RESOURCE DIRECTORY
ARTICLES, RESOURCE MATERIALS,
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES,
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE RESOURCES
& MUCH MORE FOR FAMILIES LIVING
WITH DYSLEXIA
INTERNATIONAL DYSLEXIA ASSOCIATION TEXAS BRANCHES
IDATX
2024
Rawson Saunders is dedicated to providing the extraordinary education
dyslexic learners deserve and to training educators to develop the full
potential of each and every dyslexic student. To learn more about our
award-winning school and teacher training center—where we offer
in-person or remote training opportunities—visit rawsonsaunders.org.
Dyslexic learners
deserve an
extraordinary
education.
12
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
21
12
24
30
32
36
40
Letter From the Presidents,
Misty Clack, Jennifer Vastola,
Lisa Baker & Sharon Roberts
Intervention for Students With
Dyslexia: Advances in Research
and Lingering Questions
Nathan H. Clemens
Mission Statements and Board Members,
Misty Clack, Jennifer Vastola,
Lisa Baker & Sharon Roberts
What Do Students With Dyslexia,
ADHD, and Autism Need to Be
Successful?
Dr. Norrine Russell
Having Better Executive
Functioning at Work: Ten Key Tips.
Cheryl Chase, Ph.D.
Dyslexi…uh? Understanding the
Most Common Learning Disability
Tifany K. Peltier, Ph.D.
Does the Student Fit the
Curriculum or Does the
Curriculum Fit the Student?
Kelli Sandman-Hurley, Ed.D.
Why Are Our Children Not
Reading at Grade Levels?
Malt Joshi, Ph.D.
Creating Access to Higher-Level
Text to Engage Young, Adolescent,
and Adult Dyslexic Readers in
Schools and Prisons: Providing a
Word-Level Scafold to Improve
Wide Reading in Content Area
Text and Literature
Sarah K. Blodgett
Reaching the Emergent Bilingual
Learner With Dyslexia - Strategies
& Approaches, Bilingual Article,
Concepción Cummings &
Norma Gómez-Fuentes, M.Ed.
51
Advertisements and
Sponsors
FROM THE PRESIDENTS...
Hello DyslexiaCon24 Participants,
The IDA Texas Branches are excited to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the International Dyslexia
Association annual conference with you! As we pause to appreciate the long history of the Internation-
al Dyslexia Association and the impact that the annual conferences have had on students, parents,
teachers, administrators, researchers, policy makers, and educational institutions, we are reminded that
Texas has played an important role in the overall mission of the IDA. The Dallas, Houston, and Austin
Branches, chartered in 1973, 1978, and 1988 respectively, each boast a rich history of supporting the
science of reading and Structured Literacy throughout Texas. On this milestone anniversary, the three
Texas branches are reminded that through collaboration, we can achieve remarkable and transforma-
tive goals.
In fact, this very publication, the Texas Resource Directory, is a testament to the incredible impact we
can achieve through focused and passionate collaboration. In 1995, IDA Houston pioneered the schol-
arly resource guide for their branch, laying the foundation and inspiration for this joint venture. We are
proud to have worked together to attract renowned authors, sponsors, and resources to feature in this
directory. We are thankful to our esteemed authors for submitting such thought provoking articles and
our valuable sponsors who have supported this publication and our mission!
Furthermore, we are also thrilled to participate in the IDA Collective Impact campaign to drive state-level
policy on dyslexia and enhancing university and program accreditation standards. To that end we are
supporting the pre-conference IDA Accreditation Symposium which will feature experts and practitioners
discussing the importance and benefits of IDA accreditation, structured literacy, and IDA’s Knowledge
and Practice Standards (KPS).We are committed to ensuring that all educators are proficient in
Structured Literacy and that all K-5 children learn to read through IDA’s college and university
accreditation.
In Texas, we are better together and will continue to advance the International Dyslexia Association’s
mission along with all the branches and global partners. We all have the vision of Structured Literacy
in every K-5 classroom for every child across the nation and around the world.
Misty Clack, M.Ed
President, IDA Dallas
Sharon Roberts
President, IDA Austin
Jennifer Vastola, M.Ed
President, IDA Houston
Lisa Baker, M.Ed
President-Elect, IDA Austin
TEXAS RESOURCE DIRECTORY • FALL 2024
Dyslexia Policy and State Infrastructure Workgroup Mission Statement -
Our mission is to develop and implement comprehensive policies and infrastructure to ensure efective, evidence-
based Structured Literacy instruction for all students, with a particular focus on those with dyslexia. We are com-
mitted to promoting the adoption of the Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading (KPS) and
advocating for the Knowledge and Practice Examination for Efective Reading Instruction (KPEERI) as essential
components of teacher preparation and professional development. Trough strategic collaboration and advocacy,
we aim to create a state-wide system that supports students with dyslexia in achieving their full potential.
University and Independent Program Workgroup Mission Statement -
Our mission is to establish and maintain rigorous standards for Structured Literacy teacher preparation programs
within universities and independent institutions. We are committed to aligning programs with the Knowledge and
Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading (KPS) and promoting the Knowledge and Practice Examination for
Efective Reading Instruction (KPEERI) as a critical component of teacher certifcation. By fostering collabora-
tion and innovation, we aim to produce highly qualifed educators equipped to provide efective instruction for all
students, including those with dyslexia. Empowering teachers to lead, create and implement rigorous Structured
Literacy programs
IDA Houston Board
Jennifer Vastola M.Ed., President
Mallary Lattanze M.Ed., LDT, CALT, Vice President
Andrew Mercker, Treasurer
Judy Patterson, Secretary
Jennifer Cantrell, M.Ed.,LDT, CALT, Director
Jan Cook, M.Ed, C-SLDS, Director
Alison Edwards, MS, LDT, CALT, Director
Amanda Jocz, M.Ed., Director
Michele Joseph, M.Ed, Director
Angie Maxey, MLA, Director
Lily Vasquez Mejia, M.Ed, LDT, CALT, Director
David Mendlewski, Director
Christine Pratt, Director
Laura Sandling, M.Ed., Director
Hope Rigby-Wills, EdD, Director
Mary Yarus, M.Ed., LDT, CALT, Director
IDA Austin Board
IDA Dallas Board
Misty Clack, M. Ed, President
Courtney Clemmons, MA, LPC, Vice President
Dahlem Dodson, MBA, Treasurer
Mandi Davis Skerbetz, Ed. D., Secretary
Odera A. Akachukwu, MSc, PMP, CSCP, CSM, LSSBB
Amy Amaro, MAT, LDT, CALT-QI, SLDS
Concepción Moncada Cummings, MEd, CALP
Joe Torres, MSC, Med
Stacy Edwards, MEd, CALT, WDT
Sabrina Fandell
Charlotte (Showalter)
Gregor, CALT, MEd
Natalia López, MEd, CALT, WDT, LDT
Victoria Mancuso
Teresa Melia, Esq
LaShaila Mitchum
Vaidehi Natu, PhD
Kendra Spears, MEd, CALT
Kathy Woolston
Hunter Peterson
Sharon Roberts, President
Lisa Baker M.Ed., LDT, CALT, President-Elect
Cindy Edwards M.Ed., Vice President
Mary Bach PhD, Treasurer
Cherry Lee Ed.D., LDT, CALT, Director
Christine Perlino M. Ed, Director
Dianne Watts CALT, Director
Erin Modde M.Ed., LDT, CALT, Director
Holly Rasoulian M.Ed., LDT, CALT, Director
Karen Ashorn M.Ed., CALT, Director
Linda Halbreich M.A. Ed., LDT, CALT, Director
Meagan Sullivan MA, CALT, Director
Rama Tandon M.A., Director
Shannon Heinzen M.Ed., CALP, Director
Sylvia Gonzalez LDT, CALT, Director
Intervention for Students with
Dyslexia: Advances in Research
and Lingering Questions
Nathan H. Clemens
The University of Texas at Austin
Explicit phonics instruction directly teaches the
connections between the sounds of language
and printed letters, and how to use that infor-
mation to read and spell words. It is supported
through decades of research (Ehri, 2020) and
is the core approach to intervention for stu-
dents with word-level reading disability (WLRD;
i.e., dyslexia, specific learning disability in basic
reading). However, although much has been
learned about effective strategies for students
with WLRDs, questions remain. Intervention
studies for students with WLRDs tend to have
the strongest effects on pseudoword decoding
and reading accuracy, but have weaker and
less consistent effects on generalized skills in
reading reading real words and text reading
fluency (e.g., Hall et al., 2023). There is a need
for continued inquiry on ways to enhance
existing practices and advance interventions
for students with WLRD. In this paper, I review
some recent research developments,
unanswered questions, and where research is
headed next.
Teaching Flexibility in Word Decoding
It is possible that existing interventions have
had relatively weaker effects in improving stu-
dents’ generalized word-reading skills because
they have not sufficiently fostered students’
flexible skills in decoding or how to navigate
spelling-sound variability in a semi-transparent
orthography, like English. Research has sought
ways to promote stronger generalized, inde-
pendent word reading skills for students with
WLRD.
Teaching Multiple Decoding Strategies and
Applying Them Flexibly
“Sounding out” (i.e., saying the sounds of
each letter/letter combination in a word, then
blending the sounds) is the primary strategy
for decoding. However, it will not always be
successful in determining a correct pronunci-
ation. Lovett and colleagues’ multicomponent
intervention, Triple Focus (Lovett et al., 2017),
is an example of how phonics instruction can
be expanded to equip students with a versatile,
generalizable word reading strategies. Triple
Focus involved teaching five word identification
strategies and training students to apply them
flexibly when they encounter an unknown word:
(a) sounding out; (b) reading by rime/analo-
gy (e.g., “if I know best, I can read crest”); (c)
“peeling off” to isolate prefixes or suffixes and
the root word and reading the parts together as
a whole word; (d) vowel alert in which students
are taught to apply alternative pronunciations
for vowel sounds; and (e) the “spy” strategy to
find smaller words within compound words. In
addition to learning the strategies, the interven-
tion included teaching students how to recog-
nize when alternative strategies for decoding
were needed and apply them flexibly.
Considering “Set for Variability”
For many written words in English, students
must learn to adjust a pronunciation derived
by the letter sounds in the word--its spelling
pronunciation--to its correct whole-word pro-
nunciation (i.e., its “standard pronunciation”).
For instance, when attempting to sound out the
word listen, the resulting spelling pronunciation
of “liss-ten” must be adjusted to its standard
pronunciation (“lissen”). This requires flexibility
on the part of the reader, referred to as “set for
variability” (Tunmer & Chapman, 2012). Set
for variability is a powerful predictor of reading
skills and may be underdeveloped among
students with WLRD (Steacy et al., 2023).
Ways to promote students’ set for variability
can be built into interventions. For example,
Archer and colleagues’ (2013) REWARDS
intervention program targets students in 4th
grade and up with word-reading difficulties and
includes instruction and exercises in adjusting
approximate pronunciations. In one exercise,
teachers read a sentence orally and mispro-
nounce one word based on its spelling pronun-
TEXAS RESOURCE DIRECTORY • FALL 2024
ciation (e.g., “The cap-tane steered the ship
away from the rocks”). Students are asked to
adjust the mispronounced word to its standard
pronunciation. Students are taught to use this
skill when decoding complex and multisyllabic
words.
In summary, although more research is need-
ed, teaching flexible decoding skills and set for
variability are interesting areas of inquiry. This
work may reveal new ways to enhance
students’ flexible, generalized decoding skills.
The Role of Statistical Learning in Reading
and Intervention
Statistical learning refers to skill and knowledge
acquisition that is implicit; it is thought to occur
through the recognition of patterns and prob-
abilistic sequences across many exposures to
variations in stimuli. Statistical learning offers
explanations for how children acquire language
without formal instruction.
Phonics instruction helps students learn to read
many types of words; however, it is not possi-
ble, nor is it even necessary, for instruction to
teach all the 10,000+ words that students will
encounter in text. Rather, there are self-teach-
ing mechanisms (Share, 1995) that engage as
students learn how to use the alphabetic code.
Scholars have recently argued that perceiving
underlying statistical regularities of spelling
patterns in words may help explain the
ability of skilled readers to read a vast number
of words without requiring instruction for each
one (Treiman & Kessler, 2022). The idea is that
through repeated exposure to words, readers
implicitly build an understanding of the statisti-
cal regularities of the English spelling system,
such as how pronunciations of letters and letter
units are influenced by their positions in words
(e.g., “gh” in “ghost” vs. “laugh”) or other letters
that occur with them (e.g., “ea” in “bead” vs.
“learn”). Steacy et al. (2020) found that,
compared with typically developing readers,
students with WLRDs had more difficulty
attending to letters and letter units within
words. In a review of research, Lee and
colleagues (2022) observed that individuals
with WLRD demonstrated significantly lower
performance on various types of statistical
learning tasks compared to individuals without
reading difficulties.
To date, it is not clear whether statistical learn-
ing can be “taught.” However, there is value
in considering how reading instruction and
practice opportunities can be designed that
make it more likely that statistical learning can
occur. Statistical learning thrives on consider-
able opportunities to interact with variation in
stimuli. In the case of reading, the stimuli are
words. Thus, one way to create contexts that
promote statistical learning is to ensure that
students have ample opportunities to read a
variety of texts and word types, with continu-
ous feedback and support from a teacher. As
will be discussed later, this underscores the
importance of providing students with frequent
opportunities to read authentic texts because
they contain greater variations in word types,
irregularity in spelling patterns, and diverse
syntax. Interventions might also include strate-
gies that promote flexible decoding strategies,
such as trying alternative vowel sounds when
needed (Lovett et al., 2017), or other strategies
that teach students to adjust pronunciations. It
also suggests that students may benefit from
careful exposure to more variability in spelling
patterns they are presented in decoding in-
struction. For example, Apfelbaum et al. (2013)
found that first grade students made greater
gains in learning vowel sounds when the sur-
rounding consonants varied compared to when
the surrounding consonants were consistent.
Strategies that systematically expose students
to different types of spelling patterns and teach
students to pay greater attention to letter com-
binations, their positions within words, and their
relation to other letters in a process to “prob-
lem-solve” decoding may help draw greater
attention to the statistical regularities of the
spelling system.
Research has only just begun to investigate the
role of statistical learning in reading, WLRDs,
and intervention. Additionally, it is important
to point out that although statistical learning
involves implicit learning processes, explicit
instruction in letter sounds and decoding skills
is still necessary for establishing a foundation
on which statistical learning can build.
Integrating Vocabulary (Semantic)
Instruction Within Word Reading
Interventions
A traditional focus of interventions for students
with WLRDs emphasizes the connections
between word spellings (orthographic repre-
sentations) and pronunciations (phonological
representations). Although orthographic to
phonological connections are vital, connection-
ist perspectives suggest that semantic knowl-
edge (i.e., vocabulary, morphology) may also
aid word reading skills (Seidenberg, 2017).
Kearns et al. (2016) observed that elementary
students were better able to correct mispro-
nunciations when they knew the meaning of
words. Steacy and Compton (2019), with first-
and second-graders at risk for WLRD, found
that irregular words that were more imageable
(i.e., words that are more likely to elicit a clear
mental image, such as “soup”) were more
likely to be read accurately and learned faster
than irregular words that were less imageable
(e.g., “sure”), especially for students with lower
initial word-reading skills. Other intervention
research is inconclusive on the benefits of
targeting semantic knowledge within decod-
ing instruction (see Austin et al., 2022, for a
review). However, there appears to be some
TEXAS RESOURCE DIRECTORY • FALL 2024
evidence that semantic instruction, including
teaching morphemes (i.e., spelling units within
words that hold meaning, such as affixes and
roots) may help students in learning to read
complex, irregular, and infrequent words when
letter-sound rules are less applicable (Austin et
al., 2022).
Should Reading Practice Use Decodable or
Authentic Texts?
A key aspect of reading intervention involves
providing frequent opportunities for students
to read text aloud to a teacher or skilled read-
er (who is there to provide affirmative and
corrective feedback). However, debate exists
regarding the type of text that should be used
for reading practice for students with reading
difficulties. “Decodable” text refers to stories
or passages written with a high proportion of
words that are phonetically regular and are
thus considered “decodable” by students that
have learned the letter-sound correspondences
contained in the words. In contrast, “authen-
tic” texts include stories or passages that are
written without an intentional selection of words
based on their letter-sound regularity.
Although conventional wisdom (and recom-
mendations from experts) suggest that the
use of decodable text is an important part of
intervention for students with WRLD, very little
research has directly compared the effects of
using decodable versus authentic texts. Some
studies have indicated that students improved
their reading skills regardless of the decodabil-
ity of the text used (e.g., Jenkins et al., 2004).
Price-Mohr and Price (2020) compared the use
of high- and low-decodable text and found no
differences in outcomes on early word reading
measures, but that students that read low-de-
codable texts improved their reading compre-
hension more than students that read high-de-
codable text (e.g., Price-Mohr & Price, 2020). A
recent review of intervention studies indicated
that the reading outcomes of students with
reading difficulties were similar regardless of
whether decodable or other types of text were
used (Pugh et al., 2023).
Thus, the most appropriate type of text to use
in intervention is still a matter of debate. Until
research says otherwise, it is perhaps better to
think about how decodable and authentic texts
can be used together strategically. Decodable
text offers students opportunities to immediate-
ly practice new word reading skills in connect-
ed text. In addition to providing practice, the
accessibility of decodable text can build con-
fidence, which may be important for students
with WLRD that have experienced repeated
frustration in reading. On the other hand, au-
thentic texts help familiarize students to natural
syntax and expose them to a broader range of
spelling patterns and vocabulary than what is
available in decodable text.
To consider using both strategically, decodable
text may be used more often for students at
basic levels of reading development and when
teaching a new letter sound or spelling pattern
(most providers of decodable texts offer books
with a high proportion of words with a specific
letter sound or letter combination). Authentic
text can still be used periodically at this point.
As students become more skilled, authentic
text should be used more often, with a propor-
tionate decrease in the use of decodable text
as appropriate. Eventually, authentic text can
be used exclusively. Keep in mind that suc-
cessful reading of authentic text should be the
ultimate goal for all students; decodable text is
a tool to help students get there. Regardless of
what type of text is used, a teacher should be
present to provided affirmative and corrective
feedback while the student reads orally, and
error correction should prompt students to
rely on their decoding skills to read unfamiliar
words.
Rethinking Reading Fluency Intervention
Reading fluency is the ability to read text
accurately with ease, at an appropriate rate,
and with attention to inflection and punctuation.
It also is one of the more challenging skills to
improve for students with WLRD (Torgesen,
2006). Repeated reading tends to be the most
common approach to improving reading fluen-
cy, in which students read the same passage
three to four times (Stevens et al., 2017).
However, Stevens and colleagues’ review
found that the effects of repeated reading were
strongest on the passages the students
practiced. The few studies that examined
effects on generalized reading fluency
measures observed much lower or negligible
effects.
Scholars have suggested alternatives to
repeated reading. “Wide reading” involves
reading several different passages, and
“continuous reading” involves reading one
longer passage of text. Both can be implement-
ed for the same amount reading time as
repeated reading. For instance, if repeated
reading involves reading a 100-word passage
four times, wide reading would involve read-
ing four different 100-word passages, and
continuous reading would involve reading a
single 400-word passage. Studies of these
approaches have found that wide or continu-
ous reading resulted in equivalent benefits in
students’ reading skills compared to repeated
reading (Ardoin et al., 2016; O’Connor et al.,
2007). Reed et al. (2019) found that students
who read three different passages that had a
high proportion of overlapping words demon-
strated significantly stronger gains in reading
fluency compared to students who repeatedly
read the same passage. Effects were stron-
ger for lower-achieving readers. The potential
benefits of wide and continuous reading relate
to the earlier discussion on statistical learning:
Providing students with opportunities to read
a broader range of spelling patterns may ben-
efit word recognition and skill generalization.
Additionally, as anyone who has implemented
repeated reading with a struggling reader will
attest, students often loathe reading the same
passage a third or fourth time. Wide and
continuous reading can help reduce this
monotony and may improve student motivation.
Conclusion
Questions remain regarding how to best de-
sign intervention for students with WLRD, and
exciting new research is being conducted. Part-
nerships among practitioners and researchers
will ensure a continued pursuit of important
questions and rapid dissemination of evi-
dence-based practices.
About
Dr. Nathan Clemens is a Professor in the
Department of Special Education at The Uni-
versity of Texas at Austin. Dr. Clemens studies
reading difficulties in children and youth, par-
ticularly, word reading difficulties for students
in early grades and reading comprehension
difficulties for students in later grades. His work
is aimed at improving reading interventions,
helping teachers make better use of assess-
ment data to guide their instruction, and align-
TEXAS RESOURCE DIRECTORY • FALL 2024