Classification models of learning disabilities have typically been based on political expediency and clinical folklore. In contrast, the community college system of California (CCC) spent 5 years in the research and development of an eligibility model for students with learning disabilities. This article highlights major activities of the process and details the resulting components, procedures, and criteria which were implemented. All LD students evaluated for learning disabilities are assessed with this same model. While the model is specific to the context of the CCC, the research and development process has broader application. This process is worthy of consideration as one means of combining clinical and databased evidence with the political realities of public policy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsG.L. (1984). Comprehensive Test of Adaptive Behavior.Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
2.
AdelmanH.S., & TaylorL. (1986). The problems of definition and differentiation and the need for a classification schema. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 514–520.
3.
AlgozzineB., & YsseldykeJ. (1983). Learning disabilities as a subset of school failure: The oversophistication of a concept. Exceptional Children, 50, 242–246.
4.
American College Testing. (1985). American College Testing Assessment: Academic Tests.Iowa City, OH: Author.
5.
American Psychiatric Association (1982). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders-revised (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
ArkesH.R. (1981). Impediments to accurate clinical judgment and possible ways to minimize their impact. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3, 323–350.
8.
ArkesH.R. (1988, October). Use and disuse of decision rules. Paper presented at a meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, Richmond, VA.
9.
Association for Children and Adults with Learning Disabilities. (1989). ACLD, Inc. Position Paper:Eligibility for services for persons with specific learning disabilities.Pittsburgh, PA: Author.
10.
BrownF. (1979). The SOMPA: A new system of measuring potential abilities?School Psychology Digest, 8,37-46.
California Assembly Bill 77. California Education Code. Sections 7201178600, and 84856.
13.
ChalfantJ.C. (1984). Identifying Learning Disabled Students: Guidelines for Decision Making.Burlington, VT: Northeast Regional Resource Center, Trinity College.
14.
Chancellor's Office. (1986a). Eligibility Procedures and Criteria Manual.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
15.
Chancellor's Office. (1986b). Program Development and Management Manual.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community colleges.
16.
Chancellor's Office. (1987). Review of the eligibility model for learning disabilities.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
17.
Chancellor's Office. (1988a, January). Assessing adaptive behavior in LD eligibility model. [Meeting minutes]. Learning disabilities field advisory group meeting. Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
18.
Chancellor's Office. (1988b). Intake Screening and Eligibility Record.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
19.
ClarkF. (Ed.). (1981). Major research findings of the University of Kansas Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities. (Research Report No. 31.)Lawrence: University of Kansas, Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
20.
ConeT.E., & WilsonL.R. (1981). Quantifying a severe discrepancy: A critical analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4,359-371.
21.
CoulterW.A., & MorrowH.W. (1978). A contemporary conception of adaptive behavior within the scope of psychological assessment. In CoulterW.A., & MorrowH.W., (Eds.), Adaptive behavior: Concepts and measurements.New York: Grune & Stratton.
22.
CrankJ.N. (1985). Crucial learning and instructional skills for skill-deficient college students. (Report No. EC 202 455). Reston, VA: Department of Information Services, Council foir Exceptional Children, ERIC Clearing House on Handicapped and Gifted Children. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 293 256)
23.
DeshlerD.D.SchumakerJ.B., & LenzB.K. (1984a). Academic and cognitive interventions for LD adolescents: Part 1. Journal of the Learning Disabilities, 17,108-117.
24.
DeshlerD.D.SchumakerJ.B., & LenzB.K. (1984b). Academic and cognitive interventions for LD adolescents: Part II. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17,170-187.
25.
Educational Testing Service (1985). College Board Scholastic Aptitude Test.Princeton, NJ: Author.
26.
EdwardsW. (1977). How to use multiattribute utility measurement for social decision-making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-7 (5), 326–340.
27.
FornessS.R. (1981). Concepts of learning and behavior disorders: Implications for research and practice. Exceptional Children, 48,56-64.
28.
FriedrichD.FullerG.B., & DavisD. (1984). Learning disability: Fact and fiction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 205-209.
29.
FullerG.B., & GohD.S. (1981). Intelligence, achievement, and visual-motor performance among learning disabled and emotionally impaired children. Psychology in the Schools, 18, 261–268.
30.
GagneE. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning.Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.
31.
GajarA.H. (1980). Characteristics across exceptional categories: EMR, LD, and ED. Journal of Special Education, 14, 165-179.
32.
GerberM. (1988). Tolerance and technology of instruction: Implications for special education reform. Exceptional Children, 54,309-315.
33.
GoodmanJ.F. (1979). Is tissue the issue? A critique of SOMPA's models and tests. School Psychology Digest, 8, 47-62.
34.
GordonR.A. (1980). Labelling theory, mental retardation, and public policy: Larry P. and other developments since 1974. In GoveW.R. (Ed.), The labelling of deviance: Evaluating a perspective.Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
35.
Interagency Committee on Learning Disabilities. (1987). Learning Disabilities Report to the U.S. Congress.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
36.
JastakJ.F., & JastakS. (1978). Wide Range Achievement Test.Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.
37.
JorgensenM., & MellardD.F. (1988). Qualitative survey of programs for students evaluated for learning disabilities.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
38.
KanterM. (1986). Learning disabilities and academia. Forum, 3,17-20. (Available from Academic Senate, California Community Colleges, 1107 Ninth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814)
39.
KaufmanA.S. (1979). WISC-R research: Implications for interpretation. School Psychology Review, 8, 5–27.
40.
KavaleK., & FornessS. (1985). The science of learning disabilities.San Diego: College-Hill Press.
41.
KennyD.A., & AlbrightL. (1987). Accuracy in interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 3, 390–402.
42.
KeoghB.K. (1983). Classification, compliance, and confusion. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 25.
43.
KeoghB.K. (1987). Learning disabilities: In defense of a construct. Learning Disabilities Research, 3 (1), 4–9.
44.
KicklighterR.H.BaileyB.S., & RichmondB.O. (1980). A direct measure of adaptive behavior. School Psychology Review, 9,168–173.
45.
LarryP.RilesV., 343 F. Supp. 1306 (N.D. Cal. 1972)aff'd 502 F. 2d. 963 (9th Cir. 1974) (preliminary injunction); No. C-71-2270 RFP slip op. (Oct. 16,1979) (decision on merits).
46.
LeighJ. (1987). Adaptive behavior of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 557–562.
47.
LelandH.W. (1978). Theoretical considerations of adaptive behavior. In CoulterW.A.& MorrowH.W. (Eds.), Adaptive Behavior: Concepts and measurements.New York: Grune & Stratton.
48.
MatuszekP., & OaklandT. (1979). Factors influencing teachers' and psychologists' recommendations regarding special class placement. Journal of School Psychology, 17 (2), 116–125.
49.
MayerR.E. (1987). Educational psychology: A cognitive approach.Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.
50.
MellardD.F. (1986). Academic Attribute Survey.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
51.
MellardD.F. (1986). Academic Skills Assessment Battery.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
52.
MellardD.F. (1987). Educational issues surrounding severe discrepancy: A discussion. Learning Disabilities Research, 3 (1), 50–56.
53.
MellardD.F. (1988). Demographic Characteristics: Learning Disabilities Eligibility Model 1987-.1988 Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
54.
MellardD.F.CooleyS.PoggioJ.P., & DeshlerD.D. (1983). A comprehensive analysis of four discrepancy methods. (Research Monograph No. 15).Lawrence: The University of Kansas, Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
55.
MellardD.F., & DeshlerD.D. (1984). Modeling the condition of learning disabilities on postsecondary populations. Educational Psychologist, 19, 188–197.
56.
MellardD.F., & HallidayK. (1988). Training materials for the California community colleges' learning disabilities eligibility model.Sacramento, CA: Chancellor's Office, Disabled Students Programs and Services, California Community Colleges.
57.
MercerJ. (1979). System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment.New York: Psychological Corporation.
58.
MercerC.D.HughesC., & MercerA.R. (1985). Learning disabilities definitions used by state education agencies. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8,45-55.
59.
OaklandT. (1979). Research on the adaptive behavior inventory for children and the estimated learning potential. School Psychology Digest, 8,63-70.
60.
OstertagB.BakerR.HowardR., & BestL. (1982). Learning disability programs in California community colleges. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 535–538.
61.
PattonJ., & PollowayE. (1982). Learning disabilities: The adult years. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, 79-88.
62.
PutnamM.L. (1984). Postsecondary education for learning disabled students: A review of the literature. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 68–75.
63.
ReschlyD.J.KicklighterR., & McKeeP. (1988). Recent placement litigation part II, minority EMR overrepresentation: Comparison of Larry P (1979,1984,1986) with Marshall (1984,1985) and S-1 (1986). School Psychology Review, 17, 22-38.
64.
ReynoldsC.R. (1984-1985). Critical measurement issues in learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 18, 451-476.
65.
RourkeB. R (1985). Neuropsychology of learning disabilities: Essentials of subtype analysis.New York: Guilford Press.
66.
SabatinoD.A., & MillerT.L. (1980). The dilemma of diagnosis in learning disabilities: Problems and potential directions. Psychology in the Schools, 17,76-86.
67.
SattlerJ. (1988a). Assessment of Children.San Diego: Author.
68.
SattlerJ. (1988b). Larry P extension challenged in court. National Association of School Psychologists' Communique, 17 (1), 10.
69.
SentG.M. (1986). LD Research in sociological and scientific perspective. In TorgesonJ.K., & BY. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and Educational Perspectives on Learning Disabilities.Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
70.
ShaywitzS.E., & ShawR. (1988). The admissions process: An approach to selecting learning disabled students at the most selective colleges. Learning Disabilities Focus, 3,81-86.
71.
Shiro-GeistC., & McGrathC. (1983). Psychosocial aspects of the adult learning disabled person in the world of work: A vocational rehabilitation perspective. Rehabilitation Literature, 44,210-213.
StalcupR.J., & FreemanM.A. (1980). Serving the learning disabled student in the community college. Journal of Community College Frontiers, 8 (3), 36–38.
74.
StanovichK.E. (1986). Cognitive processes and the reading problems of learning disabled children: Evaluating the assumption of specificity. In TorgesonJ.K. & BY. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities.New York: Academic Press.
75.
Title 5 California Code of Regulations. Section 56000–56088.
76.
VogelS.A. (1986). Levels and patterns of intellectual functioning among LD college students: Clinical and educational implications. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 71–79.
77.
WinterfeldtD. von, & Griffin, G. (1982). Technical note on defining optimal cutoff points for classifying learning disability. Unpublished manuscript. University of Southern California, Social Science Research Institute, Los Angeles.
WellerC, & StrawserS. (1987). Adaptive behavior of subtypes of learning disabled individuals. Journal of Special Education, 21 (1), 101–115.
80.
WellerC., & StrawserS. (1980). Detecting learning disabilities in the college-age student. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 87–89.
81.
WellerC.StrawserS., & BuchananM. (1985). Adaptive behavior: Designator of a continuum of severity of learning disabled individuals. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 200-204.
YsseldykeJ.E.AlgozzineB.ReganR., & McGueM. (1981). The influence of test scores and naturally-occurring pupil characteristics on psychoeducational decision making with children. Journal of School Psychology, 19,167-177.
