|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Discrepancy Between Definitions of Learning Disabilities and School PracticesAn Empirical Investigation
Donald L. MacMillan
Donald L. MacMillan, EdD, is a professor of education at the University of California, Riverside. His major research interests concern classification and the educational plight of children at risk and those with mild disabilities.
Frank M. Gresham
Frank M. Gresham, PhD, is professor and director of the School Psychology Program at the University of California, Riverside, His major research interests are assessment and intervention practices with children having mild disabilities, social skills assessment and training, and consultation practices in schools.
Kathleen M. Bocian
Kathleen M. Bocian, PhD, is an educational specialist in the School of Education at the University of California, Riverside. Her current interests include the interaction of classification and instruction in special education with student achievement and social skills. Address: Donald L. MacMillan, School of Education-82, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0128.
Students referred by general education teachers to school study teams (SSTs) were evaluated for learning disabilities (LD) eligibility. We classified children as LD on the basis of a WISC-III Full Scale IQ of 82 or higher and a 22-point discrepancy between IQ and any WRAT-R achievement score. Research decisions were then contrasted with actual school-based decisions regarding the child as LD. Over half of the students referred to SSTs were certified by the schools as LD, yet less than half of these school-certified students with LD evidenced the aptitude-achievement discrepancy required by the state. Examination of the cases called LD by the schools revealed that children were classified as LD on the basis of low absolute achievement, regardless of whether or not a discrepancy existed. Moreover, in cases where a discrepancy was found but the school did not classify the child as LD, that child evidenced significantly higher achievement, despite exhibiting the requisite 22-point discrepancy. The school-identified students with LD constituted an extremely heterogeneous group, including students with mental retardation along with a substantial number who failed to qualify for any special education services. Findings are discussed in terms of the discrepancy between criteria specified in state regulations and what the committee members at the school site seemed to use in classifying children with LD.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 31, No. 4,
314-326 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/002221949803100401
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
R. L. Sparks and B. J. Lovett
College Students With Learning Disability Diagnoses: Who Are They and How Do They Perform?
J Learn Disabil,
November 1, 2009;
42(6):
494 - 510.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Heiman, L. C. Zinck, and N. L. Heath
Parents and Youth With Learning Disabilities: Perceptions of Relationships and Communication
J Learn Disabil,
November 1, 2008;
41(6):
524 - 534.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Sparks
Is There a "Disability" for Learning a Foreign Language?
J Learn Disabil,
December 1, 2006;
39(6):
544 - 557.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. T. Shattuck
The Contribution of Diagnostic Substitution to the Growing Administrative Prevalence of Autism in US Special Education
Pediatrics,
April 1, 2006;
117(4):
1028 - 1037.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. M. Batsche, K. A. Kavale, and J. F. Kovaleski
Competing Views: A Dialogue on Response to Intervention
Assessment for Effective Intervention,
January 1, 2006;
32(1):
6 - 19.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. H. Noell and K. A. Gansle
Assuring the Form Has Substance: Treatment Plan Implementation as the Foundation of Assessing Response to Intervention
Assessment for Effective Intervention,
January 1, 2006;
32(1):
32 - 39.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. A. Kavale
Identifying Specific Learning Disability: Is Responsiveness to Intervention the Answer?
J Learn Disabil,
December 1, 2005;
38(6):
553 - 562.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xiangdong Yang, J. Shaftel, D. Glasnapp, and J. Poggio
Qualitative or Quantitative Differences?: Latent Class Analysis of Mathematical Ability for Special Education Students
Journal of Special Education,
February 1, 2005;
38(4):
194 - 207.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. K. Burns, V. J. Dean, and S. Klar
Using Curriculum-Based Assessment in the Responsiveness to Intervention Diagnostic Model for Learning Disabilities
Assessment for Effective Intervention,
January 1, 2004;
29(3):
47 - 56.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Barrera
Curriculum-Based Dynamic Assessment for New- or Second-Language Learners with Learning Disabilities in Secondary Education Settings
Assessment for Effective Intervention,
January 1, 2003;
29(1):
69 - 84.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. W. Murawski and H. Lee Swanson
A Meta-Analysis of Co-Teaching Research: Where Are the Data?
Remedial and Special Education,
September 1, 2001;
22(5):
258 - 267.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. J. Wadsworth, R. K. Olson, B. F. Pennington, and J. C. DeFries
Differential Genetic Etiology of Reading Disability as a Function of IQ
J Learn Disabil,
March 1, 2000;
33(2):
192 - 199.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. R. Forness, B. K. Keogh, D. L. MacMillan, K. A. Kavale, and F. M. Gresham
What Is So Special About IQ?: The Limited Explanatory Power of Cognitive Abilities in the Real World of Special Education
Remedial and Special Education,
November 1, 1998;
19(6):
315 - 322.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
