Twenty-five years ago, the author contributed a historical review of evidence on the foreign language (FL) learning problems of low-achieving and learning disabled (LD) students. Educators had proposed a new disability, FL learning disability, and developed policies permitting LD students to substitute courses or waive the FL requirement. The introduction of this new disability was premature because empirical evidence found no relationship between FL learning problems and LDs. Even so, several misguided assumptions about a unique disability for FL learning and a special relationship between FL learning problems and LDs persisted, and an LD diagnosis became the de facto criterion for FL course substitution/waiver policies. In this updated review, these assumptions and evidence falsifying them are examined. Cultural reasons for the assumptions about FL learning and LDs and the adoption of course substitution policies are proposed. The author concludes with recommendations for policymakers.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.).
4.
CarrollJ. (1990). Cognitive abilities in foreign language aptitude: Then and now. In ParryT.StansfieldC. (Eds.), Language aptitude reconsidered (pp. 11–29). Prentice Hall.
5.
CarrollJ.SaponS. (1959, 2000). Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT): Manual. Psychological Corporation. (Original work published 1959 by Psychological Corporation).
6.
CumminsJ. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49, 222–251. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543049002222
DowneyD.SnyderL. (2000). College students with LLD: The phonological core as risk for failure in foreign language classes. Topics in Language Disorders, 21(1), 82–92.
11.
DufvaM.VoetenM. (1999). Native language literacy and phonological memory as prerequisites for learning English as a foreign language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20(3), 329–348. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271649900301X
12.
FletcherJ.MiciakJ. (2017). Comprehensive cognitive assessments are not necessary for the identification and treatment of learning disabilities. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 32(1), 2–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw103
13.
FreedB. (1987). Exemptions from the foreign language requirement: A review of recent literature, problems, and policy. ADFL Bulletin, 18(2), 13–17.
GajarA. (1987). Foreign language learning disabilities: The identification of predictive and diagnostic variables. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(6), 327–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948702000604
16.
GanschowL.SparksR.JavorskyJ. (1998). Foreign language learning difficulties: An historical perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(3), 248–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949803100304
17.
GanschowL.SparksR.JavorskyJ.PohlmanJ.Bishop-MarburyA. (1991). Identifying native language difficulties among foreign language learners in college: A “foreign” language learning disability?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24(9), 530–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949102400905
18.
GardnerR.LambertW. (1965). Language aptitude, intelligence, and second-language achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 56(4), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022400
19.
GassS.Van GorpK.WinkeP. (2019). Using different carrots: How incentivization affects proficiency testing outcomes. Foreign Language Annals, 52(2), 216–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12389
20.
GoodmanJ.FreedB.McMannusW. (1988). The measurement of foreign language learning disabilities in college students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(7), 429–430.
21.
GrünkeM.CavendishW. (2016). Learning disabilities around the globe: Making sense of the heterogeneity of the different viewpoints. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 14(1), 1–8.
22.
Guckenberger et al. v. Trustees of Boston University, et al., 974 F. Supp. 106 (D. Mass. 1996, 1997, 1998).
HarrisonA.LovettB.KeiserS.ArmstrongI. (2019). Learning disability documentation submitted by osteopathic medical students. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 28, 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2019.1627358
25.
HartshorneJ.TenenbaumJ.PinkerS. (2018). A critical period for second language acquisition: Evidence from 2/3 million English speakers. Cognition, 177, 262–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.007
Kahn-HorwitzJ.ShimronJ.SparksR. (2006). Weak and strong novice readers of English as a foreign language: Effects of first language and socioeconomic status. Annals of Dyslexia, 56(1), 161–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-006-0007-1
30.
Kahn-HorwitzJ.SparksR.GoldsteinZ. (2012). English as a foreign language spelling development: A longitudinal study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33(2), 343–363. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716411000397
31.
KavaleK.FornessS. (1998). The politics of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21(4), 245–273. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511
32.
KeeneyL.SmithN. (1984). Foreign language modifications for disabled students—The campus response. AHSSPPE Bulletin, 2(1), 4–5.
33.
KormosJ. (2017). The second language learning processes of students with specific learning difficulties. Routledge.
34.
KormosJ. (2020). Specific learning difficulties in second language learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 53(2), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000442
35.
LervågA.AukrustV. (2010). Vocabulary knowledge is a critical determinant of the difference in reading comprehension between first and second language learners. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 612–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02185.x
36.
Melby-LervågM.LervågA. (2011). Cross-linguistic transfer of oral language, decoding, phonological awareness and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis of the correlational evidence. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(1), 114–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01477.x
37.
MeschyanG.HernandezA. (2002). Is native-language decoding skill related to second-language learning?Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.14
38.
MiciakJ.FletcherJ.StuebingK.VaughnS.TolarT. (2014). Patterns of cognitive strengths and weaknesses: Identification rates, agreement, and validity for learning disabilities identification. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000037
39.
MorfidiE.Van Der LeijA.De JongP. F.ScheltingaF.BekebredeJ. (2007). Reading in two orthographies: A cross-linguistic study of Dutch average and poor readers who learn English as a second language. Reading and Writing, 20, 753–784.
40.
OfieshN. (2007). Math, science, and foreign language: Evidence-based accommodation decision making at the postsecondary level. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22, 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00252.x
41.
PluckroseH.LindsayJ. (2020). Cynical theories: How activist scholarship made everything about race, gender, and identity—And why this harms everybody. Pitchstone Publishing.
42.
PompianN.ThumC. (1988). Dyslexic/learning disabled students at Dartmouth College. Annals of Dyslexia, 38(1), 276–284.
43.
ReedD.StansfieldC. (2004). Using the Modern Language Aptitude Test to identify a foreign language learning disability: Is it ethical?Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2004.9671783
44.
ShawR. (1999). The case for course substitutions as a reasonable accommodation for students with foreign language learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 320–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200406
45.
SimonC. (2000). Dyslexia and learning a foreign language: A personal experience. Annals of Dyslexia, 50, 155–187.
46.
SparksR. (1995). Examining the linguistic coding differences hypothesis to explain individual differences in foreign language learning. Annals of Dyslexia, 45(1), 187–214.
47.
SparksR. (2001). Foreign language learning problems of students classified as learning disabled and non-learning disabled: Is there a difference?Topics in Language Disorders, 21, 38–54.
SparksR. (2016). Myths about foreign language learning and learning disabilities. Foreign Language Annals, 49(2), 252–270. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12196
51.
SparksR. (2022a). Exploring L1-L2 relationships: The impact of individual differences. Multilingual Matters.
52.
SparksR. (2022b). Where does language aptitude come from? Redux. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 22, 19–40.
53.
SparksR.AlamerA. (2022). Long-term impacts of L1 language skills on L2 anxiety: The mediating role of language aptitude and L2 achievement. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221104392
54.
SparksR.ArtzerM.JavorskyJ.PattonJ.GanschowL.MillerK.HordubayD. (1998). Students classified as learning disabled (LD) and non-learning disabled students: Two comparison studies of native language skill, foreign language aptitude, and foreign language proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 31, 531–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1998.tb00598.x
55.
SparksR.GanschowL. (1995). A strong inference approach to causal factors in foreign language learning: A response to MacIntyre. The Modern Language Journal, 79(2), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05436.x
56.
SparksR.GanschowL. (1999). The Boston University lawsuit: Introduction to the special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(4), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200402
57.
SparksR.GanschowL.FluhartyK.LittleS. (1996). An exploratory study on the effects of Latin on the native language skills and foreign language aptitude of students with and without learning disabilities. Classical Journal, 91, 165–184.
58.
SparksR.GanschowL.JavorskyJ.PohlmanJ.PattonJ. (1992a). Identifying native language deficits in high and low risk foreign language learners in high school. Foreign Language Annals, 25, 403–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1992.tb01121.x
59.
SparksR.GanschowL.JavorskyJ.PohlmanJ.PattonJ. (1992b). Test comparisons among hi-risk, low-risk, and learning disabled students enrolled in foreign language courses. Modern Language Journal, 76, 142–159. https://doi.org/10.2307/329768
60.
SparksR.GanschowL.PohlmanJ. (1989). Linguistic coding deficits in foreign language learners. Annals of Dyslexia, 39, 79–97.
61.
SparksR.HumbachN.JavorskyJ. (2008). Comparing high and low achieving, LD, and ADHD foreign language learners: Individual and longitudinal differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.07.003
62.
SparksR.JavorskyJ. (1999). Students classified as learning disabled and the college foreign language requirement: Replication and comparison studies. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 329–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200407
63.
SparksR.JavorskyJ.GanschowL. (2005). Should the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) be used to determine course substitutions for and waivers of the foreign language requirement?Foreign Language Annals, 38, 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02485.x
64.
SparksR.JavorskyJ.PhilipsL. (2004). College students classified with ADHD and the foreign language requirement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370020701
65.
SparksR.JavorskyJ.PhilipsL. (2005). Comparison of the performance of college students classified as ADHD, LD, and LD/ADHD in foreign language courses. Language Learning, 55, 151–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00292.x
66.
SparksR.LovettB. (2009). Objective criteria for classification of postsecondary students as learning disabled: Effects on prevalence rates and group characteristics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 230–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409338746
67.
SparksR.LuebbersJ.CastañedaM. (2017). How well do U.S. high school students achieve in Spanish when compared to native Spanish speakers?Foreign Language Annals, 50(2), 339–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12268
68.
SparksR.LuebbersJ.CastenadaM.PattonJ. (2018). U.S. high school students and foreign language reading anxiety: Déjà vu all over again all over again. Modern Language Journal, 102(3), 533–556. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12504
69.
SparksR.PattonJ.LuebbersJ. (2019). Individual differences in L2 achievement mirror individual differences in L1 skills and L2 aptitude: Crosslinguistic transfer of L1 to L2 skills. Foreign Language Annals, 52(2), 255–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12390
70.
SparksR.PhilipsL.GanschowL. (1996). Students classified as learning disabled and the college foreign language requirement: A case study of one university. In Liskin-GasparroJ. (Ed.), Patterns and policies: The changing demographics of foreign language instruction (pp. 123–159). Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
71.
SparksR.PhilipsL.GanschowL.JavorskyJ. (1999a). Comparison of students classified as learning disabled who petitioned for or fulfilled the college foreign language requirement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 553–565. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200607
72.
SparksR.PhilipsL.GanschowL.JavorskyJ. (1999b). Students classified as learning disabled and the college foreign language requirement: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 566–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200608
73.
SparksR.PhilipsL.JavorskyJ. (2002). Students classified as LD who received course substitutions for the foreign language requirement: A replication study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 482–499538. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194020350060101
74.
SparksR.PhilipsL.JavorskyJ. (2003). Students classified as LD who petitioned for or fulfilled the college foreign language requirement—Are they different? A replication study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194030360040601
75.
StanovichK. (2005). The future of a mistake: Will discrepancy measurement make the learning disabilities field a pseudoscience?Learning Disability Quarterly, 28, 103–106. https://doi.org/10.2307/1593604
76.
StansfieldC.ReedD. (2019). The MLAT at 60 years. In WenZ. E.SkehanP.BiedrońA.LiS.SparksR. L. (Eds.), Language aptitude: Advancing theory, testing, research, and practice (pp. 15–32). Routledge.
StuebingK.FletcherJ.LeDouxJ.LyonG.ShaywitzS.ShaywitzB. (2002). Validity of IQ-discrepancy classifications of reading disabilities: A meta-analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 469–518. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312039002469
79.
SudinaE.PlonskyL. (2021). Academic perseverance in foreign language learning: An investigation of language-specific grit and its conceptual correlates. Modern Language Journal, 105, 829–851. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12738
WeisR.BittnerS. (2022). College students’ access to academic accommodations over time: Evidence of a Matthew effect in higher education. Psychological Injury and Law, 15, 236–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09429-7
82.
WeisR.EriksonC.TillC. (2016). When average is not good enough: Students with learning disabilities at selective, private colleges. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(6), 684–700. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219416646706
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
