Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | L | Learning Disability Quarterly

Why scientific research must guide educational policy and instructional practices in learning disabilities.

Article Excerpt
SOME BACKGROUND

When I initiated my research program in the neuropsychology of learning disabilities (LDs) in 1974, I was guided in part by the scholarship of William Cruickshank, Helmer Myklebust, Doris Johnson, and Samuel Kirk, among others. These gifted pioneers made an indelible impact on my thinking and my research over the years. I found compelling their clinical insights about children who had significant reading problems (and other academic problems) despite robust intellectual capability, since I worked with many such children as a psychologist in the public schools. I also learned a great deal from them about the instructional skills that teachers must possess in order to address individual differences in learning. I was particularly fascinated by this concept of "unexpected underachievement" and the paradox of learning difficulties in an intellectually competent student.

Misguided Assumptions

As I became interested in this concept of "unexpected underachievement," I was struck by the heterogeneity of reading difficulties that I observed in schools. When I began my research career, I focused on this heterogeneity and asked whether children identified with LDs in reading could be assigned to more homogeneous subtypes, with each subtype described by different reading-related deficits. My goal, if I found subtypes, was to then identify and validate subtype-by-treatment interactions.

Unfortunately, my search for valid subtypes and interactions with different treatments was unsuccessful for several reasons. Fundamentally, my work was based on scientifically untested assumptions underlying the construct of LDs: I assumed that the definition of LDs at that time was valid and I assumed that LDs was a distinct category of disability that could be differentiated empirically from other categories through psychometric (e.g., IQ-achievement discrepancies) and exclusionary criteria.

I was wrong on both counts, but I figured I might not be alone in making these assumptions. At the same time, it was clear to me that the field had made significant contributions by bringing special education services to students with LDs--services that had previously been denied. By 1969, parental and professional advocacy resulted in federal recognition of LDs and access to due process to ensure a free and appropriate...

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!