This article was downloaded by: [University of New Brunswick]

On: 23 June 2014, At: 04:58

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for
Children and Youth
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vpsf20
Improving Reading Comprehension for Elementary
Students With Learning Disabilities: UDL Enhanced
Story Mapping
Drue E. Narkon
a
& Jenny C. Wells
a
a
University of Hawaii , Honolulu , HI , USA
Published online: 25 Aug 2013.
To cite this article: Drue E. Narkon & Jenny C. Wells (2013) Improving Reading Comprehension for Elementary Students With
Learning Disabilities: UDL Enhanced Story Mapping, Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth,
57:4, 231-239, DOI: 10.1080/1045988X.2012.726286
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2012.726286
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Preventing School Failure, 57(4), 231239, 2013
Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1045-988X print / 1940-4387 online
DOI: 10.1080/1045988X.2012.726286
Improving Reading Comprehension for Elementary Students
With Learning Disabilities: UDL Enhanced Story Mapping
DRUE E. NARKON and JENNY C. WELLS
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA
Story mapping is an effective visual strategy to enhance comprehension of narrative text in students, with or without disabilities.
This article demonstrates how instruction can be designed using principles of universal design for learning with the evidence-based
story-mapping strategy to improve reading comprehension for elementary students with a reading disability. Applying the principles
of universal design for learning in the instructional design of a story-mapping lesson increases accessibility and removes barriers to
engagement and interaction experienced by students with learning disabilities who have reading and writing challenges. An illustration
of the planning and delivery of a universal design for learning enhanced story-mapping lesson that ts into the classroom schedule
in inclusive general education or special education classrooms is included.
Keywords: learning disabilities, reading comprehension, story map, universal design for learning
How do students make meaning from narrative text? Reading
comprehension is a complex interaction between the readers
(a) vocabulary knowledge, (b) interaction with the text, and
(c) application of reading comprehension strategies (National
Reading Panel, 2000). Reading comprehension is more than
decoding words uently and understanding the meaning of
individual words (Roberts, Torgesen, Boardman, & Scam-
macca, 2008, p. 66); there must be present the capability of
connecting prior knowledge to new information being read
and an understanding, as a whole, of the meaning of the writ-
ten text (Roberts et al., 2008). Good readers activate prior
knowledge to organize and develop inferences to assist them
in connecting with the text. They also monitor their under-
standing as they are reading and use specic cognitive strate-
gies when they encounter barriers that assist them in their
comprehension (National Reading Panel, 2000).
Reading Comprehension Issues for Students with Learning
Disabilities (LD)
Many students, including those without disabilities, struggle
with accessing the general curriculumbecause of reading com-
prehension difculties (Meo, 2008; Proctor, Dalton, & Gr-
isham, 2011). Although not all students with LD experience
difculties in reading, the majority do (Bryant, Bryant, Ham-
mill, Sorrells, & Kethley, 2004). Students with LD who strug-
gle with reading comprehension comprise about 80% of stu-
dents identied with LD (Gersten, Fuchs, Williams, & Baker,
Address correspondence to Drue E. Narkon, Department of Spe-
cial Education, University of Hawaii, Wist 116, 1776 University
Avenue, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA. E-mail: narkon@hawaii.edu
2001; Wade, Boon, & Spencer, 2010). Several cognitive factors
underlying the reading comprehension difculties of these stu-
dents with LD are decits in (a) working memory (Swanson,
Kehler, & Jerman, 2010), (b) transfer of knowledge, and (c)
information processing (Swanson, 1987). Although the com-
plex cognitive processing required to comprehend text, re-
ferred to as automatization, is accomplished easily in good
readers (Swanson, 1987), struggling readers are disadvantaged
in their ability to simultaneously store and process informa-
tion contained in the text (Stetter & Hughes, 2010; Swanson
et al., 2010). These underlying decits and the demands of
text comprehension put the student with a reading disability
at an extreme disadvantage in understanding the meaning of
written text. In the National Longitudinal Transition Study
2, . . .21% of students with learning disabilities (LD) are ve
or more grade levels below in reading (Kennedy & Deshler,
2010, p. 289).
Swanson and De La Paz (1998) stated that good readers
are typically not aware that they are using metacognitive
strategies (i.e., intentionally recruiting and using specic
strategies based on task demands) although they consistently
do so. Students with reading disabilities and other struggling
readers experience difculty applying strategies strategically
and using metacognitive strategies while reading (Antoniou
& Sovignier, 2007; Gersten et al., 2001; Wade et al., 2010).
Specically, they exhibit the following difculties: (a) failure to
monitor their understanding, (b) inability to use strategies that
are appropriate for the task, (c) inability to make inferences
based on the text, and (d) failure to integrate ideas within
the text. They have developed neither strategies for tracking
their understanding as they read nor strategies to repair
their understanding (Roberts et al., 2008). They also fail to
link new information with prior knowledge or monitor their
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

232 Narkon and Wells
comprehension of what they are reading (e.g., pausing after
each paragraph to summarize or ask questions, conrm or
refute predictions). In some cases, as a result of their limited
independent reading, they do not possess adequate prior
knowledge or the knowledge they access is unrelated, or even
incorrect, making text comprehension impossible (Roberts
et al., 2008).
Strategic Approaches to Reading Comprehension Instruction
How can students with reading disabilities be provided ef-
fective instruction and support within the general education
curriculum to facilitate their comprehension of narrative text?
One instructional strategy that has been validated in both gen-
eral and special education classrooms to foster comprehension
of narrative text is story mapping (Gardill & Jitendra, 1999).
The purpose of this article is to demonstrate how instruction
can be designed using principles of universal design for learn-
ing (UDL) with the evidence-based story-mapping strategy to
improve reading comprehension for elementary students with
a reading disability. As direct/explicit reading comprehension
instructionhas beendemonstratedtobe benecial for students
with LD(Bryant, Goodwin, Bryant, &Higgins, 2003; Mathes,
Fuchs, & Fuchs, 1997; Rupley, Blair, & Nichols, 2009) direct
instruction lesson planning formats, expanded direct instruc-
tion (Hunter, 1994) and mini-lesson (Atwell, 1987; Calkins,
1986; Robb, 1999), are used to demonstrate the process and
associated procedures in design and implementation of UDL
enhanced story-mapping lessons.
Story Mapping
Story maps provide a visual representationfor readers tofacili-
tate their identication, organization, andanalysis of story ele-
ments (Stetter &Hughes, 2010). Astorymapis the graphic rep-
resentation of story grammar (Boulineau, Fore, Hagan-Burke,
& Burke, 2004; Gardhill & Jitendra, 1999; Idol & Croll, 1987;
Stagliano & Boon, 2009). Stein and Glenn (1979) originally
envisioned story grammar containing two major components:
(a) setting, including characters and context; and (b) episodic
events, including initiating events, internal responses, plans,
actions, consequences, and reactions. Subsequently, other ver-
sions of story grammar were developed. Figure 1 illustrates
a story map template that provides prompts for the students,
space for the students written prediction responses, and addi-
tional boxes for students who choose to draw their responses.
The elements of this story map are (a) character(s), (b) setting,
(c) major events, (d) problem/conict, and (e) story outcome
(Mathes et al., 1997). Story map elements are prompts that
assist students in identifying and locating important informa-
tion (Stagliano & Boon, 2009; Stetter & Hughes, 2010) and
serve as an organizer to assist the students later with their
writing and comprehension of the narrative text (Boulineau
et al., 2004; Gardill & Jitendra, 1999). The story map provides
the necessary support to enable recall of the content of the
story (Idol, 1987; Idol & Croll, 1987; Stein & Glenn, 1979;
Stetter & Hughes, 2010). Over the years, story-mapping and
computer-assistedinstructionmergedintoa concept knownas
computer-based story mapping (Wade et al., 2010). Software
programs such as Kidspiration (Kindergarten to Grade 5) and
Inspiration (Grades 612) provide the option for developing
a story map on the computer using the available templates.
Although these features of story maps provide readers with
comprehension support, they do not provide complete acces-
sibility to the narrative text or to the instructional require-
ments of a story-map lesson for a student with LD. There are
additional learning challenges experienced by students with
LD that interfere with their participation in a story-map les-
son. The majority of students with LD experience reading
difculties and are characterized by a slower reading rate re-
lated to phonemic awareness and uency difculties (Bryant
et al., 2004; Constantinidou & Stainthorp, 2009). These char-
acteristics make decoding the text and extracting the relevant
information to participate in a story-map lesson extremely dif-
cult. Many of the students with reading difculties also are
impacted by writing difculties that further interfere with their
expression and engagement in instruction (Katusic, Colligan,
Weaver, & Barbaresi, 2009). This combination of challenges
creates signicant additional barriers to accessing the curricu-
lum. The UDL framework provides a means to proactively
reduce these barriers and effectively support elementary stu-
dents with LD who struggle with reading comprehension.
Principles of UDL
Applying the principles of UDL to the instructional design
of story-mapping lessons increases accessibility and removes
barriers to engagement and interaction with the content. Al-
though controversy exists regarding the evidence base sup-
porting the application of UDL (Edyburn, 2010; Spooner,
Baker, Harris, Ahlgrim-Deizell, & Browder, 2007), it has be-
come a component of recent educational legislation. Univer-
sal design has been embraced by the framers of Individuals
With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 and
the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 and has been
included in both pieces of legislation. In the Individuals With
Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004), UDL is de-
scribed as a scientically valid framework for guiding edu-
cational practice sec. 762 (G) (sec. 103 (C)). Both pieces of
legislation use the language of the Assistive Technology Act,
Section 3 (1998) for their description of UDL. In the Individ-
uals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, UDL is
dened as follows:
a concept or philosophy for designing and delivering prod-
ucts, and services that are usable by people with the widest
possible range of functional capabilities, which include
products and services that are directly usable (without re-
quiring assistive technologies) and products and services
that are made usable with assistive technologies. (pp 89)
In light of these legal mandates, there is an expectation that
teachers will plan instruction that incorporates low and high
tech strategies to remove barriers that prevent students with
disabilities from accessing and interacting with the general
education curriculum.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

UDL Enhanced Story Mapping 233
MY STORY MAP
Story Title: ____________________________________________________
Main Character(s) (Who?)
______________________________________________________
Setting (Where? When?)
______________________________________________________
Problem/Conflict?
______________________________________________________
Major Events (What happens?)
1._____________________________________________________
2._____________________________________________________
3._____________________________________________________
4._____________________________________________________
Story Outcome (How do they solve the problem?)
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Fig. 1. Story map template.
UDL is based on three major principles to reduce barriers
to learning: (a) providing multiple means of representation,
(b) providing multiple means of action and expression, and (c)
providing multiple means of engagement (Center for Applied
Special Technology, 2008). The associated UDLguidelines fo-
cus on using instructional methods, materials, and technolo-
gies that make the curriculum accessible for all learners (Cen-
ter for Applied Special Technology, 2011). The UDL prin-
ciples, guidelines, and associated instructional strategies that
may be provided for curriculum accessibility are outlined in
Table 1. The rst UDL principle, providing multiple means of
representation, incorporates providing options for perception,
language, mathematical expressions, symbols, and compre-
hension. This UDL principle helps to ensure that alternatives
are included in curriculum planning that increase accessibil-
ity, clarity, and comprehensibility across learners. The second
UDL principle, providing multiple means of action and ex-
pression, incorporates providing options for physical action,
expressive skills, uency, and executive functions (i.e., plan-
ning, monitoring). This UDL principle helps to ensure that
alternatives are included in curriculum and lesson planning
that increase all students ability to express what they know
and to engage in strategy use, practice, and organization of
information to facilitate learning. The third UDL principle,
providing multiple means of engagement, incorporates pro-
viding options for recruiting interest, sustaining effort, persis-
tence, and self-regulation. The National Center for Universal
Design for Learning website
1
has a wealth of multi-media re-
sources available to further increase understanding of UDL
1
www.udlcenter.org
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

T
a
b
l
e
1
.
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
a
l
D
e
s
i
g
n
f
o
r
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
,
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
,
a
n
d
I
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
f
o
r
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
a
n
d
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
1
.
M
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
m
e
a
n
s
o
f
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
e
r
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
,
M
a
t
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
a
l
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
S
y
m
b
o
l
s
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
o
n

C
u
s
t
o
m
i
z
i
n
g
t
e
x
t
d
i
s
p
l
a
y

P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
v
i
s
u
a
l
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
f
o
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
a
u
r
a
l
l
y

P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
n
o
n
v
i
s
u
a
l
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
f
o
r
v
i
s
u
a
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

C
l
a
r
i
f
y
i
n
g
v
o
c
a
b
u
l
a
r
y
a
n
d
s
y
m
b
o
l
s

C
l
a
r
i
f
y
i
n
g
s
y
n
t
a
x
a
n
d
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
,
m
a
k
i
n
g
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
m
e
a
n
i
n
g
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t

S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
d
e
c
o
d
i
n
g
o
f
t
e
x
t
,
m
a
t
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
a
l
n
o
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
s
y
m
b
o
l
s

P
r
o
m
o
t
i
n
g
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
a
c
r
o
s
s
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
s

I
l
l
u
s
t
r
a
t
i
n
g
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
m
e
d
i
a

A
c
t
i
v
a
t
i
n
g
o
r
s
u
p
p
l
y
i
n
g
b
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

H
i
g
h
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
s
,
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
a
s
p
e
c
t
s
,
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
i
d
e
a
s
a
n
d
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s

G
u
i
d
i
n
g
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
g
,
v
i
s
u
a
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
m
a
n
i
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

U
s
i
n
g
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
e
x
p
l
i
c
i
t
l
y
t
h
a
t
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
a
n
d
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
i
z
e
t
h
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
2
.
M
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
m
e
a
n
s
o
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
P
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
a
c
t
i
o
n
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s

P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
m
e
a
n
s
f
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
a
n
d
n
a
v
i
g
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
s
s
i
s
t
i
v
e
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
t
o
o
l
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
t
o
u
s
e
t
h
e
m

U
s
i
n
g
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
m
e
d
i
a
f
o
r
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
w
i
d
e
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
t
o
o
l
s
f
o
r
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
t
o
u
s
e
f
o
r
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
c
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
t
o
m
a
t
c
h
t
h
e
i
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
d
e
m
a
n
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
t
a
s
k

O
f
f
e
r
i
n
g
m
a
n
y
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
f
o
r
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
a
n
d
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
s
c
a
f
f
o
l
d
i
n
g
t
o
b
u
i
l
d

u
e
n
c
i
e
s

G
u
i
d
i
n
g
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
g
o
a
l
s
e
t
t
i
n
g

S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
s
c
a
f
f
o
l
d
i
n
g
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
u
s
e
,
a
n
d
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
m
a
k
i
n
g

F
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
a
n
a
g
i
n
g
o
f
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

E
n
h
a
n
c
i
n
g
t
h
e
i
r
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
f
o
r
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
3
.
M
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
m
e
a
n
s
o
f
e
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
i
n
g
I
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
S
u
s
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
e
f
f
o
r
t
a
n
d
p
e
r
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
e
S
e
l
f
-
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

O
p
t
i
m
i
z
i
n
g
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
c
h
o
i
c
e
a
n
d
a
u
t
o
n
o
m
y

P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
o
p
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
o
p
t
i
m
i
z
e
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
c
e
,
v
a
l
u
e
,
a
n
d
a
u
t
h
e
n
t
i
c
i
t
y
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
l
e
a
r
n
e
r

C
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
a
s
a
f
e
p
l
a
c
e
w
h
e
r
e
t
h
r
e
a
t
s
a
n
d
n
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
d
i
s
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
e
d

G
i
v
i
n
g
r
e
m
i
n
d
e
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
g
o
a
l
a
n
d
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
i
r
v
a
l
u
e

P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
d
e
m
a
n
d
s
a
n
d
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
t
o
o
p
t
i
m
i
z
e
c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e

F
o
s
t
e
r
i
n
g
c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y

E
m
p
h
a
s
i
z
i
n
g
e
f
f
o
r
t
a
n
d
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
w
i
t
h
m
a
s
t
e
r
y
-
o
r
i
e
n
t
e
d
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k

P
r
o
m
o
t
i
n
g
e
x
p
e
c
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
f
o
s
t
e
r
i
n
g
p
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
b
e
l
i
e
f
s

F
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
n
g
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
c
o
p
i
n
g
s
k
i
l
l
s
a
n
d
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g
s
e
l
f
-
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
r
e

e
c
t
i
o
n
N
o
t
e
.
A
d
a
p
t
e
d
f
r
o
m
C
A
S
T
(
2
0
1
1
)
.
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
a
l
D
e
s
i
g
n
f
o
r
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
2
.
0
.
W
a
k
e

e
l
d
,
M
A
:
A
u
t
h
o
r
.
234
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

UDL Enhanced Story Mapping 235
Table 2. List of Additional UDL Resources
UDL resource UDL website Content description
Developing Comprehension Using
Reading Strategy Supports
http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/
toolkits/tk modellesson.cfm?tk id =21&tkl id
= 281&disp = introduction
Sample UDL lesson using Charles
Dickens A Tale of Two Cities
CAST UDL Book Builder http://bookbuilder.cast.org How to create, share, publish, and read
digital books
CAST UDL Book Builder: Spotlight
Book
http://bookbuilder.cast.org/view.php?op =
model&book = 30018&page = 1
Sample application of UDL using The
Tortoise and the Hare
National Center on Universal Design
for Learning
http://www.udlcenter.org/resource library/
articles/hs reading
Article describing applying UDL to a
high school reading comprehension
program
National Center on Accessible
Instructional Materials
http://aim.cast.org/learn/historyarchive/
backgroundpapers/graphic organizers
Description and examples of other
graphic organizers
UDL Toolkits http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/
toolkits
Interactive activities, tutorials, and tools
are provided online
Planning for All Learners http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/
toolkits/tk lessons.cfm?tk id = 21
Examples of model units and model
lessons with UDL
Note. UDL = universal design for learning.
principles and implementation skills. For a list of additional
internet resources for implementing UDL see Table 2.
Making UDL a mandate does not provide teachers with
the skills and knowledge required to actualize the concepts;
therefore, an example of how the UDL principles, guidelines,
and associated instructional strategies may be incorporated
into the evidence-based reading comprehension instructional
strategy of story mapping is provided.
Applying UDL Principles to Story-Mapping Instruction
Reading instruction must be intentionally designed to align
students identied needs with validated instructional prac-
tices and appropriate technology selected to achieve the de-
sired lesson objectives (Meo, 2008). This begins by identifying
the skill levels and needs of all students in a classroom and
determining what is required for each of them to successfully
achieve the desired outcome of the lesson. Thoughtful analysis
of student needs and lesson goals and objectives provides the
platformfor lesson design and decision making on the instruc-
tional strategies, materials, and technology to be incorporated
into the lesson (Center for Applied Special Technology, 2008,
2011; Kennedy & Deshler, 2010).
Lesson goals and objectives should be aligned with national
and state educational standards. The specic State Common
Core Standard (2010) addressed in a story-mapping lesson is
Reading Standards for Literature K5, Key Ideas and Details,
Grade 1, 3. Describe characters, settings, and major events in
a story, using key details (p. 11). In addition, the related Inter-
national Reading Association/National Council for Teacher
Education standard (1996) addressed:
Standard 3. Students apply wide range of strategies to
comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts. They
drawon their prior experience, their interactions with other
readers and writers, their knowledge of word meaning
and of other texts, their word identication strategies, and
their understanding of textual features (e.g., sound-letter
correspondence, sentence structure, context, graphics).
(para. 2)
Story-Mapping Lesson Formats
There are two lesson formats (i.e., expanded direct instruc-
tion, mini-lesson) available for planning anddelivering a story-
mapping lesson. Both lesson formats can be used in general
or special education classrooms and both can be used for
large group, small group or one-on-one instruction. The ex-
panded lesson format is derived from the direct instruction
lesson plan developed by Hunter (1994) to aid teachers in de-
signing explicit, sequential instruction. The expanded direct
instruction lesson format may be used to provide instruction
on each individual story grammar element before completing
a story map. The other format used in general and special ed-
ucation classrooms to foster comprehension of narrative text
is a mini-lesson (Atwell, 1987; Calkins, 1986; Robb, 1999).
Mini-lessons are brief, no longer than 20 min, and were origi-
nally designed for general education instruction. Mini-lessons
are similar to expanded direct instruction lesson plans as they
involve the teacher modeling while providing guided prac-
tice to ensure students appropriate engagement (Jasmine &
Weiner, 2007). Modeling the story-mapping strategy using a
mini-lesson serves to demonstrate the visual representation of
story grammar (Boulineau et al., 2004).
The expanded direct instruction lesson may be scripted and
typically takes 30 to 60 min to implement. The lesson format
designed by Hunter (1994) serves as a framework for planning
and incorporates various elements: (a) anticipatory set where
the teacher gains the attention of the students by focusing on
the importance of the task and activates the students prior
knowledge, (b) input (i.e., teaches the main concepts or skills),
(c) modeling (i.e., shows andexplains), (d) guidedpractice (i.e.,
students practice with other students and with the guidance of
the teacher), (e) independent practice (i.e., students practice
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

236 Narkon and Wells
the new skill without teacher supervision), and (f) closure.
These elements help the teacher develop and organize the
content they are going to teach.
Mini-lessons include three elements: (a) before reading, (b)
during reading, and (c) after reading instruction. Before read-
ing instruction in a mini-lesson is equivalent to the antici-
patory set in an expanded direct instruction lesson and in-
cludes initial lesson preparation. During reading instruction
in a mini-lesson incorporates input, modeling, and guided
practice elements. After reading instruction in a mini-lesson
encompasses independent practice and closure as in the ex-
panded direct instruction lesson format.
Story-Mapping Lesson Example
Anarrative description of the planning and delivery of a story-
mapping lesson for a classroom containing students with LD
follows. The book A Bird and His Worm, by James Kacz-
man (2002) is used in this story-mapping lesson example. The
UDL principles and instructional strategies that are possible
options for representation of materials, students action and
expression, and student engagement are identied within each
component of the lesson.
Initial Lesson Planning
Learning characteristics and needs of the students in the class
are identied to facilitate decision making on the specic UDL
instructional strategies that are required for all students in the
classroom to access the content. Based on this understanding
of the students learning characteristics, the supporting lesson
materials (e.g., story-map graphic organizers) and equipment
(e.g., LCD projector, word processors) can be prepared and
assembled. Then, the instructional goals and standards to be
addressed in the lesson are identied along with the evaluation
measures to be used to analyze student performance.
The teacher now needs to choose a narrative book to read
to the class and ensure that the book selection contains the
desired story-mapping elements. To recruit student interest
in the lesson (UDL Principle 3. Engagement), students in-
terests and abilities should be considered in the selection of
the narrative text. While teaching students the story-mapping
strategy, books should be selected that are easier than the stu-
dents instructional level to facilitate their ability to engage
with the text successfully. UDL Principle 1. Representation is
addressed during lesson planning through the identication
of key vocabulary to be reviewed before reading based on the
current reading levels of students.
Before Reading
The teacher begins the lesson incorporating UDL Principle 1.
Representation instructional strategies. First, the key vocabu-
lary is introduced and students are provided the meaning of
the words using words and visual aids.
Class, today we are going to read a story; but rst, we need
to learn two new vocabulary words that are in the story.
Our new vocabulary words are journey and devour. Can
anyone tell us what journey or devour means? Lets look at
two pictures on the board.
[Teacher points to a picture of a common vacation destina-
tion]
Has anyone taken a trip before? Where did you go on your
trip? Another word for trip is journey. Lets open the book
and see if we can nd the word journey.
Next, the teacher shows the students the book cover and
asks the students to predict what the story is about just from
looking at the title and cover of the book. Then, the teacher
has them analyze the words in the title. The teacher contin-
ues to question the students, activating their prior knowl-
edge. The teacher asks the students if they can identify a
relationship between the characters just from the title of the
story.
An option for UDL Principle 1. Representation for class-
rooms with projection equipment, such as an Elmo or an
interactive whiteboard, is to project the cover of the book dur-
ing this discussion. In addition, some students may require
an individual copy of the book at their desk or photocopies
of the book could be provided to all students. While high-
lighting the characters names and pictures on the board, the
teacher then asks the students if they know any additional
information about the characters. For example, if the charac-
ters are animals, see if the students know anything about the
animals and write their ideas on the board. Next, see if the
students can identify where and when the story took place.
For example, see if the students can identify if the story takes
place in any particular season or time of day (e.g., summer,
winter, morning, nighttime) and writes these details on the
board.
Now, the story-map graphic is introduced and displayed for
the students, which helps to make the structural relationships
explicit (UDL Principle 1. Representation) and facilitates the
students ability to manage the information related to the story
(UDL Principle 2. Action and Expression). Last, the teacher
asks the students if they can identify the main characters of the
story. The students are then instructed to write down their pre-
diction responses on the story-map template (i.e., worksheet)
on the basis of this discussion.
Possible options for UDL Principle 2. Action and Expres-
sion instructional strategies that may be provided for stu-
dents, who experience difculty with writing their prediction
responses on the story-map template are (a) use desktop word
processors (i.e., Dreamwriter); (b) dictate their responses to
the teacher, paraeducators, or peer partners; (c) draw their
responses; or (d) the teacher could provide handouts for indi-
vidual students to use to cut and paste their responses on the
story-map template. For students whose engagement (UDL
Principle 3. Engagement) are enhanced through the use of
computers, graphic organizer software (i.e., Kidspiration, In-
spiration) could be used on classroom computers. Another
alternative that the teacher can consider to increase the stu-
dents effort and persistence is to use a cooperative group
structure during the lesson.
During Reading
The students read the story or the teacher reads the story to
the students while they follow along in their copy of the text.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

UDL Enhanced Story Mapping 237
UDL Principle 1. Representation instructional strategies to
increase accessibility and remove barriers that may be pro-
vided to students include the use of alternative forms of the
text (i.e., e-books for electronic readers, video reading of book,
audio book, Text-to-Speech, movie version, or leveled read-
ing books) for students who experience difculties in reading.
Providing explicit teacher prompts and cues that assist stu-
dents in identifying and locating each specic story element
scaffolds their strategy use (UDL Principle 2. Action and Ex-
pression). An instructional example of character and setting
development for students who are unable to identify the vari-
ous story elements on their own follows. As the teacher reads
the rst couple of pages aloud, he or she models his or her
thinking while displaying the blank story map. The story map
may be displayed on chart paper or through the use of pro-
jection equipment (i.e., Elmo, interactive whiteboard) while
providing cues and prompts that assist students in identifying
and locating important information:
Okay, weve nished reading the rst couple of pages of
the story. What is the rst question that we need to ask
ourselves? It is a who question. Who are the main character
animals in the story? As I look over the rst couple of pages
in the story and remember the title and cover of the book,
I realize the main character animals are the bird and the
worm. Oh, the bird and the worm are also in the title of the
story. That is another clue that the bird and the worm are
going to be main characters. Since I have an answer to my
who question, I am now going to record it on my story-map
worksheet.
The teacher will continue to provide scaffolding, as in the
example above, modeling howto identify and locate each story
element in the text to make story elements explicit and to
highlight important ideas and relations (UDL Principle 1.
Representation). This modeling process provides repetition
and practice, as well as providing an option for increasing
students capacity for executive functioning (UDLPrinciple 2.
Action and Expression). After identifying the main characters
and setting, this process is used to assist students in identifying
(a) the major events of the story, (b) what problem occurred in
the story, (c) how the character(s) solved the problem, and (d)
whether it was difcult for them to solve the problem. UDL
Principle 2. Action and Expression instructional strategies to
provide to students as they are completing their story map
are (a) use of desktop word processors (i.e., Dreamwriter);
(b) dictating their responses to the teacher, paraeducators,
or peer partners; (c) drawing their responses; (d) handouts
for students to use to cut and paste their responses on the
story-map template; or (e) copying the teachers completed
story map onto their individual story map. To enhance student
engagement (UDLPrinciple 3. Engagement), students may be
given the option to work in pairs or in a cooperative learning
group and/or be provided the option to use the Kidspiration
software on the computer.
After Reading
Once the characters, setting, major events, problem/conict,
andsolutionfor the problemare modeledby the teacher (UDL
Principle 2. Action and Expression) and the students write
their responses on the story map, or use other alternative UDL
instructional strategies for writing (e.g., cutting and pasting,
dragging and dropping choices, or drawing responses), the stu-
dents and teacher discuss their thoughts about the story. The
teacher asks the students what they enjoyed about the story
and projects a graphic organizer that is used to record student
responses (Principle 1. Representation). The class discusses
the relation between the bird, worm, fox, and snake. They also
discuss whether or not they agree with the end of the story
or outcome of the story. The students who are taught with
the expanded direct instruction lesson format are given a new
story either read aloud by the teacher or read independently
by the students.
To enhance student interest, the students may select the new
story (UDL Principle 3. Engagement). Other instructional
strategies that the teacher may use to enhance students exec-
utive functioning (UDL Principle 2. Action and Expression)
include directing the students in their creation of their own
story map by providing scaffolding: (a) who would they talk
about, (b) where would the story take place, (c) what prob-
lem/conict would the characters experience, and (d) how
would the characters solve the problem? Students are encour-
aged to discuss their answers for the story grammar elements
and predict where in the text their answers would be supported
before, during, or after reading the story. An excerpt from a
guided practice activity using a new story follows:
Now that youve selected a new story, lets talk about what
we need to do to complete our story map and understand
the story. What is the rst step before we even open the
book? Thats right! We look at the cover and read the title.
What are we looking for? Is there a picture or are there
words in the title that may help you decide who the charac-
ters are or where the story takes place? Great, write those
predictions under the Who and Where sections of your
story map. Remember, we will be reading to see if these
predictions are correct or if we need to change them.
Meanwhile, the students being taught using the mini-lesson
are asked to discuss alternative endings for the story. Then us-
ing a blank story-map template, students are asked to generate
their own story map with their alternative ending on their own
or with a partner (UDL Principle 3. Engagement). Also, stu-
dents may develop their story maps using computer graphic
organizer software (i.e., Kidspiration, Inspiration) or word
processors (i.e., Dreamwriter) that can then be projected using
an LCD projector or interactive whiteboard. UDL Principle
2. Action and Expression instructional strategies to provide
to students as they are completing their story map are (a) use
of desktop word processors (i.e., Dreamwriter); (b) dictating
their responses to the teacher, paraeducators, or peer partners;
(c) drawing their responses; or (d) copying the teachers com-
pleted story map onto their individual story map. Projecting
students completed story maps using an Elmo projector or
displaying the teachers model story map on chart paper (Prin-
ciple 1. Representation) provides support for student presen-
tations and discussion.
Assessment of students ability to demonstrate what they
know and can do relative to the lesson goals and objectives is
the next step in instruction. Although assessment is the nal
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

238 Narkon and Wells
component of this lesson, planning for assessment should be-
gin during initial lesson development. Using the knowledge,
skills, and abilities inherent in the lesson goals and objec-
tives, a rubric can be developed as a tool to assess students
performance on their UDL enhanced story maps and presen-
tations. Monitoring students progress in this way provides
essential information for planning future instruction.
Summary
Although this article has provided an illustration of a UDL
enhanced story-mapping lesson, the choice of instructional
strategies used were written to address the learner characteris-
tics that elementary students with LD who struggle with read-
ing comprehension experience. It is essential that the UDL
strategies incorporated into lesson design are there to proac-
tively address the representation, action and expression, and
engagement challenges of the curricula and should be cho-
sen to match the specic learning challenges of the students
for whom the lesson is developed (Center for Applied Special
Technology, 2008, 2011).
In addition, the instructional story example provided in
this article only illustrated explicit strategy instruction for the
character and setting elements of the story map. The teacher
must also provide explicit strategy instruction for each of the
story-map elements. The teacher should not assume that the
student understands the strategy and howto use it successfully
without this explicit scaffolding and modeling of how to use
the story-map strategy appropriately (Idol, 1987; Idol &Croll,
1987; Pressley, 2002). Explicit instruction on each of the story-
map elements and the number of elements introduced in a
story at one time needs to be determined depending upon the
students individual instructional needs.
Also, although technology is often used in UDL designed
lessons, just using technology in the classroom during a story-
mapping lesson does not equate to implementing UDL nor
does the use of students individual assistive technologies (i.e.,
voice output communication devices) replace the potential
need for UDL implementation. Assistive technologies may be
necessary to provide specic students with a means to interact
with the environment; however, they do not remove all chal-
lenges to access the curricula. Each classroom of learners is
unique and may potentially have a unique set of barriers to
accessing curricula. Implementation of UDL lesson design is
based on teachers recognition of these important underlying
principles.
Story mapping is an effective visual strategy to enhance
comprehension of narrative text in students, with or with-
out disabilities (Boulineau et al., 2004; Gardill & Jitendra,
1999; Gersten et al., 2001; Idol & Croll, 1987; Mathes et al.,
1997; Montague, Maddux, & Dereshiwsky, 2001; Stagliano &
Boon, 2009; Stetter & Hughes, 2010; Wade et al., 2010). As
a proactive process, UDL enhanced story-map lesson design
addresses the challenges of the curricula, enabling student in-
teraction with the content and instructional requirements of
the lesson at the point of initial instruction.
The success of this process depends on knowing the inter-
ests and learning characteristics of the students in the class-
room and incorporating this knowledge into lesson design.
Since students with LD experience a range of learning chal-
lenges that may interfere with their participation in a story-
map lesson, a careful analysis of the students needs guides
the decision making of the specic UDL strategies necessary
to provide complete accessibility and increase student engage-
ment and success in meeting the lesson objectives. With two
lesson formats to select from (i.e., expanded direct instruc-
tion and mini-lesson), teachers have exibility to plan a struc-
tured, evidence-based, UDLenhanced story-mapping reading
comprehension lesson that ts into the classroom schedule in
inclusive general education or special education classrooms.
Author notes
Drue E. Narkon is an associate professor at the University
of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Special Education. Her
research interests include learning disabilities, reading, and
teacher education.
Jenny C. Wells is an associate professor at the University
of Hawaii at Manoa. Her research interests include reading,
Autism spectrum disorders, and teacher education.
References
Antoniou, F., & Souvignier, E. (2007). Strategy instruction in reading
comprehension: An intervention study for students with learning
disabilities. Learning Disabilities: AContemporary Journal, 5, 4157.
Assistive Technology Act of 1998, 29 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.
Atwell, N. (1987). In the middle. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Boulineau, T., Fore, C., Hagan-Burke, S., & Burke, M. D. (2004). Use of
story-mapping to increase the story-grammar text comprehension
of elementary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability
Quarterly, 27, 105121.
Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., Hammill, D. D., Sorrells, A. M., & Kethley,
C. I. (2004). Characteristic reading behaviors of poor readers who
have learning disabilities. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 29,
3946.
Bryant, D. P., Goodwin, M., Bryant, B. R., & Higgins, K. (2003). Vocab-
ulary instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review of
the research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26, 117128.
Calkins, L. M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state
standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social
studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://
www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI ELA%20Standards.pdf
Constantinidou, M., & Stainthorp, R. (2009). Phonological awareness
and reading speed decits in reading disabled Greek-speaking chil-
dren. Educational Psychology, 29, 171186.
Center for Applied Special Technology. (2008). Universal design for learn-
ing guidelines version 1.0. Wakeeld, MA: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines/downloads
Center for Applied Special Technology. (2011). Universal Design for
Learning Guidelines version 2.0. Wakeeld, MA: Author.
Edyburn, D. L. (2010). Would you recognize universal design for learning
if you saw it? Ten propositions for new directions for the second
decade of UDL. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 3341.
Gardill, M. C., &Jitendra, A. K. (1999). Advancedstory mapinstruction:
Effects on the reading comprehension of students with learning
disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 33, 217.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

UDL Enhanced Story Mapping 239
Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teach-
ing reading comprehension strategies to students with learning dis-
abilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 21,
279320.
Hunter, M. C. (1994). Enhancing teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Idol, L. (1987). Group story mapping: A comprehension strategy for
both skilled and unskilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities,
20, 196205.
Idol, L., & Croll, V. J. (1987). Story-mapping training as a means of
improving reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly,
10, 214229.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004),
20 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. Inspiration [Computer software]. Beaver-
ton, OR: Author.
Jasmine, J., & Weiner, W. (2007). The effects of writing workshop on
abilities of rst grade students to become condent and independent
writers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 131139.
Kaczman, J. (2002). Abird and his worm. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifin.
Katusic, S. K., Colligan, R. C., Weaver, A. L., & Barbaresi, W. J.
(2009). The forgotten learning disability: Epidemiology of written-
language disorder in a population based birth cohort. Pediatrics,
123, 13061313.
Kennedy, M. J., &Deshler, D. D. (2010). Literacy instruction, technology,
and students with learning disabilities: Research we have, research
we need. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 289298.
Kidspiration [Computer software]. Beaverton, OR: Inspiration Software.
Mathes, P. G., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (1997). Cooperative story map-
ping. Remedial and Special Education, 18, 2027.
Meo, G. (2008). Curriculumplanning for all learners: Applying universal
design for learning (UDL) to a high school reading comprehension
program. Preventing School Failure, 52, 2130.
Montague, M., Maddux, C. D., & Dereshiwsky, M. I. (1990). Story
grammar and comprehension and production of narrative prose by
students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities,
23, 190197.
National Council for Teacher Education. (1996). Standards for the English
language arts. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/standards
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-
based assessment of the scientic research literature on reading and
its implications for reading instruction (National Institute of Child
Health Pub. No.004769). Washington, DC: National Institute of
Child Health and Human Development.
Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A-turn-of-
the-century status report. In C. C. Block &M. Pressley (Eds.), Com-
prehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 1127).
New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Proctor, C. P., Dalton, B., & Grisham, D. L. (2011). Scaffolding En-
glish language learners and struggling readers in a universal literacy
environment with embedded strategy instruction and vocabulary
support. Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 7193.
Robb, L. (1999). Easy mini-lessons for building vocabulary: Practical
strategies that boost word knowledge and reading comprehension. New
York, NY: Scholastic.
Roberts, G., Torgesen, J. K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008).
Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students
with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,
23, 6369.
Rupley, W. H., Blair, T. R., & Nichols, W. D. (2009). Effective reading in-
struction for struggling readers: The role of direct/explicit teaching.
Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25, 125138.
Spooner, F., Baker, J. N., Harris, A. A., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L. & Browder,
D. M. (2007). Effects of training in universal design for learning
on lesson plan development. Remedial and Special Education, 28,
108116.
Stagliano, C., & Boon, R. T. (2009). The effects of a story-mapping
procedure to improve the comprehension skills of expository text
passages for elementary students with learning disabilities. Learning
Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 7, 3558.
Stein, N., & Glenn, C. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in
elementary school children. In R. Freebie (Ed.), New directions in
discourse processing (pp. 53120). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Stetter, M. E., & Hughes, M. T. (2010). Using story grammar to assist
students with learning disabilities and reading difculties improve
their comprehension. Education and Treatment of Children, 33, 115
151.
Swanson, H. L. (1987). Information processing theory and learning dis-
abilities: An overview. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 37.
Swanson, P. N., & De La Paz, S. (1998). Teaching effective comprehen-
sion strategies to students with learning and reading disabilities.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 33, 209218.
Swanson, H. L., Kehler, P., & Jerman, O. (2010). Working memory,
strategy knowledge, andstrategy instructioninchildrenwithreading
disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 2447.
The Higher Education Opportunity Act. Public Law 110315. Retrieved
from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html
Wade, E., Boon, R. T., & Spencer, V. G. (2010). Use of Kidspiration
software to enhance the reading comprehension of story grammar
components for elementary-age students with specic learning dis-
abilities. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 8, 3141.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

N
e
w

B
r
u
n
s
w
i
c
k
]

a
t

0
4
:
5
8

2
3

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4