Marker Variables: A Search for Comparability and Generalizability in the Field of Learning Disabilities

1978 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 5-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara K. Keogh ◽  
Susan M. Major ◽  
Helen Patricia Reid ◽  
Patricia Gándara ◽  
Hisako Omori
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Disabled Students ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Cooperative Approach ◽  
Program Effects ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Conducting Research ◽  
Marker Variables

The learning disability field has been plagued by unclear definitional criteria resulting in inconsistencies and confusion regarding research findings and program effects. The concept of marker variables as presented by Keogh et al. may be a means of guiding research and comparing research results. Marker variables may be thought of as a set of core variables which are collected in common by those conducting research within a given field. The identification and adoption of a systematic, cooperative approach to the documentation of research and intervention with learning disabled students would aid in the comparability and generalizability of the findings. This article discusses the concept of marker variables as they are being applied to the learning disability field in the UCLA Marker Variable Project.

Learning Disabilities and the Professional Educator

1978 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Larsen
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
Educational Practice ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Educational Needs ◽  
Professional Standards ◽  
Ethical Practice ◽  
Disabled Students ◽  
Professional Educator

Dr. Stephen Larsen, President of D.C.L.D., has identified four central issues in the learning disability field as they relate to the educator: 1) determining the true parameters of the learning disabilities field; 2) monitoring the proliferation of tests and materials presumed relevant to educational practice; 3) insuring that learning disabled students are provided instructional opportunities in accordance with their educational needs and civil rights; and 4) determining professional standards that are necessary for competent and ethical practice. The professional educator is seen as the central person in the resolution of these issues as well as the central professional in planning, conducting, and/or coordinating the overall diagnostic and remedial efforts used with the learning disabled individual.

Learning Disability Research: How Far Have We Progressed?

1981 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 372-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean R. Harber
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Experimental Learning ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
And Control ◽  
Disability Research

This article presents an analysis of the 229 research reports which have appeared in two major learning disability journals since 1978. Findings indicate that (1) the vast majority of these studies are quasi-experimental in nature; (2) control of extraneous variables (e.g., intelligence) was not appropriately demonstrated in many studies; (3) comparability between experimental and control groups was not adequately established in numerous reports; (4) fewer than half of the studies utilized subjects classified as learning disabled; (5) in more than two-fifths of the studies involving learning disabled subjects, the criteria for such classification were not provided; (6) studies which did operationally define learning disabilities utilized a wide range of criteria. The ethical limitations of conducting experimental learning disability research are discussed and suggestions for enhancing such research are offered. Finally, the importance of focusing research efforts on homogeneous populations (e.g., the severely learning disabled) is illustrated.

Strategy Training: A Need for Clarification

1987 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie U. deBettencourt
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Training Needs ◽  
Strategy Training ◽  
Disabled Children ◽  
Disabled Students ◽  
Training Interventions ◽  
Precise Understanding

On the basis of research in the field of learning disabilities it has been concluded that many learning disabled students can be characterized as strategy-deficient, inactive learners. However, a precise understanding of strategy training procedures is frequently obscured by researchers. The term “strategy training” needs to be defined more clearly so that the approaches are understood more universally. In this article I discuss the rationale for strategy training interventions with learning disabled children, describe three approaches that are currently being studied in the field, and discuss the issues that arise.

Reliability of Standardized Assessment Instruments When Used with Learning Disabled Children

1978 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 23-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monte D. Smith ◽  
Carl M. Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disability ◽  
Basic Assumption ◽  
Field Work ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Standardized Assessment ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Disabled Children ◽  
Disabled Students ◽  
Normative Population ◽  
Affective Assessment

Many practitioners and researchers in the learning disability field work under the basic assumption that the various assessment instruments commonly used with learning disabled populations exhibit the same reliability when used with learning disabled students as when used with a more normative population. The purpose of this study was to test this assumption by examining the reliabilities of several tests of intellectual, academic, and affective assessment when administered to learning disabled students.

Discrepancy and Severity in the Learning Disabled: A Consolidated Perspective

1980 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Weller
Keyword(s):  
Social Skills ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Disabled Students ◽  
Severity Level ◽  
Socialization Skills

This paper presents a consolidated criteria model which can be used to identify the discrepancy and severity level of learning disabled students. Academic and socialization skills are evaluated in light of seven considerations: 1) the problem's effect on other abilities, 2) academic and socialization problem correspondence, 3) alteration of future life needs, 4) remediation versus compensation, 5) effect on social skills with peers and adults, 6) strengths and weaknesses, and 7) avoidance of problem areas. The seven criteria are applied to a mild, moderate, and severe learning disability grouping. Research indicating the need for continued investigation into the use of the model is reported. Recommendations for research and educational uses of the model are also presented.

Performance of Students with Learning Disabilities on Validity Indexes of the Perception of Ability Scale for Students

1992 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Chapman ◽  
Frederic J. Boersma
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Learning Problems ◽  
Response Patterns ◽  
Students With Learning Disabilities ◽  
Regular Form ◽  
Disabled Students ◽  
Normally Achieving ◽  
Scale Scores ◽  
Response Biases

The present study examined the performance of 78 students with learning disabilities and 71 normally achieving students in regular Form 1 (Grade 6) classes on three validity indexes of the Perception of Ability Scale for Students, a measure of academic self-concept. The three indexes assess consistency of responding, negative or positive response biases, and misrepresentation of self-perceptions in terms of unrealistic perceptions of perfection in school. Analysis showed that learning disabled students obtained significantly lower Full Scale scores than the normal students, but no significant differences appeared on the three validity indexes. Users of the test can be confident that learning disabled students respond to items in as valid a manner as other students. Having specific learning problems in school should not interfere with response patterns on this scale.

Learning Disabilities and other Attributes as Factors in Delinquent Activities among Adolescents in a Nonurban Area

1987 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 327-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fran Trocinsky Fleener
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
White Male ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Mathematics Skills ◽  
Poor Families ◽  
Delinquent Activity ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Northern Idaho ◽  
Eastern Washington

62% of 50 adjudicated delinquents in the Palouse area of eastern Washington and northern Idaho showed learning disabilities when tested. Among the learning disabled and nonlearning disabled delinquents, there was no difference in kind or seriousness of delinquent activity. The typical delinquent of the nonurban Palouse area tends to be white, male and has a learning disability. His reading and mathematics skills are at least two years below grade. His family is large; his real parents are divorced. He comes from a poorer economic and cultural background than do the nondelinquents. This analysis suggests that the academic treatment of the learning disabled youngster should not be ignored as a factor in delinquency, especially in economically and culturally poor families.

Family as a Factor in Delinquency

1999 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fran T. Fleener
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
Rural Area ◽  
White Male ◽  
Delinquent Behavior ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
The Other ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Dysfunctional Family

50 adjudicated delinquents were given academic and psychological tests and a self-report of delinquency according to the learning disability/delinquency study of the National Criminal Justice Service of 1980. 31 learning disabled delinquents were identified. The test of proportions compared learning disabilities in delinquent ( n = 31) and nondelinquent (ns = 24 and 43) samples. The Mann-Whitney U test compared the reported number of categories of delinquent behavior in the three groups. A typical delinquent of this rural area tends to be a white male with average or above intelligence and a learning disability. His family is large; his parents are divorced. He comes from a poorer economic and cultural background. A dysfunctional family can be a center wherein delinquency grows; on the other hand, a strong family can nurture and protect when peers and school fail.

Teaching Mathematics to Learning Disabled Students in the Secondary Classroom

1987 ◽  
Vol 80 (9) ◽  
pp. 702-747
Author(s):  
Grace M. Burton ◽  
Marcee J. Meyers
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Language Arts ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Teaching Mathematics ◽  
High School Mathematics ◽  
Disabled Students ◽  
The Past ◽  
Secondary Classroom ◽  
Regular Classes

Professionals in the field of learning disabilities have made tremendous advances in the past twenty years in research, methodology, diagnosis, and programs. Until very recently (Johnston 1984), much of this progress has focused on the young learning disabled child (Kaliski 1962; Homan 1970) and on the curricular area of language arts. Although learning disabled (LD) students are indeed enrolled in middle school and high school mathematics classes, limited attention has been paid to their difficulties and special needs, and even less information is available addressing the concerns of their mathematics teachers. Because of mainstreaming, most LD students will probably remain in the regular classes for prealgebra, algebra, and geometry.

Questioning Discrepancies: Retaking the First Step 20 Years Later

1988 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bob Algozzine ◽  
James E. Ysseldyke
Keyword(s):  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Learning Disability ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
Achievement Tests ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Achievement Scores ◽  
Grade Levels ◽  
Overall Performance ◽  
General Difference ◽  
Political Economic

The term learning disability was scarsely off the breath of the early pioneers when a profession began questioning its own integrity. Today, the proliferation of students classified as learning disabled (LD) has caused social, political, economic, and educational concerns that, in turn, have produced serious questioning of practices. The driving force behind most conceptualizations of learning disabilities is the discrepancy between ability and achievement; yet, the dimensions of this parameter have not been documented. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the nature and occurrence of discrepancies between ability and achievement scores of students demonstrating average overall performance on commonly used assessment devices. Ability and achievement scores in several domains on individual and group-administered tests were compared. In general, difference patterns of students with average overall performance scores were similar across grade levels and achievement tests. Average discrepancies were generally small; however, wide (30–50 points) ranges were evident at all grade levels for individual and group-administered tests. Implications of these findings for current and future use of discrepancies as estimators of disabilities are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document