Description and Definition of Learning Disabilities. Academic Assessment and Remediation of Adults with Learning Disabilities: A Resource Series for Adult Basic Education Teachers (original) (raw)
Related papers
1984
The second in a series of manuals on adults with learning disabilities, the booklet covers assessment techniques. The nature of assessment as an ongoing process is stressed, and the role of observation (both systematic and nonsystematic) and interview data are discussed. A seven-step evaluation sequence is proposed, with the major goal of int.geL=ting the error patterns which will indicate processing strengths and weaknesses. The importance of the interview between adult education teacher and adult student is pointed out, and guidelines are suggested for structuring the interview environment. The contribution of adult education teachers to evaluation of cognitive functioning is noted. Specific measures for assessing general cognitive ability, language, academic achievement, written expression, and personality are listed. Two bibliographies are appended-one on neurological assessments, screening and Necement, and prevailing assessment strategies; and one on general background information for adult education teachers encountering a learn_ag disabled student. (CL)
Adults with Learning Disabilities: A Review of the Literature
Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 2002
An emerging theme in professional development for adult literacy program staff over the past decade has been the topic of learning disabilities (LD). As adult educators have come to recognize that the effects of LD can play a significant role in the performance and retention of adult learners, many have sought answers to the following Definition of Learning Disabilities In the years following the 1975 enactment of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, many special educators viewed LD as a developmental delay that would be outgrown as an individual matured. The field was too new at that time to benefit from longitudinal studies that followed students into adulthood. Similarly, the adult literacy field did not readily make connections between clients who seemed to have difficulty learning and existing research on the K-12 special education population. Some early articles (Bowren, 1981; Gold, 1981) questioned the incidence of LD among adult learners and debated appropriate practices for adults with LD. But adult literacy programs were for the most part not yet attending to LD in the design and delivery of services for learners or in staff development. problems that significantly affect their academic achievement and their lives. Prevalence of Learning Disabilities in Adults Literacy providers have questions about the prevalence of LD among adults and whether its prevalence in the general adult population is different from that in the population enrolled in adult literacy education. No one study has as yet determined a generally accepted prevalence rate among adults. Varying estimates for specific segments of the population do exist, but the estimates were obtained not through formal evaluation and documentation but through instructor observation, from administrators' educated guesses, and from client self-reports. For example, the U.S. Employment and Training Administration (1991) estimated the incidence of LD among Job Training and Partnership Act Title IIA recipients to be 15-23 percent. When Ryan and Price (1993) surveyed ABE directors nationwide about the prevalence of adults with LD in ABE classes, estimates ranged from 10 percent to more than 50 percent. Other estimates have been proposed for various subpopulations, but all lack validation data. A reasonable estimate of the prevalence rate among the general adult population can be extrapolated from data on the incidence of LD among school-age children. Data collected by the U.S. Department of Education for the 1998-99 school year indicates that 4.49 percent of the school population ages six to twenty-one have a primary diagnosis of specific learning disability (U.S. Department of Education, 2000). Many believe that this rate is an underrepresentation because operational definitions of LD vary from school system to school system. This may account for the discrepancy in the reported school-age identification rate and estimates derived from other sources. Research based on brain studies supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) indicates that 20 percent of school-age children may be considered reading disabled (Lyon, 1995; Shaywitz, Escobar, Shaywitz, Fletcher, & Makuch, 1992). Although not all children with reading disabilities have LD and not all children with LD have reading disabilities, the percentage of individuals with reading-related disabilities is higher than the standard school-based special education reports would lead us to believe. Given that recent studies point toward LD as a persistent, lifelong impairment, it is reasonable to accept a higher prevalence rate for the general adult population than is reported from special education data. For subsets of the general population, such as persons enrolled in adult literacy programs, we can assume a higher incidence rate (Reder, 1995). Although studies indicate that gender is not a determining factorequal numbers of males and females have learning disabilities-there is a gender bias in the identification of LD in school-age children, with four times as many boys as girls being so identified
1985
This manual, the final document in a series, is intended to help adult education teachers help learning disabled (LD) students function in the world of work. The need for adults to develop personal-social and daily living skills along with the ability to adjust to the pluralistic nature of society is stressed. An approach to identifying strengths and weaknesses in LD adults is described and implications for vocation selection and job performance are noted. Job search strategies are outlined, including finding a position availability announcement, making an application, interviewing, and surviving on the job. Relevant federal agencies and general non-federal resources are listed along with information on materials available from five commercial publishers. (CL)
Serving Adults with Learning Disabilities: Implications for Effective Practice
1998
This document contains four monographs on serving adults with learning disabilities. The preface (Mary Ann Corley) explains how the papers were commissioned. The primary and secondary characteristics of learning-disabled adults and the implications of those characteristics for adult literacy programs are discussed in "Characteristics of Adults with Specific Learning Disabilities" (Paul J. Gerber). In "Screening for Learning Disabilities in Adult Literacy Programs," Daryl F. Mellard describes several effective screening procedures, their role in the overall assessment process, and the links between screening results and instruction. "Effective Instruction for Adults with Learning Disabilities" (Charles Hughes) details 16 principles of effective instruction: teach important skills, teach less better, teach explicitly, teach contextually, explain what is to be learned, check the old before teaching the new, model what is to be learned, use supported practice, use controlled materials, provide sufficient practice, require frequent responses, provide corrective feedback, promote generalization, be prepared, use accommodations only when necessary, and use caution in selecting instructional techniques. "Specific Learning Disabilities: A Civil Rights Issue" (Peter S. Latham, Patricia H. Latham) explores the legal rights of adults with specific learning disabilities in the areas of education and employment. In "National Adult Literacy and Learning Disabilities Monographs: A Conclusion," Neil A. Sturomski and B. Keith Lenz reiterate the main issues raised in the monographs. (MN)
1984
The fourth of seven booklets on adults with learning disabilities, this manual examines the assessment and remediation of written language problems. Spelling assessment activities are described, including lists of questions designed to investigate auditory skills, tactile skills, and visual skills. Also considered is assessment of punctuation, capitalization, syntax, organization, and ideation. Remediation activities are proposed for spelling errors caused by auditory and visual deficits, as well as errors in punctuation, capitalization, written syntax, organization, and ideation. Publications on specific topics, a brief list of materials, and a list of references conclude the booklet. (CL)
Learning Disabilities in Adolescent and Young Adult Populations: Research Implications
Focus on Exceptional Children, 1982
The learning disability (LD) field traditionally has devoted most of its attention and resources to the issues of service delivery and teacher training. In recent years, however, research and validation activities have been given increased emphasis. A significant amount of research on LD populations has been conducted by five LD Research Institutes funded by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services.* One of them, the University of Kansas Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities (KU-IRLD) has had as its research focus the LD. adolescent and young adult. Empirical information is greatly lacking on LD adolescents and young adults in particular, and underachieving adolescents in general (Deshler, Warner, Schumaker, & Alley, in press). Most field practices for these adolescents have been based largely on clinical beliefs and nonvalidated models of assessment and instruction. •Asa result of our research during the past four years, we have a clearer, but by no means definite, sense of what the condition of learning disabilities means in adolescent and young adult populations. We hope that program decision making will be enhanced by these data. The findings will be reviewed here, along with their implications, for the LD adolescent as a learner, to describe the demands of the secondary school that LD students face every day, and to discuss interventions that are being developed to help LD adolescents compensate for their deficits and survive the demands of the mainstream curriculum in secondary schools. The four major areas of findings are in academic achievement and ability, cognitive processing, setting demands, and academic interventions.
1984
The booklet, fifth in a series, examines the assessment and remediation of reading difficulties in adults with learning disabilities. The section on assessment concerns touches upon reading recognition difficulties, and includes a list of questions for investigating auditory, tactile, and visual processes. Reading comprehension difficulties are also addressed. Remediation approaches are listed for reading recognition skills according to problems in eight aLeab; auditory, visual, word categories, context clues, comprehension, memory, vocabulary, and specific reading comprehension skills. Resource materials are listed for word attack skills, vocabulary development, and comprehension. (CL)
1984
The third of seven booklets on adults with learning disabilities, this manual addresses the evaluation and remediation of oral language difficulties. An assessment section focuses on behaviors and disorders which adult education teachers should look for as well as informal diagnostic tasks in auditory discrimination, grammar, vocabulary, social use of language, and oral language recall. The remediation section parallels the assessment information section, presenting suggestions for remediating problems in auditory discrimination, grammar, vocabulary and underlying meaning, word finding, semantics, social language skills, and oral language recall. It is pointed out that few commercial materials exist for oral language instruction of the learning disabled; however, five references are listed and these are followed by a longer bibliography which includes descriptions of materials and techniques and which offer useful ideas that may be adopted according to the needs of each student. (CL)
Learning Disability Quarterly, 2018
The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) 1 affirms that the construct of learning disabilities (LD) represents a valid, unique, and heterogeneous group of disorders, and that recognition of this construct is essential for sound policy and practice. An extensive body of scientific research on LD continues to support the validity of the construct. Historically, "specific learning disability" (SLD) has been recognized and defined by the U.S. Office of Education since 1968 (U.S. Office of Education, 1968). However, recent discussion about retaining the LD category has prompted this overview of critical issues in the field of LD and their implications for policies that affect individuals with LD. This paper addresses points of general agreement in the field of LD, common misperceptions regarding LD, and unresolved issues in scholarship and practice, which inform the NJCLD's policy recommendations regarding LD research and practice. The paper presents neither all agreements nor all controversies in the field of LD; the NJCLD's purpose in presenting this document is to establish a basic consensus upon which to build policy for the United States. Understanding LD: Consensus and Controversies Even though a great deal is known about LD, the field has been the subject of controversies for most of its history. This section of the paper addresses points of agreement, common misperceptions, and unresolved issues.
Learning Disabilities in the Workplace
Learning Disabilities in the Workplace was designed for adult literacy providers. The training is divided into 2 threehour sessions that have been field tested in a variety of different settings. If providers are new to adult education in the workplace or working with adults with disabilities they may need to spend more time on specific sections. Facilitators can choose to customize the training to best meet their groups' needs.