The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prevention and Remediation of Severe Reading Disabilities: Keeping the End In Mind
Abstract
This article addresses questions about instruction for children with severe reading disabilities in 2 ways. First, outcomes from 3 recent studies are examined within the context of a hierarchy of instructional goals derived from current theory about the processes involved in acquisition of reading skill. This analysis suggests that we still have much to learn about effective instruction for children with the most severe reading disabilities. The second part of the article reports preliminary results from a 2½-year prevention project in which 138 children received instruction by 3 different methods. The primary instructional contrast involved the intensity and degree of explicitness of instruction in phonological awareness and phonetic decoding strategies for word reading. Results showed a clear advantage in phonetic reading ability for 1 group of children at the end of the second grade. However, this group did not show corresponding advantages in word-reading vocabulary or reading comprehension. The article concludes with a discussion of weaknesses in current research that suggest questions for future intervention studies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Sources of Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension and Reading Fluency.
Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.719 · Cited by 580
Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis
Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Davis, S., & Madden, N. A. (2011) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.002 · Cited by 353
Responding to Nonresponders: An Experimental Field Trial of Identification and Intervention Methods
McMaster, K. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2005) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440290507100404 · Cited by 292
How evidence-based reform will transform research and practice in education
Slavin, R. E. (2020) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2019.1611432 · Cited by 220
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Thompson, A., Svenson, E., Yen, L., Al Otaiba, S., Yang, N., Mcmaster, K. N., Prentice, K., Kazdan, S., et al. (2001) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/074193250102200103 · Cited by 150
Metadata
- Authors
- Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A.
- Venue
- Scientific Studies of Reading
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1997-07
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 217-234
- ISSN
- 1088-8438 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-799X
- OpenAlex
- W2002560686
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 43.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevention and Remediation of Severe Reading Disabilities: Keeping the End In Mind. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s1532799xssr0103_3
- The paper
- Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1997). Prevention and Remediation of Severe Reading Disabilities: Keeping the End In Mind. Scientific Studies of Reading. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0103_3
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.