The Experts below are selected from a list of 2148 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Karin Prentice - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • responsiveness to mathematical problem solving instruction comparing students at risk of Mathematics Disability with and without risk of reading Disability
    Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2004
    Co-Authors: Lynn S Fuchs, Douglas Fuchs, Karin Prentice
    Abstract:

    This study assessed responsiveness to a 16-week mathematical problem-solving treatment as a function of students' risk for Disability. Among 301 third graders, TerraNova scores were used to categorize students as at risk for both reading and Mathematics Disability (MDR/RDR; 20 control and 12 experimental), at risk for Mathematics Disability only (MDR-only; 5 and 8), at risk for reading Disability only (RDR-only; 12 and 15), or not at risk (NDR; 60 and 69). Interactions among at-risk status, treatment, and time showed that as a function of treatment, MDR/RDR, MDR-only, and RDR-only students improved less than NDR students on computation and labeling, and MDR/RDR students improved less than all other groups on conceptual underpinnings. Exploratory regressions suggested that MDR/RDR students' math deficits or their underlying mechanisms explained a greater proportion of variance in responsiveness to problem-solving treatment than reading deficits or their underlying mechanisms.

Lynn S Fuchs - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • extending responsiveness to intervention to Mathematics at first and third grades
    Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2007
    Co-Authors: Lynn S Fuchs, Douglas Fuchs, Kurstin N Hollenbeck
    Abstract:

    Responsiveness to intervention (RTI) is an innovative approach to the identification of learning disabilities (LD). The central assumption is that RTI can differentiate between two explanations for low achievement: poor instruction versus Disability. If the child responds poorly to validated instruction, then the assessment eliminates instructional quality as a viable explanation for poor academic growth and instead provides evidence of a Disability. For children who do respond nicely, RTI serves a critical prevention function. Most of RTI research has been focused on early reading. In this article, we describe two ongoing programs of research on RTI in the area of Mathematics: one on a comprehensive Mathematics curriculum at first grade and the other focused on word problems at third grade. For each research program, we describe the sample, explain how students are identified as at risk for Mathematics Disability, provide an overview of the interventions to which responsiveness is gauged, and describe some results to date.

  • responsiveness to mathematical problem solving instruction comparing students at risk of Mathematics Disability with and without risk of reading Disability
    Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2004
    Co-Authors: Lynn S Fuchs, Douglas Fuchs, Karin Prentice
    Abstract:

    This study assessed responsiveness to a 16-week mathematical problem-solving treatment as a function of students' risk for Disability. Among 301 third graders, TerraNova scores were used to categorize students as at risk for both reading and Mathematics Disability (MDR/RDR; 20 control and 12 experimental), at risk for Mathematics Disability only (MDR-only; 5 and 8), at risk for reading Disability only (RDR-only; 12 and 15), or not at risk (NDR; 60 and 69). Interactions among at-risk status, treatment, and time showed that as a function of treatment, MDR/RDR, MDR-only, and RDR-only students improved less than NDR students on computation and labeling, and MDR/RDR students improved less than all other groups on conceptual underpinnings. Exploratory regressions suggested that MDR/RDR students' math deficits or their underlying mechanisms explained a greater proportion of variance in responsiveness to problem-solving treatment than reading deficits or their underlying mechanisms.

Yulia Kovas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • overlap and specificity of genetic and environmental influences on Mathematics and reading Disability in 10 year old twins
    Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2007
    Co-Authors: Yulia Kovas, Claire M A Haworth, Nicole Harlaar, Stephen A Petrill, Philip S Dale, Robert Plomin
    Abstract:

    Background To what extent do genetic and environmental influences on reading Disability overlap with those on Mathematics Disability? Multivariate genetic research on the normal range of variation in unselected samples has led to a Generalist Genes Hypothesis which posits that the same genes largely affect individual differences in these abilities in the normal range. However, little is known about the etiology of co-morbidity for the Disability extremes of reading and Mathematics. Method From 2596 pairs of 10-year-old monozygotic and dizygotic twins assessed on a web-based battery of reading and Mathematics tests, we selected the lowest 15% on reading and on Mathematics. We conducted bivariate DeFries-Fulker (DF) extremes analyses to assess overlap and specificity of genetic and environmental influences on reading and Mathematics Disability defined by a 15% cut-off. Results Both reading and Mathematics Disability are moderately heritable (47% and 43%, respectively) and show only modest shared environmental influence (16% and 20%). There is substantial phenotypic co-morbidity between reading and Mathematics Disability. Bivariate DF extremes analyses yielded a genetic correlation of .67 between reading Disability and Mathematics Disability, suggesting that they are affected largely by the same genetic factors. The shared environmental correlation is .96 and the non-shared environmental correlation is .08. Conclusions In line with the Generalist Genes Hypothesis, the same set of generalist genes largely affects mathematical and reading disabilities. The dissociation between the disabilities occurs largely due to independent non-shared environmental influences.

  • generalist genes and learning disabilities
    Psychological Bulletin, 2005
    Co-Authors: Robert Plomin, Yulia Kovas
    Abstract:

    : The authors reviewed recent quantitative genetic research on learning disabilities that led to the conclusion that genetic diagnoses differ from traditional diagnoses in that the effects of relevant genes are largely general rather than specific. This research suggests that most genes associated with common learning disabilities--language impairment, reading Disability, and Mathematics Disability--are generalists in 3 ways. First, genes that affect common learning disabilities are largely the same genes responsible for normal variation in learning abilities. Second, genes that affect any aspect of a learning Disability affect other aspects of the Disability. Third, genes that affect one learning Disability are also likely to affect other learning disabilities. These quantitative genetic findings have far-reaching implications for molecular genetics and neuroscience as well as psychology.

Douglas Fuchs - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • extending responsiveness to intervention to Mathematics at first and third grades
    Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2007
    Co-Authors: Lynn S Fuchs, Douglas Fuchs, Kurstin N Hollenbeck
    Abstract:

    Responsiveness to intervention (RTI) is an innovative approach to the identification of learning disabilities (LD). The central assumption is that RTI can differentiate between two explanations for low achievement: poor instruction versus Disability. If the child responds poorly to validated instruction, then the assessment eliminates instructional quality as a viable explanation for poor academic growth and instead provides evidence of a Disability. For children who do respond nicely, RTI serves a critical prevention function. Most of RTI research has been focused on early reading. In this article, we describe two ongoing programs of research on RTI in the area of Mathematics: one on a comprehensive Mathematics curriculum at first grade and the other focused on word problems at third grade. For each research program, we describe the sample, explain how students are identified as at risk for Mathematics Disability, provide an overview of the interventions to which responsiveness is gauged, and describe some results to date.

  • responsiveness to mathematical problem solving instruction comparing students at risk of Mathematics Disability with and without risk of reading Disability
    Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2004
    Co-Authors: Lynn S Fuchs, Douglas Fuchs, Karin Prentice
    Abstract:

    This study assessed responsiveness to a 16-week mathematical problem-solving treatment as a function of students' risk for Disability. Among 301 third graders, TerraNova scores were used to categorize students as at risk for both reading and Mathematics Disability (MDR/RDR; 20 control and 12 experimental), at risk for Mathematics Disability only (MDR-only; 5 and 8), at risk for reading Disability only (RDR-only; 12 and 15), or not at risk (NDR; 60 and 69). Interactions among at-risk status, treatment, and time showed that as a function of treatment, MDR/RDR, MDR-only, and RDR-only students improved less than NDR students on computation and labeling, and MDR/RDR students improved less than all other groups on conceptual underpinnings. Exploratory regressions suggested that MDR/RDR students' math deficits or their underlying mechanisms explained a greater proportion of variance in responsiveness to problem-solving treatment than reading deficits or their underlying mechanisms.

Robert Plomin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • overlap and specificity of genetic and environmental influences on Mathematics and reading Disability in 10 year old twins
    Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2007
    Co-Authors: Yulia Kovas, Claire M A Haworth, Nicole Harlaar, Stephen A Petrill, Philip S Dale, Robert Plomin
    Abstract:

    Background To what extent do genetic and environmental influences on reading Disability overlap with those on Mathematics Disability? Multivariate genetic research on the normal range of variation in unselected samples has led to a Generalist Genes Hypothesis which posits that the same genes largely affect individual differences in these abilities in the normal range. However, little is known about the etiology of co-morbidity for the Disability extremes of reading and Mathematics. Method From 2596 pairs of 10-year-old monozygotic and dizygotic twins assessed on a web-based battery of reading and Mathematics tests, we selected the lowest 15% on reading and on Mathematics. We conducted bivariate DeFries-Fulker (DF) extremes analyses to assess overlap and specificity of genetic and environmental influences on reading and Mathematics Disability defined by a 15% cut-off. Results Both reading and Mathematics Disability are moderately heritable (47% and 43%, respectively) and show only modest shared environmental influence (16% and 20%). There is substantial phenotypic co-morbidity between reading and Mathematics Disability. Bivariate DF extremes analyses yielded a genetic correlation of .67 between reading Disability and Mathematics Disability, suggesting that they are affected largely by the same genetic factors. The shared environmental correlation is .96 and the non-shared environmental correlation is .08. Conclusions In line with the Generalist Genes Hypothesis, the same set of generalist genes largely affects mathematical and reading disabilities. The dissociation between the disabilities occurs largely due to independent non-shared environmental influences.

  • generalist genes and learning disabilities
    Psychological Bulletin, 2005
    Co-Authors: Robert Plomin, Yulia Kovas
    Abstract:

    : The authors reviewed recent quantitative genetic research on learning disabilities that led to the conclusion that genetic diagnoses differ from traditional diagnoses in that the effects of relevant genes are largely general rather than specific. This research suggests that most genes associated with common learning disabilities--language impairment, reading Disability, and Mathematics Disability--are generalists in 3 ways. First, genes that affect common learning disabilities are largely the same genes responsible for normal variation in learning abilities. Second, genes that affect any aspect of a learning Disability affect other aspects of the Disability. Third, genes that affect one learning Disability are also likely to affect other learning disabilities. These quantitative genetic findings have far-reaching implications for molecular genetics and neuroscience as well as psychology.