Unlike other special education categories defined in U.S. law (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), the definition of specific learning disability (SLD) has not changed since first proposed in 1968. Thus, although the operational definition of SLD has responded to new knowledge and understanding about the construct, the formal definition has remained static for 40 years, creating a schism between theory and practice. Using concepts gleaned from the scientific study of formal and operational definitions as well as the history of another special education category (i.e., mental retardation), in this article we demonstrate why change in the SLD definition is necessary. Finally, we propose a change in the SLD definition in federal regulations to redress the disconnect between theory and practice and restore integrity to the SLD field.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Association on Intellectual Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD). (2007). Frequently asked questions on intellectual disability and the AAIDD definition. Retrieved June 3, 2008, from http://www.aamr.org/Policies/faq_intellectual_disability.shtml
2.
AmesL. B. (1977). Learning disabilities: Time to check our roadmap?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10, 328–330.
3.
Aristotle. (1989). Topica (E.S. Forster, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published circa 350 B.C.E.)
4.
BatemanB. (1965). An educator's view of a diagnostic approach to learning disorders. In HellmuthJ. (Ed.), Learning Disorders (Vol. 1, pp. 219–239). Seattle, WA: Special Child Populations.
5.
BenjaminA. C. (1955). Operationalism. Springfield, IL: C.C. Thomas.
6.
BergmannG. (1961). Sense and nonsense in operation. In FrankP. G. (Ed.), The validation of scientific theories (pp. 45–56). New York: Collier.
7.
BridgmanP. W. (1927). The logic of modern physics. New York: Macmillan.
8.
BoringE. G. (1945). The use of operational definition in science. Psychological Review, 52, 243–245.
9.
Borthwick-DuffyS. (1994). Review of 1992 AAMR manual. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 98, 541–544.
10.
CarrollL. (1984a). Alice's adventures in Wonderland. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. (Original work published in 1866)
11.
CarrollL. (1984b). Through the looking glass, and what Alice found there. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. (Original work published in 1872)
12.
CarnapR. (1956). The methodological character of theoretical concepts. In FeiglH.ScrivenM. (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science and the concepts of psychology and psychoanalysis (Vol. 1, pp. 38–76). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
13.
ClausenJ. A. (1967). Mental deficiency: Development of a concept. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 71, 727–745.
14.
ClausenJ. A. (1972a). Quo vadis, AAMD?Journal of Special Education, 6, 51–61.
15.
ClausenJ. A. (1972b). The continuing problem of defining mental deficiency. Journal of Special Education, 6, 97–106.
16.
Congressional Record (Daily Edition). (1975, July 29). H 7755.
17.
CruickshankW. M. (1976). William M. Cruikshank. In KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Teaching children with learning disabilities: Personal perspectives (pp. 94–127). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
18.
FlanaganD. P.OrtizS. O.AlfonsoV. C.MascoloJ. T. (2002). The achievement test desk reference (ATDR): Comprehensive assessment and learning disabilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
19.
GarfieldS. L.WittsonC. (1960). Some reactions to the revised “Manual on Terminology and Classification in Mental Retardation.”American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 64, 951–953.
20.
GreenC. (1992). Of immortal mythological beasts: Operationism in psychology. Theory and Psychology, 2, 291–320.
21.
GreenspanS. (1997). Dead manual walking? Why the 1992 AAMR definition needs redoing. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 32, 179–190.
22.
GreshamF. M.MacMillanD. L.SipersteinG. N. (1995). Critical analysis of the 1992 AAMR definition: Implications for school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 10, 1–19.
23.
GrossmanH. J. (Ed.). (1973). Manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.
24.
GrossmanH. J. (Ed.). (1977). Manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation (rev. ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.
25.
GrossmanH. J. (Ed.). (1983). Classification in mental retardation (rev. ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.
26.
HammillD. D. (1990). On defining learning disabilities: An emerging consensus. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 74–84.
27.
HeberR. F. (1959). A manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 64 (Monograph supplement).
28.
HeberR. F. (1961). Modification in the manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 65, 490–500.
29.
HempelC. G. (1952). Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science (International encyclopedia of unified science, Vol. II, No. 7). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
HempelC. G. (1961). A logical appraisal of operationism. In FrankP. G. (Ed.), The validation of scientific theories (pp. 56–69). New York: Collier.
31.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA), Pub. L. No. 108–446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004), [Amending 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.].
32.
Interagency Committee on Learning Disabilities (ICLD). (1987). Learning disabilities — A report to the U.S. Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
33.
JacobsonJ. W.MulickJ. A. (1992). A new definition of mental retardation or a new definition of practice?Psychology in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 18, 9–14.
KantI. (1998). Critique of pure reason (P. Guyer & A. Wood, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1781)
36.
KaplanA. (1964). The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. San Francisco: Chandler.
37.
KassC. E. (1969). Introduction to learning disabilities. Seminars in Psychiatry, 1969, 1, 240–244.
38.
KavaleK. A. (2002). Discrepancy models in identification of learning disability. In BradleyR.DanielsonL.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 369–426). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
39.
KavaleK. A.FornessS. R. (1985). The science of learning disabilities. San Diego, CA: College Hill Press.
40.
KavaleK. A.FornessS. R. (1995). The nature of learning disabilities: Critical elements of diagnosis and classification. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41.
KavaleK. A.FornessS. R. (2000). What definitions of learning disability say and don't say: A critical analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 239–256.
42.
KavaleK. A.KauffmanJ. M.BachmeierR. J.LeFeverG. B. (2008). Response-to-intervention: Separating the rhetoric of self-congratulation from the reality of specific learning disability identification. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(3), 135–150.
43.
KavaleK. A.NyeC. (1985–86). Parameters of learning disabilities in achievement, linguistic, neuropsychological, and social/behavioral domains. Journal of Special Education, 19, 443–458.
44.
KerlingerF. N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed.) New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
45.
KirkS. A. (1976). Samuel A. Kirk. In KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Teaching children with learning disabilities: Personal perspectives (pp. 238–269). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
46.
LeaheyT. (1980). The myth of operationism. The Journal of Mind & Behavior, 1, 131–140.
47.
LuckassonR.Borthwick-DuffyS.BuntinxW.CoulterD.CraigE.ReeveA. (2002). Mental retardation: Definition, classification, and systems of supports (10th ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
48.
LuckassonR.CoulterD.PollowayE.ReissS.SchalockR.SnellM.SpitalnikD.StarkJ. (1992). Mental retardation: Definition, classification, and systems of support (9th ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
49.
LuckassonR.ReeveA. (2001). Naming, defining, and classifying in mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 39, 47–52.
50.
MacMillanD. L.GreshamF. M.SipersteinG. N. (1993). Conceptual and psychometric concerns over the 1992 AAMR definition of mental retardation. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 98, 325–335.
51.
McCarthyJ. M. (1971). Learning disabilities: Where have we been? Where are we going? In HammillD.BartelN. (Eds.), Educational perspectives in learning disabilities (pp. 10–19). New York: Wiley.
52.
McGradyH. J. (1980). Communication disorders and specific learning disabilities. In Van HattumR. J. (Ed.), Communication disorders: An introduction. New York: Macmillan.
53.
MercerC.HallahanD. (2002). Learning disabilities: Historical perspectives. In BradleyR.DanielsonL.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 1–65). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
National Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children (NACHC). (1968). First annual report, special education for handicapped children. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
56.
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (1988). [Letter to NJCLD Member Organizations] Washington DC: Author.
57.
RantalaV. (1977). Aspects of definability. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
58.
RobinsonR. (1954). Definition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
59.
SenfG. M. (1977). A perspective on the definition of LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10, 537–539.
60.
ShawS. F.CullenJ. P.McGuireJ. M.BrinkerhoffL. C. (1995). Operationalizing a definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 586–697.
61.
SmithJ. D.PollowayE. A. (1979). Learning disabilities: Individual needs or categorical concerns?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 525–528.
62.
SpinozaB. (1949). Ethics proceeded by on the improvement of understanding (J. Gutman, Ed. and Trans.). New York: Hafner.
63.
StevensS. S. (1935). The operational definition of psychological concepts. Psychological Review, 42, 517–552.
64.
SwansonH. L.ChristieL. (1994). Implicit notions about learning disabilities: Some directions for definitions. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 244–254.
65.
TuckerJ. S.StevensL. J.YsseldykeJ. E. (1983). Learning disabilities: The experts speak out. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 6–14.
66.
U.S. Office of Education (USOE). (1977). Assistance to states for education of handicapped children: Procedures for evaluating specific learning disabilities. Federal Register, 42(250), 65082–65085.
67.
VaughnS.FuchsL. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137–146.
68.
WechslerD. (1958). The measurement and appraisal of adult intelligence. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
69.
WiederholtJ. L. (1974). Historical perspectives on the education of the learning disabled. In MannL.SabatinoD. (Eds.), The second review of special education (pp. 103–152). Philadelphia: JSE Press.
70.
WillisJ. O.DumontR. (2006). And never the twain shall meet: Can response to intervention and cognitive assessment be reconciled?Psychology in the Schools, 43, 901–908.
