Identification of Learning Disabilities: Research To Practice (The Lea Series on Special Education and Disability)

Identification of Learning Disabilities: Research to Practice is the remarkable product of a learning disabilities summit conference convened by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in August 2001 and the activities following that summit. Both the conference and this book were seen as important preludes to congressional reauthorization of the historic Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) scheduled for 2002 and subsequent decision making surrounding implementation. The OSEP conference brought together people with different perspectives on LD (parents, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers) and resulted in this book, which examines the research on nine key issues concerning the identification of children with learning disabilities. Coverage includes alternative responses to treatment, classification approaches, processing deficit models, and approaches to decision making. Chapter Structure -- Each of the first nine chapters is organized around a lengthy, issue-oriented paper, which presents the most current research on that topic. These primary papers are then followed by four respondent papers that reflect a variety of viewpoints on the topic. Summarizing Chapter -- A small group of researchers (listed in the final chapter) dedicated an enormous amount of time to summarizing the research and developing key consensus statements regarding the identification of children with learning disabilities. Their work is sure to have a tremendous impact on future discussions in this area. Expertise -- The following well-known scholars have helped summarize the vast amount of research presented in this book as well as the consensus statements derived therefrom: Lynne Cook, Don Deshler, Doug Fuchs, Jack M. Fletcher, Frank Gresham, Dan Hallahan, Joseph Jenkins, Kenneth Kavale, Barbara Keogh, Margo Mastopieri, Cecil Mercer, Dan Reschley, Rune Simeonsson, Joe Torgesen, Sharon Vaughn, and Barbara Wise. TABLE OF CONTENTS......Page 6 FOREWORD......Page 20 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 24 INTRODUCTION......Page 26 Research on Brain-Behavior Relationships......Page 34 Research on Reading Disabilities......Page 36 Language and Reading Disabilities......Page 39 Perceptual, Perceptual-Motor, and Attention Disabilities......Page 48 Introduction of the Term Learning Disabilities......Page 55 Federal Involvement......Page 57 Educational Programming: Dominance of Psychological Processing and Visual Perceptual Training......Page 60 SOLIDIFICATION PERIOD (c.1975 TO 1985)......Page 64 Solidification of the Definition......Page 65 Federal Regulations for Identification of Learning Disabilities......Page 66 Empirically Validated Educational Procedures......Page 67 Learning Disabilities Professional Organization Turmoil......Page 70 Learning Disabilities Definitions......Page 71 Continuation of Research Strands of the Learning Disabilities Research Institutes......Page 73 Research on Phonological Processing......Page 76 Biological Causes of Learning Disabilities......Page 77 Concern over Identification Procedures......Page 79 Debate Over the Continuum of Placements......Page 81 Postmodernism and Learning Disabilities......Page 83 REFERENCES......Page 86 ENDNOTES......Page 98 RESPONSE TO "LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES"......Page 102 REFERENCES......Page 106 RESPONSE TO "LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES"......Page 108 REFERENCES......Page 112 RESPONSE TO "LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES"......Page 114 THE FEDERAL ROLE......Page 115 INCLUSION FOR BETTER OR WORSE?......Page 117 REFERENCES......Page 119 THE SEARCH FOR A CONDITION (OR CATEGORY)......Page 122 THE SEARCH FOR CURES (OR REMEDIES)......Page 125 ON OVER-REPRESENTATION......Page 126 CONCLUDING REMARKS......Page 128 REFERENCES......Page 130 CHAPTER II: EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND INTERVENTION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN WITH READING/LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 132 Reading Comprehension and Word Reading......Page 133 Ways to Read Words......Page 136 The Basis for Orthographic (Word) Reading Skill......Page 137 Skilled Reading and Reading Disabilities......Page 140 EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF STUDENTS AT RISK FOR READING/LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 143 Degree of Prediction Error......Page 145 Recent Efforts to Predict RD in Kindergarten......Page 147 Using Screening Measures to Establish Intervention Criteria......Page 149 Teaching Phonological Awareness......Page 151 Teaching Alphabetic Reading Skill (Decoding)......Page 157 Promoting Orthographic Reading Skill (Fluency)......Page 164 FINAL THOUGHTS......Page 167 Alternative Approaches to Understanding and Treating Reading/Learning Disability......Page 169 REFERENCES......Page 171 CLASSROOM PREVENTION THROUGH DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: RESPONSE TO JENKINS AND O'CONNOR......Page 184 SKILLFUL READING ENTAILS MASTERING ONE'S WRITING SYSTEM......Page 185 PREDICTING RISK VERSUS DISABILITY......Page 186 IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERVENTION......Page 189 REFERENCES......Page 191 FROM AN "EXPLODED VIEW" OF BEGINNING READING TOWARD A SCHOOLWIDE BEGINNING READING MODEL: GETTING TO SCALE IN COMPLEX HOST ENVIRONMENTS......Page 196 GETTING SCHOOLS AS COMPLEX HOST ENVIRONMENTS TO SCALE......Page 198 CONCLUSION......Page 203 REFERENCES......Page 204 EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND INTERVENTION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN WITH READING/LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 206 EARLY IDENTIFICATION......Page 207 EARLY INTERVENTION......Page 209 CONCLUSION......Page 210 REFERENCES......Page 211 RESPONSE TO "EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND INTERVENTION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN WITH READING/LEARNING DISABILITIES"......Page 212 ACCURACY OF CLASSIFICATION......Page 213 DANGERS IN DRAWING CONCLUSIONS......Page 215 MORE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS......Page 216 REFERENCES......Page 217 INTRODUCTION......Page 218 WHAT IS CLASSIFICATION?......Page 219 DEFINITIONS OF LEARNING DISABILITIES: IMPLICIT CLASSIFICATIONS MADE EXPLICIT......Page 220 Is There A Bimodal Distribution?......Page 223 Can IQ-Discrepant and Low Achieving Poor Readers Be Differentiated?......Page 224 Other Forms of LD and the IQ-Discrepancy Hypothesis......Page 231 Psychometric Issues......Page 234 Conclusions: Discrepancy Hypothesis......Page 238 Reading Disabilities......Page 239 Math Disabilities......Page 248 Conclusions: Heterogeneity......Page 254 EXCLUSION HYPOTHESIS......Page 256 Social, Economic, and Cultural Disadvantage......Page 257 Instruction......Page 259 Constitutional Factors......Page 260 Conclusions: Exclusionary Criteria......Page 264 FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR CLASSIFICATIONS OF LD......Page 265 Psychometric Approaches Are Limited......Page 266 IQ Tests Are Not Needed......Page 267 "Slow Learner" Is Not a Useful Concept......Page 268 Response to Intervention Is Important......Page 269 Consensus Process......Page 270 Learning Disabilities Are Real Phenomena......Page 271 REFERENCES......Page 272 THE REALITY......Page 284 THE CONCEPT OF LD VS. ITS OPERATIONAL DEFINITION......Page 285 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE......Page 286 CLASSIFICATION OF LD AND RESPONSE TO TREATMENT......Page 287 IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH......Page 288 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS......Page 289 REFERENCES......Page 291 ENTITLEMENT......Page 296 HETEROGENEITY TO SPECIFICITY......Page 297 TERMINOLOGY PITFALLS......Page 299 FIELD REALITIES......Page 300 POLITICS......Page 301 UNDERACHIEVEMENT......Page 302 REFERENCES......Page 303 THE SOCIOPOLITICAL PROCESS OF CLASSIFICATION RESEARCH: MAKING THE IMPLICIT EXPLICIT IN LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 306 REFERENCES......Page 310 CONVERGENCE......Page 312 EXPANSION......Page 313 CAUTION......Page 315 REFERENCES......Page 317 CHAPTER IV: LEARNING DISABILITIES AS OPERATIONALLY DEFINED BY SCHOOLS......Page 320 AUTHORITATIVE DEFINITIONS OF LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 321 THE PROCESS PRESCRIBED IN IDEA GUIDING SCHOOL IDENTIFICATION......Page 322 STAGE 1: THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHER REFERRAL......Page 324 STAGE 2: ASSESSMENT......Page 327 STAGE 3: PLACEMENT COMMITTEE DELIBERATIONS......Page 330 DEVELOPMENTS FURTHER EXPANDING THE CONCEPT OF LD IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS......Page 332 DELETION OF "BORDERLINE MENTAL RETARDATION"......Page 333 HOW THIS EXPANDED THE LD CATEGORY......Page 334 VARIATIONS IN LD CHARACTERISTICS ACROSS SITES......Page 335 CHANGES IN THE IMPORTANCE OF DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS......Page 339 VARIABILITY WITHIN THE SI LD POPULATION......Page 343 ISSUES RAISED ABOUT THE CURRENT PROCESS......Page 344 ELIGIBILITY USING A ONE-TIME-ONLY ASSESSMENT......Page 345 ASSUMED INTRINSIC/NEUROBIOLOGICAL ETIOLOGY OF LD......Page 348 CURRICULAR CONSEQUENCES OF THE HETEROGENEITY OF SI LD POPULATIONS......Page 350 WHERE ARE WE Now AND WHERE MIGHT WE Go?......Page 352 TITRATION OF INTENSITY OF TREATMENTS IN DECISION MAKING......Page 353 ISSUE OF INTELLIGENCE TESTING......Page 354 EFFORTS TO "FIX" LD: THE NEED FOR A BROADER PERSPECTIVE......Page 356 LD AND SOCIAL CLASS......Page 357 CONCLUDING REMARKS......Page 358 REFERENCES......Page 360 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 366 DECIDING WHICH CHILDREN TO SERVE......Page 368 A PROPOSED MODEL......Page 371 THE MAIN POINTS......Page 374 META-RESEARCH COMMENTARY......Page 375 RESEARCH STRATEGIES......Page 376 NEED FOR TOLERANCE......Page 377 LESSONS WE SHOULD HAVE LEARNED......Page 379 WHERE WE (CONTINUE TO) GO WRONG......Page 380 THE REAL PROBLEM......Page 381 REFERENCES......Page 382 ENDNOTE......Page 383 LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD: COMMENTARY ON "LEARNING DISABILITIES AS OPERATIONALLY DEFINED BY SCHOOLS"......Page 384 TOWARD THE FUTURE: INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE DISENFRANCHISED......Page 385 EDUCATING THE DISENFRANCHISED......Page 386 ABILITY TO BENEFIT FROM TREATMENT: VALID ALTERNATIVE, OR YET ANOTHER PIPE DREAM?......Page 387 SOME CONSIDERATIONS AS WE BEGIN TO LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD......Page 388 REFERENCES......Page 390 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 392 STATE VARIATIONS......Page 394 REASONS FOR MMR DECLINE......Page 395 SUMMARY......Page 396 UNIVERSAL SCREENING AND EARLY INTERVENTION......Page 398 OUTCOMES CRITERIA......Page 399 REFERENCES......Page 400 DISCREPANCY AND INTRA-!NDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES......Page 402 COGNITIVE DISCREPANCIES......Page 403 ORIGINS OF ABILITY-ACHIEVEMENT DISCREPANCY......Page 404 FORMULA-BASED DISCREPANCY......Page 406 GRADE-LEVEL DEVIATION......Page 407 PROBLEMS AND ISSUES......Page 408 DISCREPANCY SCORE COMPONENTS......Page 410 STANDARD SCORE METHODS......Page 411 REGRESSION METHODS......Page 412 EVALUATION OF REGRESSION METHODS......Page 414 EVALUATION OF DISCREPANCY METHODS......Page 416 INSTABILITY OF DISCREPANCY SCORES......Page 417 DISCREPANCY AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF LEARNING DISABILITY......Page 418 Statistical Classification vs. Clinical Judgment......Page 419 VAGARIES OF IDENTIFICATION AND PREVALENCE......Page 420 CONFOUNDING AMONG HIGH-INCIDENCE MILD DISABILITIES......Page 421 CONFOUNDING BETWEEN LEARNING DISABILITY AND LOW ACHIEVEMENT......Page 422 LEARNING DISABILITY VS. LOW ACHIEVEMENT DEBATE......Page 424 REANALYSIS OF THE MINNESOTA STUDIES......Page 425 EXAMINING LEARNING DISABILITY AND LOW ACHIEVEMENT SAMPLES......Page 427 LEARNING DISABILITY AND INTELLIGENCE......Page 428 THE ROLE OF INTELLIGENCE IN DEFINITIONS......Page 429 DEFINING LEARNING DISABILITY WITHOUT INTELLIGENCE......Page 430 LEARNING DISABILITY AND LOW ACHIEVEMENT: QUANTITATIVE OR QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES?......Page 433 QUALITATIVE DISTINCTIONS IN LEARNING DISABILITY......Page 434 THE STATUS OF DISCREPANCY IN THE IDENTIFICATION OF LEARNING DISABILITY......Page 436 REFERENCES......Page 440 FOUNDATIONAL CONCEPTS ABOUT LEARNING DISABILITY......Page 460 IDENTIFICATION ISSUES: GENERAL......Page 462 Balance......Page 463 WHO'S WHO?......Page 465 SUMMARY......Page 466 REFERENCES......Page 467 ENDNOTE......Page 468 A FUNCTIONAL AND INTERVENTION-BASED ASSESSMENT APPROACH TO ESTABLISHING DISCREPANCY FOR STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 470 THE PROBLEM SOLVING MODEL......Page 471 EVALUATION RESULTS......Page 474 DOES THE PROBLEM SOLVING MODEL INCREASE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PREREFERRAL STRATEGIES?......Page 475 DOES THE PROBLEM SOLVING MODEL AFFECT THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS OF COLOR REFERRED AND IDENTIFIED FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION?......Page 476 ARE PARENTS SATISFIED WITH THE PROBLEM SOLVING MODEL?......Page 477 CONCLUSION......Page 478 REFERENCES......Page 479 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 480 DISCREPANCY MODELS IN THE IDENTIFICATION OF LEARNING DISABILITY: A RESPONSE TO KAVALE......Page 482 REFERENCES......Page 486 DO DISCREPANCY MODELS SATISFY EITHER THE LETTER OR THE SPIRIT OF IDEA?......Page 490 PREDICTIVE VALIDITY......Page 491 THE LOW ACHIEVEMENT DEFINITION......Page 492 SPIRIT VS. LETTER OF THE LAW......Page 494 IDENTIFICATION AS A MEANS TO AN END......Page 496 REFERENCES......Page 497 CHAPTER VI: RESPONSIVENESS TO INTERVENTION: AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 500 Referral......Page 502 Team Recommendation......Page 503 Implications of Competing Paradigms in LD Identification......Page 504 Brief Recent History of LD......Page 506 Issues in Defining LD: The LD/LA Disputes......Page 507 IQ-Achievement Discrepancy and LD Definition......Page 509 Historical Background: Aptitude H Treatment Interaction......Page 510 Brief Overview of ATI Research......Page 512 Responsiveness to Intervention Defined......Page 513 Treatment Validity......Page 514 Support for a Treatment Validity Approach......Page 515 Ability to Model Academic Growth......Page 516 Validated Treatment Protocols......Page 518 Distinguishing Between Acquisition and Performance Deficits......Page 521 Predictor-Criterion Models......Page 522 Dual-Discrepancy Model......Page 523 Functional Assessment Models......Page 527 Reliable Changes in Behavior......Page 529 Social Validation......Page 531 CONCLUSION......Page 532 Unresolved Issues in the Alternative Responsiveness-to-intervention Approach......Page 533 REFERENCES......Page 540 NOTES......Page 552 THREE CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF "TREATMENT" IN A RESPONSIVENESS-TO-TREATMENT FRAMEWORK FOR LD IDENTIFICATION......Page 554 Intensive Remediation......Page 555 Intensive Prevention......Page 558 General Education Prevention......Page 559 CONCLUSIONS......Page 560 REFERENCES......Page 561 RESPONSIVENESS TO INTERVENTIONS: THE NEXT STEP IN SPECIAL EDUCATION IDENTIFICATION, SERVICE, AND EXITING DECISION MAKING......Page 564 ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM......Page 565 Abandoning ATI-Based Processes......Page 566 Early Intervention and Prevention......Page 567 Diagnosing Solutions......Page 568 Application of Responsiveness to Intervention Approaches......Page 570 Successful Exit of Special Education......Page 571 Alignment of Responsiveness-to-intervention Practices With IDEA Philosophy......Page 573 OSEP Support for Improvements in Professional Practices......Page 574 REFERENCES......Page 575 IS LD REAL?......Page 582 HOW ACCURATELY CAN WE IDENTIFY STUDENTS WITH LD?......Page 583 CAN RESPONSE TO TREATMENT BE USED AS A MEANS TO IDENTIFY STUDENTS WITH LD?......Page 584 WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL CONCERNS REGARDING THE EFFECTIVE USE OF RESPONSE TO TREATMENT AS A MEANS OF IDENTIFYING STUDENTS WITH LD?......Page 585 SHOULD A RESPONSE-TO-TREATMENT MODEL BE USED FOR IDENTIFYING STUDENTS AS LEARNING DISABLED?......Page 586 REFERENCES......Page 587 THE IQ-ACHIEVEMENT DISCREPANCY REVISITED......Page 588 MODELS OF RESPONSIVENESS TO REMEDIATION......Page 590 CONCERNS ABOUT THE DIAGNOSTIC TEAM......Page 591 LENGTH AND INTENSITY OF REMEDIATION......Page 592 SOURCES OF OPPOSITION TO GRESHAM'S PROPOSAL......Page 593 REFERENCES......Page 595 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 597 CHAPTER VII: EMPIRICAL AND THEORETICAL SUPPORT FOR DIRECT DIAGNOSIS OF LEARNING DISABILITIES BY ASSESSMENT OF INTRINSIC PROCESSING WEAKNESSES......Page 598 THE USE OF PROCESSING LANGUAGE IN DIFFERENT LEVELS OF EXPLANATION......Page 600 DISTINCTIONS AMONG TYPES OF PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCESSES......Page 604 WAYS IN WHICH PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCESSES CAN CAUSE INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN PERFORMANCE......Page 607 SUMMARY......Page 608 EVIDENCE FOR INTRINSIC PROCESSING WEAKNESSES AS THE CAUSE OF SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 609 THE THEORY OF PHONOLOGICALLY BASED READING DISABILITIES......Page 610 THE NONVERBAL LEARNING DISABILITIES SYNDROME......Page 613 ADVANTAGES OF A PROCESSING APPROACH TO DIAGNOSIS OVER CURRENT DISCREPANCY-BASED APPROACHES......Page 615 DIFFICULTIES IN IMPLEMENTATION OF DIAGNOSIS BASED ON DIRECT ASSESSMENT OF INTRINSIC PROCESSING WEAKNESSES......Page 618 THE KNOWLEDGE BASE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT PROCESS ASSESSMENT AS A DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH......Page 619 DIFFICULTIES IN THE ASSESSMENT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCESSES THEMSELVES......Page 621 SUMMARY......Page 623 ALTERNATIVES TO CLASSIFICATION BASED ON ASSESSMENT OF INTRINSIC PROCESSES......Page 624 THE USE OF PROCESS-MARKER VARIABLES FOR EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND OF OUTCOME/ RESPONSE TO TREATMENT VARIABLES FOR LATER DIAGNOSIS......Page 625 POINTS OF VULNERABILITY IN THE PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION MODEL......Page 628 SUMMARY......Page 631 CONSEQUENCES FOR THE FIELD AS A SOCIAL-POLITICAL-EDUCATIONAL MOVEMENT......Page 632 CONSEQUENCES FOR THE FIELD AS AN AREA OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY......Page 634 SUMMARY......Page 635 REFERENCES......Page 636 ISSUE AT STAKE......Page 648 TORGESEN'S POSITION......Page 650 OTHER POINTS......Page 651 REFERENCES......Page 654 A COMMENTARY ON "EMPIRICAL AND THEORETICAL SUPPORT FOR DIRECT DIAGNOSIS OF LEARNING DISABILITIES BY ASSESSMENT OF INTRINSIC PROCESSING WEAKNESSES"......Page 656 DISCUSSION......Page 657 ARE WEAKNESSES IN INTRINSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCESSES THE TRUE DISABILITIES?......Page 658 CAN INTRINSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCESSES BE MEASURED ADEQUATELY?......Page 661 CAN TORGESEN'S APPROACH IMPROVE DIAGNOSIS AND REMEDIAL INSTRUCTION FOR STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES?......Page 663 ENDNOTES......Page 665 BLURRING THE BOUNDARY: A COMMENTARY ON TORGESEN'S ARGUMENT FOR THE USE OF PROCESS MARKERS IN THE IDENTIFICATION OF LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 668 INTERACTIVE ORIGINS OF PROCESSING DEFICITS......Page 669 MORE THAN PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS......Page 671 REFERENCES......Page 673 LEARNING DISABILITIES IS A SPECIFIC PROCESSING DEFICIT, BUT IT IS MUCH MORE THAN PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSING......Page 676 I. WHAT IS MEANT BY DOMAIN-SPECIFIC VS. DOMAIN-GENERAL "INTRINSIC" PROCESSES?......Page 677 II. TEACHING DEFICIENCY OR PROCESSING DEFICIENCY?......Page 680 REFERENCES......Page 683 I. INTRODUCTION......Page 686 II. ISSUES IN IDENTIFICATION......Page 687 Identification......Page 688 What Instruction for Children With SRD Should Include......Page 690 IV. THE IDENTIFICATION OF CHILDREN WITH SPECIFIC COMPREHENSION PROBLEMS......Page 693 Problems Constructing Inferences......Page 694 Problems of Specifically Poor Comprehenders Are Not Related to Short-Term Memory......Page 695 Lexical and Semantic Language Processing Deficits......Page 696 Is This Just a Matthew Effect?......Page 697 V. RESEARCH ON INSTRUCTION FOR CHILDREN WITH POOR COMPREHENSION......Page 698 VI. CLINICALLY RECOGNIZING CHILDREN WITH LANGUAGE-BASED READING DISABILITIES......Page 700 Recognizing Language-Based Learning Disabilities from Classroom Behaviors......Page 701 Recognizing the Varied Profiles of Children With Phonological Deficits......Page 704 Screening for Reading Disabilities......Page 706 Diagnostic Assessment of Reading Disabilities......Page 709 Improving Teachers' Expertise......Page 710 Individualizing Instruction With Ongoing Assessment......Page 711 VIII. SUMMARY AND FUTURE CHALLENGES......Page 714 REFERENCES......Page 716 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 725 WHAT IS THE PHENOMENON UNDER STUDY? FROM READING TO THE PRACTICE OF LITERACY......Page 726 WHO IS INCLUDED IN READING DIFFICULTIES RESEARCH? OR HOW TO ACCOUNT FOR CULTURE IN LEARNING......Page 728 HOW DO TEACHERS MAKE INFORMED CLINICAL JUDGMENTS? TOWARD A HYBRID METAPHOR......Page 731 CONCLUSION......Page 732 REFERENCES......Page 733 ENDNOTES......Page 734 INDENTIFICATION......Page 736 DISCREPANCY......Page 739 CAUSALITY......Page 740 TEACHING......Page 741 INSTRUCTION......Page 742 CONCLUSION......Page 743 REFERENCES......Page 744 CLINICAL JUDGMENT IN THE ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING DISABILITIES......Page 746 DISCUSSION OF CURRENT PRACTICES......Page 747 Listening......Page 748 Writing......Page 749 A Concern about Re-evaluation and Transition......Page 751 REFERENCES......Page 752 SUMMARY......Page 758 Identification......Page 759 The Importance of Fluency in Reading Intervention......Page 761 Other Comprehension Principles......Page 764 REFERENCES......Page 765 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 769 HISTORY, POLITICS, AND THE LD CONSTRUCT......Page 770 Special Education's Soaring Enrollments and Cost......Page 773 The Regular Education Initiative......Page 774 LD Research......Page 775 1990s: THE NICHD GROUP......Page 777 The Argument Against IQ Discrepancy As a Valid LD Marker......Page 778 The Argument for Phonological Deficits As a Valid LD Marker......Page 779 Similarities Between the NICHD and REI Groups......Page 780 Need for a Meta-Analysis......Page 781 Inclusion Criteria and Search Strategies......Page 782 Coding the Studies......Page 783 Computation of Individual ESs......Page 784 Preliminary Analyses......Page 785 How Might We Consolidate the Large Number of Study Features?......Page 786 WHAT DOES THIS META-ANALYSIS TELL Us?......Page 788 REFERENCES......Page 789 INTRODUCTION......Page 796 THE SOUNDNESS OF THE METHODOLOGY......Page 797 THE NOTION THAT STUDENTS WITH LD ARE DIFFERENT FROM LOW ACHIEVERS IN KIND......Page 798 THE MERITS/LIMITATIONS OF FOCUSING ON THE READING DOMAIN ALONE......Page 799 THE ROLE OF A DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVE IN UNDERSTANDING THE LD CONSTRUCT......Page 800 CONCLUSION......Page 801 REFERENCES......Page 802 RESPONSE TO "IS 'LEARNING DISABILITIES' JUST A FANCY TERM FOR LOW ACHIEVEMENT? A META-ANALYSIS OF READING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN LOW ACHIEVERS WITH AND WITHOUT THE LABEL"......Page 806 REFERENCES......Page 809 RESPONSE TO "IS 'LEARNING DISABILITIES' JUST A FANCY TERM FOR LOW ACHIEVEMENT? A META-ANALYSIS OF READING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN Low ACHIEVERS WITH AND WITHOUT THE LABEL"......Page 810 INCENTIVES FOR EARLY INTERVENTION......Page 813 REFERENCES......Page 814 RESPONSE TO "IS 'LEARNING DISABILITIES' JUST A FANCY TERM FOR LOW ACHIEVEMENT? A META-ANALYSIS OF READING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN LOW ACHIEVERS WITH AND WITHOUT THE LABEL"......Page 816 COMPARABILITY OF SAMPLES......Page 817 PERFORMANCE OF LD STUDENTS IS LOWER AND BECOMES MORE DISCREPANT OVER TIME......Page 818 OBJECTIVE MEASURES MORE ACCURATE THAN TEACHER JUDGMENT......Page 819 NEED FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION......Page 820 REFERENCES......Page 821 CONCLUSION......Page 824 APPENDIX......Page 838 A......Page 842 B......Page 843 C......Page 844 D......Page 846 F......Page 847 G......Page 848 H......Page 849 K......Page 851 L......Page 852 M......Page 853 N......Page 855 P......Page 856 R......Page 857 S......Page 858 T......Page 860 V......Page 861 W......Page 862 Z......Page 863 A......Page 864 B......Page 865 C......Page 866 D......Page 867 E......Page 869 F......Page 870 H......Page 871 I......Page 872 L......Page 875 M......Page 876 N......Page 878 P......Page 879 R......Page 882 S......Page 884 T......Page 886 U......Page 887 W......Page 888 Y......Page 889 TABLE OF CONTENTS; FOREWORD; ACKNOWLEDGMENTS; INTRODUCTION; CHAPTER I: LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES; RESPONSE TO "LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES"; RESPONSE TO "LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES"; RESPONSE TO "LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES"; RESPONSE TO "LEARNING DISABILITIES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES"; CHAPTER II: EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND INTERVENTION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN WITH READING/LEARNING DISABILITIES; CLASSROOM PREVENTION THROUGH DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: RESPONSE TO JENKINS AND O'CONNOR. FROM AN "EXPLODED VIEW" OF BEGINNING READING TOWARD A SCHOOLWIDE BEGINNING READING MODEL: GETTING TO SCALE IN COMPLEX HOST ENVIRONMENTSEARLY IDENTIFICATION AND INTERVENTION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN WITH READING/LEARNING DISABILITIES; RESPONSE TO "EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND INTERVENTION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN WITH READING/LEARNING DISABILITIES"; CHAPTER III: CLASSIFICATION OF LEARNING DISABILITIES: AN EVIDENC-EBASED EVALUATION; REDEFINING LD IS NOT THE ANSWE.