Academic and Behavioral Characteristics of Learning Disabled Children and Average Achievers: Longitudinal Studies

Abstract

Longitudinal research in the area of learning disabilities has been lacking for some time. The study reported here is an attempt to chart the development of newly identified LD children over the early elementary school years while they are receiving LD services in the public school. This paper includes initial behavioral and academic data for a large sample of 6- and 7-year-old LD and normally achieving students, and charts the progress of about half the children over a 3-year period using teacher rating scales, a classroom observational system, and an achievement test. Results of the study over the three years show that LD children fall progressively further behind their normal peers in reading comprehension. In math, they stay relatively the same distance below their peers. The LD subjects' behavior relative to that of their peers is suboptimal for classroom learning in the first year of the study, with less on-task and more off-task behavior — a pattern which continues over the three-year period. This portrait of learning disabled children suggests that learning disabilities are difficult to remediate, and that we may need to rethink our pattern of services to these students if we want them to function successfully in the regular classroom.

Matthew effects in children with learning disabilities: Development of reading, IQ, and psychosocial problems from grade 2 to grade 8

“…These findings are very consistent with those from several prior studies in which parallel or slightly converging growth curves have been observed for better and poorer readers (Baker et al, 1984;Jordan et al, 2002;Phillips et al, 2002;Shaywitz et al, 1995). Such results are in disagreement, however, with those of several studies in which divergence between LD and NLD groups has been seen over time for at least some kinds of reading abilities (Juel, 1988;McKinney & Feagans, 1984;Bast & Reitsma, 1998). Several explanations for the disparate findings merit consideration.…”

“…In the present analyses, however, we used the same test as Shaywitz et al did, and our results for individual reading subtests mirrored those for the composite score. Moreover, the lack of group x grade x subtest interactions in our analyses, and the equivalent results for word recognition and reading comprehension in other studies using a variety of tests (Baker et al, 1984;Catts et al, 2003;Jordan et al, 2002;McKinney & Feagans, 1984), suggests that whether Matthew effects were observed cannot be attributed to the kind of reading measure(s) that different researchers have examined.…”

“…In contrast, McKinney and Feagans (1984) did find a fan spread for reading achievement over a two-year period when they compared children with LD (not specifically in reading) with classmates. In addition, Bast and Reitsma (1998) observed an increase in variability (consistent with fan spread) for word recognition scores from kindergarten through second grade (but not third grade) in an unselected sample, but found no such Matthew effect for reading comprehension.…”

“…Third, the evidence for Matthew effects on reading has been obtained in three studies that examined development over the first few years of reading acquisition, beginning in kindergarten or first grade (Bast & Reitsma, 1998;Juel, 1988;McKinney & Feagans, 1984). In contrast, studies that have failed to find the fan spread pattern have focused on a somewhat later period from second through fourth grade (Catts, et al, 2003;Jordan, et al, 2002), or as in the present study, have looked at longer-term changes in relative reading abilities over the entire elementary school period (Phillips, et al, 2002;Shaywitz, et al, 1995).…”

An observation study of reading instruction provided to elementary students with learning disabilities in the resource room

“…These findings are aligned with previous longitudinal studies that included a non-LD comparison group. Here, researchers (McKinney & Feagans, 1984) reported declining scores on word recognition and reading comprehension with increased time spent in the resource-room setting. …”