School psychologists' perceptions of how reading disabilities (RD) should be operationalized were examined and compared to those of journal editorial board members in the learning disabilities field (Speece & Shekitka, 2002). Participants were practicing school psychologists drawn from the membership directory of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). The sample consisted of 549 participants and was generally representative of the demographic characteristics of NASP membership at large. Results indicated that over 75% of participants endorsed using treatment validity/response to intervention (RTI), cognitive processing, and phonemic awareness as components of RD operationalization. A large percentage (61.9%) also endorsed use of an IQ-achievement discrepancy criterion. Statistically significant differences were found between the endorsements of this study's participants and those in the Speece and Shekitka (2002) study, with our participants reporting higher endorsement of RTI, cognitive processing, and IQachievement discrepancy criteria.

There is a clear underrepresentation of Native Americans in the field of school psychology. There are a number of factors that have led to this underrepresentation, including cultural and historical variables, barriers to accessing higher educational opportunities, and lack of financial support. Given the importance of having diverse perspectives in the field, as well as the need for mental health services and academic supports for Native American children and their families, school psychology trainers should consider actively recruiting and retaining Native American graduate students to doctoral and specialist programs. This article provides specific research-based recommendations for recruiting Native American students and strategies for supporting their success and matriculation in the program. (PsycINFO Database Record

No abstract

This study surveyed a national sample of school psychologists with respect to the identification of reading disabilities (RD). It covers school psychologists' opinions regarding perceived benefits of the use of cognitive assessment in RD identification, both within and outside of an IQ -achievement discrepancy model. The survey also solicited opinions about the nature of RD, particularly conceptions of general slow learners (and readers) versus those evidencing a discrepancy. Results related to school psychologists' concerns about job security, should IQ testing be reduced, are presented. Furthermore, the perceived benefits of a Response to Intervention (RTI) model, how school psychologists see themselves contributing to an RTI effort, as well as possible hurdles to RTI implementation are covered. Measurement of these perceptions may be beneficial in informing current and future service delivery models for RD identification as well as possible training needs of currently practicing school psychologists. Finally, the current work represents an effort to measure assessment acceptability for RD identification techniques. C 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.The latest reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004) has strongly impacted researchers, policy makers, and practitioners alike, particularly regarding the identification of specific learning disabilities (SLDs). By (a) stating that an IQachievement discrepancy model must no longer be required, and (b) encouraging consideration of a Response to Intervention (RTI) model, the reauthorization has evoked debate surrounding the issue of defining SLDs.Among SLDs, reading disabilities (RDs) have garnered the most attention having to do with operational definitions (i.e., how they are measured and identified), likely due to the high prevalence of RDs diagnostically (Lerner, 1989) and as a general referral concern (Bramlett, Murphy, Johnson, Wallingsford, & Hall, 2002;. Of the SLDs, RDs have also been the most researched and their identification process the most highly debated via published opinions, although the latter outweighs the former (Speece & Hines, 2007). For these reasons, the current study focuses specifically on RDs. Criticism Regarding Use of Intelligence Measures in RD IdentificationThe two main areas of concern when it comes to the role of cognitive testing in RD determinations include (a) questions about the utility of operationalizing the construct of RD as an ability-achievement discrepancy and (b) the usefulness of IQ test results in informing about the nature of RD (regardless of their use within a discrepancy model). Criticisms of the discrepancy approach include (a) the contention of the process as a wait-to-fail model because severe discrepancies between reading achievement and IQ manifest well after the formative years of early reading skills attainment (Fletcher et al., 1998); (b) questionable reliability due to discrepancy formulas being applied differently from one local educational agency to another, ...

No abstract