Recent research suggests that most 4-year college students diagnosed with specific learning disability (SLD) do not meet objective criteria for the disorder, show normative deficits in academic skills, or have childhood histories of SLD. The purpose of this study was to examine the functioning of students diagnosed with SLD attending community college. We reviewed SLD documentation for 359 community college students previously diagnosed with SLD and receiving academic accommodations. Most students met objective criteria (82.3%) and were first diagnosed in childhood (93.3%). Most students also showed average intellectual functioning and below-average to borderline academic achievement. However, 27.3% showed uniformly low ability and achievement scores, suggesting possible misclassification. Students who failed to meet objective criteria for SLD often submitted test data that lacked current, adult-normed standardized test scores; many were diagnosed based on response to intervention and submitted only an individualized education program or summary of performance. This finding provides initial evidence of a disconnect between the qualitative documentation that secondary schools provide and the quantitative documentation that postsecondary institutions require for SLD classification.
ADA Amendments Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110–325, 42 U.S.C. § 1201 et seq. (2008).
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
3.
Association on Higher Education and Disability. (2004). Guidelines for documentation of a learning disability in adolescents and adults. Columbus, OH: Author.
4.
BrueggemannA. E.KamphausR. W.DombrowskiS. C. (2008). An impairment model of learning disability diagnosis. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39, 424–430.
5.
CametoR.KnokeyA.SanfordC. (2011). Participation in postsecondary education of young adults with learning disabilities: Findings from NLTS2. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 17, 45–54.
6.
Child Trends Data Bank. (2010). Child trends of the National Health Interview Surveys. Retrieved from http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org
7.
ComptonD. L.FuchsL. S.FuchsD.LambertW.HamlettC. (2012). The cognitive and academic profiles of reading and mathematics learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 79–95.
8.
CortiellaC. (2011). The state of learning disabilities. New York, NY: National Center for Learning Disabilities.
9.
DehmM. J. (2008). Cognitive processing problems. In MorrisR. J.MatherN. (Eds.), Evidence-based interventions for students with learning and behavioral challenges (pp. 258–287). New York, NY: Routledge.
10.
DombrowskiS. C.KamphausR. W.ReynoldsC. R. (2004). After the demise of the discrepancy: Proposed learning disabilities diagnostic criteria. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 364–372.
11.
Equal Opportunity Employment Commission. (2011). Regulations to implement the equal employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 29 C.F.R. § 1630, 2(j)(ii).
12.
FerrariM. (2009). A comparative assessment of the cognitive functioning of adults with childhood histories of learning disability and adults with noncognitive disorders. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 21, 355–368.
13.
FerriB. A.GreggN.HeggoyS. J. (1997). Profiles of college students demonstrating learning disabilities with and without giftedness. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 552–559.
14.
FlanaganD. P.AlfonsoV. C. (2011). Essentials of specific learning disability identification. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
15.
FlanaganD. P.FiorelloC. A.OrtizS. O. (2010). Enhancing practice through application of Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory and research: A “third method” approach to specific learning disability identification. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 739–760.
16.
FlanaganD. P.OrtizS. O.AlfonsoV. C.DyndaA. M. (2006). Integration of response to intervention and norm-referenced tests in learning disability identification: Learning from the Tower of Babel. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 807–825.
17.
FlanaganD. P.OrtizS. O.AlfonsoV. C.MascoloJ. T. (2006). The achievement test desk reference (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley.
18.
FletcherJ. M. (2009). Dyslexia: The evolution of a scientific concept. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 15, 501–508.
19.
GearyD. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 4–15.
20.
GerberP. J. (2009a). Impact of learning disabilities on adults. In TaymansJ. M. (Ed.), Learning to achieve: A review of the research literature on serving adults with learning disabilities (pp. 231–252). Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
21.
GerberP. J. (2009b). Transition and adults with learning disabilities. In TaymansJ. M. (Ed.), Learning to achieve: A review of the research literature on serving adults with learning disabilities (pp. 211–228). Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
22.
GoldsteinS.SchwebachA. (2009). Neuropsychological basis of learning disabilities. In ReynoldsC. R.Fletcher-JanzenE. (Eds.), Handbook of clinical child neuropsychology (pp. 187–201). New York, NY: Springer.
23.
GordonM.LewandowskiL.MurphyK.DempseyK. (2002). ADA-based accommodations in higher education: A survey of clinicians about documentation requirements and diagnostic standards. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 357–363.
24.
GreggN. (2007). Underserved and underprepared: Postsecondary learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 219–228.
25.
GreggN. (2009). Adolescents and adults with learning disabilities and ADHD: Assessment and accommodation. New York, NY: Guilford.
26.
GreggN.ColemanC.DavisM.LindstromW.HartwigJ. (2006). Critical issues for the diagnosis of learning disabilities in the adult population. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 889–899.
27.
GreggN.NelsonJ. (2010). A meta-analysis of the test accommodations research specific to adolescents and adults with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 483–499.
28.
Higher Education Research Institute. (2011). College students with “hidden disabilities”: The Freshman Survey Fall 2010. Los Angeles: University of California.
29.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004).
30.
JohnsonE. S.HumphreyM.MellardD. F.WoodsK.SwansonH. L. (2010). Cognitive processing deficits and students with specific learning disabilities: A selective meta-analysis of the literature. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 3–18.
31.
KatsiyannisA.ZhangD.LandmarkL.ReberA. (2009). Postsecondary education for individuals with disabilities: Legal and practice considerations. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 20, 35–45.
32.
KavaleK. A. (2005). Identifying specific learning disability: Is responsiveness to intervention the answer?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 533–562.
33.
KavaleK. A.SpauldingL. S. (2008). Is response to intervention good policy for specific learning disability?Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 169–179.
34.
KazdinA. E. (2003). Research design in clinical psychology (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
35.
LewandowskiL. J.LovettB. J.GordonM. (2009). Measurement of symptom severity and impairment. In GoldsteinS.NaglieriJ. (Eds.), Assessing impairment: From theory to practice (pp. 5–14). New York, NY: Springer.
36.
LewandowskiL. J.LovettB. J.RogersC. L. (2008). Extended time as a testing accommodations for students with reading disabilities: Does a rising tide lift all ships?Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 26, 315–324.
37.
LovettB. J.GordonM.LewandowskiL. J. (2009). Measuring impairment in a legal context: Practical considerations in the evaluation of psychiatric and learning disabilities. In GoldsteinS.NaglieriJ. (Eds.), Assessing impairment: From theory to practice (pp. 93–103). New York, NY: Springer.
38.
LovettB. J.SparksR. S. (2009). College students with learning disability diagnoses: Who are they, and how do they perform?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 494–510.
39.
LyonG. R.FletcherJ. M.BarnesM. C. (2003). Learning disabilities. In MashE. J.BarkleyR. A. (Eds.), Child psychopathology (pp. 520–586). New York, NY: Guilford.
40.
MadausJ. W.BanerjeeM.HambletE. (2010). Learning disability documentation decision making at the postsecondary level. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33, 68–79.
41.
MadausJ. W.ShawS. F.MillerW. K.BanerjeeM.VitelloS. (2011). The summary of performance: The reality and the possibility. Learning Disabilities, 17, 33–37.
42.
MapouR. L.MorrisH.WeitznerR. A. (2011, June). Understanding legal and scientific issues in learning disability/ADHD evaluations: Are we documenting accommodations or accommodating documentation?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of College and University Attorneys, San Francisco, CA.
43.
McGrewK. S.WoodcockR. W. (2001). Technical manual, Woodcock–Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
44.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011a). Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/
45.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011b). Students with disabilities at degree-granting postsecondary institutions. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
46.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/
47.
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (2007). The documentation disconnect for students with learning disabilities: Improving access to postsecondary disability services. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 265–272.
NewmanL.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA. M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to four years after high school: A report from the International Longitudinal Transition Study–2 (NCSER 2009–3017). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
50.
ProctorB.PrevattF. (2003). Agreement among four models used for diagnosing learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 459–466.
51.
PryorJ. H.HurtadoB.SaenzV. B.SantosJ. L.KornW. S. (2007). The American freshman: Forty-year trends, 1966–2006. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research Institute.
52.
SchrankF. A.BeckerK. A.DeckerS. (2001). Calculating ability/achievement discrepancies between the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Third Edition and the Woodcock–Johnson III Tests of Achievement (Assessment Service Bulletin No. 4). Itasca, IL: Riverside.
53.
Semrud-ClikemanM.FineJ. G. (2008). Brief comprehensive neuropsychological assessment of children and adults with learning difficulties and disabilities. In D’AmatoR. C.HartlageL. C. (Eds.), Essentials of neuropsychological assessment (pp. 245–291). New York, NY: Springer.
54.
ShawS. F.KeenanW. R.MadausJ. W.BanerjeeM. (2010). Disability documentation, the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, and the summary of performance: How are they linked?Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 22, 142–150.
55.
SiegelL. 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.
56.
SparksR. L.LovettB. J. (2009a). College students with learning disability diagnoses: Who are they and how do they perform?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 494–510.
57.
SparksR. L.LovettB. J. (2009b). Objective Criteria for classification of postsecondary students as learning disabled. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 230–239.
58.
StanovichK. E. (1999). The sociopsychometrics of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 350–361.
59.
SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L. (2002). Difference scores in the identification of children with learning disabilities: It’s time to use a different method. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 65–83.
60.
SwansonH. L. (2012). Adults with reading disabilities: Converting a meta-analysis to practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 17–30.
61.
TurnerM.RackJ. (2004). The study of dyslexia. New York, NY: Kluwer.
62.
U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Transition of students with disabilities to postsecondary education: A guide for high school educators. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
63.
U.S. Department of Education. (2012). Federal student aid handbook: 2012–2013. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
64.
U.S. Department of Justice. (2010). Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability by public accommodations and commercial facilities. 28 C.F.R. Pt. 36, App. B, 704–705.
65.
WeisR.SykesL.UnadkatD. (2012). Qualitative differences in learning disabilities across postsecondary institutions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 491–502.
