The Role of the Teacher in Identifying Learning Disabilities

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to examine whether the Greek translation of the Learning Disability Evaluation Scale (LDES) can be used in the identification of learning disabilities. The LDES was completed by 165 teachers for one of their students, aged 5 to 14 years. The LDES was significantly correlated to students' grades in Math and Greek Language and to the Reading Ability Test. Scores on LDES from the above randomly selected sample were significantly different from scores on LDES for another sample of 47 students, who were manifesting learning disabilities, indicating that the LDES can distinguish between the two samples. The exploratory factor analysis revealed that the LDES maintains the original factor structure and the reliability values supported its internal consistency. Results and limitations are discussed.

A Comparison of Teacher Nomination and Screening to Identify Behavioral and Emotional Risk Within a Sample of Underrepresented Students

“…. Within schools, the identification of students for additional services has historically been a primary responsibility of teachers (Gerber & Semmel, 1984), whereby teachers nominate or refer students for additional services. However, additional research is needed to determine how best to utilize teachers in the process of identifying which students may be at risk for behavioral and emotional problems (Donovan & Cross, 2002).…”

“…There is general consensus that schools offer an ideal environment for both the early identification and treatment of emotional and behavioral problems in childhood based on both the accessibility of children in schools and also due to findings that school-based mental health services are the most common source of support for students with emotional and behavioral problems (Burns et al, 1995; Farmer, Burns, Phillips, Angold, & Costello, 2003). Within schools, the identification of students for additional services has historically been a primary responsibility of teachers (Gerber & Semmel, 1984), whereby teachers nominate or refer students for additional services. However, additional research is needed to determine how best to utilize teachers in the process of identifying which students may be at risk for behavioral and emotional problems (Donovan & Cross, 2002).…”

“…However, solely relying on teacher nominations to identify at-risk students presents a number of concerns. These include: (a) teachers underreporting behavioral and emotional problems (e.g., Del’Homme, Kasari, Forness, & Bagley, 1996; Lopez, Forness, Bocian, MacMillan, & Gresham, 1996), (b) differences in student referral rates depending on a teacher’s subjective understanding of students’ teachability (Gerber & Semmel, 1984; MacMillan, Meyers, & Morrison, 1980), (c) delayed referral in the identification of behavior problems compared with other academic concerns (Del’Homme et al, 1996; J. W. Lloyd, Kauffman, Landrum, & Roe, 1991), and (d) the lack of consistency and teacher understanding regarding how problematic a behavior should be prior to a referral (Tilly, 2008).…”

Assessing knowledge of primary school teachers on specific learning disabilities in two schools in India

“…There is little doubt now that early identification provides ample time and scope for planning remedial measures for children with SLD,[89] Till date, studies worldwide have utilized informal identification of children with learning and associated problems (like difficulty in focusing attention on tasks). Any informal assessment by teachers as above based on their prior learnt knowledge or experience of seeing LD children may unnecessarily subject children without LD also into the rigorous task of formal LD testing.…”

Multivariate Genetic Analysis of Learning and Early Reading Development

“…It is well documented that early letter knowledge is one of the most potent predictors of reading skill (Badian, 1995; Foulin, 2005; Gijsel, Bosman, & Verhoeven, 2009; Muter & Doethelm, 2001; Scarborough, 1998; Schatschneider, Fletchher, Francis, Carlson, & Foorman, 2004). Our results indicate that at least part of the reason for this relationship is that learning letter names and learning orthographic forms for words are based on a common set of genes (see also Byrne et al, 2007, 2009).…”