| Learning disability | |
|---|---|
| Classification and external resources | |
| ICD-10 | F81.9 |
| ICD-9 | 315.0-315.3 |
| DiseasesDB | 4509 |
| eMedicine | article/1835801 article/1835883 article/915176 |
| MeSH | D007859 |
Learning disability (sometimes called a learning disorder[1] or learning difficulty), is a classification including several disorders in which a person has difficulty learning in a typical manner, usually caused by an unknown factor or factors. The unknown factor is the disorder that affects the brain's ability to receive and process information. This disorder can make it problematic for a person to learn as quickly or in the same way as someone who isn't affected by a learning disability. Learning disability is not indicative of intelligence level. Rather, people with a learning disability have trouble performing specific types of skills or completing tasks if left to figure things out by themselves or if taught in conventional ways.
A learning disability cannot be cured or fixed. With the right support and intervention, however, people with learning disabilities can succeed in school and go on to be successful later in life.
In the 1980s, the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) defines the term learning disability as:
a heterogeneous group of disorders manifested by significant difficulties in the acquisition and use of listening, speaking, reading, writing, reasoning or mathematical abilities. These disorders are intrinsic to the individual and presumed to be due to Central Nervous System Dysfunction. Even though a learning disability may occur concomitantly with other handicapping conditions (e.g. sensory impairment, mental retardation, social and emotional disturbance) or environmental influences (e.g. cultural differences, insufficient/inappropriate instruction, psychogenic factors) it is not the direct result of those conditions or influences.
The NJCLD used the term to indicate a discrepancy between a child’s apparent capacity to learn and his or her level of achievement.[2]
The 2002 LD Roundtable produced the following definition:
The term "learning disability" does not exist in DSM-IV, but it has been proposed that it be added to DSM-5, and incorporate the conditions learning disorder not otherwise specified and disorder of written expression.[5]
Learning disabilities can be categorized either by the type of information processing that is affected or by the specific difficulties caused by a processing deficit.
Learning disabilities fall into broad categories based on the four stages of information processing used in learning: input, integration, storage, and output.[6]
Deficits in any area of information processing can manifest in a variety of specific learning disabilities. It is possible for an individual to have more than one of these difficulties. This is referred to as comorbidity or co-occurrence of learning disabilities.[7] In the UK, the term dual diagnosis is often used to refer to co-occurrence of learning difficulties.
The most common learning disability. Of all students with specific learning disabilities, 70%-80% have deficits in reading. The term "dyslexia" is often used as a synonym for reading disability; however, many researchers assert that there are different types of reading disabilities, of which dyslexia is one. A reading disability can affect any part of the reading process, including difficulty with accurate or fluent word recognition, or both, word decoding, reading rate, prosody (oral reading with expression), and reading comprehension. Before the term "dyslexia" came to prominence, this learning disability used to be known as "word blindness."
Common indicators of reading disability include difficulty with phonemic awareness—the ability to break up words into their component sounds, and difficulty with matching letter combinations to specific sounds (sound-symbol correspondence).
Speech and language disorders can also be called Dysphasia/Aphasia (coded F80.0-F80.2/315.31 in ICD-10 and DSM-IV).
Impaired written language ability may include impairments in handwriting, spelling, organization of ideas, and composition. The term "dysgraphia" is often used as an overarching term for all disorders of written expression. Others, such as the International Dyslexia Association, use the term "dysgraphia" exclusively to refer to difficulties with handwriting.
Sometimes called dyscalculia, a math disability can cause such difficulties as learning math concepts (such as quantity, place value, and time), difficulty memorizing math facts, difficulty organizing numbers, and understanding how problems are organized on the page. Dyscalculics are often referred to as having poor "number sense".[8]
Learning disabilities are often identified by school psychologists, clinical psychologists, and neuropsychologists through a combination of intelligence testing, academic achievement testing, classroom performance, and social interaction and aptitude. Other areas of assessment may include perception, cognition, memory, attention, and language abilities. The resulting information is used to determine whether a child's academic performance is commensurate with his or her cognitive ability. If a child's cognitive ability is much higher than his or her academic performance, the student is often diagnosed with a learning disability. The DSM-IV and many school systems and government programs diagnose learning disabilities in this way (although the DSM-IV refers to them as Disorder and NOT as disabilities.)
Although the discrepancy model has dominated the school system for many years, there has been substantial criticism of this approach among researchers.[10][11] Recent research has provided little evidence that a discrepancy between formally-measured IQ and achievement is a clear indicator of LD.[12] Furthermore, diagnosing on the basis of a discrepancy does not predict the effectiveness of treatment. Low academic achievers who do not have a discrepancy with IQ (i.e. their IQ scores are also low) appear to benefit from treatment just as much as low academic achievers who do have a discrepancy with IQ (i.e. their IQ scores are higher).
Much current research has focused on a treatment-oriented diagnostic process known as response to intervention (RTI). Researcher recommendations for implementing such a model include early screening for all students, placing those students who are having difficulty into research-based early intervention programs, rather than waiting until they meet diagnostic criterion. Their performance can be closely monitored to determine whether increasingly intense intervention results in adequate progress.[12] Those who respond will not require further intervention. Those who do not respond adequately to regular classroom instruction (often called "Tier 1 instruction") and a more intensive intervention (often called "Tier 2" intervention) are considered "nonresponders." These students can then be referred for further assistance through special education, in which case they are often identified with a learning disability. Some models of RTI include a third tier of intervention before a child is identified as having a learning disability.
A primary benefit of such a model is that it would not be necessary to wait for a child to be sufficiently far behind to qualify for assistance.[13] This may enable more children to receive assistance before experiencing significant failure, which may in turn result in fewer children who need intensive and expensive special education services. In the United States, the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act permitted states and school districts to use RTI as a method of identifying students with learning disabilities. RTI is now the primary means of identification of learning disabilities in Florida.
The process does not take into account children's individual neuropsychological factors such as phonological awareness and memory, that can help design instruction[14]. Second, RTI by design takes considerably longer than established techniques, often many months to find an appropriate tier of intervention. Third, it requires a strong intervention program before students can be identified with a learning disability. Lastly, RTI is considered a regular education initiative and is not driven by psychologists, reading specialists, or special educators.
Many normed assessments can be used in evaluating skills in the primary academic domains: reading, not including word recognition, fluency, and comprehension; mathematics, including computation and problem solving; and written expression, including handwriting, spelling and composition.
The most commonly used comprehensive achievement tests include the Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ III), Weschler Individual Achievement Test II (WIAT II), the Wide Range Achievement Test III (WRAT III), and the Stanford Achievement Test–10th edition. These tests include measures of many academic domains that are reliable in identifying areas of difficulty.[12]
In the reading domain, there are also specialized tests that can be used to obtain details about specific reading deficits. Assessments that measure multiple domains of reading include Gray's Diagnostic Reading Tests–2nd edition (GDRT II) and the Stanford Diagnostic Reading Assessment. Assessments that measure reading subskills include the Gray Oral Reading Test IV – Fourth Edition (GORT IV), Gray Silent Reading Test, Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP), Tests of Oral Reading and Comprehension Skills (TORCS), Test of Reading Comprehension 3 (TORC-3), Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE), and the Test of Reading Fluency. A more comprehensive list of reading assessments may be obtained from the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.[15]
The purpose of assessment is to determine what is needed for intervention, which also requires consideration of contextual variables and whether there are comorbid disorders that must also be identified and treated, such as behavioral issues or language delays.[12]
Interventions include:
Sternberg[18] has argued that early remediation can greatly reduce the number of children meeting diagnostic criteria for learning disabilities. He has also suggested that the focus on learning disabilities and the provision of accommodations in school fails to acknowledge that people have a range of strengths and weaknesses, and places undue emphasis on academic success by insisting that people should receive additional support in this arena but not in music or sports. Other research has pinpointed the use of resource rooms as an important—yet often politicized component of educating students with learning disabilities.[19]
The causes for learning disabilities are not well understood, and sometimes there is no apparent cause for a learning disability. However, some causes of neurological impairments include:
Neuropsychological differences can impact the accurate perception of social cues with peers [21].
Society both impacts upon, and is impacted by, individuals with learning disabilities. Significant factors in this relationship include poverty (with its concomitant reliance on welfare/public assistance), gender, and crime/imprisonment.
A 36 month study conducted by Taylor and Barusch[22] included 284 welfare recipients, who were frequently interviewed, called, and visited with in their homes. In this study the average age was 34 and 97% of the participants were female. Of the welfare participants 22.9% were learning disabled and 32% had no high school diploma or GED. Findings from this study imply that long term learning disabled welfare recipients will not be able to support their family through employment.
A study conducted by Margai and Henry[23] found that the laws of identifying special education children have been revised within the past years. Learning disabled children in public schools now make up 6% of all kids.
High risk neighborhoods and poor living conditions add to the factor of being more vulnerable to having a learning disability. A study was conducted exploring the areas of pollution and socioeconomic factors related to having a higher risk of a learning disability. Margai and Henry [10] used primary data and analyzed clusters of people in a distinct part of a community near a toxic waste place, living in poor neighborhoods and living in poverty). The results confirmed that a majority of the people with a learning disability came from some socio-economic indicator such as poverty, subdivided housing, and lower adult educational attainment. Individuals with a learning disability will rely more heavily on public assistance/welfare than individuals who do not because of their lack of knowledge
However, the ratio of boys to girls (having a learning disability) is equal. In dealing with learning disabilities no significant gender differences were found in a study of more than 400 children. Bandian[25] found that if identified by research criteria there were no differences in gender, but if learning disabilities were identified by general education teachers and/or special education teachers, there was twice as many boys identified compared to girls. Alongside that, there was another statement said by Bandian [12] that supported the claim stated above “boys were twice as like[ly] to be identified by teachers as in need of a learning disability programs [sic] [compared to girls].”
“girls are less often viewed as disruptive and disturbing behavior patterns that often lead to special education.”
In contrast to that Zabel and Nigro [13] also found that the
“gender pattern was reversed for LD classification, with nearly 78.6% of females who had been in special education.”
“about one half of SpEd participants and nearly 20% of the total sample reported their classification as learning disabilities.”
LD individuals make up a large portion of individuals in a detention facility which may have been a result from the LD individual not learning at a significant pace in the education system and also potentially not completing the education system. Zabel and Nigro’s study was made up of 266 youth between the ages of 12-18 who were currently in a detention facility.
People with an IQ lower than 70 are usually characterized as having mental retardation (MR), mental deficiency, or cognitive impairment and are not included under most definitions of learning disabilities, because their learning difficulties are considered to be related directly to their low IQ scores.
Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is often studied in connection with learning disabilities, but it is not actually included in the standard definitions of learning disabilities. An individual with ADHD may struggle with learning, but he or she can often learn adequately once successfully treated for the ADHD. A person can have ADHD but not learning disabilities or have learning disabilities without having ADHD. The conditions can co-occur
Some research is beginning to make a case for ADHD being included in the definition of LDs, since it is being shown to have a strong impact on "executive functions" required for learning. This has not as yet affected any official definitions.
Criticism of the concept of learning disabilities and of special education takes the position that every child has a different learning style and pace and that each child is unique, not only capable of learning but also capable of succeeding. These critics assert that applying the medical model of problem-solving to individual children who are pupils in the school system, and labeling these children as disabled, systematically prevents the improvement of the current educational system. This, they clarify, does not refer to people who have a specific disability that affects their drives, and it is not meant to apply to people who have specific mental impairments, which may need to be dealt with in special, clinical ways.[28]
Describing current instructional methods as homogenization and lockstep standardization, alternative approaches are proposed, such as the Sudbury model of democratic education schools, an alternative approach in which children, by enjoying personal freedom thus encouraged to exercise personal responsibility for their actions, learn at their own pace rather than following a chronologically-based curriculum.[29][30][31][32][33] Proponents of unschooling have also claimed that children raised in this method do not suffer from learning disabilities.
Gerald Coles asserts that there are partisan agendas behind the educational policy-makers and that the scientific research that they use to support their arguments regarding the teaching of literacy are flawed. These include the idea that there are neurological explanations for learning disabilities.[34]
Marva Collins started a low cost private school in inner city Chicago specifically for the purpose of teaching low-income black children whom the public school system had wrongly labeled as being "learning disabled." She once wrote,
"I have discovered few learning disabled students in my three decades of teaching. I have, however, discovered many, many victims of teaching inabilities.[35]
Jan Hunt, a Canadian-American child psychologist, and the director of The Natural Child Project, writes metaphorically in her essay "Learning Disability": A Rose by Another Name[36] comparing the development of a child with a rose bush in a plant nursery adducing that it is absurd to try to slow down or speed up either the child's development or the rose bush's blooming—without damaging both.
| “ | children are no different than roses in their development: they are born with the capacity and desire to learn, they learn at different rates, and they learn in different ways. If we can meet their needs, provide a safe, nurturing environment, and keep from interfering with our doubts, anxieties, and arbitrary timetables, then - like roses - they will all bloom at their own best time. If "learning disorders" are present only among children in school settings, and are absent elsewhere, the problem must lie in the learning environment of the schools, not in some mysterious, non-quantifiable "neurological disorder" within the children, or they would be present in homeschooling children too. | ” |
|
— "Learning Disability": A Rose by Another Name
|
She asserts that every child is a gifted child and quotes Einstein who warned us years ago, "It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion," as it is done in traditional education.
The Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act was taken in effect in May 1977, this American legislation guarantees certain rights to people with disabilities, especially in the cases of education and work, such being in schools, colleges and university settings.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, formerly known as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, is a United States federal law that governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education and related services to children with disabilities. It addresses the educational needs of children with disabilities from birth to the age of 21.[37] Considered as a civil rights law, states are not required to participate.
In the United States and Canada, the terms learning disability and learning disorder (LD) refer to a group of disorders that affect a broad range of academic and functional skills including the ability to speak, listen, read, write, spell, reason, organize information, and do math. A person's IQ must be average or above to have a learning disability or learning disorder.
In the UK, terms such as specific learning difficulty (SpLD), dyslexia, dyspraxia and dyscalculia are used to cover the range of learning difficulties referred to in the United States as "learning disabilities". In the UK, the term "learning disability" refers to a range of conditions that are almost invariably associated with more severe generalized cognitive impairment.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||