Under the fitted model, non-LD students who start with high vocabulary but low reading comprehension are expected to grow nearly twice as much in reading comprehension as LD students starting at the same point¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r3 · q1
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? In the vector plot of expected one-year growth, for students starting with high vocabulary knowledge and low reading comprehension, students without an LD are expected to grow nearly twice as much in reading comprehension as students with an LD. → Quinn 2020

Evidence¶

Quinn 2020¶

Quinn, Jamie M.; Wagner, Richard K.; Petscher, Yaacov; Roberts, Greg; Menzel, Andrew J.; Schatschneider, Christopher. (2020). Differential Co-Development of Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading Comprehension for Students with and without Learning Disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000382

q1 · i? · associational · r3

Numerical result derived from the fitted multiple-group LCS model and displayed as a vector plot (Figure 3) of expected growth by starting value, grouped by LD status, with 90% confidence ellipses and a 200-student subset of actual estimates. This is a model-derived expectation, not a measured experiment.

"for children who start with high vocabulary knowledge but low reading comprehension skills, students who do not have an LD are expected to grow nearly twice as much in reading comprehension as compared to students who have an LD (see the bottom right portion of Figure 3)"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Reading and Language — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• Vocabulary development was broadly similar for students with and without a learning disability, while reading comprehension gains decelerated for both groups yet the LD group started over a standard deviation lower — related
• Students with a learning disability started about one standard deviation lower in reading comprehension and did not catch up to typically developing peers by fourth grade, which the authors interpret as a developmental deficit — related