Language used in school psychological evaluation reports as predictors of SLD identification within a response to intervention model.

Abstract

Despite decades of research, much is still unknown regarding how specific learning disability (SLD) identification decisions are made, particularly how language related to sociodemographic and psychosocial factors may impact decision-making. This study employed the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) method to examine the language used in school psychological reports to better understand how sociodemographic (i.e., race, socioeconomic background, and gender) and psychosocial factors (e.g., positive and negative emotion, student effort, and student social processes) related to SLD identification within a Response to Intervention (RtI) identification method. The reports of students identified as SLD contained significantly more achievement-related language (e.g., hardworking, motivated, exerting effort) compared to students who were not identified as SLD, and achievement-related language was associated with SLD identification above and beyond RtI evaluation data (i.e., academic achievement and slope). Implications for research and practice are discussed. Impact and ImplicationsSchool psychological evaluation reports are an important source of data to examine equitable practices in the identification of specific learning disabilities (SLD). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count is a useful tool for examining reports to understand the influence of sociodemographic and psychosocial factors during SLD identification. Results highlight the importance of using academic data in accordance with state guidelines, opposed to the consideration of student psychosocial factors.

School Psychology annual journal update: Revising open science standards.

“…We are delighted to announce the article(s) of the year. For 2022 (acknowledged during the 2023 APA convention), we had one winner (i.e., Barrett et al, 2022) and three honorable mentions (i.e., Hall et al, 2022; Marraccini et al, 2022; Solomon et al, 2022). Barrett et al expanded research on analyzing how specific learning disability identification decisions are made by using a novel approach to examine the language used in psychoeducational reports.…”