Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Effect of Supplemental Reading Instruction on Fluency Outcomes for Children With Down Syndrome: A Closer Look at Curriculum-Based Measures

King, Seth, Rodgers, Derek, Lemons, Christopher J.·2022·Exceptional Children
DOI 10.1177/00144029221081006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Research supports the efficacy of intensive literacy instruction for children with moderate intellectual disabilities and Down syndrome (DS). However, much of the literature features measures closely aligned with evaluated interventions. Despite their increasing role in instruction, curriculum-based measures (CBM) are rarely featured in reading studies involving DS. Increasing the use of CBM in research has the potential to provide insight into the effectiveness of intervention and address concerns regarding the utility of approaches predicated on CBM. This single-case design study used CBM to examine the performance of children with DS ( N = 17) who had largely exhibited gains on intervention-aligned measures following an intensive reading intervention. Results of multilevel modeling were mixed, with significant ( p < .05) effects relegated to letter- and first-sound fluency. No more than 29% of participants met goals created using a procedure derived from CBM. Findings have implications for future studies and implementation of literacy interventions for children with DS.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/00144029221081006

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. 10.1080/09362835.2015.1064417 · DOI
  2. 10.1177/0741932513494020 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Allor J. H., 2010, Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45
  4. 10.3758/s13428-012-0231-z · DOI
  5. Bailey T. R., 2019, Strategies for setting high-quality academic individualized education program goals
  6. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1044/1058-0360.0904.319 · DOI
  8. Boat T.F., 2015, Mental disorders and disabilities among low-income children
  9. 10.1177/001440291007600307 · DOI
  10. 10.1177/1063426618806279 · DOI
  11. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02557.x · DOI
  12. 10.1177/0265659012474674 · DOI
  13. Burroughs N., 2019, Teaching for excellence and equity: Analyzing Teacher Characteristics, Behaviors and Student Outcomes with TIMSS, 6, 10.1007/978-3-030-16151-4 · DOI
  14. Callender A., 2020, Advances in sociology research, 31
  15. 10.1016/j.jsp.2020.01.003 · DOI
  16. 10.1352/1944-7558-116.2.111 · DOI
  17. 10.26741/abaespana/2020.cooper3e · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.ridd.2015.04.001 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.edurev.2019.01.001 · DOI
  20. 10.3758/BRM.41.2.372 · DOI
  21. 10.1177/0040059914522966 · DOI
  22. Fuchs L. S., 2020, Journal of Learning Disabilities
  23. 10.1111/ldrp.12162 · DOI
  24. 10.1002/ajmg.c.31439 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Good R. H., 2013, DIBELS Next technical manual
  26. 10.1177/0741932514530572 · DOI
  27. 10.1177/0014402919881357 · DOI
  28. 10.1007/s12124-014-9290-2 · DOI
  29. 10.1093/biomet/76.2.297 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.3109/17518423.2015.1100689 · DOI
  31. Kaufman A. S., 2004, Kaufman brief intelligence test
  32. 10.2307/2533558 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1080/09362835.2020.1749631 · DOI
  34. 10.1177/0741932517745491 · DOI
  35. 10.1080/09602011.2013.815636 · DOI
  36. Laws G., Gunn D. (2002). Relationships between reading, phonological skills and language development in individuals with Down syndrome: A five year follow-up study. Reading and Writing, 15 (5), 527–548. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016364126817. · DOI
  37. 10.4324/9781315150666 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.1598/RRQ.45.2.1 · DOI
  39. Lemons C.J., 2019, Essentials of intensive intervention, 71
  40. 10.1177/1088357615618941 · DOI
  41. 10.1016/j.jsp.2017.07.006 · DOI
  42. 10.1177/001440291307900402 · DOI
  43. 10.1007/s11145-019-09945-8 · DOI
  44. 10.1037/met0000096 · DOI
  45. 10.1037/a0026744 · DOI
  46. 10.1080/21622965.2017.1317484 · DOI
  47. 10.1016/j.ridd.2018.05.004 · DOI
  48. Roch M., 2019, International review of research in developmental disabilities, 56, 213
  49. Rodadaugh E., 2017, Northeastern Educational Research Association Conference
  50. 10.1352/0895-8017(2007)112[155:PAARNP]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  51. 10.1037/a0032964 · DOI
  52. 10.1111/jcpp.12070 · DOI
  53. 10.1080/00273171.2018.1466681 · DOI
  54. 10.1007/s00265-010-1037-6 · DOI
  55. 10.1177/0145445516676750 · DOI
  56. Tindal G., 2013, ISRNEducation, 1
  57. 10.1177/1534508418819797 · DOI
  58. 10.3109/13682820903003514 · DOI
  59. 10.1016/j.jsp.2018.02.002 · DOI
  60. What Works Clearinghouse, 2020, What works clearinghouse standards handbook, Version 4.1
  61. 10.1080/17489539.2014.917780 · DOI
  62. 10.1177/001440291207800204 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
King, S., Rodgers, D., & Lemons, C. J.
Venue
Exceptional Children
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2022-03-29
Volume
88
Issue
4
Pages
421-441
ISSN
  • 0014-4029
  • 2163-5560
DOI
10.1177/00144029221081006
Cited by
7
References
1
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Funders
Institute of Education Sciences (R324A110162)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.