The present intervention study reveals that students diagnosed with an intellectual disability (ID) are able to construct meaning from written expository text through guided social interaction. There were 31 students recruited from four special schools participating in this intervention study.The study involves a pre-test phase and a post-test phase. The students were divided into two intervention conditions: (a) reciprocal teaching (RT), which involved practice in four reading strategies—prediction, question generating, clarification, and summarisation—and (b) inference training (IT), which involved practice in answering inference questions, i.e., where you have to read between the  lines to find the answer. The training  included 16 sessions over 8 weeks. Pre- testing and post-testing included seven tests. Improvement of test results was obtained in both conditions to about the same extent, indicating that both conditions were beneficial.


structured text talk, reciprocal teaching, inference training, reading comprehension, intellectual disability

Full Text:



Katims DS. Literacy instruction for people with mental retardation: Historical highlights and contemporary analysis. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities 2000;35(1):3≠15.

Browder DM, Wakeman SY, Spooner F, Ahlgrim-Delzell L, Algozzine B. Research on reading instruction for individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children 2006;72(4):392≠408.

Swedish School Inspectorate T. Undervisningen i svenska i grundsärskolan. 2010.

Ratz C, Lenhard W. Reading skills among students with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2013;34(5):1740≠1748.

Conners FA. Reading skills and cognitive abilities of individuals with mental retardation. International Review of Research in Mental Retardation 2003;27:191≠229.

Hudson ME, Browder D, Wakeman S. Helping students with moderate and severe intellectual disability access grade-level text. Teaching Exceptional Children 2013;45(3):14≠23.

Spooner F, Knight V, Browder D, Jimenez B, Di-Biase W. Evaluating evidence-based practice in teac¬hing science content to students with severe de¬ve¬lopmental disabilities. Research and Practice for Per¬sons with Severe Disabilities 2011;36(1-2):62≠75.

Van den Bos K, Nakken H, Nicolay P, Van Houten E. Adults with mild intellectual disabilities: can their reading comprehension ability be improved? Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2007;51(11):835≠849.

Alfassi M, Weiss I, Lifshitz H. The efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering the reading literacy of students with intellectual disabilities. European Journal of Special Needs Education 2009;24(3):291≠305.

Lundberg I, Reichenberg M. Developing reading comprehension among students with mild intellectual disabilities: An intervention study. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 2013;57(1):89≠100.

Palincsar AS, Brown AL. Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction 1984;1(2):117≠175.

Raphael TE, Au KH. QAR: Enhancing com¬pre-hen¬si¬on and test taking across grades and content areas. The Reading Teacher 2005;59(3):206≠221.

Raphael TE. Question-answering strategies for children. The Reading Teacher 1982:186≠190.

Palincsar AS, Klenk L. Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts. Journal of Learning Disabilities 1992;25(4):211≠225.

Vygotsky LS. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes: Harvard uni-ver¬sity press; 1980. 16. Rosenshine B, Meister C. Reciprocal teaching: A re¬view of the research. Review of Educational Research 1994;64(4):479≠530.

Lederer JM. Reciprocal teaching of social studies in inclusive elementary classrooms. Journal of Lear¬ning Disabilities 2000;33(1):91≠106.

Alfassi M. Reading for meaning: The efficacy of re¬ci¬procal teaching in fostering reading com-pre¬hen¬sion in high school students in remedial reading cla¬sses. American Educational Research Journal 1998;35(2):309≠332.

Mims PJ, Hudson ME, Browder DM. Using read-alouds of grade-level biographies and systematic prompting to promote comprehension for students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities 2012;27(2):67≠80.

Tukey JW. We need both exploratory and confirmatory. The American Statistician 1980;34(1):23≠25.

Mills CW. White collar: The American middle classes: Oxford University Press; 2002.

Jackson R. Mental Retardation: Definition, Classification and Systems of Support American Association on Mental Retardation. British Journal of Developmental Disabilities 2003;49(96):53≠54.

Ratz C. Do students with Down syndrome have a specific learning profile for reading? Research in Developmental Disabilities 2013;34(12):4504≠4514.

Høien T. Logos. Handbok. Diagnostisering av dyslexi och andra lässvårigheter. Bryne, Norway: Logometrica; 2007.

Wolf M, Denckla MB. RAN/RAS: Rapid automatized naming and rapid alternating stimulus tests: Pro-ed; 2005.

8 Pages Stockholm: Centrum för lättläst. Available from:

Cummins J. Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy: Multilingual Matters Clevedon; 1984.

Hibbing AN, Rankin-Erickson JL. A picture is worth a thousand words: Using visual images to improve comprehension for middle school struggling readers. The Reading Teacher 2003:758≠770.

Lix Readability Formula : The Lasbarhetsindex Swedish Readability Formula. Available from:

Björnsson CH. Läsbarhet. Stockholm: Liber; 1968.

Fajardo I, Tavares G, Ávila V, Ferrer A. Towards text simplification for poor readers with intellectual disability: When do connectives enhance text cohesion? Research in Developmental Disabilities 2013;34(4):1267≠1279

Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics: Sage; 2013.


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Article Metrics Graph

No metrics found.


  • There are currently no refbacks.