Intensive Remedial Instruction for Children with Severe Reading Disabilities

By J. Torgesen, Ann W. Alexander, R. Wagner, C. A. Rashotte, K. Voeller, T. Conway. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2001

949 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Human Factors and Ergonomics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2d9385afd47a0f7e393faa56e607548a7ddc9168

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 Human Factors and Ergonomics

Citations in the corpus

Phonological Awareness Intervention: Comparison of Fast ForWord, Earobics, and LiPS (2004, methodology): “Recently, investigations of older students (8 to 10 years old) with learning disabilities have demonstrated sizable gains in reading achievement after intervention with either ADD or an embedded phonics program that stresses application to reading (Torgesen, 2001).”
Links between early rhythm skills, musical training, and phonological awareness (2013, positive): “The first of these—phonological awareness—is an essential oral language skill that is the most studied underlying component skill of reading (Bradley & Bryant, 1978; Brady, 1986; Fletcher et al., 1994; Liberman & Shankweiler, 1979; Torgesen et al., 2001; Wagner & Torgesen, 1987).”
What Is Special About Special Education for Students with Learning Disabilities? (2003, background): “Torgesen et al. (2001) provided two sessions per day (50 minutes each session) of intensive one-on-one instruction to students with LD with severe reading problems.”
A Multi-Year Evaluation of the Effects of a Response to Intervention (RTI) Model on Identification of Children for Special Education. (2007, background): “…data suggest that evidence-based interventions can markedly decrease the need for special education services when implemented with high integrity by a research associate who is paid to do that job (Torgesen et al., 2001; Vaughn, Linan-Thompson, & Hickman, 2003; Vellutino, Scanlon, & Tanzman, 1998).”
Essentials of Assessing, Preventing, and Overcoming Reading Difficulties (2015, background): “In another NICHD-funded study, researchers showed that a large percentage of third through fifth graders with severe reading disabilities could reach an average reading level, and stay there (Torgesen et al., 2001).”
Specific reading disability (dyslexia): what have we learned in the past four decades? (2004, background): “Such delays may relate to the failure of these types of interventions to produce dramatic gains in reading fluency with older children (Torgesen et al., 2001).”
Reading Instruction for Students with LD and EBD (2002, background): “We know that more impressive gains in reading for students with learning disabilities are possible (Torgesen et al., 2001) and thus have the obligation to organize instruction to ensure that they occur.”
Critical Elements of Classroom and Small–Group Instruction Promote Reading Success in All Children (2001, background): “Although Torgesen, Alexander, Wagner, Rashotte, Voeller, Conway, and Rose (2001) recently demonstrated very powerful instructional effects for one-to-one instruction (as opposed to the larger group instruction typically provided in special education resource rooms), other studies have shown similar…”
Identifying and teaching children and young people with dyslexia and literacy difficulties : an independent report (2009, background): “A further study (Torgesen et al, 2001) entailed two 50 minute sessions per day for about 8 weeks.”
Validity of IQ-Discrepancy Classifications of Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis (2002, background): “This research also suggests that (a) reading difficulties are chronic and persistent when identified after Grade 2 (Francis, Fletcher, et al., 1996); and (b) remedial interventions after Grade 2 are less effective than early intervention (Torgesen et al., 1999, 2001).”
Inclusion Versus Specialized Intervention for Very-Low-Performing Students (2015, background): “Research shows that each of these two forms of specialized intervention can dramatically reduce achievement gaps (e.g., O’Connor & Fuchs, 2013; Torgesen et al., 2001).”
Varying Intervention Delivery in Response to Intervention: Confronting and Resolving Challenges With Measurement, Instruction, and Intensity (2007, methodology): “…for delivering interventions at the selected and targeted levels is to use a standard protocol delivered in small groups to children at risk for reading difficulties and who fail to respond to regular classroom instruction (e.g., Torgesen et al., 2001; Vaughn et al., 2003; Vellutino et al., 1996).”
Making “secondary intervention” work in a three-tier responsiveness-to-intervention model: findings from the first-grade longitudinal reading study of the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (2008, neutral): “Torgesen et al. (2001) used an alternative, ‘‘normalization’’ method.”
Comparison of dual discrepancy criteria to assess response to intervention (2005, methodology): “Previous studies identified students as adequately responding or not based on level of post-intervention skill using criteria developed from norm-referenced data (e.g., a reading standard score of 90 or higher, Torgesen et al., 2001 ) or from a benchmark criterion (e.g., 40 words/min for reading fl”
Effects of working memory training on reading in children with special needs (2011, background): “Children lagging behind in their reading development do not seem to catch up with their peers ( Torgesen, Alexander, Wagner, Rashotte, Voeller, & Conway, 2001 ) and this may have a long-term negative effect on their future school career (Savolainen, Ahonen, Aro, Tolvanen, & Holopainen, 2008).”
Self-teaching in normal and disabled readers (2004, background): “More recently, however, several second-generation training studies (e.g., Lovett et al., 2000; Torgesen et al., 2001 ) that have included more intensive training in phonological awareness and decoding skills have succeeded in demonstrating sustainable and generalized gains in real-word reading.”