A Comparison over Time of Relative Discrepancy Scores of Low Achievers

Abstract

The accurate differentiation of learning disabled (LD) students from other low achieving students and the provision of effective remedial services continue to be important issues in the field of learning disabilities. Despite numerous criticisms, the calculation of a discrepancy between ability and achievement is used widely in the identification of students with learning disabilities. In the present investigation, the stability of discrepancies for LD and non-LD, low achieving students was examined. A differential change in relative descrepancy scores was found between the two groups of students from grades two to five. LD and non-LD groups did not differ significantly in second grade but did differ significantly in fifth grade in terms of relative discrepancy. Results and the implications for service delivery models are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Algozzine

Forgnone

Mercer

, & Triffiletti

(1979). Toward defining discrepancies for specific learning disabilities: An analysis and alternatives. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 25–31.

Algozzine

, & Ysseldyke

J. E.

(1982). Classification decisions in learning disabilities. Educational and Psychological Research, 2, 117–129.

Algozzine

& Ysseldyke

(1983). Learning disabilities as a subset of school failure: The over-sophistication of a concept. Exceptional Children, 50, 242–246.

Algozzine

Ysseldyke

J. E.

, & Shinn

(1982). Identifying children with learning disabilities: When is a discrepancy severe? Journal of School Psychology, 20, 299–305.

Danielson

L. D.

& Bauer

J. N.

(1978). A formula-based classificiation of learning disabled children: An examination of the issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11, 163–176.

Duncan

D. B.

(1955). Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11, 1–42.

Elliott

(1981). Quantitative evaluation procedures for learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 14, 84–87.

Englert

C. S.

(1983). Measuring special education teacher effectiveness. Exceptional Children, 50, 247–254.

Englert

C. S.

(1984). Effective direct instruction practices in special education settings. Remedial and Special Education, 5(2), 38–47.

10.

Epps

Ysseldyke

J. E.

, & Algozzine

(1983). Impact of different definitions of learning disabilities on the number of students identified. Jrnl. of Psychoeduc. Assessment, 1, 344–352.

11.

Fisher

Berliner

Filby

Marliave

Cahen

, & Dishaw

(1980). Teaching behaviors, academic learning time, and student achievement: An overview. In Denham

& Lieberman

(Eds.), Time to learn (pp. 11–32). Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.

12.

Forness

S. R.

Sinclair

, & Guthrie

(1983). Learning disability discrepancy formulas: Their use in actual practice. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 107–114.

13.

Glass

G. V.

, & Stanly

J. C.

(1970). Statistical methods in eduation and psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

14.

Kakalik

J. S.

Furry

W. S.

Thomas

M. A.

, & Carney

M. F.

(1981). The cost of special education: Summary of study findings. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

15.

McLeod

(1979). Educational underachievement: Toward a defensible psychometric definition. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 42–50.

16.

O'Donnell

L. E.

(1980). Intra-individual discrepancy in diagnosing specific learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 10–18.

17.

Reith

H. J.

Polsgrove

, & Semmel

(1981). Instructional variables that make a difference: Attention to task and beyond. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 2(3), 61–71.

18.

Salvia

, & Clark

(1973). Use of deficits to identify the learning disabled. Exceptional Children, 40, 305–308.

19.

Stevens

, & Rosenshine

(1981). Advances in research on teaching. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 2(1), 1–9.

20.

Wilson

L. R.

Cone

T. E.

Busch

, & Allee

(1983). A critique of the expectancy formula approach: Beating a dead horse? Psychology in the Schools, 20, 241–249.

21.

Ysseldyke

Algozzine

, & Epps

(1983). A logical and empirical analysis of current practice in classifying students as handicapped. Exceptional Children, 50, 160–170.

22.

Ysseldyke

J. E.

Algozzine

Shinn

M. R.

, & McGue

(1982). Similarities and differences between low achievers and students classified learning disabled. Journal of Special Education, 16, 73–85.