Learning Disability and Cultural-Economic Disadvantage: The Case for a Relationship

Abstract

A case is presented to reveal the existence of a relationship between learning disabilities and cultural-economic disadvantage. Evidence from a variety of sources is presented suggesting that the problem is most properly viewed as a complex interrelationship among the phenomena of learning disabilities, brain dysfunction, and cultural-economic disadvantage. The arguments presented reveal a strong association between learning disabilities and cultural-economic disadvantage. A comparison of the learning disabled and culturally disadvantaged groups in terms of symptomatology found them to be more alike than different. Finally, the question is asked as to why disadvantaged children are excluded from service within the learning disability framework. A reexamination of the relationship is called for since the services provided learning disabled children appear appropriate for meeting the educational needs of culturally-economically disadvantaged children.

Matthew Effects for Whom?

“…As noted above, we focused on risk factors such as gender, race/ethnicity, and social class because many previous studies have found these to be important predictors of reading actions, resources, and skills growth, as well as reading disabilities (Kavale, 1988; McCoach et al, 2006). For example, ethnographic (e.g., Lareau, 2003; Neuman & Celano, 2001), survey (e.g., Dickinson, McCabe, & Anastasopoulos, 2002), and quasi-experimental research (e.g., Downhower & Beagle, 1998) all indicate that young children living in socio-economically poor communities are particularly likely to begin school as poor readers because they often lack access to books and other print materials.…”

“…Epidemiological research repeatedly finds that children from certain population groups (i.e., boys, minorities, and those from low-income households) are much more likely to be identified as disabled (e.g., Delgado & Scott, 2006; Donovan & Cross, 2002; Kavale, 1988; Klinger, Artiles, & Barletta, 2006). For example, Katusic, Colligan, Barbaresi, Schaid, and Jacobsen (2001) found that boys were two to three times more likely to be reading disabled than girls, regardless of whether a regression-, discrepancy, or low-achievement identification method was used.…”

A Decade of Research on Learning Disabilities

“…The appropriateness of such a practice is questionable and remains to be demonstrated by research. Kavale (1988) argued that learning disabilities and cultural-eco-nomic disadvantage are strongly related. However, SES has received limited attention as an independent variable or even as a descriptive variable.…”

History, Politics, and the General Education Initiative: Sleeter's Reinterpretation of Learning Disabilities as a Case Study

“…Although the exclusion clause is a problematic component of LD definitions (see Kavale, 1980, for an analysis), in its historical context it was a useful and rational means for establishing the LD category. As LD evolved into a cate-gory of special education, it included a variety of notions (e.g., underachievement, perceptual problems, central nervous system dysfunction, linguistic deficits, and the like) that remained essentially isolated elements that LD children the exclusion clause is a ey component of LD definitions... in its historical ,.6ontex,t,,Itwas,,,a useful and rational~~b~~~t~~~~ ~1~~ ~L.~ ~~~gvry.. ~~' .…”