The diagnosis of LD in English learners: Is it nondiscriminatory?

Journal of Learning Disabilities

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 206-214

  Figueroa, Richard A ^a   Newsome, Patricia ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Grant Union High School District   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744522410     PISSN: 00222194     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00222194060390030201     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
3. Artiles, A. J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J. J., & Higareda, I. (2002). English language learner representation in special education in California urban school districts. In D. J. Losen & G. Orfield (Eds.), Racial inequality in special education (pp. 117-136). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Brigham, C. C. (1930). Intelligence tests of immigrant groups. Psychological Review, 37, 158-165.
5. California Department of Education. (2004). California special education programs: A compendium of laws. Sacramento: California Department of Education, Special Education Division.
6. Cleary, T. A., Humphreys, L. G., Kendrick, S. A., & Wesman, A. (1975). Educational uses of tests with disadvantaged students. The American Psychologist, 15, 15-40.
7. Colvin, S. S. (1921). Intelligence and its measurement: A symposium (IV). Journal of Educational Psychology, 12, 136-139.
8. Diana v. California Board of Education, No. C-70-37, U.S. Dist. Northern California. (1970).
9. Dornic, S. (1977). Information processing and bilingualism. Stockholm: University of Stockholm, Department of Psychology.
10. Dornic, S. (1978a). Noise and language dominance. Stockholm: University of Stockholm, Department of Psychology.
11. Dornic, S. (1978b). The bilingual's performance: Language dominance, stress, and individual differences. In D. Gerver & H. Sinaiko (Eds.), Language and interpretation and communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12. Dornic, S. (1979). Information processing in bilinguals: Some selected issues. Psychological Research, 40, 329-348.
13. Eels, K., Davis, A., Havighurst, R. J., Herrick, V. E., & Tyler, R. (1951). Intelligence and cultural differences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Figueroa, R. A. (1990). Assessment of linguistic minority group children. In C. R. Reynolds & R. W. Kamphaus (Eds.), Handbook of psychological and educational assessment of children: Vol 1. Intelligence and achievement (pp.671-696). New York: Guilford.
15. Figueroa, R. A. (2005). Dificultades o desabilidades de aprendizaje? [Learning difficulties or learning disabilities?] Learning Disability Quarterly, 28, 163-167.
16. Figueroa, R. A., & Garcia, E. (1994). Issues in testing students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Multicultural Education, 2, 10-23.
17. Garth, T. R. (1923). A comparison of the intelligence of Mexican and full blood Indian children. Psychological Review, 30, 388-401.
18. Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language, 36, 3-15.
19. Heber, R. (1961). A manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation (2nd Edition). American Journal on Mental Deficiency [Monograph Supplement 64].
20. Heller, K. A., Holtzman, W. H., & Messick, S. (1982). Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
21. Heubert, J. P., & Hauser, R. M. (1999). High stakes testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22. Jensen, A. R., & Inouye, A. R. (1980). Level I and Level II abilities in Asian, White, and Black children. Intelligence, 4, 41-49.
23. Jose P. v. Ambach, No.C-270 (E.D. N.Y. 1979).
24. Klingner, J. K., & Harry, B. (in press). The special education referral and decision-making process for English language learners: Child study team meetings and staffings. Teachers College Record.
25. Larry P. v. Riles, 343 F. Supp. 1306 (N.D. Cal. 1972), aff'd, 502 F.2d 963 (9th Cir. 1974); 495 F. Supp. 926 (N.D. Cal. 1979); appeal docketed, No. 80-4027 (9th Cir. 1980).
26. Manuel, H. T. (1935). Spanish and English editions of the Stanford-Binet in relation to the abilities of Mexican children (University of Texas Bulletin No. 3532). Austin: University of Texas.
27. Mehan, H., Hertweck, H., & Meihls, J. L. (1986), Handicapping the handicapped. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
28. Mercer, J. R. (1973). Labeling the mentally retarded. Berkeley: University of California Press.
29. Mercer, J. R. (1979), The system of multicultural pluralistic assessment: Technical manual. New York: Psychological Corp.
30. National Association of School Psychologists. (2003). Portraits of the children [Videotape]. Washington, DC: Author.
31. Orwin, R. G. (1994). Evaluating coding decisions. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 139-162). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
32. P.A.S.E. (Parents in Action on Special Education) v. Hannon, No. 74 C 3586 (N.D. 1ll. 1980).
33. Pellegrino, J. W., Jones, L. R., & Mitchell, K. J. (Eds.). (1999). Grading the nation's report card: Evaluating NAEP and transforming the assessment of educational progress. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34. President's Commission on Mental Retardation. (1969). MR.: 69. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
35. Sandoval, J. (1979). The WISC-R and internal evidence of test bias with minority groups. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 919-927.
36. Sanchez-Boyce, M. (2000). The use of interpreters in special education assessments. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Davis.
37. Skrtic, R. (1991). The special education paradox: Equity as the way to excellence. Harvard Educational Review, 61, 148-186
38. Thomas, A., & Grimes, J. (Eds.). (1990). Best practices in school psychology III. Washington, IX: National Association of School Psychologists.
39. Thomas, A., & Grimes, J. (Eds.). (1995). Best practices in school psychology II. Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
40. Turnbull, R., Turnbull, A., Shank, M., & Smith, S. J. (2004). Exceptional children (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, Merrill, Prentice Hall.
41. U.S. Congress. (1974). Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
42. U. S. Congress. (2004). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
43. Valdes, G., & Figueroa, R. A. (1994). Bilingualism and testing: A special case of bias, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
44. Woodrow, H. (1921). Intelligence and its measurement: A symposium (XI). Journal of Educational Psychology, 12, 207-210.