We used data derived from a survey sample, the Connecticut Longitudinal Study (CLS), to compare two commonly employed definitions of reading disability: a discrepancy-based model (D) and a low reading achievement model (L). We identified children satisfying each definition in second grade and compared the groups retrospectively in kindergarten and prospectively in fifth grade using parent-based, teacher-based, and child-based measures. Our findings suggest more similarities than differences between the reading disabled groups. The most salient differences were those related to ability and seem inherent in the definitions of the groups: Children identified as D have significantly higher verbal, performance, and full scale IQ scores than those identified as L. These findings suggest that both groups of children with reading disability, that is, those defined by either D or L, should be considered eligible for special education services.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Agronin, M., Holahan, J.M., Shaywitz, B.A., & Shaywitz, S.E. (1992). The Multi-Grade Inventory for Teachers (MIT): Scale development, reliability, and validity of an instrument to assess children with attentional deficits and learning disabilities. In S.E. Shaywitz & B.A. Shaywitz (Eds.), Attention deficit disorder comes of age: Toward the twenty-first century (pp. 89–116). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3.
Catts, H. (1989). Defining dyslexia as a developmental language disorder. Annals of Dyslexia, 39, 50–67.
4.
Cone, T.E., & Wilson, L.R. (1981). Quantifying a severe discrepancy: A critical analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 359–371.
5.
Fletcher, J.M., Espy, K.A., Francis, D.J., Davidson, K.C., Rourke, B.P., & Shaywitz, S.E. (1989). Comparisons of cutoff and regression-based definitions of reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 334–355.
6.
Fletcher, J.M., Shaywitz, S.E., Francis, D.J., Steubing, K.K., Shankweiler, D.P., Katz, L., Liberman, I.Y., & Shaywitz, B.A. (1992). Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Manuscript submitted for publication.
7.
Francis, D.J., Shaywitz, S.E., Steubing, K.K., Shaywitz, B.A., & Fletcher, J.M. (in press). The measurement of change: Assessing behavior over time and within a development context (measuring and analyzing change).
8.
Frankenberger, W., & Fronzaglio, K. (1991). A review of states' criteria for identifying children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 495–500.
9.
Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Development, 53, 87–97.
10.
Hollingshead, A.B. (1957). Two-factor index of social position. Unpublished manuscript, Yale University.
11.
Jorm, A.F., Share, D.L., Maclean, R., & Matthews, R. (1986). Cognitive factors at school entry predictive of specific reading retardation and general reading backwardness: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 27, 45–54.
12.
Kamhi, A.G. (1992). Response to historical perspective: A developmental language perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 48–52.
13.
Kaplan, E., Goodglass, H., & Weintraub, S. (1983). The Boston naming test. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger.
14.
Kirk, S., & Elkins, J. (1975). Characteristics of children enrolled in the child service demonstration centers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 8, 630–637.
15.
Norman, C., & Zigmond, N. (1980). Characteristics of children labeled and served as learning disabled in school systems affiliated with child service demonstration centers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13, 16–21.
16.
Pennington, B.F. (1985). Issues in diagnosis and phenotype analysis of dyslexia: Implications for family studies. In S. Smith (Ed.), Genetics and learning disabilities. Baltimore: College-Hill.
17.
Reynolds, C.R. (1984). Critical measurement issues in learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 18, 451–476.
18.
Rutter, M. (1989). Isle of Wight revisited: Twenty-five years of child psychiatric epidemiology. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 28, 633–653.
19.
Rutter, M., Tizard, J., & Whitmore, K. (1970). Education, health, and behavior. London: Longman.
20.
Rutter, M., & Yule, W. (1975). The concept of specific reading retardation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 16, 181–197.
21.
Senf, G.M. (1986). LD research in sociological and scientific perspective. In J.K. Torgesen & B.Y.L. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 27–53). New York: Academic Press.
22.
Shaywitz, B.A., Shaywitz, S.E., Liberman, I.Y., Fletcher, J.M., Shankweiler, D.P., Duncan, J.S., Katz, L., Liberman, A.M., Francis, C.J., Dreyer, L.G., Crain, S., Brady, S., Fowler, A., Kier, L.E., Rosenfield, N.S., Core, J.C., & Makuch, R.W. (1991). Neurolinguistic and biologic mechanisms in dyslexia. In D.D. Duane & D.B. Gray (Eds.), The reading brain (pp. 27–52). Parkton, MD: York Press.
23.
Shaywitz, S.E. (1986). Early recognition of vulnerability—EREV (Technical report to Connecticut State Department of Education). New Haven, CT: Yale University.
24.
Shaywitz, S.E., Escobar, M.D., Shaywitz, B.A., Fletcher, J.M., & Makuch, R. (1992). Evidence that dyslexia may represent the lower tail of a normal distribution of reading ability. New England Journal of Medicine, 326, 145–150.
25.
Shaywitz, S.E., Holahan, J.M., Marchione, K., Sadler, A.E., & Shaywitz, B.A. (1992). Yale Children's Inventory: Normative data and their implications for the diagnosis of attention deficit disorder in children. In S.E. Shaywitz & B.A. Shaywitz (Eds.), Attention deficit disorder comes of age: Toward the twenty-first century (pp. 29–67). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
26.
Shaywitz, S.E., Schnell, C., Shaywitz, B.A., & Towle, V.R. (1986). Yale Children's Inventory (YCI): An instrument to assess children with attention deficits and learning disabilities. I. Scale development and psychometric properties. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 14, 347–364.
27.
Shaywitz, S.E., Shaywitz, B.A., Fletcher, J.M., & Escobar, M.D. (1990). Prevalence of reading disability in boys and girls: Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Journal of the American Medical Association, 264, 998–1002.
28.
Shaywitz, S.E., Shaywitz, B.A., Schnell, C., & Towle, V.R. (1988). Concurrent and predictive validity of the Yale Children's Inventory: An instrument to assess children with attentional deficits and learning disabilities. Pediatrics, 81, 562–571.
29.
Siegel, L.S. (1988). Definitional and theoretical issues and research on learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 264–266.
30.
Siegel, L.S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 469–478, 486.
31.
Silva, P.A., McGee, R., & Williams, S. (1985). Some characteristics of 9-year-old boys with general reading backwardness or specific reading retardation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 26, 407–421.
32.
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Cognitive processes and the reading problems of learning-disabled children: Evaluating the assumption of specificity. In J.K. Torgesen & B. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 87–131). New York: Academic Press.
33.
Stanovich, K.E. (1991). Discrepancy definition of reading disability: Has intelligence led us astray?Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 7–29.
34.
Thorndike, R.L. (1963). The concepts over- and under-achievement. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
35.
U.S. Office of Education. (1977). Assistance to states for education for handicapped children: Procedures for evaluating specific learning disabilities. (Federal Register, 42: 62082–62085)
36.
Wechsler, D. (1974). Wechsler intelligence scale for children-Revised. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
Yule, W., Rutter, M., Berger, M., & Thompson, J. (1974). Over- and under-achievement in reading: Distribution in the general population. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 44, 1–12.
