps if we can establish a highly successful corporate executives who are dyslexic.

balance between traditional path and dyslexic-path, wed see more of the extraordinary creativity and
intelligence blossom down in the 98%. Perhaps thered be more ads reading, Intern Program,
dyslexia preferred.
Comment [Office14]: Postulating on a quite possible end-
result of troubleshooting dyslexia in ways that reveal and
emphasize students strengths.

Continuing questions
The Understood Team (2014) explained a few things about research:
Different researchers have a different approaches and focus areas, so this gives the
impression there are different dyslexias. It may be helpful to think of dyslexia as
underlying cognitive skills that are weak or strong, and so lead to different issues.
While reading through research (or trying to figure out a child), try to identify the
underlying cognitive skills that are making it difficult to understand the sound system.
 Then extrapolate how that particular profile of strengths/weaknesses should inform
instruction.
Comment [Office15]: A working definition of dyslexia by
The Understood Team.
Scientific discoveries are not always correct, but can be updated later.
Since my new spelling plan is researched based, these truths about research are applicable.
This means my new spelling plan will ever be a work-in-progress. I thought I returned to school to
find The Answer, but that doesnt seem to be the case. I think we can only learn to be better judges
of whats-out-there. Whats reputable out in the big picture, selecting what may work for the students
profiles in my room, and then learning to deliver the strategy effectively.

The Gap Between Law and Implementation Comment [Office16]: Another fact about dyslexia is that
The Understood Team (2014) spoke on why the changes to instruction has been so slow, despite changes to instruction that would address dyslexia are slow
to happen in our schools.
actual policies and/or law already in place regarding dyslexia?

1) There is a field of study called science of implementation. Three things are required to move
something that is law into the classroom: training, organization, and leadership.

2) Training for teachers on dyslexia

would require follow-up in form of a practicum where the teacher works with a student
w/dyslexia under the guidance of a coach.
training CANNOT be accomplished in just one workshop, teachers need to learn
-need to learn the structure of language (eg 6syllable types of English)
-how to teach that structure
-how to teach to someone who doesnt easily get it
-under guidance of a real expert
-at least a years time, with several visits/feedback

3) Organization
creating time for instructional blocks (eg, 2 30min per week will NOT make a difference)
access to materials

4) Leadership
the people who understand it and follow-through
some school districts embrace the need to change, and some resist it

References

Adams, M.J., & Osborn, J. (1990). Beginning reading instruction in the united states. retrieved from
https://goo.gl/xmSPjV
Amtmann, D., Abbott, R.D., & Berninger, V. (2008). Identifying and predicting classes of response to explicit
phonological spelling instruction during independent composing. Journal of Learning Disabilities,
41(3), 218-234.
Apel, K., & Masterson, J.J. (2001). Theory-guided spelling assessment and intervention: A case study.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 182-195.
Cortiella, C. (2013). Diplomas at risk: A critical look at the graduation rate of students with learning
disabilities. Retrieved from: http://www.advocacyinstitute.org/resources/Diplomas.at.Risk.pdf
Davis, R. (1997). The gift of dyslexia. New York, NY: The Penguin Group
Ehri, L.C. & Rosenthal, J. (2007). Spellings of words: A neglected facilitator of vocabulary learning. Journal of
Literacy Research, 34(4), 389-409.
Goodwin, A.P., Soyeon, A. (2010). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions: effects on literacy
achievement of children with literacy difficulties. Ann. of Dyslexia, 60, 183-208.
Griffin, P., Snow, C., & Burns, S. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by age 3. Meaningful
Differences in the Everyday Experiences of Young American Children. Baltimoore, MD: Brookes
Publishing Company.
Marazzi, C. (2011). Dyslexia and the economy. Anegelaki: Journal of the Theorectical Humanities, 16(3).
Nagy, W., Berninger, V.W., & Abbott, R.D., (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy
outcomes in upper elementary and middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1),
134-147.
Nies, K.A., & Belfiore, P.J. (2006). Enhancing spelling performance in students with learning disabilities.
Journal of Behavior and Education
Puranik, C.S. & AlOtaiba, S. (2012). Examining the contribution of handwriting and spelling to written
expression in kindergarten children. Read Writ, 25(1), 1523-1546. doi:10.1007/s11145-011-9331-x
Reading Rockets. (2014, April 25). Meaningful differences: The word gap. [video clip of interview]. Retrieved
from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOLzEUmXV5s .
Reading Rockets. (2014, April 25). Spelling. [video clip of interview]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yhl3_eqKoWI .
Richards, T., Berninger, V., Nagy, W., Parsons, A., Field, K., & Richards, A. (2005). Brain activation during
language task contrasts in children with and without dyslexia: Inferring mapping processes and
assessing response to spelling instruction. Educational & Child Psychology, 22(2), 62-80.
Santoro, L.E., Coyne, M. D., & Simmons, D.C. (2006). The reading-spelling connection: developing and
evaluating a beginning spelling intervention for children at risk of reading disability. Learning
Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(2), 122-133.
Shaywitz, S.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (2008). The education of dyslexic children from childhood to young adulthood.
The Annual Review of Psychology. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093633
Strattman, K., & Hodson, B. W. (2005). Variables that influence decoding and spelling in beginning readers.
Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 21(2), 165-190.
The Understood Team. (2015, July 15). From brain science to teaching, experts weigh in at dyslexia
understood. [video of interview]. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/YiodZb .
Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Swanson, E.A., Edmonds, M., & Kim, A. (2015). A synthesis of spelling
and reading interventions and their effects on the spelling outcomes fo students with LD. Journal of
Learning Disabilites, 39(6), 528-543.
Weiser, B., & Mathes, P. (2011). Using encoding instruction to improve the reading and spelling
performances of elementary students at risk for literacy difficulties: A best-evidence synthesis. Review
of Educational Research Season, XX(X), XXX-XXX. doi:10.3102/0034654310396719 retrieved from
AERA http://rer.aera.net