References 1. American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Arlington: American Psychiatric Association. 2. Compton D L., Miller, A. C. , Elleman, A. M., & Steacy, L. M. (2014). Have We Forsaken Reading Theory in the Name of “Quick Fix” Interventions for Children With Reading Disability? Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 55-73. DOI: 10.1080/10888438.2013.836200. Articulates a carefully argues road map for the need to link interventions to theory. The proposed form that interventions should take has the potential to have direct impact on remediation for reading difficulties 3. O’Connor, R., & Fuchs, L. S. (2013). Responsiveness to intervention in the elementary grades: Implications for early childhood education. In V. Buysse, E. Peisner-Feinberg, & J. Cantler (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention (RTI) in early childhood education (pp. 41–56). Baltimore, MD: Brookes. 4. Barnes, M. A., Davis, C., Priebe, S., Arrington, N., Francis, D., & Fletcher, J. (2012, July). Word-level, text-level and general purpose cognitive skills in struggling adolescent readers: Implications for assessment and intervention. In M. W. Lovett & D. Greenberg (Chairs), Assessment and intervention research with struggling adolescent and adult readers. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, Montreal, Canada. 5. Brasseur-Hock, I., Hock, M. F., Kieffer, M. J., Biancarosa, G., & Deshler, D. D. (2011). Adolescent struggling readers in urban schools: Results of a latent class analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 438–452. 6. Solis, M., Ciullo, S., Vaughn, S., Pyle, N., Hassaram, B., & Leroux, A. (2012). Reading comprehension interventions for middle school students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of 30 years of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 327–340. 7. Willingham, D. (2006, Winter). The usefulness of brief instruction in reading comprehension strategies. American Educator, 50, 39–45. 8. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2, 127–160. 9. Rayner, K, Foorman, B., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2, 31–74. 10. Johnston, A. M., Barnes, M. A., & Desrochers, A. (2008). Reading comprehension: Developmental processes, individual differences, and interventions. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49, 125–132. 11. Stanovich, K. E., Cunningham, A. E., & Feeman, D. J. (1984). Relation between early reading acquisition and word decoding with and without context: A longitudinal study of first-grade children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 668–677. 12. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel (NIH Publication No. 00–4754). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 13. Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 167–188. 14. Ehri, L. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18, 5–21. doi:10.1080/10888438.2013.819356 15. Nation, K., Angell, P., & Castles, A. (2007). Orthographic learning via self-teaching in children learning to read English: Effects of exposure, durability, and context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 96, 71–84. 16. Wang, H., Nickels, L., Nation, K., & Castles, A. (2013). Predictors of orthographic learning of regular and irregular words. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 369–384. 17. Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218. 18. Kintsch W., & Rawson, K. A. (2005). Comprehension. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 209–226). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. 19. Perfetti, C. A., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 227–247). Oxford: Blackwell. 20. Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., Barnes, M. A., & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inference-making ability, and the relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 29, 850–859. 21. Kintsch, W. (2009). Learning and constructivism. In S. Tobias & T. M. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 223–241). New York, NY: Routledge 22. Frank, S. L., Koppen, M., Noordman, L. G. M., & Vonk, W. (2003). Modeling knowledge-based inferences in story comprehension. Cognitive Science, 27, 875–910. 23.Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 360-407. 24. Clinton, V., & van den Broek, P. (2012). Interest, inferences, and learning from texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 650–663. 25. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. V. (1999). Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing, 11, 489–503. 26. Emery, D.W., & Milhalevich, C. (1992). Directed discussion of character perspectives. Reading Research and Instruction, 31, 51–59. 27. Elbro C., & Buch-Iversen, I. (2013). Activation of background knowledge for inference making: effects on reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 435–452., 28. Hansen, J. & Pearson, D. P. (1983). An instructional study: Improving the inferential comprehension of good and poor fourth-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 821–829. 29. Spires, H. A., & Donley, J. (1998). Prior knowledge activation: Inducing engagement with informational texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 249–260. 30. Yuill, N., & Joscelyne, T. (1988). Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor comprehenders’ story understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 152–158. 31. Yuill, N., & Oakhill, J. (1988). Effects of inference awareness training on poor reading comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2, 313–345. 32. Chen, V., & Savage, R. S. (2014). Evidence for a simplicity principle: teaching common complex grapheme-to-phonemes improves reading and motivation in at-risk readers. Journal of Research in Reading, 37, 2, 196–214. DOI:10.1111/1467-9817.12022. Evidence that poor readers benefit from training in more complex graphemic units. 33. Vousden, J.I., Ellefson, M.R., Solity, J., & Chater, N. (2011). Simplifying reading: Applying the simplicity principle to reading. Cognitive Science, 35, 1, 34–78. Doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01134.x 34. Goodwin, A. P., & Ahn, S. (2013). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions in English: Effects on literacy outcomes for school-age children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17:4, 257-285, DOI: 10.1080/10888438.2012.689791. Excellent meta-analysis of existing morphological intervention studies. Provides a detailed commentary on the characteristics of studies which should inform the development of further programs. 35.Wolter, J. A., & Dilworth, V. (2014). The effects of a multilinguistic morphological awareness approach for improving language and literacy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47, 76-85. DOI: 10.1177/0022219413509972. 36. Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2006). Improving literacy by teaching morphemes. New York, NY: Routledge. 37. Berninger, V. W., Winn, W. D., Stock, P., Abbott, R. D., Eschen, K., Lin, S.-J., & Nagy, W. (2008). Tier 3 specialized writing instruction for students with dyslexia. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 95–129. 38. McCutchen, D., Stull, S., Herrera,B. L., Lotas, S., & Evans, S. (2014). Putting words to work: Effects of morphological instruction on children's writing. Journal of Learning Disabilities 47, 86-97. DOI: 10.1177/0022219413509969. Provided evidence for the link between morphology and writing being an effective tool in remediation. Particularly important in linking writing to a curriculum area. 39. Seymour, P. H. K., Aro, M., & Erskine, J. M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143–174. 40.Heikkilä, R., Aro , M., Närhi, V., Westerholm, J., & Ahonen. T. (2013). Does training in syllable recognition improve reading speed? A computer-based trial with poor readers from second and third grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17, 398-414, DOI:10.1080/10888438.2012.753452