Baldwin, R.S., & Vaughn, S. (1989). Why Siegel's arguments are irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 513, 520.
2.
Carrier, J.G. (1986). Learning disability: Social class and the construction of inequality in American education. New York: Greenwood Press.
3.
Coles, G.S. (1987). The learning mystique: A critical look at “learning disabilities.”New York: Pantheon.
4.
Cruickshank, W.M. (1972). Some issues facing the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 5, 380–388.
5.
Forness, S.R., & Kavale, K.A. (1991). Social skills deficits as primary learning disabilities: A note on problems with the ICLD diagnostic criteria. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6, 44–49.
6.
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.
7.
Hammill, D.D. (1990). On defining learning disabilities: An emerging consensus. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 74–84.
8.
Interagency Committee on Learning Disabilities. (1987). Learning disabilities: A report to the U.S. Congress. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services.
Kavale, K.A. (1987b). Theoretical quandaries in learning disabilities. In S. Vaughn & C. Bos (Eds.), Research in learning disabilities: Issues and future directions (pp. 19–29). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
11.
Kavale, K.A. (1993). A science and theory of learning disabilities. In G.R. Lyon, D.B. Gray, J.F. Kavanagh, & N.A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Better understanding learning disabilities: New views from research and their implications for education and public policies (pp. 109–138). Baltimore: Brookes.
12.
Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (1985). The science of learning disabilities. San Diego: College-Hill.
13.
Kavale, K.A., Forness, S.R., & Lorsbach, T.R. (1991). Definition for definitions of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14, 257–266.
14.
Kavale, K.A., & Nye, C. (1991). The structure of learning disabilities. Exceptionality, 2, 141–156.
15.
Keogh, B.K. (1987). Learning disabilities: In defense of a construct. Learning Disabilities Research, 3, 4–9.
16.
Leong, C.K. (1989). The locus of so-called IQ test results in reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 507–512.
17.
Mather, N., & Healy, W.C. (1990). Deposing aptitude-achievement discrepancy as the imperial criterion for learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1, 40–48.
18.
Reynolds, C.R. (1985). Measuring the aptitude-achievement discrepancy in learning disability diagnosis. Remedial and Special Education, 6(2), 37–55.
19.
Scruggs, T.E. (1988). Nature of learning disabilities. In K.A. Kavale (Ed.), Learning disabilities: State of the art and practice (pp. 22–43). Boston: Little, Brown.
20.
Siegel, L.S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 469–478, 486.
21.
Stanovich, K.E. (1991a). Conceptual and empirical problems with discrepancy definitions of reading disability. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14, 269–280.
22.
Stanovich, K.E. (1991b). Discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Has intelligence led us astray?Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 7–29.
23.
Wiederholt, J.L. (1974). Historical perspectives on the education of the learning disabled. In L. Mann & D. Sabatino (Eds.), The second review of special education (pp. 103–152). Philadelphia: Journal of Special Education Press.
24.
Ysseldyke, J., Algozzine, B., Shinn, M., & McGue, M. (1982). Similarities and differences between low achievers and students classified learning disabled. The Journal of Special Education, 16, 73–85.