Researchers, policy makers, and teacher trainers, who were identified by peers as being on the “cutting edge” of research and programming in learning disabilities, responded to surveys in 1975 and 1981. The “experts” generally endorsed learning disabilities as a viable classification and asserted that learning disabilities are identifiable by specific symptoms or a syndrome of symptoms. Considerable variability in responses was evident with regard to the prevalence of learning disabilities among school age children and the age at which a learning disability can be identified with assurance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Keogh, B.K., Major-Kingsley, S., Omori-Gordon, H., & Reid, H.P.A System of Marker Variables for the Field of Learning Disabilities. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1982.
Kirk, S.A., Senf, G.M.Larsen, R.P.Current issues in learning disabilities. In W.M. Cruickshank & A.A. Silver (Eds.), Bridges to Tomorrow: The Best of ACLD (Vol 2). Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1981.
4.
McGrady, H.Communication disorders and specific learning disabilities. In R.J. Van Hattum (Ed.), Communication Disorders: An Introduction. New York: Macmillian, 1980.
5.
Mirkin, P., Marston, D., & Deno, S.L.Direct and Repeated Measurement of Academic Skills: An Alternative to Traditional Screening. Referral, and Identification of Learning Disabled Students (Research Report No. 75). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, 1982.
6.
Thurlow, M.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E.Teachers' Beliefs about LD Students (Research Report No. 66). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, 1982.
7.
Ysseldyke, J.E., Algozzine, B. & Epps, S.A Logical and Empirical Analysis of Current Practices in Classifying Students as Handicapped (Research Report No. 92). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, 1982.
