Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification

Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification

Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification

Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification

Synopsis

  • Complete coverage on how SLD manifests in academic performance
  • Expert advice on theory- and research-based approaches to SLD identification
  • Conveniently formatted for rapid reference

Quickly acquire the knowledge and skills you need to accurately identify specific learning disabilities

Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification provides a brief overview examining the definitions and classification systems of-and methods for-identification of specific learning disabilities (SLDs). Focusing on descriptive efforts of the manifestations of SLDs in the academically critical areas of reading, writing, math, oral expression, and listening comprehension, this book features contributions by leading experts in the field, including Virginia Berninger, Steven Feifer, Jack Fletcher, Nancy Mather, Jack Naglieri, and more.

Like all the volumes in the Essentials of Psychological Assessment series, each concise chapter features numerous callout boxes highlighting key concepts, bulleted points, and extensive illustrative material, as well as test questions that help you gauge and reinforce your grasp of the information covered.

With multiple perspectives spanning several different theoretical orientations and offering various approaches to SLD identification that can be put into practice right away-from RTI methods to cognitive strengths and weaknesses approaches-this book offers important content for professionals who work with children and youth at risk for learning disabilities. With a Foreword by Cecil Reynolds, Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification presents rich and up-to-date information on models and methods of SLD identification.

Excerpt

According to the calculations of the United States Department of Education’s National Center for Educational Statistics, the most frequently occurring disability among school-aged individuals in the United States is a specific learning disability (SLD). In fact, it accounts for nearly half of all disabilities in the school-aged population. It may well then come as a surprise to those who do not work in the field that in spite of the presence of a common definition of SLD, one that has essentially remained unchanged since 1975, there remains very little agreement about the best model or method of identifying students with SLD. Always controversial, since the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (then known as IDEIA), the most recent reauthorization, in 2004, of the first version of the federal law requiring the public schools of the United States to provide a free and appropriate public education to students with disabilities (PL 94–142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act), the disagreements over the best approach to identification of an SLD have grown. Prior to 2004, the Federal Regulations for implementation of the various versions of IDEA required, as a necessary but insufficient condition (except in special circumstances), the presence of a severe discrepancy between aptitude and achievement for a diagnosis of SLD. The regulations accompanying IDEA (all 307 small-print Federal Register pages of them), which retained the definition of SLD essentially as written in the 1975 law, dropped this requirement, and instead allow the schools to use one or a combination of three basic approaches to SLD identification: the severe discrepancy criteria of prior regulations, a process based on the response of a student to evidence-based (aka: science) interventions for learning problems (known popularly as the RTI approach), or any other approach the state or local education agency determines to be a scientifically or research-based approach to determination of an SLD.

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.