These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Do the effects of computer-assisted practice differ for children with reading disabilities with and without IQ-achievement discrepancy?
    Author: Jiménez JE, del Rosario Ortiz M, Rodrigo M, Hernández-Valle I, Ramírez G, Estévez A, O'Shanahan I, de la Luz Trabaue M.
    Journal: J Learn Disabil; 2003; 36(1):34-47. PubMed ID: 15490890.
    Abstract:
    This study was designed to assess whether the effects of computer-assisted practice on visual word recognition differed for children with reading disabilities (RD) with or without aptitude-achievement discrepancy. A sample of 73 Spanish children with low reading performance was selected using the discrepancy method, based on a standard score comparison (i.e., the difference between IQ and achievement standard scores). The sample was classified into three groups: (1) a group of 14 children with dyslexia (age M = 103.85 months; SD = 8.45) who received computer-based reading practice; (2) a group of 31 "garden-variety" (GV) poor readers (age M = 107.06 months; SD = 6.75) who received the same type of instruction; and (3) a group of 28 children with low reading performance (age M = 103.33 months; SD = 9.04) who did not receive computer-assisted practice. Children were pre- and posttested in word recognition, reading comprehension, phonological awareness, and visual and phonological tasks. The results indicated that both computer-assisted intervention groups showed improved word recognition compared to the control group. Nevertheless, children with dyslexia had more difficulties than GV poor readers during computer-based word reading under conditions that required extensive phonological computation, because their performance was more affected by low-frequency words and long words. In conclusion, we did not find empirical evidence in favor of the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability, because IQ did not differentially predict treatment outcomes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]