Spelfabet

Learning the building blocks of words - sounds, their spellings, and word parts

This page is an archive of one-page Briefings on special educational topics from the Macquarie University Special Education Centre (MUSEC) website between 2005 and 2018. When MUSEC was disestablished in 2018, these documents, many still useful and relevant, were set to disappear from the public domain. I thus sought and gained written permission from MUSEC staff to republish them, on the condition that they remained unaltered, and their authors and source were acknowledged.

Please note that information in these briefings may no longer be current, and I cannot provide any guarantees as to the accuracy of all information, since many of the topics are beyond my professional expertise as a speech pathologist. When in doubt, please search for more recent references published in well-respected, peer-reviewed journals (try searching using Google Scholar, and/or ask a subject expert), and use your own judgement.

For new briefings like these on current educational topics, try Nomanis Notes.

MUSEC Briefings archive

By the Macquarie University Special Education Centre, 2005-2018.

Either click on an issue number to take you to the Briefing as a pdf, or scroll down for both the pdf and references:

Briefing Summaries:

MUSEC Briefing 41 – The Davis Dyslexia Program

References

  • Pfeiffer, S; Davis , R; Kellog, E;  Hern C; McLaughlin,  T. F and Curry, G. (2001). The effect of the Davis Learning Strategies on first grade word recognition and subsequent education referrals. Reading Improvement, 38, 74-84

MUSEC Briefing 40 – Is it a scam?

References

  • http://raisingchildren.net.au/autism_spectrum_disorder_choosing_interventions.html#warning, which as of December 2018 seems to have been relocated to https://raisingchildren.net.au/autism/therapies-services/therapies-interventions/choosing-interventions-for-asd
  • http://www.chaddofutah.com/AssessingComplementaryand-orcontroversailtreatments.pdf
  • http://www.ncld.org/checklist/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1383&Itemid=2003&lang=en
  • Jacobson, J. W., Foxx, R. M.,  & J. A. Mulick, J. A. (2005), Controversial therapies for developmental disabilities: Fad, fashion, and science in professional practice.(pp. 331-350). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Simpson, R. L. (2005). Evidence-based practices and students with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 140-149.
  • Stephenson, J.  (2004). A teacher’s guide to controversial practices. Special Education Perspectives, 13, 66-74.

MUSEC Briefing 39 – What is direct instruction?

References

  • Becker, W.C., & Engelmann, S. (1996) Sponsor findings from Project Follow Through. Effective School Practices, 15(1).http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~adiep/ft/becker.htm
  • Carnine, D. W., J. Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E.J., & S. Tarve, S. G. (2013) What is direct instruction? http://www.education.com/reference/article/what-direct-instruction/ (Excerpt from Direct Instruction Reading, by D.W. Carnine, J. Silbert, E.J. Kame’enui, S. G. Tarver, 2004 edition, p. 11.)
  • Carnine, D. W., J. Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E.J., & S. Tarve, S. G. (2004)Direct Instruction Reading (Fourth edition). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall  (p. 11)
  • Grossen, B. (1995-6). Overview: The story behind Project Follow Through. Effective School Practices, 15(1).http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~adiep/ft/grossen.htm
  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge. (pp. 204-207)
  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.
  • Rosenshine, B. (2008). Five meanings of direct instruction.Lincoln, Illinois: Centre on Innovation and Improvement.

MUSEC Briefing 38 – Response Cards

References

  • Berrong, A. K., Schuster, J. W., MOrse, T. E., & COllins, B. V. (2007). The effects of response cards on active participation and social behaviour of students with moderate and severe disabilities. JOurnal of Physical and Developmental Disabilities, 19, 187-199. dpi 10.1007/s10882-007-9047-7
  • Gardner, R., Heward, W. L., & Grossi, T. A. (1994). Effects of response cards on student participation and academic achievement: A systematic replication with inner-city students during whole-class science instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 63-71.
  • Munro, D. W., & Stephenson, J. (2009). The effect of response cards on student and teacher behaviour during vocabulary instruction. Jounral of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 795-800.

MUSEC Briefing 37 – Cogmed

References

  • Apter, B. (2013). Improving working memory. Educational Psychology in Practice, 29(1), 96-97.
  • Chacko, A., Bedard, A.C., Marks, D.J., Feirsen, N., Uderman, J.Z., Chimiklis, A., Rajwan, E., Cornwell, M., Anderson, L., Zwilling, A. & Ramon, M. (2013). A randomized clinical trial of Cogmed Working Memory Training in school-age children with ADHD: A replication in a diverse sample using a control condition. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(6), 769-783.
  • Diamond, A. (2012). Activities and programs that improve children’s executive functions Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 335-341.
  • Egeland, J., Aarlien, A. K., & Saunes, B. (2013). Few effects of far transfer of working memory training in ADHD: A randomized controlled trial.PloS One, 8(10), 1-9.
  • Gibson, B. S., Gondoli, D. M., Kronenberger, W. G., Johnson, A. C., Steeger, C. M., & Morrissey, R. A. (2013). Exploration of an adaptive training regimen that can target the secondary memory component of working memory capacity.Memory & Cognition, 41(5), 726-737.
  • Gray, S.A., Chaban, P., Martinussen, R., Goldberg, R., Gotlieb, H., Kronitz, R., Hockenberry, M. & Tannock, R. (2012). Effects of a computerized working memory training program on working memory, attention, and academics in adolescents with severe LD and comorbid ADHD: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53, 1277-1284.
  • Holmes, J., & Gathercole, S.E. (2013). Taking working memory training from the laboratory into schools. Educational Psychology. Online May 10
  • Karin I. E. & Dahlin, K.I.E. (2010). Effects of working memory training on reading in children with special needs. Reading and Writing, 24, 479-491.
  • Kasper, L.J., Alderson, R.M., & Hudec, K.L. (2012). Moderators of working memory deficits in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 32(7), 605-617.
  • Melby-Lervåg, M., & Hulme, C. (2013). Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Developmental Psychology, 49(2), 270-291.
  • Morrison, A.B., & Chein, J.M. (2011). Does working memory training work? The promise and challenges of enhancing cognition by training working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin& Review, 18(1), 46-60.
  • Papp, K.V., & Snyder, P.J. (2012). Editorial to accompany – Training the brain: Fact and fad in cognitive and behavioral remediation. Brain and Cognition, 79(2), 158.
  • Pascoe, L., Roberts, G., Doyle, L. W., Lee, K. J., Thompson, D. K., Seal, M. L., Josev, E.K., Nosarti, C., Gathercole, S., & Anderson, P. J. (2013). Preventing academic difficulties in preterm children: a randomised controlled trial of an adaptive working memory training intervention – IMPRINT study. BMC Pediatrics, 13, 144-156.
  • Rabipour, S., & Raz, A. (2012). Training the brain: Fact and fad in cognitive and behavioral remediation. Brain and Cognition, 79(2), 159-179.
  • Redick, T.S., Shipstead, Z., Harrison, T.L., Hicks, K.L. Fried, D.E., Hambrick, D.Z., Kane, M.J., & Engle, R.W. (2013). No evidence of intelligence improvement after working memory training: A randomized, placebo-controlled study. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 142(2), 359-379.
  • Riccio C.A., & Gomes H. (2013). Interventions for executive function deficits in children and adolescents. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 2(2), 133-140.
  • Shipstead, Z., Hicks, K.L., & Engle, R.W. (2012). Cogmed working memory training: Does the evidence support the claims? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(3), 185-193.
  • Shipstead, Z., Redick, T. S., & Engle, R. W. (2012). Is working memory training effective?Psychological Bulletin, 138(4), 628-654.
  • Takeuchi, H., Taki, Y., & Kawashima, R. (2010). Effects of working memory training on cognitive functions and neural systems. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 21(6), 427-49.

MUSEC Briefing 36 – Interactive Metronome Training

References

  • Taub, G,E; McGrew, K, S & Keith, T, Z. ( 2007). Improvements in interval time tracking and effects on reading achievement. Psychology in Schools, 44,849-863.

MUSEC Briefing 35 – Mnemonics

References

  • Scruggs, T.E., Mastropieri, M.A., Berkeley, S.L., & Marshak, L. (2010). Mnemonic strategies: Evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46, 79 – 86. doi:1177/1053451210374985
  • Wolgemoth, J.R., Cobb, R.B., & Alwell, M. (2008). The effects of mnemonic interventions on academic outcomes for youth with disabilities: A systematic review. Learning Disabilities Research, 23, 1-10.

MUSEC Briefing 34 – Using Scripts to Teach Conversation Skills to Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders

References

  • Sarokoff, R. A., Taylor, B. A., & Poulson, C. L. (2001). Teaching children with autism to engage in conversational exchanges: Script fading with embedded textual stimuli. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 81-­‐ doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-­‐81
  • Wichnick, A. M., Vener, S. M., Pyrtek, M., & Poulson, C. L. (2010). The effect of a script-­‐ fading procedure on responses to peer initiations among young children with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 4,290-­‐ doi: 10.1016/j.rasd.2009.09.016

MUSEC Briefing 33 – Behavioural Optometry

References

  • American Academy of Pediatrics (2011). Joint technical report – Learning disabilities, dyslexia, and vision. Pediatrics, 127, e818-e856. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/3/e818
  • Barrett, B.T. (2009). A critical evaluation of the evidence supporting the practice of behavioural vision therapy. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics,29, 4-25

MUSEC Briefing 32 – The Tomatis Method as a Treatment for Autism

References

  • Corbett, B. A., Shickman, K., & Ferrer, E. (2008). Brief report: The effects of Tomatis sound therapy on language in children with autism. Journal of Autism and other Developmental Disorders, 38, 562-­¿566. doi: 10.1007/s10803-­¿007-­¿ 0413-­¿1.
  • Dawson, G., & Watling, R. (2000). Interventions to facilitate auditory, visual and motor integration in autism: A review of the evidence. Journal of Autism and other Developmental Disorders,30, 415-­¿421.
  • Sinha, Y., Silove, N., Wheeler, D., & Williams, K. (updated May 30, 2007). Auditory integration training and other sound therapies for autism spectrum disorders. [Cochrane Review]. In: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2009 (1). Available from The Cochrane Library, Wiley Interscience. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003681.pub2.

MUSEC Briefing 31 – Visual Activity Schedules

References

  • Allday, R.A. (2008). Using visual strategies to improve classroom success for students with autism. Special Education Perspectives, 17, 94-109.
  • Banda, D.R., Grimmett, E., & Hart, S. L. (2009). Helping students with autism spectrum disorders in general education classrooms manage transition issues. Teaching Exceptional Children, 41(4) 16-21.

MUSEC Briefing 30 – Learning Styles

References

  • Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004) Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.
  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement.London: Routledge. (pp. 195-197)
  • Kavale, K., & Forness, S. (1987). Substance over style: Assessing the efficacy of modality testing and teaching. Exceptional Children, 54,228-239.
  • Landrum, T.J., &McDuffie, K. A. (2010). Learning styles in the age of differentiated instruction. Exceptionality, 18,6-17.
  • Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2009). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9,105-119.

MUSEC Briefing 29 – Functional Communication Training

References

  • Durand, V. M., & Carr, E. G. (1992). An analysis of maintenance following functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(4), 777-794. doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-777
  • Mirenda, P. (1997). Supporting individuals with challenging behavior through functional communication training and AAC: Research review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13(4), 207-225. doi:10.1080/07434619712331278048
  • Wacker, D. P., Berg, W. K., Harding, J. W., Barretto, A., Rankin, B., & Ganzer, J. (2005). Treatment effectiveness, stimulus generalization, and acceptability to parents of functional communication training. Educational Psychology, 25(2), 233-256.           doi:10.1080/0144341042000301184

MUSEC Briefing 28 – Fast ForWord Language

References

  • Borman, G.D., Benson, J.G., & Overman, L. (2009). A randomized field trial of the Fast ForWord language computer-based training program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31, 82-106.
  • Cohen, W., Hodson, A., O’Hare, A., Boyle, J., Durrani, T., McCartney, E., Mattey, M., Naftalin, L., & Watson, J. (2005). Effects of computer-based intervention through acoustically modified speech (Fast ForWord) in severe mixed receptive-expressive language impairment: Outcomes from a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 48, 715-729.
  • Gillam, R.B., Loeb, D.F., Hoffman, L.M., Bohman, T., Champlin, C.A., Thibodeau, L., Widen, J., Brandel, J., & Friel-Patti, S. (2008). The efficacy of Fast ForWord language intervention in school-age children with language impairment: A randomized controlled trial. Journal
    of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 97-119.
  • Given, B.K., Wasserman, J.D., Chari, S.A., Beattie, K., & Eden, G.F. (2008). A randomized, controlled study of computer-based intervention in middle school struggling readers. Brain and Language, 106, 83-97.
  • Pokorni, J.L., Worthington, C.K., & Jamison, P.J. (2004). Phonological awareness intervention: Comparison of Fast ForWord, Earobics, and LiPS. Journal of Educational Research, 97, 147-157.
  • Rouse, C.E., & Krueger, A.B. (2004). Putting computerized instruction to the test: A randomized evaluation of a ‘scientifically based’ reading program. Economics of Education Review, 23, 323-338.
  • Strong, G. K., Torgerson, C. J., Torgerson, D., & Hulme, C. (2010). A systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the ‘Fast ForWord’ language intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52, 224-235.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 27: Schema-based Instruction for Mathematics Word Problem-solving

References

  • Jitendra, A. (2002). Teaching students math problem-solving through graphic representations. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 34 (4), 34-38.
  • Jitendra, A. (2007). Solving math word problems: teaching students with leaning disabilities using schema-based instruction, Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
  • Jitendra, A. K., George, M. P., Sood, S., & Price, K. (2010). Schema-based instruction: facilitating mathematical word problem solving for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Preventing School Failure, 54, 145-151

MUSEC Briefing Issue 26: Cellfield Program

References

  • The Efficacy of the Cellfield Intervention for reading difficulties: An integrated computer-based approach targeting deficits associated with dyslexia. Lee-Ann Prideaux, Kerry A. Marsh and Dimitri Caplygin. (2005) Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties. 10, 2, 51-62.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 25: Strategic Use of Classroom Seating

References

  • Kern, L., & Clemens, N. H. (2008). Antecedent strategies to promote appropriate classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 65-75.
  • Wannarka, R., & Ruhl, K. (2008). Seating arrangements that promote positive academic and behavioural outcomes: a review of empirical research. Support for Learning, 23,89-93.
  • Wheldall, K., & Bradd, L. (2010). Classroom seating arrangements and classroom behaviour. In K. Wheldall (Ed.), Developments in educational psychology (second edition) (pp. 181-195). London: Routledge.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 24: Specific and Contingent Teacher Praise

References

  • Beaman, R., & Wheldall, K. (2010). Teachers’ use of approval and disapproval in the classroom. In K. Wheldall (Ed.), Developments in educational psychology (second edition) (pp. 153-180). London: Routledge.
  • Gable, R. A., Hester, P. H., Rock, M. L., & Hughes, K. G. (2009). Back to basics: Rules, praise, ignoring, and reprimands revisited. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44, 195-205
  • Sutherland, K. S., Wehby, J. H., & Copeland, S. R. (2000). Effect of varying rates of behavior-specific praise on the on-task behavior of students with EBD.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8 (1), 2-8.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 23: The Listening Program®

References

  • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2004). Auditory IntegrationTraining [Technical Report]. Available from http://www.asha.org/policy/. doi:10.1044/policy.TR2004-00260
  • Crncec, R., Wilson, S. J. & Prior, M. (2006). The cognitive and academic benefits of music to children. Educational Psychology, 26, 579-594. Doi:10.1080/01443410500342542
  • Nwora, A. J.  & Gee, B. M. (2009). A case study of a five-year-old child with pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified using sound-based interventions. Occupational Therapy International, 16,25-43. Doi:10.1002/oti.263

MUSEC Briefing Issue 22: Irlen Tinted Lenses and Overlays

References

  • American Academy of Ophthalmology. (2009). Policy Statement: Learning Disabilities, Dyslexia and Vision. Retrieved 30th December 2009 from http://www.aao.org/about/policy/upload/Learning-Disabilities-Dyslexia-Vision-2009.pdf
  • Hyatt, K. J., Stephenson, J., & Carter, M. (2009). A review of three controversial educational practices: Perceptual motor programs, sensory integration and tinted lenses. Education and Treatment of Children, 32, 313-342.
  • Kavale, K. A., & Mostert, M. P. (2004). The positive side of special education: Minimizing its fads, fancies and follies. Lanaham, MD: Scarercrow Education.
  • Parker, R. M. (1990). Power, control, and validity in research, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 613-620

MUSEC Briefing Issue 21: Choosing Effective Programs for Low Progress Readers

References:

  • Department of Education, Science and Training. (2005). Teaching reading.Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, DHHS. (2000).Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read (00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  • Rose, J. (2006). Independent review of the teaching of early reading: Final Report.London: Department for Education and Skills.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 20: Picture Exchange Communication System

References:

  • Preston, D. & Carter, M. (in press). A review of the Efficacy of the Picture Exchange Communication System intervention. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, DOI 10.1007/s10803-009-0763-y.
  • Sulzer-Azaroff, B., Hoffman, A. O., Horton, C. B., Bondy, A., & Frost, L. (2009). The Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS): What do the data say? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities,24, 89-103.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 19: Sensory Integration

References:

  • Arendt, R. E., MacLean, W. E., & Baumeister, A. A. (1988). Critique of sensory integration therapy and its application to mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 92, 401-411.
  • Hoehn, T. P., & Baumeister, A. A. (1994). A critique of the application of sensory integration therapy to children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 338-350.
  • Leong, H. M., & Carter, M. (2008). Research on the efficacy of sensory integration therapy: Past, present and future. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 32, 83-99.
  • Devlin, S., Healy, O., Leader, G., & Reed, P. (2008). The analysis and treatment of problem behavior evoked by auditory stimulation. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2, 671-680.
  • Devlin, S., Leader, G., & Healy, O. (2009). Comparison of behavioral intervention and sensory-integration therapy in the treatment of self-injurious behavior. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 223-231.
  • Vargas, S., & Camilli, G. (1999). A meta-analysis of research on sensory integration treatment. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 53, 189-198.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 18: Explicit Instruction for Students with Special Learning Needs

References:

  • Apps, M., & Carter, M. (2006). When all is said and done, more is said than done: Research examining constructivist instruction for students with special needs. Australian Journal of Special Education, 31, 107-125.
  • Ellis, L. A. (2005). Balancing approaches: revisiting the educational psychology research on teaching students with learning difficulties.Australian Education Review (No. 48). Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research. Can be accessed at http://research.acer.edu.au/aer/6/
  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement.London, UK: Routledge.
  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 17: Response to Intervention

References:

  • Bender, W. N. & Shores, C. (Eds.). (2007). Response to intervention: A practical guide for every teacher.Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
  • Council for Exceptional Children (2008). Responsiveness to intervention: A collection of articles from Teaching Exceptional Children.Washington, DC: Council for Exceptional Children.
  • Fuchs, L. S. & Fuchs, D. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39, 14-20.
  • The US National Centre on Response to Intervention is now called the Centre on Multi-Tiered System Of Supports.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 15: Weighted Vests

References:

  • Baranek, G. T. (2002). Efficacy of sensory and motor interventions for children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32, 397-422.
  • Stephenson, J., & Carter, M. (2009). The use of weighted vests with children with autism spectrum disorder and other disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39, 104-114.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 14: Precision Requests

References:

  • Kehle, T. J., Bray, M. A., & Theodore, L. A. (2000). A multi-component intervention designed to reduce disruptive classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 475-481.
  • Musser, E. H., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J. & Jenson, W. R. (2001). Reducing disruptive behaviors in students with serious emotional disturbance. School Psychology Review, 30, 294-304.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 13: Book Levelling

References:

  • Brabham, E. G., & Villaume, S. K. (2002). Leveled text: The good news and the bad news. The Reading Teacher, 55, 438-441.
  • Jamison, R., L, & Burton, W. (2002). Matching texts and readers: Leveling early reading materials for assessment and instruction. The Reading teacher, 55, 348-356.
  • Pearce, S., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2006). MULTILIT book levels: Towards a new system for levelling texts. Special Education Perspectives, 15, 38-56.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 12: Social Stories

References:

  • Ali, S., & Frederickson, N. (2006). Investigating the evidence base of Social Stories. Educational Psychology in Practice, 22, 355-377.
  • Reynhout, G., & Carter, M. (2006). Social stories for children with disabilities. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 36, 445-469.
  • Rust, J., & Smith, A. (2006). How should the effectiveness of Social Stories to modify the behaviour of children on the autism spectrum be tested? Autism, 10, 125-138.
  • Sansosti, F., Powell-Smith, K., & Kincaid, D. (2004). A research synthesis of social story interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 194-204.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 11: Dore/DDAT Exercise Program

References:

  • Reynolds, D., Nicolson, R. I., & Hambly, H. (2003). An evaluation of an exercisebased treatment for children with reading difficulties. Dyslexia, 9, 48-71
  • Snowling, M., & Hulme, C. (2003). A critique of claims from Reynolds, Nicolson & Hambly (2003) that DDAT is an effective treatment for children with reading difficulties – ‘lies, damned lies and (inappropriate) statistics’, Dyslexia, 9, 127-133
  • White, S., Milne, E., Rosen, S., Hansen, P., Swettenham, J., Frith, U., & Ramus, F. (2006). The role of sensorimotor impairments in dyslexia: A multiple case study of dyslexic children. Developmental Science, 9, 237-269

MUSEC Briefing Issue 10: Parents Identifying Giftedness

References:

  • Alsop, G. (1997). Coping or counselling: Families of intellectually gifted students. Roeper Review, 20(1), 28-. Retrieved November 11, 2005 from Expanded Academic ASAP database.
  • Copenhaver, R. W., & McIntyre, D. J. (1992). Teachers’ perceptions of gifted students. Roeper Review, 14, 151-153.
  • Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented(5th ed., pp. 32-44). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Gear, G. H. (1976). Accuracy of teacher judgment in identifying intellectually gifted children: A review of the literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20, 478-489.
  • Jacobs, J. C. (1971). Effectiveness of teacher and parent identification of gifted as a function of school level. Psychology in the Schools, 8, 140-142.
  • Plunkett, M. (2000). Impacting on teacher attitudes toward gifted students. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 9(2), 33-42.
  • Richert, E. S. (1997). Excellence with equity in identification and programming. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education(pp. 75-88). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 9: Facilitated Communication

References:

  • Jacobson, J. W., Foxx, R. M., & Mulick, J. A. (2005). Controversial therapies for developmental disabilities; Fad, fashion and science in professional practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Jacobson, J. W., Mulick, J. A., & Schwartz, A. A. (1995). A history of facilitated communication: Science, Pseudoscience, and Antiscience: Science working group on facilitated communication. American Psychologist, 50, 750-765.
  • Montee, B. B., Miltenberger, R. G., & Wittrock, D. (1995). An experimental analysis of facilitated communication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 189-200.
  • Shane, H. C. (1994). Facilitated communication: The clinical and social phenomenon. San Diego, CA: Singular Press.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 8: Teacher Aides

References:

  • Giangreco, M. F., & Broer, S. M. (2005). Questionable utilization of paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes? Focus on Autism and other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 10-26.
  • Giangreco, M. F., Yuan, S., McKenzie, B., Cameron, P., & Fialka, J. (2005). “Be careful what you wish for…” Five reasons to be concerned about the assignment of individual paraprofessionals. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(5), 28-34.
  • Giangreco, M. F., Edelman, S., Broder, S. M., & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities; Literature from the last decade. Exceptional Children, 68, 45-63.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 7: Behaviour Chain Interruption Strategy

References:

  • Carter, M., & Grunsell, J. (2001). The behavior chain interruption strategy: A review of research and discussion of future directions. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 37-49.
  • Grunsell, J., & Carter, M. (2002). The behavior chain interruption strategy: Generalization to out-of-routine contexts. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 378-90.
  • Hunt, P., & Goetz, L. (1988). Teaching spontaneous communication in natural settings using interrupted behavior chains. Topics in Language Disorders, 9, 58-71.
  • Sigafoos, J., & Littlewood, R. (1999). Communication intervention of the playground: A case study on teaching requesting to a young child with autism. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 46, 421-29.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 6: Knowing what works

References:

MUSEC Briefing Issue 5: BrainGym®

References:

  • Hammill, D. D. (2004). What we know about correlates of reading. Exceptional Children, 70, 453-468.
  • Kavale, K., & Mattson, P. D. (1983). “One jumped off the balance beam”: Meta-analysis of perceptual-motor training. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 165-173.
  • Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thompson, S. (2003). What is special about special education for students with learning disabilities? Journal of Special Education, 37, 140-147.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 4: Curriculum-Based Measurement of Reading

References:

  • Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
  • Deno, S. L. (2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 184-192.
  • Fuchs, L. S. (2004). The past, present, and future of curriculum-based measurement research. School Psychology Review, 33, 188-192.
  • Madelaine, A., & Wheldall, K. (1999). Curriculum-based measurement of reading: A critical review. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 46, 71-85.
  • Madelaine, A., & Wheldall, K. (2004). Curriculum-based measurement of reading: Recent Advances. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 51, 57-82.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 3: Reading Recovery for Young Struggling Readers

References (updated November 2010):

  • Reynolds, M., & Wheldall, K. (2007). Reading Recovery twenty years down the track: Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54, 199-223.
  • Reynolds, M., Wheldall, K. & Madelaine, A. (2009). The devil is in the detail regarding the efficacy of Reading Recovery: A rejoinder to Schwartz, Hobsbaum, Briggs, and Scull. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 56, 17-35.
  • Schwartz, R. M., Hobsbaum, A., Briggs, C., & Scull, J. (2009). Reading Recovery and evidence-based practice: A response to Reynolds and Wheldall (2007). International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 56(1): 5-15.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 2: Behavioural Momentum

References:

  • Ardoin, S. P., Martens, B. K., & Wolfe, L. A. (1999). Using high-probability instruction sequences with fading to increase students compliance during transitions. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 32, 339-351.
  • Davis, C., & Reichle, J. (1996). Variant and invariant high-probability requests: Increasing appropriate behaviours in children with emotional-behavioural disorders. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 29, 471-482.
  • Lee, D., Belfiore, P. J., Scheeler, M. C., Hua, Y., & Smith, R. (2004). Behavioural momentum in academics: Using embedded high-p sequences to increase academic productivity. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 789-801.
  • Nevin, J. A. (1996). The momentum of compliance. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 29, 535-547.
  • Romano, J. P., & Roll, D. (2000). Expanding the utility of behavioural momentum for youth with developmental disabilities. Behavioral Interventions, 15, 99-111.
  • Wehby, J. H., & Hollahan, M.S. (2000). Effects of high probability requests on the latency to initiate academic tasks. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 33, 259-262.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 1: Multisensory Environments to Reduce Challenging Behaviour in People with Severe Disabilities

References:

  • Chan, S., Fung, M. Y., Tong, C. W., & Thompson, D. (2005). The clinical effectiveness of a multisensory therapy on clients with developmental disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 131-142.
  • Hogg, J., Cabet, J., Lambe, L., & Smeddle, M. (2001). The use of ‘Snoezelen’ as multisensory stimulation with people with intellectual disabilities: A review of the research. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 22, 353-372.
  • Martin, N. T., Gaffan, E. A., & Williams, T. (1998). Behavioural effects of long-term multisensory stimulation. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 37, 69-82.
  • Stephenson, J. (2002). Characterization of multisensory environments: Why do teachers use them? Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 15, 73-90.
  • Withers, P. S., & Ensum, I (1995). Successful treatment of severe self injury incorporating the use of DRO, a Snoezelen room and orientation cues. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 164-167.