Critical issues for the diagnosis of learning disabilities in the adult population

Psychology in the Schools

Volumn 43, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 889-899

  Gregg, Noel ^a,b   Coleman, Chris ^a   Davis, Mark ^a   Lindstrom, William ^a   Hartwig, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b University of Georgia ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750503386     PISSN: 00333085     EISSN: 15206807     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pits.20196     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327.
4. Bateman, B. (1992). Learning disabilities: The changing landscape. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 29-36.
5. Benson, J. (1998). Developing a strong program of construct validation: A test anxiety example. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17, 10-22.
6. Brackett, J., & McPherson, A. (2006). Learning disabilities diagnosis in post-secondary students: A comparison of discrepancy-based diagnostic models. In N. Gregg, C. Hoy, & A. Gay (Eds.), Adults with learning disabilities: Theoretical and practical perspectives (pp. 68-84). New York: Guilford Press.
7. Bruck, M. (1993). Component spelling skills of college students with childhood diagnoses of dyslexia. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16, 171-184.
8. Carlisle, J.F., & Rice, M.S. (2002). Improving reading comprehension: Research-based principles and practices. Baltimore, Maryland: York Press.
9. Caruso, J.C., & Cliff, N. (1999). The properties of equally and differentially weighted WAIS-III factor scores. Psychological Assessment, 11(2), 198-206.
10. Cohen, A.S., Gregg, N., & Deng, M. (2005). The role of extended time and item content on a high-stakes mathematics test. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20(4), 225-233.
11. Dombrowski, S.C., Kamphaus, R.W., & Reynolds, C.R. (2004). After the demise of the discrepancy: Proposed learning disabilities diagnostic criteria. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 364-372.
12. Evans, J.J., Floyd, R.G., McGrew, K.S., & Leforgee, M.H. (2002). Relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during childhood and adolescence. School Psychology Review, 31(2), 246-262.
13. Fine, M., & Asch, A. (1988). Women with disabilities: Essays in psychology, culture, and politics. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
14. Flanagan, D., & Kaufman, A.S. (2004). Essentials of WISC-IV Assessment. New York: Wiley.
15. Flanagan, D., Keiser, S., Bernier, J.E., & Ortiz, S.O. (2003). Diagnosis of learning disability in adulthood. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
16. Fletcher, J.M., & Reschly, D.J. (2005). Changing procedures for identifying learning disabilities: The danger of perpetuating old ideas. The School Psychologist, 59, 10-15.
17. Floyd, R., Clark, M., & Shadish, N. (2005). The exchangeability of intelligence quotients. (Unpublished manuscript)
18. Floyd, R.G., Evans, J.J., & McGrew, K.S. (2003). Relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and mathematics achievement across the school-age years. Psychology in the Schools, 40, 155-171.
19. Frith, U. (1999). Paradoxes in the definition of dyslexia. Dyslexia: An International Journal of Research and Practice, 5, 192-214.
20. Goodenough, A. (2001, May 23). Teaching by the book, no asides allowed [Electronic version]. The New York Times.
21. Gregg, N., Coleman, C., & Davis, M. (2002). Discourse complexity of college writers with and without disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(11), 23-28.
22. Gregg, N., Coleman, C., Davis, M., & Chalk, J. (in press). Timed essay writing: Implications for high-stakes tests. Journal of Learning Disabilities.
23. Gregg, N., Davis, M., Coleman, C., Jordan, M., & Hoy, C. (2006). Broad and specific cognitive processing abilities: Implications for accommodation decisions at the postsecondary level. Unpublished manuscript, University of Georgia.
24. Gregg, N., & Ferri, B. (1996). Paradigms and theories: Changing and challenging. In N. Gregg, C. Hoy, & A. Gay (Eds.), Adults with learning disabilities: Theoretical and practical perspectives (pp. 21-54). New York: Guilford Press.
25. Gregg, N., Hoy, C., Flaherty, D.A., Norris, P., Coleman, C., Davis, M., et al. (2005). Documenting decoding and spelling accommodations for postsecondary students demonstrating dyslexia - It's more than processing speed. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 3(2), 1-17.
26. Gregg, N., Scott, S., McPeek, D., & Ferri, B. (1999). Definitions and eligibility criteria applied to the adolescent and adult population with learning disabilities across agencies. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22(3), 213-223.
27. Hahn, H. (1987). Civil rights for disabled Americans: The foundation of a political agenda. In A. Gartner & T. Joe (Eds.), Images of the disabled, disabling images (pp. 181-203). New York: Praeger.
28. Hale, J.B., Fiorello, C.A., Kavanagh, J.A., Hoeppner, J.B., & Gaitherer, R.A. (2001). WISC-III predictors of academic achievement for children with learning disabilities: Are global and factor scores comparable? School Psychology Quarterly, 16(1). 31-35.
29. Hale, J.B., Naglieri, J.A., Kaufman, A.S., & Kavale, K.A. (2004). Specific learning disability classification in the new Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: The danger of good ideas. The School Psychologist, 58, 6-13.
30. Hoy, C., Gregg, N., Wisenbaker, J., Bonham, S., King, M., & Moreland, C. (1996). Clinical model versus discrepancy model in determining eligibility for learning disabilities services at a rehabilitation setting. In N. Gregg, C. Hoy, & A. Gay (Eds.), Adults with learning disabilities: Theoretical and practical perspectives (pp. 55-67). New York: Guilford Press.
31. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of 1997, PL 105-17, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.
32. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004), Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004). [Amending 20 U.S.C. §§1400 et seq.]
33. Kaufman, A., & Kaufman, N., (1993). Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
34. Kavale, K.A., Fuchs, D., & Scruggs, T.E. (1994). Setting the record straight on learning disability and low achievement: Implications for policy-making. Learning Disability Research & Practice, 9, 70-77.
35. Kavale, K.A., Kaufman, A.S., Naglieri, J.A., & Hale, J. (2005). Changing procedures for identifying learning disabilities: The danger of poorly supported ideas. The School Psychologist, 59, 16-25.
36. Mather, N., & Gregg, N. (2006). Specific learning disabilities: Clarifying, not eliminating, a construct. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37(1), 99-106.
37. Mather, N., Gregg, N., & Simon, J. (2005). The curse of high stakes texts and high abilities: Reactions to Wong v. Regents of the University of California. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13, 139-144.
38. McGrew, K.S., Ford, L., & Woodcock, R.W. (2002). Woodcock-Johnson Battery (3rd ed.). In A.S. Kaufman & E.O. Lictenberger (Eds). Assessing adolescent and adult intelligence (2nd ed., pp. 562-627). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
39. McGrew, K.S., & Woodcock, R.W. (2001). Technical manual. Woodcock-Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
40. Naglieri, J.A., Hale, J.B., Kaufman, A., & Kavale, K.A. (in press). Implementation of IDEA: Using RTI and cognitive assessment methods. Psychology in the Schools.
41. National Center on Secondary Education and Transition. (2006). The transition planning process. Retrieved January 15, 2006, from http://www.ncset.org/publications/discussionpaper/
42. National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (1997). Operationalizing the NJCLD definition of learning disabilities for ongoing assessment. Available: http://www.ldonline.org/njcld/operationalizing.html.
43. Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No. 93-112, 87 Stat. 355.
44. Reynolds, C.R., & Kamphaus, R.W. (2003). Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
45. Roid, G.H. (2003). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (5th ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside.
46. Schwab (2006). IDEA 2004 close up: Transition planning. Retrieved January 15, 2006 from http://www.schwablearning.org/articles.asp?r=998
47. Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
48. Woodcock, R.W., McGrew, K.S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities. Itasca, IL: Riverside.