The most well-known learning disability affecting reading is dyslexia. However, there are two other common reading disabilities. All three reading disabilities can be understood in relation to the Simple View of Reading (SVR), which says that good reading comprehension requires two broad types of abilities: good
Three Types of Reading Disabilities
The three types of reading disabilities are:Â
1.
2. Specific reading comprehension disabilities, which involves the opposite pattern to dyslexia. These students' problems are specific to the language comprehension part of the SVR. Difficulties in language comprehension affect these children's reading comprehension, despite the fact that they have at least average phonological and word recognition skills. Students' specific language comprehension weaknesses can vary. For instance, one student's difficulties might involve vocabulary, whereas another student's difficulties might involve sentence structure.
3. Mixed reading disabilities, involving problems with both word recognition and language comprehension. These students have decoding difficulties, but they may have poor reading comprehension even when reading texts that they can decode well, because of weaknesses in vocabulary or other language areas that also affect their reading comprehension. Students with mixed reading disabilities often have oral language comprehension that is somewhat below grade expectations, with reading comprehension that is even lower because of the added impact of poor word recognition.Â
Eligibility for Special Education
In K-12 public schools, to be eligible for special education as a student with a specific learning disability, struggling readers have to meet certain requirements. These requirements include low achievement in at least one of the following areas:
Students with dyslexia typically have low achievement in at least the first two areas, and often in the third as well. Their oral language comprehension is good, but poor word recognition affects their comprehension when they are reading. In specific reading comprehension disabilities, the students' low achievement is often only in reading comprehension. Students with mixed reading disabilities have low achievement in all three areas. Their intervention needs include comprehension as well as word recognition and fluency.
Structured literacy (SL) approaches can benefit students with all three reading disabilities. SL is an umbrella term for certain intervention methods and commercial programs that share a focus on specific content and use distinct instructional features. The content of SL involves important components of language and literacy, such as those displayed in the Reading Universe taxonomy. Features of SL include:
Students with all reading disabilities can benefit from SL approaches. However, they need different emphases depending on the type of reading disability they have. Students with dyslexia require SL interventions focused on word recognition, spelling, and fluency. Students with specific reading comprehension disabilities need SL interventions focused on the specific areas of comprehension in which they are weak, such as vocabulary or sentence structure. Students with mixed reading disabilities need interventions in both word recognition and comprehension.
Many poor readers have problems similar to those outlined above but do not have disabilities. Sometimes children's difficulties stem from limited experiences with language or literacy, or from weaknesses in curriculum or instruction. These students can also benefit from SL approaches. However, students with disabilities often require more intensity of intervention than poor readers without disabilities, such as more time in intervention or smaller group sizes. Teachers can use the Reading Universe taxonomy, which is organized according to the Simple View of Reading, to find suggestions for helping all of these struggling readers in a variety of important areas of reading.
References
Aaron, P. G., Joshi, M., Gooden, R., & Bentum, K. (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, 67-84.
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, 278-293.
Catts, H.W., Compton, D.L., Tomblin, J.B., & Bridges, M.S. (2012). Prevalence and nature of late-emerging poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 166-181.
Cutting, L. E., Clements-Stephens, A., Pugh, K. R., Burns, S., Cao, A., Pekar, J. J., et al. (2013). Not all reading disabilities are dyslexia: Distinct neurobiology of specific comprehension deficits. Brain Connectivity, 3, 199-211.Â
Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. A. (2019). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention, 2nd edition. New York: Guilford Press.
Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2,127-160.
International Dyslexia Association. (2019).
International Dyslexia Association. (2020).
Spear-Swerling, L. (2015). The power of RTI and reading profiles: A blueprint for solving reading problems. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
Spear-Swerling, L. (2018). Structured literacy and typical literacy practices: Understanding differences to create instructional opportunities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 51, 201-211.
Spear-Swerling, L., Editor (2022).