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.

No abstract

Measures of visual-motor integration skills continue to be widely used in psychological assessments with children. However, the construct validity of many visual-motor integration measures remains unclear. In this study, we investigated the relative contributions of maturation and cognitive skills to the development of visual-motor integration skills in young children (N = 856). We used a block regression analysis to determine the contribution of maturation, as indicated by age, followed by broad cognitive factors (Study 1) and subsequently by individual subtests in verbal and nonverbal domains subsumed under each factor (Study 2) in explaining score variance of the Bender Visual-Motor Gestalt Test (2nd ed.; BG-II; Brannigan & Decker, 2003) Copy and Recall scores in children between the ages of 4 and 7 years. Results confirm that maturation accounted for a large proportion of variance in both BG-II Copy and Recall performance, above which Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (5th ed.; SB-5; Roid, 2003) Quantitative Reasoning and Fluid Reasoning factors significantly contributed to visual-motor integration performance for the Copy phase, and SB-5 Quantitative Reasoning and Visual-Spatial factors accounted for a significant amount of variance for the Recall phase. Additionally, nonverbal domains were more related to visual-motor performance than verbal domains. Results from this study are interpreted to suggest nonverbal reasoning and visual-spatial attention are important contributing factors to visual-motor integration, as measured by the BG-II. Developmental implications of visual-motor integration skills, nonverbal problem solving, and mathematical competence are discussed.

Research has demonstrated that many children have learning problems related to deficits in specific cognitive processes that are not adequately represented by a single IQ score. The administration of cognitive measures that include narrow abilities is useful in understanding specific learning problems and developing effective interventions. However, school psychology training programs have not readily adopted contemporary assessment practices. This article reviews the historical and legislative factors influencing school psychologists' use of intellectual measures for identifying children with learning and other high-incidence disabilities. Distinctions between contemporary cognitive assessment and traditional IQ testing are reviewed. Specific challenges to incorporating evidence-based assessment practice within school psychology training programs are identified. Guidelines for using alternative research-based procedures that include the use of cognitive measures to assess a child's strengths and weaknesses are provided. Potential directions for the application of cognitive theory in educational settings, professional training in appropriate interpretive strategies, and ethical guidance for the appropriate use of cognitive measures are also discussed. C 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Long-standing controversies regarding the use of intelligence testing in school-based practice have become a foremost concern in contemporary school psychology. Historically, school psychologists over-relied on IQ scores when making disability identification decisions, particularly as applied to specific learning disability (SLD). We concur with the large body of research showing that the IQ-achievement discrepancy method, when used as a primary or sole indicator of SLD, is an invalid approach (see Stanovich, 2005, for review). Similarly, we agree that approaches to SLD identification that do not use cognitive assessment as part of the evaluation procedure are not supported by research (see Reynolds & Shaywitz, 2009, for a review). As such, we support contemporary, research-based alternatives to SLD identification, consistent with the third option of the Federal Regulations (e.g., Hale, Flanagan, & Naglieri, 2008, "because they emanate from the marriage of a collective body of knowledge that has been acquired through research in the fields of neuroscience, pedagogy, assessment, and intervention" (Della Tofallo, 2010, pp. 180-181). Research-based alternative approaches have strongly de-emphasized sole reliance on IQ in favor of theory-based flexible batteries that include measures of cognitive abilities that are predictive of specific academic skills and that yield information relevant for classroom instruction (e.g., Flanagan, Ortiz, & Alfonso, 2013). In this article, we review intellectual assessment within a historical context, provide a rationale for

The current study provides a methodological review of studies supporting a general factor of intelligence as the primary model for contemporary measures of cognitive abilities. A further evaluation is provided by an empirical evaluation that compares statistical estimates using different approaches in a large sample of children (ages 9–13 years, N = 780) administered a comprehensive battery of cognitive measures. Results from this study demonstrate the ramifications of using the bifactor and Schmid–Leiman (BF/SL) technique and suggest that using BF/SL methods limit interpretation of cognitive abilities to only a general factor. The inadvertent use of BF/SL methods is demonstrated to impact both model dimensionality and variance estimates for specific measures. As demonstrated in this study, conclusions from both exploratory and confirmatory studies using BF/SL methods are significantly questioned, especially for studies with a questionable theoretical basis. Guidelines for the interpretation of cognitive test scores in applied practice are discussed.

Executive Functions and Fluid Reasoning are both considered to be core aspects of intelligence and mediated by frontal lobe functioning. However, both constructs considerably overlap, and the distinction between the two constructs is unclear. For this study, three measures of Executive Functions and three measures of Fluid Reasoning were administered to a group of participants. Significant correlations were found establishing an empirical association between these two constructs. Factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis also provide evidence for construct similarity. Future research in defining these constructs for measurement purposes and using tests of these constructs in clinical practice is discussed.

Attention problems are ubiquitous in clinical practice, commonly found in many childhood learning and behavior disorders. Practitioners need cost- and time-effective methods for determining whether children have attention problems due to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or numerous other conditions. This study examined the utility of a 15-minute ADHD screening battery designed to differentiate ADHD (including inattentive, IT, and combined, CT, subtypes), specific learning disability (SLD), and typical child samples. Results for the 368 children (age 6 to 12 years) revealed that the Trail Making Test-Part B (Time/Errors), Hale-Denckla Cancellation Test (Time/Correct), and Child Attention Profile (Inattention/Overactivity) teacher ratings discriminated between typical and ADHD groups (87% correct classification; sensitivity = .64; specificity = .92) and differentiated between IT, CT, and SLD groups (80% correct classification; IT sensitivity = .82, and specificity = .96; CT sensitivity = .84, and specificity = .82). Discriminant function and Bonferroni post hoc results revealed different neuropsychological and behavioral patterns among groups.

Cognitive deficits in working memory (WM) are characteristic features of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and autism. However, few studies have investigated cognitive deficits using a wide range of cognitive measures. We compared children with ADHD (n = 49) and autism (n = 33) with a demographically matched control group (n = 79) on a multidimensional battery of cognitive ability. Results confirmed previous research that both groups were characterized by deficits in WM. However, results also suggest verbal WM measures were better predictors than nonverbal WM measures. In addition, measures of visual-motor integration are equally discriminating of children with ADHD and autism from a matched control group. In all, 81% discrimination accuracy was obtained using only WM and visual-motor integration measures. Demonstrated shared deficits in WM and visual-motor integration are explained based on proposed neurological mechanisms common across the two disorders. Clinical implications are discussed.