Online ISSN: 2325-7466
2006
Triannual
National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET)
United States

Articles

Learning Disabilities Today: An Examination of Effective and Not-So-Effective Interventions

  • Vance L. Austin (Author) Manhattanville College image/svg+xml
    Dr. Vance Austin is Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Special Education at Manhattanville College and also teaches part-time in a special high school for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. He has formerly worked full time as a special education teacher in both public and private schools where he accumulated over twenty-five years of teaching experience and has also taught at several colleges and universities. Dr. Austin’s interests in special education extend beyond the U.S. to include Canada and Vietnam. His current research focus is in the area of finding effective interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders as well as improving the quality of teaching in special education. He has authored many articles and book chapters, and presented at numerous national and international conferences on the topics of effective teaching and behavior management, and is completing a second book for teachers on the subject of working effectively with students with emotional and behavioral disorders.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.271
Abstract
The classification of "Specific Learning Disabilities" has experienced revision in the last decade due, in no small part, to the changes provided in IDEIA 2004. The "discrepancy clause" has been replaced with "…response to scientific, research-based intervention," for example. As a result, two new frameworks have been developed to ensure that students at risk for a learning problem or behavioral problem receive effective, research-based interventions to pre-empt the unwarranted classification of those students; namely, "Response to Intervention" relative to academic instruction, and "Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports" regarding student behavior. The article examines both these systems critically and suggests practical applications in today’s schools. Similarly, the author provides some effective strategies to address the characteristic learning challenges students with learning disabilities face in the classroom. The article concludes with an analysis of "Differentiated Instruction" and provides the reader with a "practical" way to differentiate the curriculum at all academic levels.
Keywords
At Risk Students, Behavior Problems, Graphs, Individualized Instruction, Intervention, Learning Disabilities
References

Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (1986). The problems of definition and differentiation and the need for a classification schema. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19(9), Ansalone, G. (2010). Tracking: Educational differentiation or defective strategy. Educational Research Quarterly, 34(2), 3–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948601900901

Callinan, S., Cunningham, E., & Theiler, S. (2013). Revisiting discrepancy theory in learning disabilities: What went wrong and why we should go back. Australian Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 23(1), 1-17. doi:10.1017/jgc.2012.22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jgc.2012.22

Carruthers, P. (1998). Conscious thinking: Language or elimination? Mind & Language, 13(4), 457. Catton, Bruce. “Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts.” The American Story. Ed. Garet Garrett. Chicago, Regenery, 1955. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00087

Colker, R. (2013). Politics trump science: The collision between No Child Left Behind and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Journal of Law & Education, 42(4), 585-631.

Filter, K. J., McKenna, M. K., Benedict, E. A., Horner, R. H., Todd, A. W., & Watson, J. (2007).

Check in/ Check out: A Post-Hoc Evaluation of an Efficient, Secondary-Level Targeted Intervention for Reducing Problem Behaviors in Schools. Education and Treatment of Children, 30, 69-84 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2007.0000

Flanagan, D., Fiorello, C., & Ortiz, S. (2010). Enhancing practice through application of Cattell–Horn-Carroll theory and research: A “third method” approach to specific learning disability identification. Psychology in the Schools, 47(7), 739-760. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.umiss.lib.olemiss.edu/ehost/detail?vid=3&hid=13&sid=f121f88f-721b-45cd-b4e2-589dc56a3d2%40sessionmgr14&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZW hvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=aph&AN=16699984. FloridaInclusionNetwork.comRetrieved July 10, 2014. (n.a.)

Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice (Wiley-Blackwell), 18(3), 172-186. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00073

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.

Hale, J., Alfonso, V., Berninger, V., Bracken, B., Christo, C., Clark, E., & Simon, J. (2010). Critical issues in response-to-intervention, comprehensive evaluation, and specific learning disabilities identification and intervention: An expert white paper consensus. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(3), 223-236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/073194871003300310

Hayes, O. C. (2009). The use of melodic and rhythmic mnemonics to improve memory and recall in elementary students in the content areas. Unpublished master’s thesis, Dominican University of California, San Rafael, CA.

Ikeda, M. J. (2012). Policy and practice considerations for response to intervention: Reflections and commentary. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 274-277. doi:10.1177/0022219412442170 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412442170

Joseph, S. (2013). Differentiating instruction: Experiences of pre-service and in-service trained teachers. Caribbean Curriculum, 20, 31–51.

Klinger, J., & Vaughn, S. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities. Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/461828

Luria, A.R. (1970). Traumatic Aphasia: Its Syndromes, Psychology, and Treatment. Mouton de Gruyter. ISBN 90-279-0717-X. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110816297

Maccini, P., & Hughes, C. A. (2000). Effects of a problem-solving strategy on the introductory algebra performance of secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 10-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/SLDRP1501_2

Maccini, P., Mulcahy, C. A., & Wilson, M. G. (2007). A Follow‐Up of Mathematics Interventions for Secondary Students with Learning Disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22(1), 58-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00231.x

McTighe, J., & Brown, J. L. (2005). Differentiated instruction and educational standards: Is détente possible? Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 234-244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4403_8

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158

Murray, D. (1972). Teach writing as a process not product. The Leaflet, 71(3), 11-14.

Norden, J. (2007). Understanding the brain. Chantilly, VA: The Teaching Company. Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and instruction, 1(2), 117-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1

Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1985). Reciprocal teaching: Activities to promote read (ing) with your mind. Reading, thinking and concept development: Strategies for the classroom. New York: The College Board.

Patton, J. R., Cronin, M. E., Bassett, D. S., & Koppel, A. E. (1997). A life skills approach to mathematics instruction preparing students with learning disabilities for the real-life Math demands of adulthood. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(2), 178-187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949703000205

Reschly, D. J. (2014). Response to intervention and the identification of specific learning disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 34(1), 39-58. doi:10.1097/TLD.0000000000000003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000003

Reynolds, C. R., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2009). Response to intervention: Ready or not? Or, from wait to-fail to watch-them fail. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(2), 130-145. doi:10.1037/a016158 Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293-336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016158

Speece, D. L., Case, L., & Molloy, D. (2003). Responsiveness to general education instruction as the first gate to learning disabilities identification. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice (Wiley-Blackwell), 18(3), 147-156. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00071 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00071

Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935-947.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Responsiveness-to-intervention and school-wide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17(4), 223-237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09362830903235375

Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Reconcilable differences: Standards-based teaching and differentiation. Educational leadership, 58(1), 6-13.

Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction & understanding by design: Connecting content and kids. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Vanderheyden, A. M., Kovaleski, J. E., Shapiro, E. S., & Painter, D. T. (2014). Scientifically supported identification of SLD using RTI: A response to Colker. Journal of Law & Education, 43(2), 229-247.

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice (Wiley-Blackwell), 18(3), 137-146. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00070 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00070

Von Restorff H. (1933). Uber die wirkung von bereichsbildungen im sprunenfeld. Psycholgische Forschung, 18, 299-342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02409636

Willis, J. (2007). Review of research: Brain-based teaching strategies for improving students' memory, learning, and test-taking success. Childhood Education, 83(5), 310-315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2007.10522940

Wolfe, P. (2001). Brain matters: Translating research into classroom practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Yates, A. J. (1966). The art of memory. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

There are 38 references in total.
How to Cite
Austin, V. L. (2015). Learning Disabilities Today: An Examination of Effective and Not-So-Effective Interventions. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 10(2), 7-28. https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.271

Spring/Summer 2015

Article Information

  • Article Type Articles
  • Submitted April 14, 2015
  • Published June 15, 2015
  • Issue Spring/Summer 2015
  • Section Articles
  • File Downloads 0
  • Abstract Views 0
  • Altmetrics
  • Share
Download data is not yet available.