本研究目的為：(1)以閱讀障礙類型之診斷為模擬效標，鑑別「無教學反應」(non-responsiveness,NR)的RTI分組指標為何；(2)比較不同教學反應組別在智力、語文能力、需求特徵之差異。本研究對象為曾接受語文有效補救教學一年的27位新北市某校五年級學生。本研究RTI分組候選指標有三種─成長(growth)、後測水準(level)、及雙重差距(dual discrepancy)。本研究以閱讀障礙類型之診斷作為RTI候選指標之模擬效標，而模擬效標之適切性分別由閱讀障礙學生出現率、閱讀障礙各類型之比例、及診斷是閱讀障礙學生之外部效標(縣市學障鑑定)作為依據。
本研究結果為：(一)最佳RTI分組指標為後測水準常模參照識字(正確性或流暢性)-1SD切截，其優點為敏感性(81.3％)與精確度(77.8％)高、犯偽陽率與偽陰率低，尤其對識字有困難的讀寫型與語言型閱障生之偵測可達100％，且犯偽陰性之缺點可藉由後續鑑定程序之其他工具協助修正；(二)本研究閱讀障礙診斷標準為-1SD，診斷結果符合文獻調查之閱讀障礙出現率及各類型比例，且診斷是閱讀障礙學生之外部效標良好；(三)最佳RTI分組指標所區分的R與NR兩組在智力方面無差異；兩組在語文方面除了受分組指標操作影響之項目(識字與朗讀文章的正確性與流暢性)呈自然差異外，閱讀理解、聽覺理解、聽寫等並無顯著差異；兩組在需求特徵之各題項雖無顯著差異，但NR組在「閱讀不流暢、理解抽象符號或詞彙差」較R組弱。此外，R組學生中是否具「不會寫出完整通順句子」特徵，可提供避免遺漏偽陰性學生鑑定之參考。
基於運用RTI在閱讀障礙鑑定之發現，提供學校實務及未來研究之建議。

The purpose of this research is to:identify what the response to intervention (RTI) criteria of non-responsiveness is by utilizing the simulated validity diagnosed within classification of reading disabilities; and comparie the responsived(R) with the non-responsived(NR) groups in intelligence, basic reading skills, and special needs. There are 27 fifth-grade students participanted in this study, who attended a one-year evidenced-based literacy remedial program, in an elementary school in New Taipei City. The classifications of candidate indicators of RTI in this study are discrepant score of pretest and posttest, post-treatment level of performance, and dual discrepancy. The stimulated validity of candidate indicators of RTI in this study came from the classification of reading disabilities, and the relevance of simulated validity depending upon the prevalence of reading disability students, the ratio of types of reading disabilities, and the external validity of diagnoses of reading disability students identified by the city government.

There are three majory findings. First, the optimal RTI classification indicator is the accuracy or fluency of word recognition in norm referenced approach with -1SD cutoff. The advantages of this indicator are high sensitivity (81.3%) and accuracy (77.8%) with low false positive and false negative ratio; more important, this indicator is able to completly detect dyslexia and language learning disabilities, and the flaw of false negative can be modified via follow-up evaluation of identification.
Second, the diagnostic criteria of reading disabilities in this research is -1SD cutoff, the final results are accordance with the prevalence and the ratio of types of reading disabilities within literature reviews. Furthermore, the external validity of diagnoses of reading disability students is good.
Third, there are no significant differences between R and NR groups in intelligence test. Except the accuracy and fluency of word recognition and text, there are no significant differences in reading comprehension, listening comprehension and dictation in the two groups. Furthermore, NR group represent lower performances than R group in the characteristics of “reading influent” and “hard to comprehend abstract symbols or phrases”, whereas there is no significant difference within the two groups in these characteristics of special needs. Additionally, the R group with the characteristic of “difficult to write down a complete and clear sentence” provide a clue to avoid the neglect of the false negative students to be unidentified.

In light of the findings of the RTI operation in reading disabilities identifications, the researcher provid some suggestions for practice in schools and future research.

一、中文部分
王文中、陳雪珠(1999)。教學觀點量表之發展與試題反應分析。應用心理研究，2，181-207。
孔繁鐘、孔繁錦(2000)譯。美國精神疾病診斷準則手冊第四版(DSM-IV)。 台北：合記。
王瓊珠(2001)。台灣地區讀寫障礙研究回顧與展望。國家科學委員會研究彙刊：人文及社會科學，11，4，331-344。
王瓊珠(2004)。學習障礙學生鑑定問題探討─以台北市國小為例。國小 特殊教育，37，39-46。
王瓊珠(2014)。低成就學生之心理特質與輔導。載於陳淑麗、宣崇慧主編(2014)，帶好每一個學生─有效的補救教學。台北：心理。
吳怡潔(2006) 。「閱讀的簡單觀點模式」在中文一般及閱讀理解困難學童之驗證研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版。
吳美燕(2007）。教學反應模式在鑑定國小四年級閱讀障礙學生可行性之研究。臺北市立教育大學特殊教育學系身心障礙教育教學碩士學位班碩士論文，未出版。
李俊仁(1999) 。聲韻處理能力和閱讀能力的關係。國立中正大學心理學系博士論文，未出版。
李翠卿(2013)。蕭敬騰：那溫暖，讓我想變成好一點的人。親子天下雜誌，46。民國103年8月11日，取自http://www.parenting.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5049872
李淑華(2009)。電腦化課文摘要動態評量效益之探討。國立台南大學測驗統計碩士論文，未出版。
邱上真、洪碧霞（1998)。中文閱讀能力評量模式的探討：理論與實務─國語文低成就學生閱讀表現之追蹤研究（III）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC 87-2413-H-003-F5）。台北：行政院國家科學委員會。
胡永崇(2005)。以教學反應(RTI)作為學習障礙學生鑑定標準之探討。屏師特殊教育，11，1-9。
胡永崇(2006)。學習障礙者之教育。載於王文科(主編)，特殊教育導論，3版，347-384。台北：心理。
柯華葳(1999)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗施測說明。台北：行政院國家科學委員會特殊教育工作小組。
柯華葳(2007)。中文閱讀障礙診斷流程與測驗簡介。台北：教育部特殊教育工作小組。
柯華葳(2010)：閱讀成分與閱讀發展。載於中文閱讀障礙，柯華葳主編。台北：心理。
柯華葳、詹益綾(2007) 。國民小學二至六年級閱讀理解篩選測驗使用手冊。台北：教育部特殊教育工作小組。
洪儷瑜(1995)。學習障礙礙者教育。台北：心理。
洪儷瑜(2005a) 。由語文學習困難的評量工具談其概念與應用。載於洪儷瑜、王瓊珠、陳長益主編，突破學習困難─評量與因應之探討，2-28。台北：心理。
洪儷瑜(2005b) 。學習障礙鑑定工作檢討與建議─由「各縣市實施學習障礙學生鑑定工作調查表」談起。民國98年12月30日，取自http://192.192.250.54/liyuhung/chinese/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?cid=9&lid=40
洪儷瑜(2006a) 。特殊需求學生轉介表-100R。民國98年10月29日，取自http://web.cc.ntnu.edu.tw/~t14010。
洪儷瑜(2006b)。『特殊需求學生轉介資料表-100R』使用說明。民國98年10月29日，取自http://nflcr.knu.edu.tw/liyuhung/chinese/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=45。
洪儷瑜(2008)。突破困難、帶起讀寫樂趣─如何提升低成就學生的語文能力。載於希望小學語文科教材實驗計畫(講義)。台灣師範大學特殊教育學系，未出版。
洪儷瑜(2010)。閱讀困難學生的特質。載於王瓊珠、陳淑麗主編(2010)：突破閱讀困難理念與實務。台北：心理。
洪儷瑜（2012）：學習障礙鑑定原則鑑定辦法說明。臺北市：作者。
洪儷瑜、丘彥南、張郁雯、孟瑛如、蔡明富(2001)：問題行為篩選量表指導手冊。台北：教育部。
洪儷瑜、王瓊珠、張郁雯、陳秀芬、陳慶順(1999)。識字量估計測驗。台北：教育部。
洪儷瑜、王瓊珠、張郁雯、陳秀芬、陳慶順(2007)：常見字流暢性測驗(看字讀音造詞測驗)使用手冊。台北：國立台灣師範大學特殊教育中心。
洪儷瑜、陳淑麗、王瓊珠、方金雅、陳美芳、張郁雯、柯華葳(2007) 。中文閱讀診斷工具臨床驗證性研究。柯華葳主持，中文閱讀障礙診斷測驗期末報告。台北：教育部特殊教育工作小組。
洪儷瑜、陳淑麗、王瓊珠、方金雅、張郁雯、陳美芳、柯華葳(2009) 。閱讀障礙篩選流程的檢驗─篩選或教師轉介之比較。特殊教育研究學刊，(34)，1，1-22。
洪儷瑜、何淑玫(2010)。「介入反應」在特殊教育的意義與運用。特殊教育季刊，115, 1-12。
洪儷瑜（2012）。學習障礙鑑定原則鑑定辦法說明。臺北市：作者。
粘玉芳（2007）。不同閱讀障礙類型兒童與普通兒童口語敘事表現之比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
連文宏、洪儷瑜、闕嫣男、蔡明蒼(2013)。三個轉介時程之疑似學習障礙學生後續鑑定結果比較─台北市國中階段學習障礙學生之鑑定通報資料庫分析。特殊教育季刊。127，9-21。
張正芬 、王華沛、鄒國蘇(2001) 。自閉症兒童行為檢核表。台北：教育部特殊教育工作小組。
張英鵬(2004) 。他山之石可攻錯─美國轉介前介入方案之推動與成效探討。屏師特殊教育，9，9-17。
陳心怡、洪儷瑜 (2007) 。由心評教師看特教鑑定工作的人力資源問題。特殊教育學會年刊，149-168.
陳玉燕（2010）。建構國中階段閱讀障礙學生教學反應模式之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版。
教育部(2006) 。身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準(95年9月修)，法務部全國法規資料庫。民國98年10月29日，取自http://law.moj.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4A.asp?FullDoc=all&Fcode=H0080065
教育部(2010，5月)。特殊教育通報網98學年度統計資料。民國99年8月17日，取自http://www.set.edu.tw/sta2/default.asp
教育部(2013，5月)。特殊教育通報網101學年度統計資料。民國103年7月1日，取自http://www.set.edu.tw/sta2/default.asp
教育部(2014)。國民小學及國民中學補救教學實施方案。國民小學及國民中學補救教學資源平台。民國103年7月1日，取自http://priori.moe.gov.tw/
教育部統計處(2010) 。教育部統計處教育統計(99年版)-各級學校縣市別學生人數。民國99年8月17日，取自http://www.edu.tw/statistics/content.aspx?site_content_sn=23553
教育部統計處(2014) 。教育部統計處教育統計(101年)-各級學校縣市別學生人數。民國103年7月22日，取自https://stats.moe.gov.tw/(2014.7.22)
陳心怡、洪儷瑜 (2007)。由心評教師看特教鑑定工作的人力資源問題。特殊教育學會年刊, 149-168.
陳怡伶(2004)。閱讀障礙學生的聲韻覺識、唸名速度和視覺技巧與識字的關係。國立臺南大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。未出版。
陳美芳(1999)。國語文低成就學童口語理解能力的發展。特殊教育研究學刊，17，189-204。
陳美芳、吳怡潔(2007) 。聽覺理解測驗使用手冊。台北：教育部特殊教育小組。
陳淑麗(2004)。轉介前介入對原住民閱讀障礙診斷區辨效度之研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文，已出版。
陳淑麗(2008)。國小弱勢學生課業輔導現況調查之研究。台東大學教育學報。19(1)，1-32。
陳淑麗、洪儷瑜(2003)。學習障礙國中學生在不同差距標準差異之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，24，85-111。
陳淑麗、洪儷瑜、曾世杰(2005) 。以國語文補救教學診斷原住民低成就學童是否為學習障礙：轉介前介入的效度考驗研究。特殊教育研究學刊，29，127-150。
陳淑麗、洪儷瑜、曾世杰(2006) 。原住民國語文低成就學童文化與經驗本位補救教學成效之研究。師大學報，51(2),147-171。
陳淑麗、曾世杰、蔣汝梅（2012）。初級與次級國語文介入對弱勢低學力學校的成效研究：不同介入長度的比較。特殊教育研究學刊，37（3），27-58。
陳秀芬(2014)。教學反應模式在國中閱讀障礙鑑定系統之建構。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
陳瑋婷(2008)。「教學介入反應」對學習障礙學生鑑定之啟示與挑戰。特殊教育季刊，106，24-31。
陳榮華(1997) 。魏氏兒童智力量表第三版指導手冊。台北：中國行為科學社。
陳慶順(1999)。識字困難學生與普通學生識字認知成分之比較研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版。
曾世杰、陳淑麗、蔣汝梅（2013）。提升教育優先區國民小學一年級學生的讀寫能力─多層級教學介入模式之探究。特殊教育研究學刊，38（3），55-80。
黃志強（2010）。應用教學反應模式對國小學習障礙學生鑑定之研究。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育學系博士論文，未出版。
黃柏華、梁怡萱(2005)：轉介前介入於特殊教育中的角色探析。特殊教育季刊，95，1-11。
黃冠穎(2004) 。部件識字教學法對國小二年級國語低成就學童補救教學學習成效之研究。國立花蓮師範學院特殊教育教學碩士論文，未出版。
黃瑞珍(2006)。：國小LD學生鑑定問題與可行方向。國小特殊教育，41,1-13。
黃毅志(2008) 。如何精確測量職業地位？「改良版台灣地區新職業聲望 與社經地位量表」之建構。台東大學教育學報，19(1)，151～160。
楊秀文(2001) 。不同語文理解類型學生之研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育碩士論文，未出版。
楊雯雯(2009，9月) 。診斷檢驗工具之效能與應用。民國99年4月20日，取自http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrsBohyZdZTjksA.r1r1gt.;_ylu=X3oDMTBydTdmYjgyBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA3R3MQR2dGlkAw--/RV=2/RE=1406588403/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww2.cde.org.tw%2fHTA%2fSubLink%2f%25E8%25A8%25BA%25E6%2596%25B7%25E5%25B7%25A5%25E5%2585%25B7%25E4%25B9%258B%25E6%2595%2588%25E8%2583%25BD%25E8%2588%2587%25E6%2587%2589%25E7%2594%25A8.pdf/RK=0/RS=3mkp6Zues.rXR6i0LJdSMPrTnpU-
謝燕嬌(2003)。中文聲韻覺識測驗之發展及其相關研究。國立臺東大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版。

二、英文部分
Aaron, P. G.(1997).The impending demise of the discrepancy formula. Review of Educational Research, 67,4,461-504.
Aaron, P. G., Frantz, S. S., & Manges, A. R.(1990).Dissociation between pronunciation and comprehension in reading disabilities. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 3, 1-22.
Aaron, P. G., Joshi, R. M., Gooden, R., ＆ Bentum, K. E. ( 2008).Diagnosis and treatment of reading disabilities based on the component model of reading：An alternative to the discrepancy model of LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 1,67.
Aaron, P. G., Joshi, R. M., & William, K. A.(1999). Not all the reading disabilities are alike. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 120-147.
Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P., & Little, T. D. (2005, June). The role of fluency in reading comprehension: should fluency be included in the simple view? Paper presented at the annual meeting of Society for the Scientific Study of Reading. Abstract retrieved January 8, 2010, from http://www2.ku.edu/~splh/Catts/posters.html
Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006).Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component?Reading and Writing,19,933–958.
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Zook, D., Ogier,S., Britton L.Z., & Brooksher, R.(1999).Early intervention for reading disabilities: Teaching the alphabet principle in a connectionist framework. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(6), 491-504.
Bishop, D. V. M.,& Snowling, M. J. (2004). Developmental dyslexia and specific language impairment: Same or different? Psychological Bulletin , 130, 858-886.
Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. E.(1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection. Nature, 301, 419-421.
Catts, H.W., Adlof, S. M., Hogan, T. P., & Weismer, S. E.(2005). Are specific language impairment and dyslexia distinct disorder？ Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1378-1396.
Catts, H. W., Adlof, S. M., & Weismer, S. E. (2006).Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 2,278.
Catts, H., Hogan, T., Adlof, S., & Barth, A.(2003). The simple view of reading: Changes over time.Paper presented at the annual conference of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, Boulder, CO. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from http://www2.ku.edu/~splh/Catts/posters.html
Catts, H. W., Hogan, T. P.,& Fey, M. E.(2003).Subgrouping poor readers on the basis of individual differences in reading-related abilities.Journal of Learning Disabilities,36(2), 151-164.
Case, L. P., Speece, D. L., & Molloy, D. E.(2003).The validity of a response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: a longitudinal analysis of individual differences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32/ 4,557-582
Carver, R. P.＆Clark, S. W.(1998).Investigating reading disabilities using the rauding diagnostic system. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(5),453-473.
Chall, J. S.（1996）. Stages of reading development（2nd ed.）.Orlando, F L：Harcourt Brace.
Chung, K.K.H, McBride-Chang, C., Wong, S.W.L, & Cheung, H.(2008).The role of visual and auditory temporal processing for Chinese children with developmental dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 58(1), 15-36.
Fletcher, J. M., Denton, C., & Francis, D. J.(2005).Validity of alternative approaches for the identification of learning disabilities: operationalizing unexpected underachievement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6), 545-553.
Fletcher, J, M., Francis, D. J., Boudousquie, A.＆Copeland, K. (2006). Effects of accommodations on high-stakes testing for students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72( 2), 136-151.
Fletcher, J. M., ＆ Lyon, G. R. (2008).Dyslexia: Why precise definitions are important and how we have achieved them. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 34(1), 27-31.
Foster, W. A.,＆Miller , M.(2007).Development of the literacy achievement gap: a longitudinal study of kindergarten through third grade. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 38( 3), 173-181.
Fuchs, L. S. (2009, November). Responsiveness To Intervention.何素華(Chair),Creating a new era of inclusive education. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Chung Yuan Christian University, Chung Li, Taiwan.
Fuchs, D., Deshler, D. D., ＆ Reschly, D. J. (2004)National research center on learning disabilities: multimethod studies of identification and classification issues. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27(4), 189-196.
Fuchs, L. S, & Fuchs, D. (1997). Use of curriculum-based measurement in identifying students with disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 30(3), 1-16.
Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 204–219.
Fuchs, L., S.＆Fuchs, D. (2002).Mathematical problem-solving profiles of students with mathematics disabilities with and without comorbid reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(6), 563-575.
Fuchs, L. S.＆ Fuchs, D. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39, 5, 14-21.
Fuchs,D., Fuchs, L. S.,＆ Compton, D. L.(2004). Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness to instruction: specifying measures and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27,4, 216-228.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., McMaster, K. L., Yen, L.,＆ Svenson, E.(2004).Nonresponders: How to find them? How to help them? What do they mean for special education? Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(1), 72-79.
Good, R. H. Ill, Simmons, D. C., & Kame'enui, E. J. (2001). The importance and decision-making utility of a continuum of fluency-based indicators of foundational reading skills for third grade high-stakes outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 257-288
George, K. ＆ Georgiou, J. P.(2009). Revisiting the “simple view of reading” in a group of children with poor reading comprehension .Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42 , 76-84.
Gresham, F.M.(2002) .Responsiveness to intervention: an alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities.Retrieved December 8,2009 ,from NRCLD website: http://www.nrcld.org/resources/ldsummit/gresham4.html
Gresham, F. M. (2007). Responsiveness to Intervention in the SLD Determination Process. The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NRCLD)website. Retrieved Auguest 8, 2010, from：http://www.nrcld.org/resources/ldsummit/gresham4.html
Hammill, D. D.(2004) What we know about correlates of reading. Exceptional Children, 70(4), 453-468.
Hoover, W. A.,＆ Gough, P. B. (1990).The simple view of reading . Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal,2,127-160.
Hughes, C. ＆ Dexter, D.D. ( n . d .). Field studies of RTI programs. The National Center for Learning Disabilities websid. Retrieved January 8,2010, from http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/research/fieldstudies
IDEA DATA (2004).Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved January 8,2010, from http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ446.108
IDEA DATA (2008a).Individiduals with Disabilities Education Act Data,IDEA Data website─State-Level Data Files/Part B Child Count / 2008 (csv)，Retrieved January 8,2010, from https://www.ideadata.org/PartBChildCount.asp
IDEA DATA (2008b)：Individiduals with Disabilities Education Act Data,IDEA Data website─Population & Enrollment Data/2008/Table C-4，Retrieved January 8,2010, from https://www.ideadata.org/PopulationData.asp
Joshi, R. M.,＆ Aaron, P. G.(2000).The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex. Reading Psychlogy, 21, 85-97.
Kavale, K. A., Holdnack, J. A.＆ Mostert, M. P.(2006) Responsiveness to intervention and the identification of specific learning disability : a critique and alternative proposal. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29(2), 113-127.
Kavale, K. A., Kauffman, J. M., Bachmeier, R. J., ＆ LeFever, G. B. (2008) Response to intervention: separating the rhetoric of self-congratulation from the reality of specific learning disability identification. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(3), 135-151.
Koumoula, A., Tsironi, V., Stamouli, V.＆ Bardani,I.(2004).An epidemiological study of number processing and mental calculation in greek schoolchildren. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(5), 377-389.
Laasonen, M. , Lehtinen , M., Leppamaki , S., Tani, P.,＆Hokkanen , L. (2010).Project DyAdd: Phonological processing,reading, spelling, and arithmetic in adults with dyslexia or ADHD. Journal of Learning Disabilities,43(1). 3–14.
Learner, J., ＆ Johns, B.(2009). Learning Disabilities and Related Mild Disabilitie (11rt ed.). Boston, New York：Houghton Mifflin.
McKenzie, R. G.(2009) Obscuring vital distinctions: the oversimplification of learning disabilities within RTI. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(4), 203-216.
McMaster, K. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S.＆ Compton, D. L. (2005) Responding to nonresponders: an experimental field trial of identification and intervention methods.Exceptional Children, 71(4), 445-463.
Meyer, M. S., Wood, F. B., Hart, L. A., & Felton, R. H. (1998). Longitudinal course of rapid naming in disabled and nondisabled readers.Annals of Dylexia, 43, 91-114.
Nation, K. (2005). Why reading comprehension failed: Insights from developmental disorder. Topics in Language Disorder, 25, 21-32.
Nation, K., Clarke, P., Marshall, C. M., ＆ Durand, M. (2004) Hidden language impairments in children: parallels between poor reading comprehension and specific language impairment? Journal of Speech,Language,and Hearing Research,47,1,199.
NCLD.(n.d.a). Approaches to RTI. The National Center for Learning Disabilities websid. Retrieved January 20,2010, from http://www.rtinetwork.org/Learn/What/ar/ApproachesRTI
NCLD.(n.d.b). Field Studies of RTI Programs. The National Center for Learning Disabilities websid. Retrieved January 1,2010, from http://www.rtinetwork.org/Learn/Research/ar/FieldStudies
NRCLD.(n.d.). Responsiveness to intervention: an alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities websid. Retrieved January 10, 2010, from http://www.nrcld.org/free/rti.html
Overton , T., Fielding , C.,＆ Simonsson, M. (2004).Decision making in determining eligibility of culturally and linguistically diverse learners: reasons given by assessment personnel. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(4), 319.
Powell , S. R., Fuchs , L. S., Fuchs , D., Cirino, P. T.,＆Fletcher , J. M.(2009).Do word-problem features differentially affect problem difficulty as a function of students’ mathematics difficulty with and without reading difficulty? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(2), 99-110.
Sideridis, G. D., Mouzaki, A., Simos, P.,＆ Protopapas, A. (2006). Classification of students with reading comprehension difficulties : the roles of motivation, affect, and psychopathology. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29(3), 159-181.
Smith, A. B., Smith , S. L. ,Locke, J. L.,＆Bennett, J. (2008).A longitudinal study of speech timing in young children later found to have reading disability. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(5), 1300-1315.
Speece , D. L.(2005).Hitting the moving target known as reading development: some thoughts on screeing children for secondary interventions.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6), 487-493.
Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K.,＆ Rashotte, C.A. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities:Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1), 33-59.
Trei, L. (2003, February). Remediation training improves reading ability of dyslexic children. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2003/february26/dyslexia-226.html
Tunmer, W., ＆ Greaney, K. (2010).Defining Dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(3), 229–243.
VanDerHeyden, A. (2007). Approaches to RTI. Retrieved January 3, 2010, from http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/what/approachesrti
Vaughn, S., Cirino,P.T., ＆Wanzek,J.(2010).Response to Intervention for middle school students with reading difficulties: Effects of a primary and secondary intervention. School Psychology Review, 39(1), 3-23.
Vellutino, F. R., Fletcher, J. M., Snowling,M. J.,＆ Scanlon, D. M.(2004).Specific reading disability (Dyslexia)：what we have learned in the past decades? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(1), 2–40.
Vellutino, F., Scanlon, D., Sipay, E., Small, S., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denckla, M. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638.
Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Lyon, G. R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers.More evidence against the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(3), 223-239.
Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S., ＆ Fanuele, D, P.(2006).Response to intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities: evidence for the role of kindergarten and first-grade interventions . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 157-170.
Wren,S.(2002).Cognitive Elements of Reading. Retrieved January 20, 2010, from http://www.sedl.org/reading/framework/elements.html
Wren, S.(2006).The simple view of reading: R=D×C. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from http://www.balancedreading.com/simple.html