Reading for special needs

Reading for special needs has become an area of interest as the understanding of reading has improved. Teaching children with special needs how to read was not historically pursued under the assumption of the reading readiness model[1] that a reader must learn to read in a hierarchical manner such that one skill must be mastered before learning the next skill (e.g. a child might be expected to learn the names of the letters in the alphabet in the correct order before being taught how to read his or her name).[2] This approach often led to teaching sub-skills of reading in a decontextualized manner, preventing students with special needs from progressing to more advanced literacy lessons and subjecting them to repeated age-inappropriate instruction (e.g. singing the alphabet song).

During the 1970s, the education system shifted to targeting functional skills that were age-appropriate for people with special needs.[3][4] This led to teaching sight words that were viewed as necessary for participation in the school and community (e.g. exit, danger, poison, go). This approach was an improvement upon previous practices, but it limited the range of literacy skills that people with special needs developed.[2]

A newer model for reading development, the "emergent literacy" or "early literacy" model, purports that children begin reading from birth and that learning to read is an interactive process based on children's exposure to literate activities. It is under this new model that children with developmental disabilities and special needs have been considered to be able to learn to read.[5][6]

  1. ^ van Kleeck A, Schuele CM (November 2010). "Historical perspectives on literacy in early childhood". Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 19 (4): 341–55. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0038). PMID 20581109. S2CID 44839260.
  2. ^ a b Elizabeth B. Keefe; Susan R. Glaser; Susan Copeland; Elizabeth B. Keefe (2007). Effective literacy instruction for students with moderate or severe disabilities. Paul H. Brookes Publishing. ISBN 978-1-55766-837-0. OCLC 77011619.
  3. ^ Browder, D.; Flowers, C.; Ahlgrim-Delzell, L.; Karvonen, M.; Spooner, F.; Algozzine, R. (2004). "The Alignment of Alternate Assessment Content with Academic and Functional Curricula". The Journal of Special Education. 37 (4): 211–223. doi:10.1177/00224669040370040101. ISSN 0022-4669. S2CID 73640629.
  4. ^ Brown, L.; Branston, M. B.; Hamre-Nietupski, S.; Pumpian, I.; Certo, N.; Gruenewald, L. (1979). "A Strategy for Developing Chronological-Age-Appropriate and Functional Curricular Content for Severely Handicapped Adolescents and Young Adults". The Journal of Special Education. 13 (1): 81–90. doi:10.1177/002246697901300113. ISSN 0022-4669. S2CID 145477722.
  5. ^ K.A. Erickson (2000). "All children are ready to learn: An emergent versus readiness perspective in early literacy assessment". Seminars in Speech and Language. 21 (3): 193–202, quiz 202-3. doi:10.1055/s-2000-13193. PMID 10958428. S2CID 19651351.
  6. ^ D.A. Koppenhaver & K.A. Erickson (2003). "Natural emergent literacy supports for preschoolers with autism and severe communication impairments". Topics in Language Disorders. 23 (4): 283. doi:10.1097/00011363-200310000-00004. S2CID 145683425.