The use of IQ scores and discrepancy formulas for identifying specific learning disabilities (SLD) has been widely discredited by prominent researchers for more than a decade. Nevertheless, the overwhelming majority of state policies still specify the use of discrepancy formulas, including the simple difference method, which is psychometrically inferior to regression-based methods. This study compares the use of a minimum IQ cutoff score and a simple difference method versus a regression-based method for identifying SLD in a sample of African American and European American full-time college students (N = 117). Replicating the findings from previous studies using typically achieving children, typically achieving adults, and school-age children with SLD, this study adds to the chorus of voices criticizing the use of outdated assessment practices that can have deleterious effects for individuals with SLD. The implications for legislative policy are discussed in the context of the historical overrepresentation of African Americans in all special education categories except SLD and the increased access to higher education that students with SLD have gained during the past decade.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Berk, R. (1984). Screening and diagnosis of children with learning disabilities. Spring-field, IL: Thomas.
2.
Berninger, V.W., & Abbott, R.D. (1994). Redefining learning disabilities: Moving beyond aptitude-achievement discrepancies to failure to respond to validated treatment protocols. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp. 163—185). Baltimore: Brookes.
3.
Braden, J.P. (1987). A comparison of regression and standard score discrepancy methods for learning disabilities evaluation. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 23— 29.
4.
Bronson, F.L. (1983). Overrepresentation of low-socioeconomic minority students in special education programs in California. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 517—525.
5.
Chinn, P.C., & Hughes, S. (1987). Representation of minority students in special education classes. Remedial and Special Education, 8(4), 41—46.
6.
Cook, R.J. (1998). Kappa. In P. Armitage & T. Colton (Eds.) The encyclopedia of biostatistics (pp. 2160—2166). New York: Wiley.
7.
Colarusso, R.P., Keel, M.C., & Dangel, H.L. (2001). A comparison of eligibility criteria and their impact on minority representation in LD programs. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 1—7.
8.
Collins, R., & Camblin, L.D. (1983). Politics and science of learning disability classification: Implications for Black children. Contemporary Education, 54, 113—118.
9.
Cone, T.E., & Wilson, L.R. (1981). Quantifying a severe discrepancy: A critical analysis . Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 359—371.
10.
Dent, H.E. (1996). Non-biased assessment or realistic assessment? In R. Lewis (Ed.), Handbook of tests and measures for Black populations (pp. 103—122). Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry.
11.
Fletcher, J.M., Espy, K.A., Francis, D.J., Rourke, B.P., & Shaywitz, S.E. (1989). Comparisons of cutoff score and regression-based definitions of reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 334—338.
12.
Fletcher, J.M., Francis, D.J., Shaywitz, S.E., Lyon, G.R., Foorman, B.R., Stuebing, K.K., et al. (1998). Intelligent testing and the discrepancy model for children with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 186—203.
13.
Fletcher, J.M., Francis, D.J., Rourke, B.P., Shaywitz, S.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (1992). The validity of discrepancy-based definitions of reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 25, 555—561, 573.
14.
Fletcher, J.M., Shaywitz, S.E., Shankweiler, D.P., Katz, L., Liberman, I.Y., Stuebing, K.K., et al. (1994). Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 6—23.
15.
Francis, D.J., Espy, K.A., Rourke, B.P., & Fletcher, J.M. (1991). Validity of intelligence test scores in the definition of learning disability: A critical analysis . In B. P. Rourke (Ed.), Neuropsychological validation of learning disability subtypes (pp. 15—44). New York: Guilford Press.
16.
Francis, D.J., Shaywitz, S.E., Stuebing, K.K., Shaywitz, B.A., & Fletcher, J.M. (1991). Measurement of change: Assessing behavior over time and within a developmental context. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp. 29—58). Baltimore: Brookes .
17.
Frankenberger, W., & Fronzaglio, K. (1991). A review of states' criteria and procedures for identifying children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 495—500.
18.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1998) Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 204—219.
19.
Gajar, A.J. (1992). Adults with learning disabilities: Current and future research priorities. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 25, 507—519.
20.
Gay, G. (1993). Ethnic minorities and educational equality. In J. A. Bans & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 171— 194). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
21.
Gregory, J.F., Shanahan, T., & Walberg, H.J. (1985). Learning disabled 10th graders in mainstreamed settings: A descriptive analysis. Remedial and Special Education , 6, 25—33.
22.
Heath, C.P., & Kush, J.C. (1991). Use of discrepancy formulas in the assessment of learning disabilities. In J. E. Obrzut & G. W. Hynd (Eds.), Neuropsychological foundations of learning disabilities: A handbook of issues, methods, and practice (pp. 287— 307). San Diego: Academic Press.
23.
Helms, J.E. (1992). Why is there no study of cultural equivalence in standardized cognitive ability testing?American Psychologist , 47, 1083—1101.
24.
Helms, J.E. (1997). The triple quandary of race, culture, and social class in standardized cognitive ability testing. In D. P. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft, & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 517— 532). New York: Guilford Press.
25.
Henderson, C. (1992). College freshmen with disabilities: A statistical profile. Washington, DC: American Council on Education, HEATH Resource Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 354792)
26.
Henderson, C. (1995). College freshmen with disabilities: A triennial statistical profile. Washington, DC: American Council on Education, HEATH Resource Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 387971)
27.
Henderson, C. (1999). College freshmen with disabilities, 1999: A biennial statistical profile. Statistical year 1998. Washington, DC: American Council on Education, HEATH Resource Center . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 436900)
28.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
29.
Kaufman, A.S., & Doppelt, J.E. (1976). Analysis of WISC-R standardization data in terms of the stratification variables. Child Development, 47, 165—171.
30.
Kistner, J., Osborne, M., & LeVerrier, L. (1988). Causal attributions of learning-disabled children: Developmental patterns and relation to academic progress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 82— 89.
31.
Larry P. v. Wilson Riles, 495 F. Supp. 926 (N.D. Calif. 1979).
32.
Lyon, G.R. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities: A position in search of logic and data. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 504—506, 512.
33.
MacMillan, D.L., Gresham, F.M., & Bocian, K.M. (1998). Discrepancy between definitions of learning disabilities and school practices: An empirical investigation. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 314— 326.
McLeod, J. (1979). Educational under-achievement: Toward a defensible psychometric definition. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 12, 42—50.
36.
McLeskey, J., Waldron, N.L., & Wornhoff, S.A. (1990). Factors influencing the identification of Black and White students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 362—366.
37.
Mercer, C.D., Jordan, L., Allsopp, D.H., & Mercer, A.R. (1996). Learning disabilities definitions and criteria used by state education departments. Learning Disability Quarterly , 19, 217—232.
38.
Mercer, C.D., King-Sears, P., & Mercer, A.R. (1990). Learning disabilities definitions and criteria used by state education departments. Learning Disability Quarterly , 13, 141—152.
39.
Mercer, J.R. (1979). [Expert testimony in the Larry P. trial]. In Larry P. v. Riles, 495 F. Supp. 926 (Northern District Calif. 1979 ).
40.
Meyer, M.S. (2000). The ability-achievement discrepancy: Does it contribute to an understanding of learning disabilities?Educational Psychology Review, 12, 315—337.
41.
Olivarez, A., Jr., Palmer, D.J., & Guillemard, L. (1992). Predictive bias with referred and nonreferred Black, Hispanic and White pupils. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, 175—186.
42.
Payette, K.A., & Clarizio, H.F. (1994). Discrepant team decisions: The effects of race, gender, achievement, and IQ on LD eligibility. Psychology in the Schools, 31(1), 40—48.
43.
Reynolds, C.R. (1990). Conceptual and technical problems in learning disability diagnosis. In C. Reynolds & R. Kamphaus (Eds.), Handbook of psychological and educational assessment of children: Intelligence and achievement (pp. 571—592). New York: Guilford Press.
44.
Reynolds, C.R., Chastain, R.L., Kaufman, A.S., & McLean, J.E. (1987). Demographic characteristics and IQ among adults: An analysis of the WAIS-R standardization sample as a function of the stratification variables. Journal of School Psychology, 25, 323—342.
45.
Schuerholz, L.J., Harris, E.L., Baumgardner, T.L., Reiss, A.L., Freund, L.S., Church, R.P., et al. (1995). An analysis of two discrepancy-based models and a processing-deficit approach in identifying learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 18—29.
46.
Shaywitz, B.A., Fletcher, J.M., Holahan, J., & Shaywitz, S.E. (1992). Discrepancy compared to low achievement definitions of reading disability: Results from the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 639—648.
47.
Shaywitz, B.A., & Shaywitz, S.E. (1991). Measuring and analyzing change. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp. 59—68). Baltimore: Brookes.
48.
Siegel, L.S. (1999). Issues in the definition and diagnosis of learning disabilities: A perspective on Guckenberger v. Boston University. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 304—319.
49.
Stanovich, K.E. (1999). The sociopsychometrics of learning disabilities . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 350—361.
50.
Stanovich, K.E., & Siegel, L.S. (1994). Phenotypical performance profile of children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 24—53.
51.
Torgesen, J.K., & Wagner, R.K. (1998). Alternative diagnostic approaches for specific developmental reading disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 220—232.
52.
Tucker, J.A. (1980). Ethnic proportions in classes for the learning disabled: Issues in nonbiased assessment. The Journal of Special Education, 14, 93—105.
53.
U.S. Department of Education. (1994). 1994 elementary and secondary school civil rights compliance report . Washington, DC: Author.
54.
U.S. Department of Education. (1998). Twentieth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
55.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Twenty-second annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
56.
Wagner, M. (1995). The contributions of poverty and ethnic background to the participation of secondary school students in special education. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
