This paper presents a selective review of current alternative conceptualizations of learning disabilities and reading disability. Generally these new frameworks are devoid of the conceptual and methodological problems that plagued the earlier theories of learning disabilities. Altogether they present an exciting array of diverse ways of conceptualizing the causes of learning disabilities. More importantly they hold exciting heuristic promise. Through theory-based and programmatic research, important knowledge will accrue to our understanding of the causes of learning disabilities. This knowledge will enable us to serve the learning disabled more profitably.
T his paper is a sequel to "TheRole of Theory in Learning Disabilities Research, Part 1: An Analysis of Problems." It contains a selective review of current theories of learning disabilities and reading disability or both. The theories were assessed for their strengths and weaknesses in the order they appeared in the literature. They include theories proposed by Adelman (1971), Senf (1972), Satz and Van Nostrand (1973), Ross (1976), Vellutino (1977), and Torgesen (1977). Finally a theory on reading disability from our colleagues in reading, Wiener and Cromer (1967), is discussed because of its relevance to our field.
ADELMANS INTERACTIONAL MODEL Adelman (1971) has presented an interactional model of learning disabilities. His model stresses that a youngster's success or failure in school is a function of the interaction between his strengths, weaknesses, limitations, and the specific classroom situational factors he encounters including individual differences among teachers and differing approaches to instruction.Thus he rejects the idea that the responsibility of school failure rests entirely with the "disordered child." Adelman emphasizes that the nature of the interaction between the child and the instructional program determines school success or failure. This interaction is stated in a testable form:The model predicts the greater the discrepancy between the child's characteristics and the program characteristics, the greater the likelihood of poor school performance. This hypothesis suggests that there are children whose learning difficulties are due, primarily, to the fact that their classroom programs are not effectively personalized to accommodate individual differences. A corollary to this hypothesis is that the greater the teacher's ability in personalizing instruction, the fewer will be the number of children in his classroom who exhibit learning problems; conversely, the poorer the teacher's ability in personalizing instruction, the greater will be the number of children, with learning