How Many Learning Disabilities Are There? A Commentary on Stanovich's “Dysrationalia

Kavale, Kenneth A.

doi:10.1177/002221949302600805

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently, confusion still exists as to an acceptable discrepancy range; consequently, the severity level that must be reached before a student is considered to have a learning disability is unclear (Brinckerhoff, Shaw, & McGuire, 1993;Kavale, 1993;Sparks, Ganschow, & Javorsky, 1995). Many institutions of higher learning rely on their respective special education state guidelines and extend and apply them directly to the college-age student; many honor special education decisions or determinations that were made prior to college.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Job Satisfaction of College Graduates with Learning Disabilities

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Job satisfaction, as assessed via five scales that posed questions concerning colleagues, work, supervision, pay, and promotion, as well as overall total job satisfaction, was examined for 55 self-identified college graduates with learning disabilities (LD) and 55 control graduates matched by gender, major, degree, and graduation year. All participants graduated from a competitive midwestern university from 1987 to 1994 and represented advantaged groups when compared to both LD and non-LD populations. The graduates with LD required significantly more time to complete their degrees and showed significantly lower CPAs. Data analysis indicated that the graduates with LD perceived themselves as receiving significantly less pay and promotion opportunities, and reported less total job satisfaction, than graduates without LD. However, no significant salary differences between the groups were found. The implications of these findings are examined.

show abstract

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Job Satisfaction of College Graduates with Learning Disabilities

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After 46 years, professionals in the LD field have yet to agree on either the definition of and diagnostic criteria for LD or even the most effective practices to teach students classified as LD (Lyon et al, 2001). In the absence of a standard definition, no one knows who an LD child really is; as a result, Kavale (1993) has described LD as a concept “devoid of meaning” (p. 522). Failing to agree on a standard definition of and diagnostic criteria for LD threatens the validity and scientific merit of the LD concept (Moats & Lyon, 1993).…”

Section: Problems With the Definition And Diagnosis Of Ldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For many years, special educators have advocated the integration of students with disabilities into general education programs and classrooms. (See Kavale &Forness, 2000a, andMock &Kauffman, 2005, for a history of how students with disabilities have been included in regular education programs.) Indeed, some special educators have advocated the complete elimination of special education and insist that special education is harmful to students with disabilities (e.g., see Lipsky & Gartner, 1997;Stainback & Stainback, 1992).…”

Section: Contradictory Recommendations Of Special Education Advocatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

If You Don't Know Where You're Going, You'll Wind up Somewhere Else: The Case of “Foreign Language Learning Disability”

Sparks¹

2009

Foreign Language Annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the lack of empirical evidence, the term foreign language learning disability (FLLD) has become popular in the learning disabilities (LD) and foreign language literature. I contend that there is not a unique “disability” for foreign language learning and suggest instead that foreign language skills run along a continuum of very strong to very weak foreign language learners. To support my positions, I review problems with the definition and diagnostic criteria for LD. Then, I cite problems with the development and use of a logically consistent, easily operationalized, and empirically valid definition and diagnostic criteria for the FLLD concept and explain how proponents of this “disability” misuse the foreign language aptitude concept. Last, I detail implications for identifying students who exhibit foreign language learning problems, address policies that permit students to obtain waivers from or course substitutions for foreign language requirements, and describe issues hidden from foreign language educators because of the LD and FLLD concepts.

show abstract

“…This definition implies that LDs are a heterogeneous condition sharing the common characteristic of poor school performance and/or failure to achieve in school (Kavale 1993). This and subsequent (unofficial) definitions (see Hammill 1990) are used primarily for educational decision-making.…”

Section: Foreign Language Annals-winter I995mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Lyon and Moats (1993) suggest that "different approaches to measurement clearly lead to different sample characteristics and different prevalence estimates" of LD students (5). Kavale (1993) speculates that problems with the definition of LD foster an "anything goes" mentality in the field, allowing for a situation in which "new" forms of LD are constantly created, resulting in: a concept that is relatively devoid of meaning and is replaced by a variety of discrete forms of learning disability which may or may not be valid. The learning disability concept then becomes merely a loosely structured umbrella term, within which is possible to suggest the existence of any number of deficits that at another time might merely have been considered correlated deficits and not learning disabilities themselves.…”

Section: Foreign Language Annals-winter I995mentioning

confidence: 99%

I Know One When I See One (Or, I Know One Because I Am One): A Response to Mabbott

Sparks

Ganschow

Javorsky

1995

Foreign Language Annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Educational institutions have witnessed an explosive growth in the numbers of children, adolescents, and adults labeled as learning disabled (LD). The term LD is used increasingly by both educators and the general public. Recently, the term has also appeared in the foreign language literature. However, the LD concept has come under increasing criticism because of the problems of finding an acceptable definition and the concept's lack of scientific validity. In a recent article in this journal, Ann Mabbott describes as LD five adults, all of whom have achieved degrees of proficiency in a foreign language. In this response to Mabbott, the authors take issue with her diagnosis of the subjects as LD because she provides neither substantive standardized testing evidence of the subjects' intellectual ability and academic achievement nor corroboration of the subjects' self‐reports of their native and foreign language learning problems. The importance of using objective criteria to diminish heterogeneity in research samples is examined in the context of Mabbott's case studies.

show abstract

How Many Learning Disabilities Are There? A Commentary on Stanovich's “Dysrationalia

Cited by 8 publications

References 12 publications

Job Satisfaction of College Graduates with Learning Disabilities

Job Satisfaction of College Graduates with Learning Disabilities

If You Don't Know Where You're Going, You'll Wind up Somewhere Else: The Case of “Foreign Language Learning Disability”

I Know One When I See One (Or, I Know One Because I Am One): A Response to Mabbott

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About