A broad consensus has been achieved regarding the importance of early primary and secondary interventions for children in academic domains for the purposes of improving overall academic competencies and preventing low achievement that often leads to a diagnosis of specific learning disability (SLD) and long-term special education placement. The characteristics of effective prevention programs generally are well established. The degree to which these programs prevent SLD is uncertain, and the subsequent procedures for determining SLD eligibility are very much at issue. Issues are discussed regarding what should be done about SLD identification after primary and secondary intervention efforts are proven inadequate for individual children.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barbour, B. (2002). Best practices in promoting educational reform at a school district level. In A. Thomas and J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (4th ed., pp. 293—300). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists .
2.
Donovan, M.S., & Cross, C.T. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
3.
Fletcher, J.M., Lyon, G.R., Barnes, M., Stuebing, K.K., Francis, D.J., Olson, R.K., et al. (2002). Classification of learning disabilities: An evidenced-based evaluation. In R. Bradley , L. Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 185—250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4.
Fletcher, J.M., & Reschly, D.J. (2005). Changing procedures for identifying learning disabilities: The danger of perpetuating old ideas. The School Psychologist , 59(1), 10—15.
5.
Foorman, B.R. (1995). Research on the great debate: Code-oriented versus whole-language approaches to reading instruction. School Psychology Review, 24, 376— 392.
6.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (1989). Exploring effective and efficient prereferral interventions: A component analysis of behavioral consultation. School Psychology Review, 18, 260—279.
7.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Tindal, G., & Deno, S.L. (1986). Performance instability of learning disabled, emotionally handicapped, and nonhandicapped children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9, 84—88.
8.
Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P.L., & Young, C.L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 157—171.
9.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199—208.
10.
Hallahan, D., & Kauffman, J. (1977). Labels, categories, behaviors: ED, LD, and EMR reconsidered. The Journal of Special Education, 11, 139—149.
11.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004) 20 U.S.C. 1400-1419.
12.
Kamps, D.M., & Greenwood, C.R. (2004). Secondary interventions in reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities.
13.
Kaufman, A.S. (2004). Standardized cognitive assessment and the new IDEA guidelines— Fit or misfit? National Association of
14.
School Psychologists convention final program, Bethesda, MD.
15.
Kaufman, A.S., & Kaufman, N.L. (2004). Kaufman assessment battery for children (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
16.
Kavale, K.A. (2002). Discrepancy models in the identification of learning disability. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 369—426). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (1999). Efficacy of special education and related services . Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
18.
Marston, D. (2002). A functional and intervention-based assessment approach to establishing discrepancy for students with learning disabilities . In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 437—447). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum .
Reschly, D.J., & Grimes, J.P. (1991). State department and university cooperation: Evaluation of continuing education in consultation and curriculum based assessment. School Psychology Review, 20, 519—526.
21.
Reschly, D.J., & Hosp, J.L. (2004). State SLD policies and practices. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 197—213.
Torgesen, J.L., Alexander, A.W., Wagner, R.K., Rashotte, C.A., Voeller, K.S., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33—58, 78.
24.
Vaughn, S., Gersten, R., & Chard, D.J. (2000). The underlying message in LD intervention research: Findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children, 67, 99—114.
25.
Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thompson, S. (2003). What is special about special education for students with learning disabilities?The Journal of Special Education, 37, 140— 147.
26.
Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
