Developed in concert with the Learning Disabilities Association of America (LDA), this White Paper regarding specific learning disabilities identification and intervention represents the expert consensus of 58 accomplished scholars in education, psychology, medicine, and the law. Survey responses and empirical evidence suggest that five conclusions are warranted: 1) The SLD definition should be maintained and the statutory requirements in SLD identification procedures should be strengthened; 2) neither ability-achievement discrepancy analysis nor failure to respond to intervention alone is sufficient for SLD identification; 3) a “third method” approach that identifies a pattern of psychological processing strengths and weaknesses, and achievement deficits consistent with this pattern of processing weaknesses, makes the most empirical and clinical sense; 4) an empirically-validated RTI model could be used to prevent learning problems, but comprehensive evaluations should occur for SLD identification purposes, and children with SLD need individualized interventions based on specific learning needs, not merely more intense interventions; and 5) assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological processes should be used for both SLD identification and intervention purposes.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) was reauthorized by the U.S. Congress in 2004, yet ongoing regulatory efforts are required to determine its operationalization and implementation. Of particular concern to school psychologists and others involved in the educational process are the guidelines for identification of children with specific learning disabilities (SLD). Two seemingly opposite camps have been arguing for either a response-tointervention (RTI) approach for SLD identification or a methodology that includes comprehensive evaluations for SLD identification and intervention purposes. In this article, the authors propose a resolution to these critical issues by emphasizing a multitiered approach to serving children with learning problems-one that begins with RTI, but then provides for comprehensive evaluation of cognitive processes if RTI methods are not successful in ameliorating the child's learning difficulties. If a child fails to respond to intervention and demonstrates a deficit in the basic psychological processes following comprehensive evaluation, both the definitional criteria for SLD and the method for determining SLD eligibility will be addressed. This methodology incorporates the best aspects of both the RTI and comprehensive evaluation perspectives to forge a balanced practice model that ensures diagnostic accuracy and optimizes educational outcomes for children with SLD. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.As this article is being written, events are unfolding that could profoundly shape the future of school psychology. Passed by Congress in 2004, the reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) includes language that must be operationalized to reflect the intent of the law. Implementation will be equally challenging because this language must be examined within the context of sound school psychology and special education science and practice. Seemingly opposing factions have called for either a response-to-intervention (RTI) approach or one that includes comprehensive evaluation of basic psychological processes prior to classification of children with specific learning disabilities (SLD). These apparently disparate approaches should not necessarily lead to a politicized professional schism. Instead, both positions should be scrutinized for their individual merits and limitations, with the result being a model that incorporates the best tenets of both perspectives in a balanced practice model that maximizes SLD diagnostic accuracy and optimizes educational outcomes for this heterogeneous and enigmatic population.Both the RTI and comprehensive assessment positions help address long-standing problems surrounding accurate identification of children with SLD. Whether the approach is a standard protocol or a more flexible problem-solving model (see Fuchs, Mock, Morgan, & Young, 2003), the RTI methods advocated by proponents are a welcome and long-awaited addition to the field. The use of research-based instruction, regular student progress mo...
The Digit Span (DS) subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III) is thought to be a measure of attention, concentration, sequencing, number facility, and auditory short-term memory. An optional WISC-III subtest and part of the Freedom from Distractibility (FD) factor, DS assesses several cognitive constructs, yet its utility in differential diagnosis has been questioned because poor DS or FD performance has been inconsistently associated with attention processes. In this study of 195 children referred for comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations, Digits Forward (DF) and Digits Backward (DB) component scores were found to be differentially predictive of attention, executive function, and behavior rating measures. Results suggest that DB is associated with attention and executive function processes, not the short-term rote auditory memory processes tapped by DF.
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III) provides a Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ), four factor standard scores, and subtest scale scores. Although the incremental validity of the WISC-III factor scores over FSIQ in predicting academic achievement has been questioned, this finding was based on the assumption that FSIQ should be entered first into the regression equation and failed to examine the shared variance among predictors. In contrast with previous findings, this study of 174 children meeting criteria for learning disabilities revealed that the WISC-III factors accounted for a large portion of achievement variance during hierarchical regression analyses, yet FSIQ added little predictive power. A commonality analysis of FSIQ indicated that it is largely comprised of unique, not shared, factor variance. Analyzing the WISC-III subtests from a Gf-Gc theoretical framework, academic achievement commonality analyses revealed complex relationships among the predictors, with crystallized, quantitative, and short-term memory factors accounting for the most achievement variance, regardless of academic domain. Results suggest that simple rejection of factor or subtest scores based on hierarchical regression techniques is unwarranted and that systematic exploration of nomothetic and idiographic patterns of performance is recommended for practitioners.
The authors' purpose in this study was to compare the effectiveness of two instructional approaches on mildly handicapped and nonhandicapped students' science achievement. Students were assigned at random to one of two conditions: (a) direct instruction, and (b) discovery teaching. The content of the lessons remained constant across conditions and focused on such concepts as displacement, flotation, variable, controlled experimentation, and scientific prediction. The results show that students in both groups learned equally well as measured by an immediate posttest. However, students in the discovery teaching condition outperformed their direct instruction counterparts on a retention test administered two weeks after the posttest. Finally, learning‐disabled students in the discovery condition performed better than their direct‐instruction counterparts on a performance‐based measure designed to assess generalization. Implications for research and for practice are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.