Response to intervention (RTI) has received attention for its potential to improve special education eligibility practices for emergent bilinguals, who are often disproportionately identified with disabilities. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the use of RTI as a means of reducing disproportionality in special education for emergent bilinguals. Seven studies met the eligibility criteria. Two studies used experimental/quasi-experimental group designs and reported that RTI was associated with reduced levels of disproportionality for emergent bilinguals. Two studies examining secondary data reported that emergent bilinguals were not disproportionately represented in special education when provided access to RTI but did not provide outcomes for schools in which RTI was not used. Three studies failed to identify evidence of an effect. Two studies reported that RTI was associated with improvements in reading. Results suggest that, although RTI offers benefits for emergent bilinguals in some contexts, its effect on disproportionality in special education is less clear.

In this study, we examine the effect of an intervention on decoding strategies of monolingual Spanish-speaking, first-grade students in Spain. Participants were first-grade Spanish-speaking monolingual students assigned to one of three conditions based on their reading risk in Spain. The first group comprised normally developing readers; the second group comprised students at risk for a reading disability who received an empirically derived intervention; the third group comprised students at risk for a reading disability who received business as usual instruction. Findings suggest that students at risk for a reading disability who received the intervention scored significantly higher than students at risk who did not receive the intervention at the end of first grade. Moreover, students at risk who received the intervention moved from a sound-by-sound decoding strategy to being able to blend sounds to read a pseudoword as effectively as normally developing students. Implications for practice and future research on Spanish decoding and word automaticity are discussed.

While spelling instruction may enhance reading interventions, there is little experimental evidence to date that examines the benefit of integrating spelling activities above and beyond explicit word reading instruction and practice alone. The study sought to investigate whether a common approach to spelling practice, cover-copy-compare (CCC), uniquely contributed to multisyllabic word reading skills of third to fifth grade students with dyslexia ( n = 32). In this brief experiment, students completed two controlled individual sessions (30-min each). Each session included two instructional components and one practice component. The practice component differed by study condition, with students randomized to either reading practice (Decoding condition) or spelling practice using a modified CCC activity (Decoding+Spelling condition). No between-group differences were observed on researcher-developed or standardized word reading and pseudoword reading measures; however, a small but statistically significant effect favored students in the Decoding condition on a standardized measure of word reading efficiency. Findings suggest students in both conditions improved their reading of multisyllabic words, and there did not appear to be a differential benefit of spelling practice via CCC compared with reading practice. We discuss implications for future research on the contribution of spelling practice to word-level reading interventions for students with dyslexia.

Although students are often taught to look for keywords when solving word problems, this strategy is erroneous. It is especially problematic when students solve inconsistent word problems that include a relational term, such as more but are not solved with the assumed operation (e.g., addition). In this study, we analyzed 112 Grade 3 students’ constructed equations on four word problems that included the word more. We compared students with and without mathematics difficulty and disaggregated based on dual-language status. Most students constructed accurate equations for the two consistent word problems, but fewer constructed accurate equations for the two inconsistent word problems. Students with mathematics difficulty, particularly those who were also dual-language learners, had the lowest rates of accurate equations on the inconsistent word problems. This analysis reinforces previous calls by researchers to avoid the ineffective keywords strategy.

A large body of research documents underlying cognitive factors, many of which are shared, in students with reading disabilities (RDs), math disabilities (MDs), comorbid reading and math disabilities (RD + MD), as well as students with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and students with RD and ADHD. In an effort to examine differences in reading, mathematics, and cognitive outcomes among these students, we investigated the outcomes between these groups across the published research literature by conducting a systematic review. A total of 16 studies met inclusion criteria. Data from a total of 1,910 participants across studies was used to answer our research questions. Mean effect size differences across studies highlight lower overall outcomes for students with RD + MD and students with RD + ADHD compared to students with RD, MD, or ADHD alone.

Despite the importance of reliable, valid, and equitable identification of students with specific learning disabilities (SLD), research has highlighted the potential for school psychologists’ personal characteristics to influence the identification decision. No studies to date have examined the broad range of individual characteristics and their potential to affect the SLD identification decision or individuals’ confidence in their decision. We conducted a study with 264 full-time practicing school psychologists to isolate the role of individual characteristics, including beliefs about SLD and decision-making style, on the SLD identification decision and confidence in the decision. Results indicated that, all else equal, a variety of individual characteristics emerged as significant predictors of the identification decision and confidence. Implications for research and practice are discussed, as well as suggestions for future research.

The purpose of this study was to determine the initial efficacy of a decimal vocabulary intervention for Grade 5 students with mathematics difficulty (MD) and to explore its impact on decimal arithmetic performance. We employed a nonconcurrent multiple-baseline, single-case research design to evaluate the effect of the intervention. Five fifth-grade students experiencing MD participated in the study and the intervention occurred 25 min per session over a total of 10 sessions. Visual analysis demonstrated that the decimal vocabulary intervention significantly enhanced both decimal vocabulary and decimal arithmetic performance, and these improvements sustained 3 weeks after the intervention. Findings suggested that students with MD could acquire decimal vocabulary through a brief intervention and retain the knowledge even after the intervention ended. Moreover, improved decimal vocabulary knowledge may positively affect their decimal arithmetic performance.

Registered Reports are a novel approach to empirical publication that involve two stages of peer review: one before a study is conducted (of prospective Introduction and Method sections), and one after the study is conducted and fully written up. In this paper, we describe Registered Reports and their potential benefits (e.g., expert peer reviewers providing input on the design of research before it is conducted, combatting publication bias by basing acceptance for publication on the quality of study plans rather than study findings) and limitations, provide an overview of the three Registered Reports in the special series, and highlight lessons learned in guest editing this special series of Registered Reports.

Geometry education is an important aspect of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, but it is often overlooked in K–12 education in the United States. Chunking strategy reduces the cognitive load demanded in the processing of information, and it has been applied as a testing accommodation for high school students with math difficulties (MD) in prior research. This study extended prior research from test accommodation to examining the effect of schematic chunking as an intervention on the geometry performance of high schoolers with MD. A multiple probe design across participants was used. Three tenth graders with difficulties in learning geometry participated in this study. We revealed that the schematic chunking strategy improved all three students’ performance in solving high school geometry problems, with varying improvement on two generalization measures. Qualitative analysis suggested that all three participants adopted the schematic chunking strategy; however, some barriers interfered with their successful use of the chunking strategy. Individual differences in responses to the schematic chunking intervention suggested that the effectiveness of the chunking strategy depends on the assumption that students have the prerequisite expertise to recognize meaningful schematic chunks and can retrieve related theorems from long-term memory. We recommended that schematic chunking strategy should be integrated with, rather than replacing, geometry content instruction.

This study reviews the literature on error patterns in mathematics among students with mathematics difficulty. We analyzed and synthesized the findings from 17 studies, focusing on the characteristics of error analysis studies, the mathematics topics examined, and the specific error patterns identified. The results revealed the following: (a) the criteria used to identify mathematics difficulties and the coding processes varied; (b) the mathematics topics investigated encompassed fractions (including fraction computation and representation), problem-solving, and general computation; and (c) a variety of common error types were identified across these mathematical domains. Implications for practitioners and researchers were discussed.