Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The Journal of Special Education
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rose, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by Zirkel, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rose, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by Zirkel, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Orton-Gillingham Methodology for Students With Reading Disabilities

30 Years of Case Law

Tessie E. Rose

University of Nevada Las Vegas, tessie.rose{at}unlv.edu

Perry Zirkel

Lehigh University

Although numerous studies have investigated autism methodology case law, few studies have investigated case law regarding reading methodology, particularly the Orton-Gillingham approach, for students with reading disabilities. We provide the results of a systematic case analysis of all published Orton-Gillingham decisions from the original passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) through 2005. Results indicate that in the past 30 years, hearing/review officers and courts reviewed 64 Orton-Gillingham cases, with 77% occurring within the last 10 years. Unlike autism methodology cases, districts have won an overwhelming majority (75%). Although inconclusive, the addition of the terms "peer-reviewed research" and "scientifically based research" in the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA may benefit parents in Orton-Gillingham methodology disputes, thus leading to increased litigation. This article concludes with recommendations for reversing the upward trend in the number of Orton-Gillingham reading methodology disputes.

References

  • Antonaccio v. Bd. of Educ. of Arlington Cent. Sch. Dist., 281 F. Supp. 2d 710 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).
  • Arlington Cent. Sch. Dist. v. D.K., 37 IDELR ¶ 277 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).
  • Austin Indep. Sch. Dist., 25 IDELR 875 (Tex. SEA 1997).
  • Banks v. Danbury Bd. of Educ., 238 F. Supp. 2d 428 (D. Conn. 2003).
  • Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J.L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J.F., Prasse, D., et al. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
  • Bd. of Educ. of Downers Grove Grade Sch. Dist. No. 58 v. Steven L., 23 IDELR 39 (N.D. Ill. 1995).
  • Bd. of Educ. of Hendrick Hudson Sch. Dist. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982).
  • Bd. of Educ. of the New Paltz Cent. Sch. Dist., 26 IDELR 1321 (N.Y. SEA 1997).
  • Bd. of Educ. of Oak Park & River Forest High Sch. Dist. No. 200 v. Kelly E., 21 F. Supp. 2d 861 (N.D. Ill. 1998), vacated on other grounds, 207 F.3d 931 (7th Cir. 2000).
  • Bd. of Educ. of Portage Pub. Sch., 25 IDELR 372 (Mich. SEA 1996).
  • Bd. of Educ. of Rhinebeck Cent. Sch. Dist., 39 IDELR ¶ 148 (N.Y. SEA 2003).
  • Bd. of Educ. of Taconic Hills Cent. Sch. Dist., 32 IDELR ¶ 195 (N.Y. SEA 2000).
  • Bd. of Educ. of Victor Cent. Sch. Dist., 27 IDELR 1159 (N.Y. SEA 1998).
  • Bend-Lapine Sch. Dist. v. DW, 28 IDELR 734 (9th Cir. 1998).
  • Bhat, P., Rapport, M.J.K., & Griffin, C.C. (2000). A legal perspective on the use of specific reading methods for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23(4), 283—297.[CrossRef]
  • Boston Pub. Sch., 44 IDELR ¶ 26 (Mass. SEA 2005).
  • Brandywine Sch. Dist., 21 IDELR 1013 (Del. SEA 1994).
  • Bright Solutions for Dyslexia. (1998). Sharing the latest research results with those who need to know. Retrieved December 12, 2005, from http://www.dys-add.com/teach.html
  • Campbell v. Bd. of Educ. of Centerline Sch. Dist., 38 IDELR ¶ 154 (6th Cir. 2003).
  • Casey K. v. St. Anne Cmty. High Sch. Dist. No. 302, 46 IDELR ¶ 102 (C.D. Ill. 2006).
  • Choutka, C.M., Doloughty, P.T., & Zirkel, P.A. (2004). The "discrete trials" of applied behavior analysis for children with autism: Outcome-related factors in the case law. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 95—103.
  • Christopher O., In re, EHLR 505:150 (Mass. SEA 1983).
  • Clark, D.B., & Uhry, J.K. (1995). Dyslexia: Theory & practice of remedial instruction (2nd ed.). Baltimore: York Press.
  • Cronkite v. State of California, 25 IDELR 947 (C.D. Cal. 1997).
  • Daniel G. v. Delaware Valley Sch. Dist., 813 A.2d 36 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002).
  • Davidson v. Gibson County Special Sch. Dist., 37 IDELR ¶ 279 (W.D. Tenn. 2002).
  • Deal v. Hamilton County Bd. of Educ., 392 F.3d 840 (6th Cir. 2004).
  • Dempsey, I., & Foreman, P. (2001). A review of the education approaches for individuals with autism. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 48(1), 103—116.
  • Doe v. Bd. of Educ. of Tullahoma City Sch., 9 F.3d 455 (6th Cir. 1993).
  • Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1975).
  • El Paso Indep. Sch. Dist., 31 IDELR ¶ 25 (Tex. SEA 1998).
  • E.S. v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 196, 135 F.3d 566 (8th Cir. 1998).
  • Etscheidt, S. (2003). An analysis of legal hearings and cases related to individualized education programs for children with autism. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28(2), 51—69.[CrossRef]
  • Evans v. Bd. of Educ. of Rhinebeck Cent. Sch. Dist., 24 IDELR 338 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).
  • Florence County Sch. Dist. Four v. Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993).
  • Fremont Unified Sch. Dist., 27 IDELR 1092 (Cal. SEA 1997).
  • Galina C. v. Shaker Reg'l Sch. Dist., 41 IDELR ¶ 3 (D.N.H. 2004). Garden City Pub. Sch., 18 IDELR 686 (Mich. SEA 1991).
  • Gerstmyer v. Howard County Pub. Sch., 850 F. Supp. 361 (D. Md. 1994).
  • Gillingham, A., & Stillman, B.W. (1956). Remedial training. Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service.
  • Gillingham, A., & Stillman, B.W. (1960). Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling and penmanship (7th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service.
  • Glazier v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 876, 558 N.W.2d 763 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997).
  • Grafton Pub. Sch., 22 IDELR 528 (Mass. SEA 1995).
  • Grapevine-Colleyville Indep. Sch. Dist., 21 IDELR 875 (Tex. SEA 1994).
  • Grim v. Bd. of Educ. of Rhinebeck Cent. Sch. Dist., 346 F.3d 377 (2d Cir. 2003).
  • Gwinnett County Sch. Sys. 27 IDELR 890 (Ga. SEA 1998).
  • Handicapped Child, In re, EHLR 501:356 (N.Y. SEA 1980).
  • Hingham Pub. Sch., 28 IDELR 1292 (Mass. SEA 1998a).
  • Hingham Pub. Sch., 29 IDELR 567 (Mass. SEA 1998b).
  • Horizon Instructional Sys., 44 IDELR ¶ 74 (Cal. SEA 2005).
  • Horowitz, S.H. (2005). Early reading instruction: So what exactly am I supposed to do? Retrieved Sept. 8, 2005, from http://www.ncld.org/newsltr/0405newsltr/0405research.cfm
  • IDEA Proposed Regulations, 70 Fed. Reg. 35,782 et seq. (June 12, 2005).
  • IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 300.1 et seq. (2006).
  • IDEA Regulations Commentary, 64 Fed. Reg. 12,537 et seq. (Mar. 12, 1999).
  • IDEA Regulations Commentary, 71 Fed. Reg. 46,540 et seq. (Aug. 14, 2006).
  • Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2006)
  • Institute for Multi-Sensory Education. (2000 ). Orton-Gillingham: Methodology. Retrieved September 8, 2005, from http://www.orton-gillingham.com/orton-gillingham2.asp
  • Kildonan School. (n.d.). The Kildonan School: Amenia, New York. Retrieved January 18, 2006, from http://www.kildonan.org/home/index.asp
  • Laguna Beach Unified Sch. Dist. 26, IDELR 903 (Cal. SEA 1997).
  • Maloney, M., & Shenker, B. (1995). The continuing evolution of special education law, 1978—1995. Horsham, PA: LRP.
  • Manchester Sch. Dist. v. Christopher B., 807 F. Supp. 860 (D.N.H. 1992).
  • Mather v. Hartford Sch. Dist., 928 F. Supp. 437 (D. Vt. 1996).
  • M.B. v. Arlington Cent. Sch. Dist., 36 IDELR ¶ 130 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).
  • McCarthy v. Indep. Sch. Dist. 284, 43 IDELR ¶ 222 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005).
  • McIntyre, C.W., & Pickering, J.S. (1995). Multisensory structured language programs: Content & principles of instruction. Retrieved September 8, 2005, from http://ldonline.org/ld_indepth/reading/mssl_methods.html
  • Medford Pub. Sch., 33 IDELR ¶ 116 (Mass. SEA 2000).
  • Miller v.Bd. of Educ. of Albuquerque Pub. Sch., 46 IDELR ¶ 162 (D.N.M. 2006).
  • Moats, L.C., & Farrell, M.L. (1999). Multisensory instruction. In J. R. Birsh (Ed.), Multisensory teaching of basic literacy skills (pp. 1—17). Baltimore: Brookes.
  • Montgomery County Pub. Sch., 24 IDELR 975 (Md. SEA 1996).
  • Morgan Hill Unified Sch. Dist., In re, EHLR 502:144 (Cal. SEA 1980).
  • Moubry v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 696, 9 F. Supp. 2d 1086 (D. Minn. 1998) (Moubry II).
  • Moubry v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 696, 33 IDELR ¶ 92 (D. Minn. 2000) (Moubry III).
  • Ms. M v. Portland Sch. Comm., 39 IDELR ¶ 33 (D. Me. 2003), further proceedings on other grounds, 360 F.3d 267 (1st Cir. 2004).
  • Nelson, C., & Huefner, D.S. (2003). Young children with autism: Judicial responses to the Lovaas and discrete trial training debates. Journal of Early Intervention, 26, 1—19.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • New York Dep't. of Educ., 46 IDELR ¶ 58 (N.Y. SEA 2006).
  • No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 70 § 6301 et seq. ( 2006).
  • N. Thurston Sch. Dist., 105 LRP 43624 (Wash. SEA 2005).
  • Oak View Union Sch. Dist., 24 IDELR 183 (Cal. SEA 1995).
  • Pascoe v. Washington Cent. Sch. Dist., 29 IDELR 31 (S.D.N.Y. 1998).
  • Plympton Pub. Sch., 28 IDELR 563 (Mass. SEA 1998).
  • Pomona Unified Sch. Dist., 19 IDELR 603 (Cal. SEA 1993).
  • Reading and Language Arts Centers. (2004). Phonics FirstTM Orton-Gillingham training. Retrieved December 12, 2005, from http://www.rlac.com/training/nclb.php
  • Ridgewood Bd. of Educ. v. N.E., 172 F.3d 238 (3d Cir. 1999).
  • Ritchey, K.D., & Goeke, J.L. (2006). Orton-Gillingham and Orton-Gillingham-based reading instruction: A review of literature. The Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 171—183.
  • Robert B. v. W. Chester Area Sch. Dist., 44 IDELR ¶ 123 (E.D. Pa. 2005).
  • Robert M., In re, EHLR 401:252 (Pa. SEA 1988).
  • Rochester Sch. Dist., 18 IDELR 1313 (Vt. SEA 1991).
  • Rogers, S.J. (1998). Empirically supported comprehensive treatments for young children with autism. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27(2), 168—179.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Sanders, M. (2001). Understanding dyslexia and the reading process: A guide for educators and parents. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Santa Barbara High Sch. Dist., 26 IDELR 473 (Cal. SEA 1997).
  • Schlude v. Ne Cent. Sch. Dist., 892 F. Supp. 560 (S.D.N.Y. 1995).
  • School Administrative Dist. #22, 43 IDELR ¶ 268 (Ma. SEA 2005).
  • Scituate Sch. Comm. v. Robert B., 620 F. Supp. 1224 (D.R.I. 1985), aff'd mem., 795 F.2d 77 (1st Cir. 1986).
  • Sheffield, B.B. (1991). The structured flexibility of Orton-Gillingham. Annals of Dyslexia, 41, 41—54.[CrossRef]
  • Stow Pub. Sch., 16 EHLR 1304 (Mass. SEA 1990).
  • Straube v. Florida Union Free Sch. Dist., 801 F. Supp. 1164 (S.D.N.Y. 1992).
  • Student with a Disability. In re, 34 IDELR ¶ 22 (Mich. SEA 2000).
  • Todd v. Duneland Sch. Corp., 299 F.3d 899 (7th Cir. 2002).
  • Torgesen, J.K., Alexander, A.W., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Voeller, K.K.S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Reading Disabilities, 34, 33—58.
  • Town of Burlington v. Dept. of Educ. of Massachusetts, EHLR 552:408 (D. Mass. 1980), rev'd in part on other grounds, 736 F.2d (1st Cir. 1984), aff'd, 471 U.S. 359 (1985).
  • Unified Sch. Dist. No. 259, 30 IDELR 1004 (Kan. SEA 1999).
  • Vista Unified Sch. Dist., 24 IDELR 189 (Cal. SEA 1995).
  • Wall v. Mattituck-Cutchogue Sch. Dist., 945 F. Supp. 114 (E.D.N.Y. 1996).
  • Walpole Pub. Sch., 16 EHLR 701 (Mass. SEA 1990).
  • Waltham Pub. Sch., 23 IDELR 168 (Mass. SEA 1995).
  • Watson v. Kingston City Sch. Dist., 325 F. Supp. 2d 141 (N.D.N.Y. 2004), aff'd, 142 Fed. Appx. 9 (2d Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct.1040 (2006).
  • William S. v. Chelmsford Pub. Sch., EHLR 502:335 (Mass. SEA 1981).
  • Yell, M.L., Katsiyannis, A., Drasgow, E., & Herbst, M. (2003). Developing legally correct and educationally appropriate programs for students with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 18, 182—191.
  • Zirkel, P. (2006). The legal meaning of specific learning disability for special education eligibility. Alexandria, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
  • Zirkel, P., & D'Angelo, A. (2002). Special education case law: An empirical trend analysis. West's Education Law Reporter, 101, 731—753.
  • Zucker, S. (2004, March). Scientifically based research: NCLB and assessment. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.

The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 41, No. 3, 171-185 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/00224669070410030301
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rose, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by Zirkel, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rose, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by Zirkel, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?