It Depends: A Sociohistorical Account of the Definition and Methods of Identification of Learning Disabilities

Abstract

In the midst of unprecedented knowledge generation in the field of education, the definition of learning disabilities and the methods used for its identification have essentially remained the same for nearly 30 years. Working from a sociohistorical perspective, the authors’ distinct professional positions within education (university academic, federal program officer, and school administrator) serve as the lenses to examine the constancy of the official definition and the means for the identification of learning disabilities relative to changes throughout the historical chronologies of educational theory, policy, and practice. The concept of context as that which weaves is used to illustrate the relationships across several historical episodes.

Language-Minority Learners in Special Education

“…For example, from 1994 to 1999 in California, special education placement for K-12 Latino LM students in California increased by 345% despite only a 12% increase of LM learners in the overall population (Artiles & Ortiz, 2002). Among other domains, in the domain of LDs, there is diagnostic confusion about what LD is and how it should be identified, which has implications for the proportion of LM learners represented in special education and the integrity of the disability categories (Gallego, Zamora Duran, & Reyes, 2006;Klingner & Harry, 2006;Reschly, 2002).…”

Learning Disabilities and Inequality

“…Academic struggles are the obvious ‘inherent’ inequity related to LDs, but researchers using a medical perspective also attribute the heightened emotional and behavioral issues of youth labeled with an LD to comorbidity, or biological ties between these various symptoms (Elksnin and Elksnin ). From this perspective, the LD label is a necessary step toward providing the extra services these students need from their schools (Angrosino ; Gallego, Durán, and Reyes ). These researchers focus on how to improve these services so as to reduce any inequalities these students experience as a result of their disability (Jitendra and Star ; Rusch, Hughes, Agran, Martin, and Johnson ).…”

“…These researchers explore whether schools and teachers respond to students labeled with an LD as the law mandates, i.e. with as much access as possible to the regular education curriculum (ERIC/OSEP ; Gallego, Durán, and Reyes ; Ho ; Kalyanpur and Harry ; Taylor ). They focus on the degree to which students labeled with LDs are integrated into classrooms with their unlabeled peers (Abu El‐Haj and Rubin ; Curcic, Gabel, Zeitlin, Cribaro‐DiFatta, and Glarner ) and whether special education even results in better outcomes for labeled students (Baglieri and Knopf ; Brown ; Brucker ; Ferretti and Eisenman ; Kettler, Dickenson, Bennett, Morgan, Gilmore, Beddow, Swaffield, Turner, Herrera, Turner, and Palmer ; MacMillan and Reschly ; O'Connor and Fernandez ; Taylor ).…”

“…Researchers often contrast the medical and social models of disability. The medical perspective emphasizes the biological roots of disabilities, and situates the ‘problem’ within the individual (Carrier ; Dudley‐Marling ; Gallego, Durán, and Reyes ; Reid and Valle ). Researchers working from this perspective tend to focus on improving the processes by which LDs are identified and treated (Chappell ) but are frequently criticized for not paying sufficient attention to potential links between LDs and inequality (Carrier ; Dudley‐Marling ; Reid and Valle ).…”

“…Recognitions like these were bolstered by emerging arguments that academic performance and IQ could not be attributed to biological factors alone but also reflected social processes and forces within and outside of schools (Carrier ). Learning differences are attributable to prenatal factors, malnutrition, differences in parenting style, and/or sensory deprivation (Carrier ; Carrier ; Demmert ; Gallego, Durán, and Reyes ; Hallahan ; Ho ; Shonkoff and Phillips ). Because of the United States' racist history and persisting racial stratification, minority youth still have less educated parents, lower levels of family income, and less access to dominant culture resources (Iceland ).…”