Differences Between Learning Disability Subtypes Classified Using the Revised Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery

Abstract

This study examined the characteristics of students with specific learning disabilities in either reading and spelling or arithmetic. Based on scores obtained using the revised Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery, students with a marked weakness in arithmetic relative to reading and spelling were designated as Group A. Group R-S showed the opposite pattern. Each group included 30 participants ranging in age from 7 to 16 years, with a mean age of 10 years. The boy-to-girl ratios were 16:14 and 19:11 in Group A and Group R-S, respectively. Comparisons using measures from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III) indicated that Group A was weaker in nonverbal skills than Group R-S, despite equivalent overall IQ scores between the two groups. Group R-S showed a within-group strength in nonverbal versus verbal skills. Group A students were more likely than Group R-S students to have counseling provided as part of their Individualized Education Program, suggesting greater socioemotional difficulty among Group A students. The present study supports the connection between nonverbal skills and socioemotional functioning noted by previous researchers, and generalizes findings from earlier studies to more current test editions.

Persistent arithmetic, reading, or arithmetic and reading disability

“…Others also have found differences between children or adults low in arithmetic or low in reading (Davis, Parr, and Lan 1997;Shafrir and Siegel 1994;Share et al 1988). Share et al (1988) attempted to confirm Rourke's hypothesis that children with pure arithmetic disability and those with arithmetic plus reading disability show reverse patterns of strengths and weaknesses on measures of verbal and nonverbal skills.…”

“…In the Rourke and Finlayson (1978) and Rourke and Strang (1978) studies, only 13 percent of the children were girls. Davis et al (1997), who compared 30 children with a pure arithmetic disability with the same number who showed only a reading/spelling disability, found that the low arithmetic group was weaker than the low reading/spelling group on nonverbal tasks, whereas the low reading/spelling group was stronger on nonverbal than on verbal tasks. There were also indications of greater socioemotional problems in the low arithmetic group.…”

Emotional Adjustment and School Functioning of Young Adolescents with Multiple Versus Single Learning Disabilities

“…Despite the existence of distinct types or categories of LD (e.g., reading and math), researchers often group individuals with one or more learning deficits into a single LD category. Although LD subtyping research has become more prominent in the recent literature (e.g., Davis, Parr, & Lan, 1997;Fuerst & Rourke, 1995;McIntosh & Gridley, 1993;Swanson, 1994), the participants in this research are generally selected from clinic-referred samples, and the results of these studies are not generalizable to the general school population of students with LD.…”

A Nationwide Epidemiologic Modeling Study of LD

“…Although very interesting research has been produced in this arena, the scientific advances are seriously limited by methodological impediments. Such studies tend to be overly reliant on relatively small samples of children who are classified a priori and by disparate criteria (Morris, 1988) as having LD, thereby failing to ensure that the subtypes identified are truly unique to LD populations and not commonplace among non-LD populations (e.g., Brewer, Moore, & Hiscock, 1997;Davis, Parr, & Lan, 1997;Fletcher, Morris, & Lyon, 2003;Morris et al, 1998;Silver, Pennett, Black, Fair, & Balise, 1999;Spreen & Haaf, 1986). These studies also tend to construct children's profiles based on attributes that have no empirically established factorial validity or that are drawn from different standardized test batteries.…”