Search results
1 – 3 of 3Kenneth A. Kavale and Steven R. Forness
Problems and issues surrounding the use of discrepancy in identifying learning disability are reviewed. Since 1976, discrepancy has been the primary criterion for defining…
Abstract
Problems and issues surrounding the use of discrepancy in identifying learning disability are reviewed. Since 1976, discrepancy has been the primary criterion for defining learning disability in practice. In a psychometric and statistical sense, however, issues about the best means for calculating a discrepancy remain unresolved. Another problem involves divergent findings about how systematically and rigorously the discrepancy criterion has been applied in practice. The problems and issues have resulted in questions about the status of learning disability as an independent category of special education. It is possible, however, to demonstrate that learning disability can be reliably differentiated from other conditions and that discrepancy is a major factor in demonstrating the differences. Consequently, it is concluded that discrepancy is a legitimate theoretical concept and should be considered as a necessary criterion for the identification of learning disability.
Four types of calculations are currently being used to identify discrepancies between intellectual ability and achievement. These include deviation from grade level, expectancy…
Abstract
Four types of calculations are currently being used to identify discrepancies between intellectual ability and achievement. These include deviation from grade level, expectancy formulas, simple standard score differences, and regression-based differences (Fletcher et al., 1994; Gresham, 2001; Sattler, 1992; Van den Broeck, 2002).