In the study, there were 45 children with learning disabilities years old. These children were in self-contained special education classrooms. Thirteen children received intervention for 6 weeks and 7 children received intervention for 12 weeks. The remaining 25 children were in the control group, which received no intervention.
A four phase process is being used to identify items to go into the initial cognitive evaluation tool. The first phase was to gather information from existing literature. The results of this literature review are below.
Next, in order to rank items for possible inclusion into the tool, the WebAIM development team weighed the feasibility and importance of items e. What is its impact on users? Will feedback on the item be useful to developers?
learning disabilities comprise between % of all students reporting a disability in the college/ university setting. The number of students with learning disabilities enrolled in. Learning Disabilities, U.S. Office of Education, U.S. Office of Education, The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, The Learning Disabilities Association of America, and The Interagency Committee on Learning Disabilities). This study employed children years old. 50 children had language learning disabilities and 50 control children did not. The children, children with LLD and the control children, were given measures in intelligence, language skill, and social discourse individually in interviews over an hour and a half.
Third, with the item set narrowed, WebAIM sought the opinions of experts and developers regarding the importance and usefulness of select items. Finally, WebAIM will soon test items with users who have cognitive or learning disabilities to see if individual features make actual differences in their web experiences.
What follows is a condensed description of our literature review process and results. It is hoped that these results are useful to developers in the field now as they work to create web content that accessible to those with cognitive or learning disabilities.
Moreover, since WebAIM will not be able to add all of the important features to its tool now, it is hoped that sharing our results can forward both research and the efforts of others in the field.
Method in brief A systematic review of the literature was a first step in identifying the items to be placed in the first phase of this tool. This was a lengthy process. The hunt for potential articles began as staff members engaged in separate web-based and library repository searches for information.
We used 36 search term combinations i. We a set of criteria to determine which of the articles, published since the yearwould be included in the review e. The result was an impressive set of articles. Each article was randomly assigned to one of 4 staff for primary analysis using a protocol developed for this review.
All staff members were trained to use the protocol and reliably apply coding conventions. The inter-rater reliability for this process was Results What follows are brief descriptions of the items found in this review of the literature.
Readers will note frequency counts along with each item. Although WebAIM staff counted the number of times any item appeared across the articles — and thus have a sense of which ones appeared more often — the numbers are not a valid measure of importance or prominence of any given feature.
For example, if we read three different articles from the same set of authors describing variants of the same research, this result could appear 3 times. Since the literature was coded across several staff members there was no easy way to determine the extent to which the entire result contained duplicative analyses.
Thus, although the frequency counts provide interesting information, the reader is cautioned against inferring a direct relationship of importance from those numbers. Six categories or themes of recommendations emerged in this pool of literature.
Below, each is described along with the components mentioned in the literature. WebAIM staff created the hierarchical structure that emerged in any category.
It should be noted that these categories are not presented in rank order. Also, please note that the numbers that appear by each element are not additive within their category as some articles made direct reference to components and others made direct references to upper level categories. You may also view the full results of this review here.The Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders among People with Intellectual Disabilities: An Analysis of the Literature.
Authors. Background It has often been stated that the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in people with intellectual disabilities is greater than it is in the population as a whole. secondary analysis of the effectiveness of an intervention, such as a meta-analysis or research literature review. Brown, A.
L., & Palincsar, A. S. (). Guided cooperative learning and . Effective Reading Interventions for Kids with Learning Disabilities By: Kristin Stanberry, Lee Swanson Research-based information and advice for sizing up reading programs and finding the right one for your child with a learning disability.
This study employed children years old. 50 children had language learning disabilities and 50 control children did not.
The children, children with LLD and the control children, were given measures in intelligence, language skill, and social discourse individually in interviews over an hour and a half.
children’s literature to teach about learning disabilities.
Herein we focus on how children’s literature that portrays learning disabilities can be used to promote awareness, tive disabilities. Fewer books have characterized specific learning disabilities. However, a recent and comprehen-sive analysis located 90 fiction . This meta-analysis aims to get to an overall conclusion regarding the efficacy of psychological and educational therapy on improving the academic performance of students who have learning disabilities (math, writing and dyslexia) with surveying the results of different studies.