Each of the five institutes has made unique contributions to the understanding of LD. The report of the Minnesota institute, however, does not accurately reflect the state of the art in the field, and the work of this research group has potential for serious misinterpretation and misapplication. Unresolved issues include classification of children, the relationship of LD to mental retardation, and collaborative research among institutes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ButterfieldE. C., & BelmontJ. M.Assessing and improving the cognitive functions of mentally retarded people. In BialerI., & SternlichtM. (Eds.), Psychological issues in mental retardation.New York: Psychological Dimensions,1977.
2.
GallagherJ. J.The trend to contract research: Problems and opportunities.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1979, 1(5), 29–38.
3.
HallahanD. P. (Ed.) Teaching exceptional children to use cognitive strategies.Exceptional Education Quarterly, 1980, 1(1).
4.
KeoghB. K. (Ed.) Advances in special education.Greenwich, Conn.: J.A.I. Press,1980.
5.
McKinneyJ. D.The search of subtypes of specific learning disability. Paper presented at the Gatlinburg Conference on Research in Mental Retardation/Developmental Disabilities, Gatlinburg, Tenn., April 1982.
6.
SatzP., & MorrisR.Learning disability subtypes: A review. In PirozzoloF. J., & WittrockM. C. (Eds.), Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading.New York: Academic Press,1981.
7.
TorgesenJ. K., & LichtB. K.The learning disabled child as an inactive learner: Retrospect and prospects. In McKinneyJ. D., & FeagansL. (Eds.), Current topics in learning disabilities (Vol. 1). Norwood, NJ: Ablex, in press.
