Twelve school-age children with language-learning disabilities (LLD) participated in a study comparing the effects of two reading feedback strategies for improving their oral and written language performance. Children were matched for age, disability, gender, and general reading performance. Participants were assigned to one of three study groups, Treatment 1 (T1), Treatment 2 (T2), or Control (C). Children were pre- and posttested on standardized tests of reading and oral vocabulary. T1 and T2 participated in 6 weeks of reading intervention. T1 used traditional decoding-based feedback strategies, and T2 used meaning-based feedback strategies, termed Communicative Reading Strategies (CRS). Significant differences across groups were found for reading comprehension, oral reading, and expressive vocabulary measures. Pairwise comparisons indicated that T2 performed significantly better than T1 and C on reading comprehension at posttest. Though not reaching levels of significance, T2 made greater gains than T1 and C on oral reading and expressive vocabulary measures. Results are discussed with implications for using CRS (T2) with school-age poor readers.