@article{kearns_borkenhagen_2024, title={Following the Rules in an Unruly Writing System: The Cognitive Science of Learning to Read English}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.2299}, DOI={10.1002/trtr.2299}, abstractNote={Abstract The core task of reading is to look at letters and identify their sounds and meaning. In English, the spelling system is quasiregular , meaning it includes many reliable patterns (some so reliable they could be called "rules") but also many inconsistent ones (the sound of EA in heat vs. head ). The triangle model of reading (Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989) demonstrates that novice readers gradually learn the connections between the features of words, including their letters, the ways they make sounds, and the concepts that comprise their meaning. Learners' knowledge changes gradually based on experience pronouncing printed words. Eventually, the reader will say words with variable patterns (like how to say EA ) correctly but be unable to articulate rules associated with their pronunciation—because rules are not an inherent part of the learning process. Building robust knowledge of reading words aloud sometimes happens without any help. However, novice readers will often learn more in less time if the teacher explains the structure of the language in terms of sound‐spelling rules (sometimes termed "patterns" to emphasize their variability). This type of instruction, phonics, has known value in supporting reading development. However, distinguishing between the underlying learning process (which doesn't involve rules) and associated teaching practices (which often do) has implications for practitioners. Students will benefit from a balance of implicit and explicit forms of instruction, including simple strategies for reading words, teaching high‐utility rules, emphasizing practice over explanation, and using letters when doing phonemic awareness activities.}, journal={The Reading Teacher}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Borkenhagen, Matthew J. Cooper}, year={2024}, month={Mar} }
 @article{chandler_toste_hart_kearns_2024, title={Instruction to support word‐level reading skills for adolescent learners with learning disabilities}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1399}, DOI={10.1002/jaal.1399}, journal={Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy}, author={Chandler, Brennan W. and Toste, Jessica R. and Hart, Elizabeth J. and Kearns, Devin M.}, year={2024}, month={Nov} }
 @article{stalega_kearns_bourget_bayer_hebert_2024, title={Is Phonological-Only Instruction Helpful for Reading?: A Meta-Analysis}, url={https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2024.2340708}, DOI={10.1080/10888438.2024.2340708}, abstractNote={Purpose Phonological awareness (PA), the awareness of sounds in spoken words, is strongly linked to reading outcomes. However, there is an ongoing debate regarding the effectiveness of PA instruction without including print (i.e. PA without exposure to words or letters). Specifically, is PA-only instruction just as effective in improving reading outcomes when compared to print-based instruction (e.g. phonics)?}, journal={Scientific Studies of Reading}, author={Stalega, Melissa V. and Kearns, Devin M. and Bourget, Jessica and Bayer, Nina and Hebert, Michael}, year={2024}, month={Nov} }
 @article{talbott_reyes_kearns_mancilla-martinez_wang_2023, title={Evidence-Based Assessment in Special Education Research: Advancing the Use of Evidence in Assessment Tools and Empirical Processes}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231171092}, DOI={10.1177/00144029231171092}, abstractNote={Evidence-based assessment (EBA) requires that investigators employ scientific theories and research findings to guide decisions about what domains to measure, how and when to measure them, and how to make decisions and interpret results. To implement EBA, investigators need high-quality assessment tools along with evidence-based processes. We advance EBA in three sections in this article. First, we describe an empirically grounded framework, the Operations Triad Model (OTM), to inform EBA decision-making in the articulation of relevant educational theory. Originally designed for interpreting mental health assessments, we describe features of the OTM that facilitate its fusion with educational theory, namely its falsifiability. In turn, we cite evidence to support the OTM's ability to inform hypothesis generation and testing, study design, instrument selection, and measurement validation. Second, we describe quality indicators for interpreting psychometric data about measurement tools, which informs both the development and selection of measures and the process of measurement validation. Third, we apply the OTM and EBA to research in special education in two contexts: (a) empirical research for causal explanation and (b) implementation science research. We provide open data resources to advance measurement validation and conclude with future directions for research.}, journal={Exceptional Children}, author={Talbott, Elizabeth and Reyes, Andres De Los and Kearns, Devin M. and Mancilla-Martinez, Jeannette and Wang, Mo}, year={2023}, month={Jul} }
 @article{pugh_kearns_hiebert_2023, title={Text Types and Their Relation to Efficacy in Beginning Reading Interventions}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.513}, DOI={10.1002/rrq.513}, abstractNote={Abstract Researchers disagree about the value of controlling the decodability of texts for students with reading difficulty, specifically what type of text they should read: decodable texts (words limited to taught patterns), nondecodable texts (those not limited by instruction), or both . We analyzed the effects of reading intervention for elementary‐age students with reading difficulty ( k = 119) to determine whether effects varied by the type of texts students read—decodable, nondecodable, or both—compared with interventions without text reading. Inadequate information was available to code text type for 22 interventions including text reading; effect sizes were calculated for 97 studies. Effects for interventions with decodable or nondecodable reading did not differ from no‐text interventions . For both types of interventions, the effect ( g = 0.28) approached significance versus no‐text, 95% CI [−0.09, 0.65]. Disaggregating effects by whether the measures were standardized or researcher‐designed showed a significant both‐types effect, g = 0.45, 95% CI [0.02, 0.89] relative to no‐text. Disaggregating by whether outcomes were for word recognition or reading comprehension showed a positive both‐types effect for word recognition outcomes; data were inadequate to examine comprehension. A possible confounding effect of time spent reading was tested but was uncorrelated with the intervention effect. The both‐types finding suggests the possible value of varied reading experiences in intervention, but this analysis did not account for other factors that might be correlated with text type and the intervention effect. Furthermore, more comprehensive reporting about text types is important for replication and meta‐analytic review.}, journal={Reading Research Quarterly}, author={Pugh, Alia and Kearns, Devin M. and Hiebert, Elfrieda H.}, year={2023}, month={Oct} }
 @article{zagata_kearns_truckenmiller_zhao_2023, title={Using the Features of Written Compositions to Understand Reading Comprehension}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.503}, DOI={10.1002/rrq.503}, abstractNote={Abstract The current study is an exploration of the association between the characteristics of students' written compositions and their reading comprehension performance. We address the empirical question about the degree to which writing is predictive of reading comprehension by comparing the utility of several popular written composition metrics. These include the 6+1 Trait ® Model of Writing, a metric from curriculum‐based measurement in written expression, Coh‐Metrix, and automated counts of word features. The dependent variable for all data analytic models was the reading comprehension score (RC score) from the FAIR‐FS. First, we conducted two random forest regressions, one containing the reading skills, namely, scores on the vocabulary, syntax, word recognition, and reading fluency tasks on the FAIR‐FS and the other containing these reading skills in addition to all of the writing scores calculated from the written composition task. Second, we use the importance indices from the random forest regression to select skills to include in an explanatory regression model. In addition to finding that the writing related skills added to the importance, we further found that the most important skills in the random forest regression were reading‐related followed by the various instantiations of curriculum‐based measures, number of morphemes, and incidence of gerund density. These signify a unique contribution between curriculum‐based measures and reading comprehension when accounting for comprehension‐related reading skills thus furthering our understanding of the interdependency between the components of writing and reading.}, journal={Reading Research Quarterly}, author={Zagata, Elizabeth and Kearns, Devin and Truckenmiller, Adrea J. and Zhao, Zichen}, year={2023}, month={Oct} }
 @article{kearns_walker_borges_duffy_2022, title={Can reading practitioners and researchers improve intensive reading support systems in a large urban school system?}, url={https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12406}, DOI={10.1111/1467-9817.12406}, abstractNote={One way to provide intensive intervention for students with severe and persistent reading difficulties is to use a systematic data‐based decision‐making process called data‐based individualisation (DBI). DBI is a process for identifying needs and aligning them with specialist support. Meta‐analyses of DBI studies by university‐based researchers have shown positive effects, but university research studies do not involve many of the implementation science‐related factors that affect success. This study addresses the dearth of data from practice‐based studies that incorporate DBI and was done as a researcher–practitioner collaboration, developed with based on the theory that the collaborators' combined knowledge and skills could produce positive outcomes. Mixed methods were used to examine whether there was evidence of success in implementation DBI conducted through a researcher–practitioner partnership in New York City Public Schools, the largest public school system in the United States. Specifically, data were collected concerning the quality of DBI implementation and changes in teachers' and administrators' perspectives about the value of implementing intensive intervention. Results indicated that district‐level implementation met many criteria for effective DBI, that school teams ( N = 6) implemented DBI with an overall high level of fidelity (mean score of 4.1 on a 5‐point scale) and that teachers and school administrators changed their thinking about intensive intervention as a result of participation in DBI. Stakeholder interview data indicated a high level of social acceptability for DBI implementation. Features of the research–practice partnership thought to have contributed to the success of the project are discussed.}, journal={Journal of Research in Reading}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Walker, Melodee A. and Borges, Jason C. and Duffy, Meghan E.}, year={2022}, month={Aug} }
 @article{siegelman_rueckl_lo_kearns_morris_compton_2022, title={Quantifying the regularities between orthography and semantics and their impact on group- and individual-level behavior.}, url={https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001109}, DOI={10.1037/xlm0001109}, abstractNote={Statistical views of reading highlight the link between proficient literacy and the assimilation of various regularities embedded in writing systems, including those in the mapping between print and meaning. Still, orthographic-semantic (O-S) regularities remain relatively understudied, with open questions regarding 3 issues: (a) how O-S regularities should be quantified, (b) how they impact the behavior of proficient readers, and (c) whether individual differences in sensitivity to these regularities predict reading skills. The goal of the current article is to address these questions. We start by reviewing previous studies estimating print-meaning regularities, where orthography-to-semantics consistency (OSC) is defined as the mean semantic similarity between a word and its orthographic neighbors. While we adopt this general strategy, we identify a potential confound in previous operational definitions. We therefore offer a modified measure, which we use to examine group-level OSC effects in available data sets of single word recognition and reading for comprehension. Our findings validate the existence of OSC effects but reveal variation across tasks, with OSC effects emerging more strongly in tasks involving a direct mapping of print to meaning. Next, we present a reanalysis of word naming data from 399 second through fifth graders, where we examine individual differences in reliance on O-S regularities and their relation to participants' reading skills. We show that early readers whose naming accuracy is more influenced by OSC (i.e., those who rely more on O-S) have better passage comprehension abilities. We conclude by discussing the role of O-S regularities in proficient reading and literacy acquisition. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).}, journal={Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition}, author={Siegelman, Noam and Rueckl, Jay G. and Lo, Jason Chor Ming and Kearns, Devin M. and Morris, Robin D. and Compton, Donald L.}, year={2022}, month={Jun} }
 @article{kearns_feinberg_anderson_2021, title={Implementation of Data-Based Decision-Making: Linking Research From the Special Series to Practice}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194211032403}, DOI={10.1177/00222194211032403}, abstractNote={The papers in the special series describe the role of data-based decision-making (DBDM) in improving the outcomes of students with learning disabilities based on research across Germany, the Netherlands, and the United States. The articles address multiple aspects of a model of DBDM that includes the role of teacher knowledge, skills, beliefs, and sources of professional learning and the role of systems-level factors in improving student achievement. In this article, the conclusions of each paper are described in terms of that model. The papers illustrate that DBDM can improve achievement for students with learning disabilities through a DBDM process called data-based individualization (DBI)-especially if teachers have innovative supports (e.g., new technologies). For teachers, DBDM professional development (PD) can improve DBDM knowledge and implementation, but PD may not be adequate in all cases, with practical experience playing a central role. In addition, classroom-level DBDM may not translate to success for students with learning disabilities. Finally, the articles reveal a need to focus more on systems-level factors in successful DBDM systems like DBI-especially when implemented outside the experimental context. These findings provide a contemporary lens on DBDM as it related to students with learning disabilities and establish foci for future research.}, journal={Journal of Learning Disabilities}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Feinberg, Natasha J. and Anderson, Leslie J.}, year={2021}, month={Sep} }
 @article{kearns_hiebert_2022, title={The Word Complexity of Primary‐Level Texts: Differences Between First and Third Grade in Widely Used Curricula}, volume={7}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.429}, DOI={10.1002/rrq.429}, abstractNote={Abstract The Common Core State Standards emphasize the need for U.S. students to read complex texts. As a result, the level of word complexity for primary‐level texts is important, particularly the dimensions of and changes in complexity between first grade and the important third‐grade high‐stakes testing year. In this study, we addressed word complexity in these grades by examining its dimensions and differences in the texts in three widely used U.S. reading programs. Fourteen measures of word complexity were computed, and exploratory factor analysis established that four dimensions—orthography, length, familiarity, and morphology—characterized word complexity. As expected, the third‐grade texts have more complex words than the first‐grade texts have in the four dimensions, with the greatest differences in length and familiarity. More surprisingly, the words in the first‐grade texts increase in complexity over the year, but overall, the words in the third‐grade texts do not. Polysyllabic words are common in texts in both grades, comprising 48% of unique words in first‐grade texts and 65% in third‐grade texts. Polymorphemic words comprise 13% of unique first‐grade words and 19% of third‐grade words (for derived words, 3% and 6%, respectively, of all words). Results show that word complexity changes markedly between grades as expected, not only in length and familiarity but also in syllabic and morphemic structure. Implications for instruction and future word complexity analyses are discussed.}, journal={Reading Research Quarterly}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Hiebert, Elfrieda H.}, year={2022}, month={Jan} }
 @article{kearns_2020, title={Does English Have Useful Syllable Division Patterns?}, volume={55}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.342}, DOI={10.1002/rrq.342}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT Programs for teaching English reading, especially for students with dyslexia, and educational practice standards often recommend instruction on dividing polysyllabic words into syllables. Syllable division is effort intensive and could inhibit fluency when reading in text. The division strategies might still be useful if they work so consistently that they will help students decode most unfamiliar polysyllabic words. No study of the English lexicon has confirmed that the pattern is highly consistent. This study addresses this gap in the literature. The utility of the two most frequently taught patterns was examined in a corpus analysis of 14,844 words from texts used in grades 1–8. The VC|CV pattern involves a single vowel (V), two consonants (CC), and another vowel. According to the expected pattern, the first vowel should have a short (lax) sound, such as the a in rabbit . This was true of 70.6% of instances in VCCV words in the corpus. For the V|CV pattern, the first vowel is expected have a long (tense) sound, such as the a in mason . This was true in 30.5% of instances in VCV words in the corpus. The patterns were more consistent for bisyllabic words than longer words (78.8% vs. 62.5% for VCCV words and 47.3% vs. 18.8% for VCV words, respectively). When comparing only short‐ and long‐vowel pronunciations (ignoring other sounds such as schwa), the first vowel followed the expected pattern in 94.3% instances of VCCV words and 53.3% of VCV words. The unreliability of VCV may not justify the effort required to use the strategy. There are implications for the debate about the science of reading.}, number={S1}, journal={Reading Research Quarterly}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Kearns, Devin M.}, year={2020}, month={Sep} }
 @article{lyon_hogan_kearns_2021, title={Individualizing Literacy Instruction in Co-Taught Classrooms Through a Station Teaching Model}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944376}, DOI={10.1177/1053451220944376}, abstractNote={The Project CALI (Content Area Literacy Instruction) instructional framework is designed to enhance reading comprehension for all students, those with disabilities as well as their typically developing peers, in inclusive co-taught middle school content-area classrooms. For students with and at-risk for disabilities, even well-designed, research-based, and whole-class instruction often leads to inadequate improvement in reading comprehension and thus learning of content material. In CALI, teachers use student data to determine which students need more support and targeted, individualized instruction, and by contrast, which students may benefit from opportunities to extend their learning with more challenging texts and student-managed work. This article provides guidance for designing and implementing customizable lessons using station-teaching to individualize instruction. The Project CALI student support model is the final instructional piece of the CALI instructional framework.}, journal={Intervention in School and Clinic}, author={Lyon, Cheryl and Hogan, Erin K. and Kearns, Devin M.}, year={2021}, month={Mar} }
 @article{peng_fuchs_fuchs_cho_elleman_kearns_patton_compton_2020, title={Is “Response/No Response” Too Simple a Notion for RTI Frameworks? Exploring Multiple Response Types With Latent Profile Analysis}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420931818}, DOI={10.1177/0022219420931818}, abstractNote={We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a randomized control trial to explore this question: Does “response/no response” best characterize students’ reactions to a generally efficacious first-grade reading program, or is a more nuanced characterization necessary? Data were collected on 265 at-risk readers’ word reading prior to and immediately following program implementation in first grade and in spring of second grade. Pretreatment data were also obtained on domain-specific skills (letter knowledge, decoding, passage comprehension, language) and domain-general skills (working memory, non-verbal reasoning). Latent profile analysis of word reading across the three time points with controls as a local norm revealed a strongly responsive group ( n = 45) with mean word-reading z scores of 0.25, 1.64, and 1.26 at the three time points, respectively; a mildly responsive group ( n = 109), z scores = 0.30, 0.47, and 0.55; a mildly non-responsive group ( n = 90), z scores = −0.11, −0.15, and −0.55; and a strongly non-responsive group ( n = 21), z scores = −1.24, −1.26, and −1.57. The two responsive groups had stronger pretreatment letter knowledge and passage comprehension than the two non-responsive groups. The mildly non-responsive group demonstrated better pretreatment passage comprehension than the strongly non-responsive group. No domain-general skill distinguished the four groups. Findings suggest response to early reading intervention was more complicated than response/no response, and pretreatment reading comprehension was an important predictor of response even with pretreatment word reading controlled.}, journal={Journal of Learning Disabilities}, author={Peng, Peng and Fuchs, Douglas and Fuchs, Lynn S. and Cho, Eunsoo and Elleman, Amy M. and Kearns, Devin M. and Patton, Samuel, III and Compton, Donald L.}, year={2020}, month={Nov} }
 @article{seidenberg_borkenhagen_kearns_2020, title={Lost in Translation? Challenges in Connecting Reading Science and Educational Practice}, volume={55}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.341}, DOI={10.1002/rrq.341}, abstractNote={Abstract Can the science of reading contribute to improving educational practices, allowing more students to become skilled readers? Much has been learned about the behavioral and brain bases of reading, how students learn to read, and factors that contribute to low literacy. The potential to use research findings to improve literacy outcomes is substantial but remains largely unrealized. The lack of improvement in literacy levels, especially among students who face other challenges such as poverty, has led to new pressure to incorporate the science of reading in curricula, instructional practices, and teacher education. In the interest of promoting these efforts, the authors discuss three issues that could undermine them: the need for additional translational research linking reading science to classroom activities, the oversimplified way that the science is sometimes represented in the educational context, and the fact that theories of reading have become more complex and less intuitive as the field has progressed. Addressing these concerns may allow reading science to be used more effectively and achieve greater acceptance among educators.}, number={S1}, journal={Reading Research Quarterly}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Seidenberg, Mark S. and Borkenhagen, Matt Cooper and Kearns, Devin M.}, year={2020}, month={Sep} }
 @article{wexler_kearns_hogan_clancy_shelton_2021, title={Preparing to Implement Evidence-Based Literacy Practices in the Co-taught Classroom}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944369}, DOI={10.1177/1053451220944369}, abstractNote={It is essential that middle school content-area and special education co-teachers adopt evidence-based literacy practices that they can integrate into their content-area instruction to address the needs of all of the students in their classes. This article provides co-teachers with four planning tips to improve implementation of the practices they adopt. The planning tips are organized using the acronym FIRST: (a) monitor Fidelity of implementation of the adopted practices, (b) Integrate the practices into daily content-area instruction and across the year, (c) determine the Roles of each co-teacher when planning for and implementing instruction in the adopted practices, and (d) consider specific guidelines to Select Texts for each literacy-focused lesson. The planning tips are illustrated using examples related to the content-area literacy instruction (CALI) instructional framework, which is a set of evidence-based literacy practices and procedures designed to improve the literacy instruction middle school coteachers implement in their content-area classes.}, journal={Intervention in School and Clinic}, author={Wexler, Jade and Kearns, Devin M. and Hogan, Erin K. and Clancy, Erin and Shelton, Alexandra}, year={2021}, month={Mar} }
 @article{kearns_lyon_pollack_2021, title={Teaching World and Word Knowledge to Access Content-Area Texts in Co-Taught Classrooms}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944371}, DOI={10.1177/1053451220944371}, abstractNote={In co-taught classes, general education and special education teachers can improve the content-area learning and literacy skills of students with learning disabilities by helping them read texts effectively. Co-teachers can improve comprehension by providing students with background and vocabulary knowledge before reading. In this article, a routine for introducing background (world) and vocabulary (word) knowledge—the world knowledge and word knowledge routine (world and word)—is described. The article includes explanations how each part of the routine works and uses an example to illustrate how co-teachers could use the routine to promote student reading comprehension.}, journal={Intervention in School and Clinic}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Lyon, Cheryl P. and Pollack, Marney S.}, year={2021}, month={Mar} }
 @article{kearns_hancock_hoeft_pugh_frost_2019, title={The Neurobiology of Dyslexia}, volume={51}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059918820051}, DOI={10.1177/0040059918820051}, abstractNote={Author(s): Kearns, Devin M; Hancock, Roeland; Hoeft, Fumiko; Pugh, Kenneth R; Frost, Stephen J}, number={3}, journal={TEACHING Exceptional Children}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Hancock, Roeland and Hoeft, Fumiko and Pugh, Kenneth R. and Frost, Stephen J.}, year={2019}, month={Jan}, pages={175–188} }
 @article{kearns_ghanem_2019, title={The role of semantic information in children’s word reading: Does meaning affect readers’ ability to say polysyllabic words aloud?}, volume={1}, url={https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000316}, DOI={10.1037/edu0000316}, abstractNote={In an effort to improve oral reading, beginning and remedial reading programs in English focus on phonological awareness skills and recoding with grapheme–phoneme correspondences. The meanings of the words children practice reading aloud are given little emphasis. Some studies now suggest semantic knowledge may have a direct effect on children’s oral reading, but it is unclear whether it is due to knowledge of a given word, general semantic knowledge (vocabulary size), or morphological awareness. We asked third and fourth graders with reading difficulty and their typically achieving peers (N = 95) to read polysyllabic words (N = 48) in isolation. We tested children’s semantic knowledge for those specific words, general semantic knowledge (vocabulary size), morphological awareness, and orthographic and phonological knowledge. Using generalized linear mixed-effects models, we found a word-specific semantic effect—along with word-specific orthographic and phonological effects—and general effects of semantic knowledge, morphological awareness, and phonological awareness. The results add to the studies showing the importance of semantic information but is unique in clarifying that a general semantic effect may be at least partly morphological. The findings support a distributed processing account of reading acquisition in which readers use all reliable information to pronounce words, not only letter–sound consistencies. There may be implications for curriculum design. The word-specific semantic effect may suggest that beginning readers should practice reading words in their phonological lexicons. The general morphological effect suggests that children might benefit from learning morphological units early in their reading development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)}, journal={Journal of Educational Psychology}, publisher={American Psychological Association (APA)}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Ghanem, Reem Al}, year={2019}, month={Aug} }
 @article{lemons_vaughn_wexler_kearns_sinclair_2018, title={Envisioning an Improved Continuum of Special Education Services for Students with Learning Disabilities: Considering Intervention Intensity}, url={https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12173}, DOI={10.1111/ldrp.12173}, abstractNote={Abstract In Endrew F. v Douglas County School District RE‐1 , the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the requirement that schools provide special education services designed to confer educational benefit that is more than de minimis. Endrew offers an opportunity for the special education community to consider whether students with learning disabilities have access to a full continuum of services, including individualized, data‐driven, and intensive interventions. We examine predominant models of service delivery, highlight concerns that these are insufficient, and envision an improved continuum of services better aligned with the raised expectations of Endrew . We also highlight important barriers that need to be addressed before an improved continuum can be implemented in many schools in the United States.}, journal={Learning Disabilities Research & Practice}, author={Lemons, Christopher J. and Vaughn, Sharon and Wexler, Jade and Kearns, Devin M. and Sinclair, Anne C.}, year={2018}, month={Aug} }
 @article{kearns_whaley_2019, title={Helping Students With Dyslexia Read Long Words: Using Syllables and Morphemes}, url={https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059918810010}, DOI={10.1177/0040059918810010}, journal={TEACHING Exceptional Children}, author={Kearns, Devin M. and Whaley, Victoria M.}, year={2019}, month={Jan} }