Many descriptions of subjects in research reports about learning disabled persons limit meaningful interpretation of the results because of their vagueness and inconsistency. Researchers are hampered in replicating or extending the research, and practitioners are uncertain about the application of the reported findings. In an effort to establish more universal standards in this area, the Council for Learning Disabilities' (CLD) Research Committee proposes a set of guidelines to be used for subject descriptions in LD research reports.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ConeT.E.WilsonL.R.Quantifying a severe discrepancy: A critical analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1981, 4, 359–371.
2.
HarberJ.R.Learning disability research: How far have we progressed?Learning Disability Quarterly, 1981, 4, 372–381. (a)
3.
HarberJ.R.Critical evaluation of published research: Some guidelines. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1981, 4, 260–270. (b)
4.
KavaleK.NyeD.Identification criteria for learning disabilities: A survey of the research literature. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1981, 4, 383–388.
5.
KeoghB.K.Major-KingsleyS.Omori-GordonH.ReidH.P.UCLA marker variable project. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1982.
LyonR.Subgroups of learning disabled readers: Clinical and empirical identification. In MyklebustH. (Ed.), Progress in learning disabilities (Vol. 5). New York: Grune and Stratton, 1982.)
8.
LyonR.StewardN.FreedmanD.Neuropsychological characteristics of empirically derived subgroups of learning disabled readers. Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, 1982, 4 (4), 343–365.
9.
LyonR.WatsonB.Empirically derived subgroups of learning disabled readers: Diagnostic characteristics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1981, 14 (5), 256–261.
10.
OlsonJ.L.MealorD.J.Learning disabilities identification: Do researchers have the answer?Learning Disability Quarterly, 1981, 4, 389–392.
State Department of Iowa, Department of Public Instruction, Special Education Division. The identification of pupils with learning disabilities, 1981.
13.
YsseldykeJ.E.AlgozzineB.ShinnM.R.McGueM.Similarities and differences between low achievers and students classified learning disabled. The Journal of Special Education, 1982, 16, 73–85.
