Australian Centre for Educational Studies
Macquarie Home page, Access Key - h Events, Access Key - e Macquarie handbook, Access Key - b Library page, Access Key - l Search page, Access Key - s Contact information, Access Key - c

Overview
MUSEC Briefings
Early Links
In the media
MUSEC School
  - K to 6
  - Conditions
  - Info Sessions
MULTILIT®

Skip Navigation LinksACES > MUSEC Home > Community Outreach > MUSEC Briefings

MUSEC Briefings

On this page:


Briefing Summaries:


MUSEC Briefing Issue 13:

References:

  • Brabham, E. G., & Villaume, S. K. (2002). Leveled text: The good news and the bad news. The Reading Teacher, 55, 438-441.
  • Jamison, R., L, & Burton, W. (2002). Matching texts and readers: Leveling early reading materials for assessment and instruction. The Reading teacher, 55, 348-356.
  • Pearce, S., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2006). MULTILIT book levels: Towards a new system for levelling texts. Special Education Perspectives, 15, 38-56.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 12:

References:

  • Ali, S., & Frederickson, N. (2006). Investigating the evidence base of Social Stories. Educational Psychology in Practice, 22, 355-377.
  • Reynhout, G., & Carter, M. (2006). Social stories for children with disabilities. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 36, 445-469.
  • Rust, J., & Smith, A. (2006). How should the effectiveness of Social Stories to modify the behaviour of children on the autism spectrum be tested? Autism, 10, 125-138.
  • Sansosti, F., Powell-Smith, K., & Kincaid, D. (2004). A research synthesis of social story interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 194-204.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 11:

References:

  • Reynolds, D., Nicolson, R. I., & Hambly, H. (2003). An evaluation of an exercisebased treatment for children with reading difficulties. Dyslexia, 9, 48-71
  • Snowling, M., & Hulme, C. (2003). A critique of claims from Reynolds, Nicolson & Hambly (2003) that DDAT is an effective treatment for children with reading difficulties - 'lies, damned lies and (inappropriate) statistics', Dyslexia, 9, 127-133
  • White, S., Milne, E., Rosen, S., Hansen, P., Swettenham, J., Frith, U., & Ramus, F. (2006). The role of sensorimotor impairments in dyslexia: A multiple case study of dyslexic children. Developmental Science, 9, 237-269

MUSEC Briefing Issue 10:

References:

  • Alsop, G. (1997). Coping or counselling: Families of intellectually gifted students. Roeper Review, 20(1), 28-. Retrieved November 11, 2005 from Expanded Academic ASAP database.
  • Copenhaver, R. W., & McIntyre, D. J. (1992). Teachers' perceptions of gifted students. Roeper Review, 14, 151-153.
  • Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed., pp. 32-44). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Gear, G. H. (1976). Accuracy of teacher judgment in identifying intellectually gifted children: A review of the literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20, 478-489.
  • Jacobs, J. C. (1971). Effectiveness of teacher and parent identification of gifted as a function of school level. Psychology in the Schools, 8, 140-142.
  • Plunkett, M. (2000). Impacting on teacher attitudes toward gifted students. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 9(2), 33-42.
  • Richert, E. S. (1997). Excellence with equity in identification and programming. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 75-88). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 9:

References:

  • Jacobson, J. W., Foxx, R. M., & Mulick, J. A. (2005). Controversial therapies for developmental disabilities; Fad, fashion and science in professional practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Jacobson, J. W., Mulick, J. A., & Schwartz, A. A. (1995). A history of facilitated communication: Science, Pseudoscience, and Antiscience: Science working group on facilitated communication. American Psychologist, 50, 750-765.
  • Montee, B. B., Miltenberger, R. G., & Wittrock, D. (1995). An experimental analysis of facilitated communication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 189-200.
  • Shane, H. C. (1994). Facilitated communication: The clinical and social phenomenon. San Diego, CA: Singular Press.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 8:

References:

  • Giangreco, M. F., & Broer, S. M. (2005). Questionable utilization of paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes? Focus on Autism and other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 10-26.
  • Giangreco, M. F., Yuan, S., McKenzie, B., Cameron, P., & Fialka, J. (2005). "Be careful what you wish for..." Five reasons to be concerned about the assignment of individual paraprofessionals. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(5), 28-34.
  • Giangreco, M. F., Edelman, S., Broder, S. M., & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities; Literature from the last decade. Exceptional Children, 68, 45-63.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 7:

References:

  • Carter, M., & Grunsell, J. (2001). The behavior chain interruption strategy: A review of research and discussion of future directions. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26, 37-49.
  • Grunsell, J., & Carter, M. (2002). The behavior chain interruption strategy: Generalization to out-of-routine contexts. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 378-90.
  • Hunt, P., & Goetz, L. (1988). Teaching spontaneous communication in natural settings using interrupted behavior chains. Topics in Language Disorders, 9, 58-71.
  • Sigafoos, J., & Littlewood, R. (1999). Communication intervention of the playground: A case study on teaching requesting to a young child with autism. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 46, 421-29.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 6:

References:

  • Odom, S. L., Brantlinger, E., Gersten, R., Horner, R. H., Thompson, B., & Harris, K. (2005). Research in special education: Scientific method and evidence-based practices. Exceptional Children, 71, 137-148.
  • Greenwood, C. R. (2001). Science and students with learning and behavior problems. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 37-52.
  • Stanovich, P. J., & Stanovich, K. E. (2003). Using research and reason in education: How teachers can use scientifically based research to make curricular and instructional decisions. Available at: www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/publications/pdf/Stanovich_Color.pdf

MUSEC Briefing Issue 5:

References:

  • Hammill, D. D. (2004). What we know about correlates of reading. Exceptional Children, 70, 453-468.
  • Kavale, K., & Mattson, P. D. (1983). "One jumped off the balance beam": Meta-analysis of perceptual-motor training. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 165-173.
  • Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thompson, S. (2003). What is special about special education for students with learning disabilities? Journal of Special Education, 37, 140-147.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 4:

References:

  • Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
  • Deno, S. L. (2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 184-192.
  • Fuchs, L. S. (2004). The past, present, and future of curriculum-based measurement research. School Psychology Review, 33, 188-192.
  • Madelaine, A., & Wheldall, K. (1999). Curriculum-based measurement of reading: A critical review. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 46, 71-85.
  • Madelaine, A., & Wheldall, K. (2004). Curriculum-based measurement of reading: Recent Advances. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 51, 57-82.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 3:

References:

  • Center, Y, Wheldall, K., Freeman, L., Outhred, L., & McNaught, M. (1995). An evaluation of Reading Recovery. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 240-263.
  • Shanahan, T. & Barr, R. (1995). Reading Recovery: An independent evaluation of the effects of an early instructional intervention for at-risk learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 958-996.
  • Tunmer, W. & Chapman, J.W. (2003). The reading recovery approach to preventative early intervention: As good as it gets? Reading Psychology, 24, 337-360.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 2:

References:

  • Ardoin, S. P., Martens, B. K., & Wolfe, L. A. (1999). Using high-probability instruction sequences with fading to increase students compliance during transitions. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 32, 339-351.
  • Davis, C., & Reichle, J. (1996). Variant and invariant high-probability requests: Increasing appropriate behaviours in children with emotional-behavioural disorders. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 29, 471-482.
  • Lee, D., Belfiore, P. J., Scheeler, M. C., Hua, Y., & Smith, R. (2004). Behavioural momentum in academics: Using embedded high-p sequences to increase academic productivity. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 789-801.
  • Nevin, J. A. (1996). The momentum of compliance. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 29, 535-547.
  • Romano, J. P., & Roll, D. (2000). Expanding the utility of behavioural momentum for youth with developmental disabilities. Behavioral Interventions, 15, 99-111.
  • Wehby, J. H., & Hollahan, M.S. (2000). Effects of high probability requests on the latency to initiate academic tasks. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 33, 259-262.

MUSEC Briefing Issue 1:

References:

  • Chan, S., Fung, M. Y., Tong, C. W., & Thompson, D. (2005). The clinical effectiveness of a multisensory therapy on clients with developmental disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 131-142.
  • Hogg, J., Cabet, J., Lambe, L., & Smeddle, M. (2001). The use of 'Snoezelen' as multisensory stimulation with people with intellectual disabilities: A review of the research. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 22, 353-372.
  • Martin, N. T., Gaffan, E. A., & Williams, T. (1998). Behavioural effects of long-term multisensory stimulation. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 37, 69-82.
  • Stephenson, J. (2002). Characterization of multisensory environments: Why do teachers use them? Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 15, 73-90.
  • Withers, P. S., & Ensum, I (1995). Successful treatment of severe self injury incorporating the use of DRO, a Snoezelen room and orientation cues. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 164-167.

 

Australia's Innovative University