Towards an identification of Learning Disabilities (LD) in the school: contributions of the American experience
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.unipluri.16974Keywords:
learning disabilities, assessment, intelligence, discrepancy mode, operationalizationAbstract
This article presents the approach to one of the perspectives commonly used by researchers to identify and characterize Learning Disabilities (LDs) as a neuropsychological disorder. However, the differences, limitations, and inaccuracies in identifying students with these conditions have raised debates that influence the social, political, educational, and clinical fields and, of course, have also affected research in this area. Contrary to such perspective, the classification systems suggested by research in this field have shown a difficulty in identifying the cases really connected to the presence of learning disabilities. In consequence, researchers, medical professionals, and educators feel the need to establish accurate identification criteria that lead to the design of intervention approaches that meet their needs. This reflects the available evidence on LD approaches that underlie the American context achieving a more comprehensive approach as well as clearer characterization and classification criteria. In short, the goal is to provide elements to support the importance of achieving a model of operationalization of LDs seeking an objective identification focused on a holistic approach and able to consider contextual and individual factors, leaving behind those deficient models that end in absolutist, categorical and reductionist conceptions.
Downloads
References
Aaron, P. G., Kuchta, Steven y Grapenthin, Cindy Taylor (1988). «Is There a Thing Called Dyslexia?» En: Annals of Dyslexia, Vol. 38, N.o 1, pp. 31-49. USA: International Dyslexia Association, Springer.
Bond, Guy Loraine y Tinker, Miles Albert (1973). Reading Difficulties: Their Diagnosis and Correction. 3.a ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Cahan, Sorel, Fono, Dafna y nirel, Ronit (2012). «The Regression-Based Discrepancy Definition of Learning Disability. A Critical Appraisal». En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 45, N.o 1, pp. 170-178. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
CArreker, Suzanne y Joshi, R. Malatesha (2010). «Response to Intervention: Are the Emperor’s Clothes Really New?» En: Psicothema, Vol. 22, N.o 4, pp. 943-948. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo.
CavendiSh, Wendy (2013). «Identification of Learning Disabilities. Implications of Proposed DSM-5 Criteria for School-Based Assessment». En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 46, N.o 1, pp. 52-57. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Culbertson, Jan L. (1998). «Learning Disabilities». En: ollenDiCK, Thomas H. y herSen, Michel (Eds.). Handbook of Child Psychopathology, pp. 117-156. New York: Plenum Press.
Dean, Vincent J. et ál. (2006). «Comparison of Ecological Validity of Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Models». En: Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 43, N.o 2, pp. 157-168. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Dombrowski, Stefan C., KamphAuS, Randy W. y Reynolds, Cecil R. (2004). «After the Demise of the Discrepancy: Proposed Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Criteria». En: Professional Psychology:Research and Practice, Vol. 35, N.o 4, pp. 364-372. Washington: American Psychological Association (APA).
Feifer, Steven G. (2008). «Integrating Response to Intervention (RTI) with Neuropsychology: A Scientific Approach to Reading». En: Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 45, N.o 9, pp. 812-825. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
FlanAgan, Dawn P., Fiorello, Catherine A. y ortiz, Samuel O. (2010). «Enhancing Practice through Application of Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory and Research: A “Third Method” Approach to Specific Learning Disability Identification». En: Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 47, N.o 7, pp. 739-760. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Flanagan, Dawn P. y AlFonSo, Vincent C. (2010). Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification.Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Fletcher, Jack M. (2012). «Classification and Identification of Learning Disabilities». En: wong, Bernice y butler, Debora L. (Ed.as). Learning About Learning Disabilities, pp. 1-26. 4.a ed. Estados Unidos: Academic Press.
Fletcher, Jack M. et ál. (1994). «Cognitive Profiles of Reading Disability: Comparisons of Discrepancy and Low Achievement Definitions». En: Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 86, N.o 1, pp. 6-23. Washington: American Psychological Association (APA).
Fletcher, Jack M. et ál. (2002). «Classification of Learning Disabilities: An Evidence Based Evaluation». En: Bradley, Renne, Danielson, Louis y Hallahan, Daniel P. (Eds.). Identification of Learning Disabilities: Research to Practice,pp. 185-250. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Fletcher, Jack M., Morris, Robin D. y lyon, G. Reid (2003). «Classification and Definition of Learning Disabilities: An Integrative Perspective». En: Swanson, H. Lee, HarriS, Karen R. y Graham, Steve (Eds.). Handbook of Learning Disabilities, pp. 30-56. New York: The Guilford Press.
Fletcher, Jack M. et ál. (2004). «Alternative Approaches to the Definition and Identification of Learning Disabilities: Some Questions and Answers». En: Annals of Dyslexia, Vol. 54, N.o 2, pp. 304-331. New York: Springer.
Fletcher, Jack M., Denton, Carolyn y Francis, David J. (2005). «Validity of Alternative Approaches for the Identification of Learning Disabilities: Operationalizing Unexpected Underachievement». En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 38, pp. 545-552. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Fletcher, Jack M. y VauGhn, Sharon (2009). «Response to Intervention: Preventing and Remediating Academic Deficits». En: Child Development Perspectives, Vol. 3, N.o 1, pp. 30-37. Estados Unidos: The Society for Research in Child Development, John Wiley & Sons.
Gresham, Frank M., Macmillan, Donald L. y Bocian, Kathleen M. (1996). «Learning Disabilities, Low Achievement, and Mild Mental Retardation: More Alike than Different?» En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 29, N.o 6, pp. 570-581. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Gresham, Frank M. y Vellutino, Frank R. (2010). «What Is the Role of Intelligence in the Identification of Specific Learning Disabilities? Issues and Clarifications». En: Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,Vol. 25, N.o 4, 194-206. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Hale, James B. et ál. (2010). «Critical Issues in Response-to-Intervention, Comprehensive Evaluation, and Specific Learning Disabilities Identification and Intervention: An Expert white Paper Consensus». En: Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 33, N.o 3, pp. 223-236. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Learning Disabilities Association of America.
Hallahan, Daniel P. y Mercer, Cecil D. (2002). «Learning Disabilities: Historical Perspectives». En: Bradley, Renne, Danielson, Louis y Hallahan, Daniel P. (Eds.). Identification of Learning Disabilities: Research to Practice, pp. 1-67. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbraum.
Hallahan, Daniel P. y Mock, Devery R. (2003). «A Brief History of the Field of Learning Disabilities». En: Swanson, H. Lee, HarriS, Karen R. y Graham, Steve (Eds.) Handbook of Learning Disabilities, pp. 15-32. New York: The Guilford Press.
Harris, Amelia I. (1971). Handicapped and Impaired in Great Britain. London: HMSO.
Hoskyn, Maureen y Swanson, H. Lee (2000). «Cognitive Processing of Low Achievers and Children with Reading Disabilities: A Selective MetaAnalytic Review of the Published Literature». En: School Psychology Review, Vol. 29, N.o 1, pp. 102-119. Minneapolis: National Association of School Psycho-logists (NASP).
Johnson, Evelyn S. et ál. (2010). «Cognitive Processing Deficits and Students with Specific Learning Disabilities: A Selective MetaAnalysis of the Literature». Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 33, N.o 1, pp. 3-18. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Learning Disabilities Association of America.
Kavale, Kenneth A. (2005). «Identifying Specific Learning Disability: Is Resposiveness to Intervention the Answer?» En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 38, N.o 6, pp. 553-562. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Kavale, Kenneth A. et ál. (2005). «Changing Procedures for Identifying Learning Disabilities: The Danger of Poorly Supported Ideas». En: The School Psychologist, Vol. 59, N.o 1, pp. 16-25. Washington DC: American Psychological Association (APA) Division 16.
Kavale, Kenneth A., Holdnack, James A. y Mostert, Mark P. (2006). «Responsiveness to Intervention and the Identification of Specific Learning Disability: A Critique and Alternative Proposal». En: Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 28, N.o 1, 113-127. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Learning Disabilities Association of America.
Lloyd, John Wills, Keller, Clay y Hung, Li-yu (2007). «International Understanding of Learning Disabilities». En: Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, Vol. 22, N.o 3, pp. 159-160. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Mather, Nancy y Gregg, Noel (2006). «Specific Learning Disabilities: Clarifying, Not Eliminating, A Construct». En: Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol. 37, pp. 99-106. Wash-ington DC: American Psychological Association (APA).
MCdermott, Paul A. et ál. (2006). «A Nationwide Epidemiologic Modeling Study of LD: Risks, Protection and Unintended Impact».En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 39, pp. 230-251. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Mellard, Daryl F. DeShler, Donald D. y Barth, Amy (2004). «LD Identification: It ́s not Simply A Matter of Building A Better Mousetrap». En: Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 27, N.o 4, pp. 229-242. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Learning Disabilities Association of America.
Peterson, Kristin M. H. y Shinn, Mark R. (2002). «Severe Discrepancy Models: Which Best Explains School Identification Practices for Learning Disabilities?» En: School Psychology Review, Vol. 31, N.o4, pp. 459-476. Minneapolis: National Association of School Psychologists (NASP).
Pineda, David et ál. (1999). «Prevalence of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms in 4 to 17-Year-Old Children in the General Population». En: Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, Vol. 27, N.o 6, pp. 455-462. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers.
Reyes Aragón, Carlos de los, Lewisharb, Soraya, Peña Ortiz, Mónica (2008). «Estudio de prevalencia de dificultades de lectura en niños escolarizados de 7 años de Barranquilla (Colombia)». En: Psicología desde el Caribe, N.o 22, pp. 37-49, julio-diciembre. Colombia: Universidad del Norte.
Reynolds, Cecil R. (1985). «Measuring the Aptitude-Achievement Discrepancy in Learning Disability Diagnosis». En: Remedial and Special Education, Vol. 6, N.o 5, pp. 37-55. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Selz, Marion y Reitan, Ralph M. (1979). «Neuropsychological Test Performance of Normal, Learning-Disabled and Brain-Damaged Older Children». En: Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, Vol. 167, N.o 5, pp. 298-302. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Shaywitz, Sally E. et ál. (1990). «Prevalence of Reading Disability in Boys and Girls: Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study». En: Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 264, N.o 8, pp. 998-1002. USA: American Medical Association (AMA).
Siegel, Linda S. (1989). «IQ Is Irrelevant to the Definition of Learning Disabilities». En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 22, N.o 8, pp. 469-478. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Siegel, Linda S. (1999). «Issues in the Definition and Diagnosis of Learning Disabilities: A Perspective on Guckenberger v. Boston University». En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 32, N.o 4, pp. 304-319. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Siegel, Linda S. (2003). «IQ-Discrepancy Definitions and the Diagnosis of LD: Introduction to the Special Issue». En: Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 36, N.o 1, pp. 2-3. Austin: Hammill Institute on Disabilities.
Skues, Jason L. y Cunningham, Everarda G. (2011). «A Contemporary Review of the Definition, Prevalence, Identification and Support of Learning Disabilities in Australian Schools». En: Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, Vol. 16, N.o 2, pp. 159-180. Londres: Routledge.
Stuebing, Karla K. et ál. (2012). «Evaluation of the Technical Adequacy of Three Methods for Identifying Specific Learning Disabilities Based on Cognitive Discrepancies». En: School Psychology Review, Vol. 41, N.o 1, pp. 3-22. Minneapolis: National Association of School Psychologists (NASP).
Talerog., Claudia, Espinosab., Andrés y Vélez Van Meerbeke, Alberto (2005). «Dificultad del aprendizaje de la lectura en las escuelas de una localidad de Bogotá». En: Acta Neurológica Colombiana, Vol. 21, N.o 4, pp. 280-288. Bogotá: Asociación Colombiana de Neurología.
Vaughn, Sharon, Linan-Thompson, Sylvia y Hic-Kman, Peggy (2003). «Response to Instruction As A Means of Identifying Students with Reading/Learning Disabilities». En: Exceptional Children, Vol. 69, N.o4,pp. 391-409. Arlington: Council for Exceptional Children.
Wilson, Lonny R. y Cone, Thomas (1984). «The Regression Equation Method of Determining Academic Discrepancy». En: Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 22, N.o 1, pp. 95-110. Memphis: Society for the Study of School Psychology, Elsevier.
Woodcock, Richard W. (1984). «A Response to Some Questions Raised about the Woodcock-Johnson: Efficacy of the Aptitude Clusters». En: School Psycho-logy Review, Vol. 13, N.o 3, pp. 355-362. Minneapolis: National Association of School Psychologists (NASP).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who have publications in this Journal accept the following terms:
- The content of each article is the responsibility of its authors
- The author(s) preserve(s) the moral rights over the article and transfer(s) the patrimonial rights to the University of Antioquia, which can publish it or distribute electronic copies, as well as include it in indexing services, directories or national and international Open Access data bases, under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-NC-ND).
- The author(s) should sign a declaration of transfer of economic rights to the University of Antioquia, after the acceptance of the manuscript.
- Authors are allowed and advised to disseminate their work through the Internet (eg, institutional telematic archives or their website) before and during the submission process. That can produce interesting exchanges and increase citations of the published work.
- The author(s) has (have) the responsibility to arrange and get the necessary permissions to reproduce any material protected by copyright.
