Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Learning Disabilities

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, (IDEA), the term specific learning disability is defined as a specific disorder in one or more areas of psychological processes involved in understanding and using spoken or written language, which results in deficits in the ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematics. Specific learning disability, also referred to as specific learning disorder, does not include learning problems that are attributable to sensory disorders, emotional disturbance, intellectual disabilities, or cultural or economic disadvantages. Today, learning disabilities account for as much as 50% of all students receiving special education. This entry first discusses the causes of and identification of learning disabilities. It then describes the characteristics of students with learning disabilities and types of learning disabilities. Finally, it looks at instructional strategies that are thought to be effective with students with learning disabilities.

Although a single cause of a learning disability is not known, the possible causes include physiological factors (e.g., heredity, brain injury, and biochemical imbalance) and environmental factors (e.g., poor nutrition and exposure to environmental toxins, such as lead). Students with learning disabilities are a heterogeneous group, meaning that they may have problems in reading, mathematics, written language, or oral language.

Identification of Learning Disabilities

IQ-Achievement Discrepancy

Traditionally, learning disabilities are identified based on the discrepancies between a composite measure of IQ and academic achievement, such as mathematics achievement. That is, if students show at least a two standard deviation difference between their intelligence, indexed by an IQ test, and academic ability, indexed by an academic achievement test, the students are identified as having a learning disability. Thus, a student who exhibits unexpected learning difficulties as indicated by academic achievement far below what would be expected by the IQ score (e.g., average IQ score of 100 and below-average reading achievement score of 70) would be identified as having a learning disability. On the other hand, a student with a below-average IQ score of 85 and a below-average mathematics achievement score of 80 would not be identified as having a learning disability because there is not a large enough discrepancy.

The IQ-achievement discrepancy model has been often criticized for being a wait-to-fail model. That is, students are not identified as having learning disabilities until there are substantial differences between their IQ and achievement scores, thereby delaying early intervention opportunities. This model also does not assess or inform the quality of instruction received by students, thereby not allowing discrimination between those who are low achievers as a result of poor instruction and those with true learning disabilities.

Response to Intervention

As an alternative to the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, response to intervention is a three-tier approach to providing high-quality, research validation instruction with ongoing progress monitoring and data-based decision making. In general, all students are given a universal screening measure at the beginning of the year to identify those who are at risk. In Tier 1, teachers provide evidence-based instruction in the general education, whole-class setting and monitor student progress on a weekly basis. Students who do not make adequate progress (generally around 20–30% of students) move to the more intensive level. In Tier 2, students receive additional support, such as targeted interventions, in a small-group setting (three to five students) from either the general classroom teacher or other educational personnel, such as a reading specialist, special education teacher, or tutor. Student progress is monitored continuously throughout. Those who make adequate progress may return to Tier 1 or continue to receive Tier 2 instruction, and those who still do not make sufficient progress in Tier 2 move to the most intensive level (5–10% of students).

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading