In a survey of the 106 California Community Colleges, it was found that over 75% operated formal programs for the learning disabled, while an additional 12% provided informal services for their LD student population. Though diversity existed among the college LD programs surveyed, a consistency of process and practice was evident. Most colleges provided similar means for the identification and diagnosis of potential LD students and in the support services delivered. More specifically, LD programming similarities were demonstrated in intake interviewing, referral procedure and agencies, assessment tools, personnel, counseling, and availability of a learning center. Based on the model provided by the California Community Colleges, these recommendations are made for adoption by others who wish to implement LD programming at the post-secondary level: (a) a defined identification and assessment approach, IEP development, and delivery system; (b) collection of assessment data on all students that measures discrepancy; (c) appropriate, valid, and reliable assessment instruments; id) lEPs that indicate assessment data, discrepancy, needs, goals, and programming methodology; (e) a multidisciplinary team approach to assessment, IEP development, and delivery systems; (f) consistent data reporting methods securely maintained; (g) confidentiality of material; and (h) in-service programming.

No abstract

No abstract

Textbook study and use is generally a major problem facing the secondary level learning disabled student. The reading level of these texts is often too advanced for LD students to handle. Many times LD students are required to read texts at their frustration reading level (less than 50 per cent comprehension; more than five word recognition errors per 100 words); this difficulty negates efficient learning and is a factor in subsequent behavioral and attendance problems. Social studies, math, science, and similar textbooks are simply beyond many LD students' capabilities, not so much because of the concepts discussed but because of the high readability levels required.Several solutions are available to the teacher of LD secondary students who face this reading roadblock. First, they may resort to a non-reading curriculum in which reading is eliminated altogether as an information gathering device. Movies, audiotapes, videotapes, talking books, class discussions, and other systems of information acquisition are used to replace textbooks (Wiseman and Hartwell 1978;Faas 1980). Another solution would be the use of commercial products Bruce A. Ostertag, PhD, is on the faculty