I have been having a great conversation with a woman who has a personal interest in special education.We have been communicating via email messages. She has given me permission to post the ongoing conversation here.
She was asking a question that is unrelated to a post, so I am just going to put it in a response here. The next few posts will be my response to her and her responses to mine. Hopefully you will get the gist!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
was looking at the first few posts in your blog, and thought I wanted to get your opinion on something. So here goes: I started taking an LD course from a university in September, for my BA. I ended up dropping out, because it was just too much work and stress with their tight schedule, but also because I had a hard time with what the course materials were saying. The course was called "Learning Disabilities", but right in the first unit they were saying that LD is defined, very narrowly, as a condition where there is a gap between potential and achievement. It seems to be entirely dependent on IQ tests, and a kid who simply has trouble learning to read & write, but hasn't got a high IQ, doesn't qualify as "learning disabled". What I'm wondering is: what about kids who just plain old have trouble with learning, but don't have the fancy IQ scores to qualify for the label? If they aren't "learning disabled", what are they? And does anyone care, and try to figure out how to teach them, and will that teaching actually be any different from that for kids with the qualified label?
A
Hi A,
Your questions are really on point, and the content of your course reiterates what I am talking about in my posts. There are such different levels of information floating around. The discrepancy model, as I understand it stipulates that in order to qualify for funding in the public school system, (and at the same time, an official label) that there must be a gap of at least two standard deviations between the learner's intellectual functioning ( Level C testing to be done by qualified school psychologists or registered psychologists) and their academic functioning, as decided in level B academic testing. ( for example, individual achievement tests, which are supposed to be done by qualified special ed teachers).
The latest research is moving very quickly away from this idea- it is very possible to have dyslexia and not have the two standard deviations. FYI, two deviations is 30 points in Standard Score terms, which is ALOT.
The more recent research focuses on phonological problems- this is more important for deciding on the label of severe learning disabled. Theoretically, even children with low intelligence can still be dyslexic. We are realizing that it is not as simple as saying, "There. He's dyslexic." We recognize that like autism, dyslexia occurs on a continuum of severity, and frequently comes "packaged" with other problems, like ADHD, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Oppositional Defiant disorder, to name a few.
I will include the latest definition in research, below. I have read that we are now moving towards a model that would state that if a learner is present, exposed to adequate instruction, and is paying attention, he should learn. If not, then we would suspect learning disabilities. Basically, if a brain is organized for learning to read, it will happen with normal effort and exposure. If it is not, then a more intensive kind of instruction is necessary. It is my own belief that we can see this by age 6 or 7. There is no need to wait. As the school boards won't recognize the term learning disability unless it has been diagnosed by a professional, it seems it does matter if they have the label only if you want funding in the public system. I work with lots of learners that have the same sort of profile as those labeled, and I work with them as though they are, and they get good results. I have a battery of tests that bring me to the same conclusions and I usually know when someone has dyslexia without an IQ test. After 25 years it's not hard for me to spot, when I put the testing together with a history, interviews with teachers, and a review of report cards.
Schools still seem to be operating from the discrepancy model even though research is moving away from it. However, if your job is to distribute too little funds for too many learners, the discrepancy model conserves funds! (that probably covers most school districts!)
-“Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and or fluent word recognition and poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience that can impede growth of vocabulary and background knowledge.” Lyon, Shaywitz, and Shaywitz, 2003
And the short version:
“An unexpected inability to learn to read despite adequate intelligence, motivation and instruction.”
Thanks for visiting the blog.
Post a Comment