Individual Differences in Response to Early Interventions in Reading: The Lingering Problem of Treatment Resisters

By J. Torgesen. 2000

873 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/29fdb6c8069591820037644cfba062755636c1e4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Principles for literacy assessment (2005, background): “However, because this strategy remains in a discourse that expects individual disabilities, the handful of children who remain unsuccessful become viewed as bona fide “disabled,” or “treatment resisters” (Torgeson, 2000).”
Response to Intervention: A Research-Based Summary (2011, methodology): “Using Oregon’s consumer guide and Florida’s rubric for selecting core reading programs as their basis, Al Otaiba, Kosanovich-Grek, Torgesen, Hassler, and Wahl (2005) reported that effective core reading programs aligned with Reading First share three important features: 1. a clearly articulated stat”
Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive abilities and their effects on reading decoding skills: g has indirect effects, more specific abilities have direct effects. (2007, background): “…researchers studying alternate identification strategies for children with severe difficulties with reading decoding skills, such as failure to respond to empirically validated interventions, have implicated some cognitive abilities as important (see Al Otaiba & Fuchs, 2002, and Torgesen, 2000).”
Reading Instruction Grouping for Students with Reading Difficulties (2003, background): “…that this limitation is mitigated somewhat by the significant number of intervention studies that have already documented students’ progress using similar intensive interventions when compared with a noninstruction control group (e.g., Torgesen, 1999; Torgesen et al., 2001; Vellutino et al., 2000).”
Auditory processing interventions and developmental dyslexia: a comparison of phonemic and rhythmic approaches (2013, background): “Torgesen (2000) reports that 2–6% of children from the 16% most at risk of reading failure make minimal progress despite concentrated exposure to such instruction, while many others fail to catch-up successfully to age-appropriate levels.”
Learner Characteristics that Influence the Treatment Effectiveness of Early Literacy Interventions: A Meta–Analytic Review (2003, background): “Phonological processing deficits represent a combination of phonological and rapid-naming deficits (Torgesen, 2000).”
The double deficit hypothesis in the transparent Finnish orthography: a longitudinal study from kindergarten to Grade 2 (2013, background): “It is possible, for example, that the combination of double deficit and behavioral problems is an eventual source for the ‘‘lingering problem of treatment resisters’’ as Torgesen (2000) put it.”
Identifying English Language Learners with Learning Disabilities: Key Challenges and Possible Approaches (2005, background): “Torgesen (2000) analyzed the results of numerous published studies of the effectiveness of intervention programs for which individual-child response data were available or could be obtained from the authors of the studies.”
Reading and School Completion: Critical Connections and Matthew Effects (2010, background): “For example, Torgesen (2000) estimated that as many as 50% of children who are most at risk for reading failure can be brought to normal levels of performance following effective early reading instruction and interventions.”
A definition of dyslexia (2003, background): “On the other hand, a number of recent studies (see Torgesen, 2000, for a review) have shown that many children identified as at risk for reading failure in kindergarten and first grade, and provided with effective instruction, developed proficient early reading skills.”
Prediction of Reading Comprehension: Relative Contributions of Word Recognition, Language Proficiency, and Other Cognitive Skills Can Depend on How Comprehension Is Measured (2006, background): “When bottom-up skills are weak and effortful, comprehension will likely be impeded because words are misidentified and because fewer cognitive resources can be devoted to the processing of meaning (Adams, 1990; LaBerge & Samuels, 1974; Lyon, 1995; Perfetti, 1985; Perfetti & Hogaboam, 1975; Perfetti,”