Purpose

In this article, the author presents a conceptual framework for intervention at school-age levels reflecting upon a number of aspects raised by Kamhi (2014) in the lead article of this forum. The focus is on the persistence of traditional practices, components of language intervention, and prioritizing goals for students with language learning difficulties. Weaving together learning and generalization challenges, the author considers advanced levels of language that move beyond preschool and early elementary grade goals and objectives with a focus on comprehension and meta-abilities.

Method

Using a 3-tiered macrostructure, the author demonstrates how integrating students' background knowledge into intervention, helping them develop an awareness of structure and content interactions, and addressing the increasing demands of the curriculum provide a roadmap for improving clinical practices at school-age levels.

Conclusion

Reiterating some of Kamhi's notions, the author addresses gaps that exist between available and, often, exciting research in language, literacy, and current practices in schools. Professionals are challenged by the persistence of approaches and techniques that defy what they know about children and adolescents with language learning disabilities. Nonetheless, there are reasons to remain optimistic about the future.

References

  • Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English.American Educational Research Journal, 40, 685–730.
  • Appleby, J., Brinkley, A., Broussard, A. S., McPherson, J. M., & Ritchie, D. A. (2006). The American vision: Modern times (California ed.). New York, NY: Glencoe/McGraw Hill.
  • Bain, R. B. (2005). “They thought the world was flat?”: Applying the principles of how people learn in teaching high school history.In M. S. Donovan, & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom (pp. 179–216). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • Bashir, A. S., & Singer, B. D. (2006). Assisting students in becoming self-regulated writers.In T. A. Ukrainetz (Ed.), Contextualized language intervention (pp. 565–598). Eau Claire, WI: Thinking Publications.
  • Baumann, J. F. (2009). Intensity in vocabulary instruction and effects on reading comprehension.Topics in Language Disorders, 29, 312–328.
  • Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Worthy, J. (1995). Giving text a voice can improve students' understanding.Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 220–238.
  • Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis of linguistic structures.In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279–362). New York, NY: Wiley.
  • Bliss, L. S., McCabe, A., & Miranda, A. E. (1998). Narrative assessment profile: Discourse analysis for school-age children.Journal of Communication Disorders, 31, 347–363.
  • Boudreau, D. (2008). Narrative abilities: Advances in research and implications for clinical practice.Topics in Language Disorders, 28, 99–114.
  • Carlisle, J. F., & Goodwin, A. P. (2014). Morphemes matter: How morphological knowledge contributes to reading and writing.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 265–282). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Connor, C. M., Kaya, S., Luck, M., Toste, J. R., Canto, A., Rice, D., … Underwood, P. S. (2010). Content area literacy: Individualizing student instruction in second-grade science.The Reading Teacher, 63, 474–485.
  • Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list.TESOL Quarterly, 34, 213–238.
  • Culatta, B., Hall-Kenyon, K. M., & Black, S. (2010). Teaching expository comprehension in early childhood classrooms.Topics in Language Disorders, 30, 323–338.
  • Damico, J., Baildon, M., Exter, M., & Guo, S.-J. (2010). Where we read from matters: Disciplinary literacy in a ninth-grade social studies classroom.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 53, 325–335.
  • Diakidoy, I.-A. N., Mouskounti, T., & Ioannides, C. (2011). Comprehension and learning from refutation and expository texts.Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 22–38.
  • Duke, N. K., Cartwright, K. B., & Hilden, K. R. (2014). Difficulties with reading comprehension.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 451–468). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2008/2009). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension.Journal of Education, 189, 107–122.
  • Duke, N. K., Pressley, M., & Hilden, K. (2004). Difficulties with reading comprehension.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 501–520). New York, NY: Guildford Press.
  • Ehren, B. J. (2000). Maintaining a therapeutic focus and sharing responsibility for student success: Keys to in-classroom speech-language services.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 219–229.
  • Ehren, B. J. (2002, April16). Getting into the adolescent literacy game.ASHA Leader. pp. 4–5, 10. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
  • Ehren, B. J. (2005). Looking for evidence-based practice in reading comprehension instruction.Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 310–321.
  • Ehren, B. J. (2009). Looking through an adolescent literacy lens at the narrow view of reading.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 192–195.
  • Ehren, B. J. (2013, November). Helping older students meet Common Core Standards: Important work for SLPs. Workshop presented for the Corona-Norco Unified School District, Norco, CA.
  • Ehren, B. J., Fey, M., & Gillam, R. (2005, July). SLPs start your engines: Evidence-based practice in schools. Plenary session of the 2005 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Schools' Conference, Indianapolis, IN.
  • Ehren, B. J., Lenz, B. K., & Deshler, D. D. (2014). Adolescents who struggle and 21st century literacy.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 619–636). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Ehren, B. J., Murza, K. A., & Malani, M. D. (2012). Disciplinary literacy from a speech-language pathologist's perspective.Topics in Language Disorders, 32, 85–98.
  • Faggella-Luby, M. N., Graner, P. S., Deshler, D. D., & Drew, S. V. (2012). Building a house on sand: Why disciplinary literacy is not sufficient to replace general strategies for adolescent learners who struggle.Topics in Language Disorders, 32, 69–84.
  • Fang, Z. (2004). Scientific literacy: A systematic functional linguistics perspective.Science Education, 89, 335–347.
  • Fang, Z. (2012). Language correlates of disciplinary literacy.Topics in Language Disorders, 32, 19–34.
  • Fang, Z., Schleppegrell, M. J., & Moore, J. (2014). The linguistic challenges of learning across academic disciplines.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 302–321). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Fey, M. E., Catts, H. W., & Larrivee, L. S. (1995). Preparing preschoolers for the academic and social challenges of school.In M. E. Fey, J. Windsor, & S. F. Warren (Eds.), Language intervention: Preschool through elementary years (pp. 3–37). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
  • Fey, M. E., Richard, G. J., Geffner, D., Kamhi, A. G., Medwetsky, L., Paul, D., … Schooling, T. (2011). Auditory processing disorder and auditory/language intervention: An evidence-based systematic review.Language Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 246–264.
  • Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Student and teacher perspectives on the usefulness of content literacy strategies.Literacy Research and Instruction, 47, 246–263.
  • Gajiria, M., Jitendra, A. K., Sood, S., & Sacks, G. (2007). Improving comprehension of expository text in students with LD: A research synthesis.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 210–225.
  • Gillam, R. B., Hoffman, L. M., Marler, J. A., & Wynn-Dancy, M. L. (2002). Sensitivity to increased task demands: Contributions from data-driven and conceptually driven information processing deficits.Topics in Language Disorders, 22, 30–48.
  • Gillam, R. B., & Pearson, N. A. (2004). Test of Narrative Language. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
  • Gorrell, P. (1998). Syntactic analysis and reanalysis in sentence processing.In J. D. Fodor, & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in sentence processing (pp. 201–246). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
  • Hall, K. M., Markham, J. C., & Culatta, B. (2005). The development of the early expository comprehension assessment (EECA): A look at reliability.Communication Disorders Quarterly, 26, 195–206.
  • Hall, K. M., & Saby, B. (2009). Focus on the facts: Using informational texts effectively in early elementary classrooms.Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 261–268.
  • Hall, L. A. (2012). How popular culture texts inform and shape students' discussions of social studies texts.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55, 296–305.
  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Some grammatical problems in scientific English.In M. A. K. Halliday, & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 69–85). London, England: Falmer.
  • Hall-Kenyon, K. M., & Black, S. (2010). Learning from expository texts: Classroom-based strategies for promoting comprehension and content knowledge in the elementary grades.Topics in Language Disorders, 30, 339–349.
  • Harcourt School Publishers. (2000). Harcourt Brace social studies: The early United States. Teachers edition, Grade 5, 1. New York, NY: Author.
  • Hoffman, L. M. (2009). Narrative language intervention intensity and dosage: Telling the whole story.Topics in Language Disorders, 29, 329–343.
  • L. M. Hoffman (Ed.), (2013). Adolescent language.Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, 20, 35–74.
  • Kamhi, A. G. (2004). A meme's eye view of speech-language pathology.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 35, 105–111.
  • Kamhi, A. G. (2011). What speech-language pathologists need to know about auditory processing disorder.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 265–272.
  • Kamhi, A. G. (2014). Improving clinical practice for children with language and learning disorders.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 45, 92–103. doi:10.1044/2014_LSHSS-13-0063
  • Keenan, J. M. (2014). Assessment of reading comprehension.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 469–484). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Kidd, E. (2013). The role of verbal working memory in children's sentence comprehension: A critical review.Topics in Language Disorders, 33, 208–223.
  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  • Knickerbocker, J. L., & Rycik, J. A. (2006). Reexamining literature study in the middle grades: A critical response framework.American Secondary Education, 34, 43–56.
  • Lahey, M., & Bloom, L. (1994). Variability in language learning disabilities.In G. P. Wallach, & K. G. Butler (Eds.), Language learning disabilities in school-age children and adolescents: Some principles and applications (pp. 354–372). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Johnson, K. (2010). Text mapping plus: Improving comprehension through supportive retellings.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 53, 423–426.
  • Leland, C., Ociepka, A., & Kuonen, K. (2012). Reading from different interpretive stances: In search of a critical perspective.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55, 428–437.
  • Lesaux, N. K., Kieffer, M. J., Faller, S. E., & Kelley, J. G. (2010). The effectiveness and ease of implementation of an academic vocabulary intervention for linguistically diverse students in urban middle schools.Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 196–228.
  • Loewen, J. W. (2010). Teaching what really happened: How to avoid the tyranny of textbooks and get students excited about doing history. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  • MacDonald, M. C., & Christiansen, M. H. (2002). Reassessing memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Kaplan (1996).Psychological Review, 109, 35–54.
  • Magimairaj, B. M., & Montgomery, J. W. (2012). Children's verbal working memory: Role of processing complexity instructions in predicting spoken sentence comprehension.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55, 669–682.
  • Manak, J. (2011). The social construction of intertextuality and literacy understanding: The impact of interactive read-alouds on the writing of third graders during writing workshop.Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 309–311.
  • Mason, L. H., Meadan, H., Hedin, L., & Corso, L. (2006). Self-regulatory strategy development instruction for expository text comprehension.Teaching Exceptional Children, 38, 47–52.
  • McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches.Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 218–253.
  • McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Sinatra, G. M., & Loxterman, J. A. (1992). The contribution of prior knowledge and coherent text to comprehension.Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 79–93.
  • Miller, C. A., Leonard, L. B., & Finneran, D. (2008). Grammaticality judgements in adolescents with and without language impairment.International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 43, 346–360.
  • Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 52, 96–107.
  • Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse.Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 38–70.
  • National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington, DC: AuthorRetrieved from www.corestandards.org
  • M. A. Nippold, & C. M. Scott (Eds.), 2010). Expository discourse in children, adolescents, and adults: Development and disorders. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
  • Ogle, D. M. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text.Reading Teacher, 39, 564–570.
  • Ogle, D. M. (2010). Comprehension in social studies.In K. Ganske, & D. Fisher (Eds.), Comprehension across the curriculum: Perspectives and practices K-12 (pp. 160–174). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of?.M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, 3(pp. 545–561). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Raphael, T. E., & Au, K. H. (2005). QAR: Enhancing comprehension and test taking across grades and content areas.Reading Teacher, 59, 206–221.
  • Scott, C. M., & Balthazar, C. H. (2010). The grammar of information: Challenges for older students with language impairments.Topics in Language Disorders, 30, 288–307.
  • Scott, C. M., & Koonce, N. M. (2014). Syntactic contributions to literacy learning.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 283–301). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • C. M. Schuele (Ed.), (2013). Beyond 14 grammatical morphemes: Toward a broader view of grammatical development.Topics in Language Disorders, 33, 115–183.
  • Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter?.Topics in Language Disorders, 32, 7–18.
  • Sinatra, G. M., & Broughton, S. H. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text.Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 374–393.
  • Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
  • Soltero-González, L., Klingner, J. K., & Cano-Rodríquez, E. (2014). English language learners: Instructional practices to promote literacy development.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 654–674). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Sun, L., & Wallach, G. P. (2013). Adolescent literacy: Looking beyond core language learning deficits.Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, 20, 57–66.
  • Sun, L., & Wallach, G. P. (2014). Language disorders are learning disabilities: Challenges on the divergent and diverse path to language learning disability.Topics in Language Disorders, 34, 25–38.
  • T. A. Ukrainetz (Ed.), (2009). How much is enough?.The intensity evidence in language intervention, Topics in Language Disorders, 29, 289–376.
  • van Kleeck, A. (1994). Metalinguistic development.In G. P. Wallach, & K. G. Butler (Eds.), Language learning disabilities in school-age children and adolescents: Some principles and applications (pp. 53–98). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  • VanSledright, B. A. (2002). Confronting history's interpretive paradox while teaching fifth graders to investigate the past.American Educational Research Journal, 39, 1089–1115.
  • VanSledright, B. A. (2004). What does it mean to read history? Fertile ground for cross-disciplinary collaborations?.Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 342–346.
  • Vaughn, S., & Klingner, J. (2004). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning disabilities.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 541–555). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Villano, T. L. (2005). Should social studies textbooks become history? A look at alternative methods to activate schema in the intermediate classroom.Reading Teacher, 59, 122–130.
  • Wallach, G. P. (2011). Peeling the onion of auditory processing disorder: A language/curricular-based perspective.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 273–285.
  • Wallach, G. P., Charlton, S., & Bartholomew, J. C. (2014). The spoken–written comprehension connection: Constructive intervention strategies.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 485–501). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Wallach, G. P., Charlton, S. J., & Christie, J. (2009). Making a broader case for the narrow view? Where to begin?.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 201–211.
  • Wallach, G. P., Charlton, S. J., & Christie, J. (2010). What do you mean by that? Constructive beginnings when working with adolescents with language learning disabilities.Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, 17, 77–84.
  • Ward-Lonergan, J. M., & Duthie, J. K. (2013). Expository discourse intervention for adolescents with language disorders.Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, 20, 44–56.
  • Westby, C., Culatta, B., Lawrence, B., & Hall-Kenyon, K. (2010). Summarizing expository texts.Topics in Language Disorders, 30, 275–287.
  • Whitmire, K. A., Rivers, K. O., Mele-McCarthy, J. A., & Staskowski, M. (2014). Building an evidence base for speech-language services in the schools: Challenges and recommendations.Communication Disorders Quarterly, 35, 84–92.
  • Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
  • Wixson, K. K., Lipson, M. Y., & Valencia, S. W. (2014). Response to intervention for teaching and learning in language and literacy.In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & G. P. Wallach (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (2nd ed., pp. 637–653). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Additional Resources