National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$120.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education (2002)
Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences (BBCSS)

Citation Manager

. "9 Weighing the Benefits of Placement." Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2002.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
336
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education

TABLE 9-5 Percentage of Children in Embedded Phonics Program with Standard Scores Below 90 (Percentage Normalized)

 

Pre

Post

2 Yrs

 

Decoding measures

Word attack

100

54

46

(54)

Nonword efficiency

100

83

83

(17)

Word identification

100

83

67

(33)

Sight-word efficiency

100

100

87

(13)

Gray Oral

Accuracy

79

62

35

(44)

Rate

100

100

91

(09)

Comprehension measures

Passage comprehension

75

46

21

(54)

Gray oral

71

50

52

(19)

 

SOURCE: Wagner (2000).

more girls, for example, to be identified in this group. In addition, the impact would vary by state, given their marked differences in rates of identification and placement of children with reading problems.

While the behavioral problems of students with ED/BD are well documented (Kauffman, 1993; Kerr and Nelson, 1989; Russell and Ann, 1985), the academic difficulties of this population often have not been the focus of research. However, students with ED/BD have demonstrated severe aca-

TABLE 9-6 Percentage of Children in Auditory Discrimination in Depth Program with Standard Scores Below 90 (Percentage Normalized)

 

Pre

Post

2 Yrs

 

Decoding measures

Word attack

100

16

31

(69)

Nonword efficiency

100

92

73

(27)

Word identification

100

72

61

(39)

Sight-word efficiency

100

100

88

(12)

Gray Oral

Accuracy

92

40

35

(57)

Rate

100

96

88

(12)

Comprehension measures

Passage comprehension

65

40

15

(50)

Gray oral

92

64

46

(46)

 

SOURCE: Wagner (2000).

Page
336