Issues of accuracy of classification practices for mildly handicapped students remain paramount in the public schools. This study investigates academic performance differences between students receiving special education services for the mildly handicapped, low-achieving students receiving Chapter 1 services, and regular education students. All students were in grades 4, 5, and 6. These groups are compared on curriculum-based measures of reading, spelling, written expression, and math. Consistent differences are obtained with the results discussed in terms of alternative identification practices for mildly handicapped students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Algozzine, B., & Ysseldyke, J. (1982). Learning disabilities as a subset of school failure: The oversimplification of a concept (Research Rep. No. 69). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
2.
Clymer, T., & Fenn, T. (1979). Ginn Reading 720, Rainbow Edition.Lexington, MA: Ginn.
3.
Deno, S., Marston, D., & Mirkin, P. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Exceptional Children, 48, 368–371.
4.
Deno, S., Marston, D., Shinn, M., & Tindal, J. (1983). Oral reading fluency: A simple datum for scaling reading disability. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities2(4), 53–59.
5.
Deno, S., Mirkin, P., & Chiang, B. (1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49(1), 36–44.
6.
Deno, S., Mirkin, P., Lowry, L., & Kuehnle, K. (1980). Relationships among simple measures of spelling and performance on standardized achievement tests (Research Rep. No. 21). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
7.
Deno, S., Mirkin, P., & Wesson, C. (1984). How to write effective data-based IEPs. Teaching Exceptional Children, 99–104.
8.
Hallahan, D., & Kauffman, J. (1976). Introduction to Learning Disabilities.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.
Jenkins, J., Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1979). Measuring pupil progress toward the least restrictive alternative. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2(4), 81–91.
10.
Jenkins, J., & Pany, D. (1978). Standardized achievement tests: How useful for special education?Exceptional Children, 44(6), 448–453.
11.
Keogh, B. (1983). Classification, compliance, and confusion. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16(2), 25.
12.
Kirk, S., & Elkins, J. (1975). Characteristics of children enrolled in the Child Service Demonstration Centers. Exceptional Children, 42, 17–21.
13.
Mann, L., Davis, C., Boyer, C., Metz, C., & Wolford, B. (1983). LD or not LD, that was the question. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16(1), 14–17.
14.
Marston, D. (1982). The technical adequacy of direct and repeated measurement of academic skills in low achieving elementary students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
15.
Marston, D., Deno, S. L., & Tindal, G. (1983). A comparison of standardized achievement tests and direct measurement techniques in measuring pupil progress (Research Rep. No. 126). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
16.
Marston, D., Mirkin, P. K., & Deno, S. L. (in press). Curriculum-based measurement: An alternative to traditional referral, screening and identification. Journal of Special Education.
17.
Marston, D., Tindal, G., & Deno. S. (1982). Predictive efficiency of direct measurement: An analysis of cost and accuracy in classification (Research Rep. No. 104). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
18.
McLeod, J. (1983). Learning disability is for educators. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16(1), 23–24.
19.
Mercer, C., Forgnone, C., & Wolking, W. (1976). Definitions of learning disabilities used in the United States. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9, 376–386.
20.
Mirkin, P. (1980). Conclusions. In J. Ysseldyke & M. Thurlow (Eds.) The special education assessment and decision-making process: Seven (see studies).Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
21.
Neisworth, J., & Greer, J. (1975). Functional similarities of learning disabilities and mild retardation. Exceptional Children, 42, 17–21.
22.
Oakland, T., & Matuszek, P. (1977). Using tests in a non-discriminatory fashion. In T. Oakland (Ed.), Psychological and educational assessment of minority children (pp. 52–69). New York: Bruner/Mazel.
23.
Page, G. (1980). Tests and decisions for the handicapped: A guide to evaluation under the new laws. Journal of Special Education, 14(4), 423–483.
24.
Reynolds, M., & Wang, M. (1983). Restructuring “special” school programs. Policy Studies Review, 2(1), 189–212.
25.
Scriven, M. (1983). Comments on Gene Glass. Policy Studies Review, 2(1), 79–85.
26.
Senf, G. (1981). Issues surrounding the diagnosis of learning disabilities: Child handicap versus failure of the child-school interaction. In T. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in School Psychology (pp. 83–131). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
Shinn, M., & Marston, D. (1983). Data based assessment manual.Minneapolis: Minneapolis Public Schools.
28.
Shinn, M. R., Ysseldyke, J., Deno, S., & Tindal, S. (1982). A comparison of psychometric and functional differences between students labeled learning disabled and low achieving (Research Rep. No. 71). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.
29.
Tindal, G., Wesson, C., Germann, G., Deno, S., & Mirkin, P. (in press). A data-based system for delivery of special education. In T. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in school psychology.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
Tucker, J. (1980). Ethnic proportions in classes for the learning disabled: Issues in nonbiased assessment, Journal of Special Education, 14(1), 93–105.
31.
Wallace, G., & Larsen, S. (1977). Educational assessment of learning problems: Testing and teaching.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
32.
Warner, M., Schumaker, J., Alley, G., & Deschler, D. (1980). Learning disabled adolescents in the public schools: Are they different from other low achievers?Exceptional Education Quarterly, 1(2), 217–36.
33.
White, O., & Haring, N. (1980). Exceptional teaching.Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
34.
Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
35.
Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., Richey, L., & Graden, J. (1982). Declaring students eligible for learning disability services: Why bother with the data. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 5, 37–44.
36.
Ysseldyke, J., Algozzine, B., Shinn, M., & McGue, M. (1982). Similarities and differences between underachievers and students classified learning disabled. Journal of Special Education, 16, 73–85.
