Presents reliability and standard error of measurement figures for several combinations of ability and achievement measures. Discusses the rates and types of errors that occur when such scores are used to classify children as learning-disabled. Three recommendations for using difference scores are given. (BH)

Examined ability of Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery (WJPEB) to identify learning-disabled (LD) students. Administered WJPEB to 71 previously identified LD students and evaluated cluster score performance. Used three methods of obtaining discrepancies; slightly more than one-half of LD students were identified. Memory deficits were…

A teacher offers suggestions for the diagnosis of mathematical learning disabilities including differentiation of emotional problems from mathematical problems, specification of mathematical skills, and distinction between mathematical failure and procedural failure, failure resulting from the manner in which tests are administered. (DB)

This response argues that Linda Siegel's paper (EC221505) confuses measures of intelligence with predicted achievement, calls for doing away with the construct of learning disabilities rather than the discrepancy definition model, and overlooks the need to determine which students qualify for special educational services for treatment of learning…

A school district made identification decisions for 51 students referred because of academic difficulties; 24 students were learning disabled. The school identification decisions, based on application of a severe discrepancy on the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery, did not correlate with decisions based on the federal definition of…

Compared the WISC-R Verbal-Performance IQ discrepancies of learning-disabled children and of the normative sample. It was concluded that without clinical evidence to suggest otherwise, it cannot be assumed automatically that a child's discrepancy score, unless of extreme magnitude, is related to the learning disability itself. (Author)

This critique of a paper by Linda Siegel (EC221505) challenges Siegel's assumptions on the relationship of Intelligence Quotient to learning disabilities as being unacceptable and non-literature-based, and points out that discussion of Intelligence Quotient cutoffs may be moot given that 49 states employ no cutoff for learning disabilities. (JDD)

This article discusses definitional differences, survey data, and studies relevant to the question of a discernible hearing-impaired, learning-disabled subgroup. The existence of such a group is a subject of speculation, and diagnostic difficulties and the inadequacies of current standardized testing procedures have prevented the formation and…

This commentary supports Linda Siegel's challenge to the learning disabilities field (in EC221505) to produce data indicating that dyslexic readers differ from other poor readers in their cognitive processing, educational prognosis, and response to treatment. The commentary also points out that the existence of Matthew effects reinforces Siegel's…

Use of the discrepancy approach in defining learning disabilities is challenged, as intelligence tests do not measure potential, are not independent from what is measured by achievement tests, and are not powerful predictors of low reading performance. Use of intelligence tests in analysis, identification, and definition of learning disabilities…

In commenting on Linda Siegel's argument (in EC221505) that Intelligence Quotient is not causally related to reading difficulties, this paper argues that Intelligence Quotient is relevant to the definition of reading disabilities but that present knowledge may not justify its use in the selection of children for special services. (JDD)

This response to Linda Siegel's paper (EC221505) suggests some alternative explanations of phonological processing as a basis for determining reading disability. Discussed are the use of pseudoword tests, the relationship between phonological coding and intelligence quotient, and the relationship between phonological coding and reading…

This response to a paper by Linda Siegel (EC221505) on the relationship between Intelligence Quotient and learning disabilities addresses the differences between classification and identification, limitations in Siegel's conceptualization of intelligence, and the representation of the language and learning domains subsumed within the learning…

An item analysis profile sheet to accompany the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) is helpful in providing a functional test interpretation. The lack of recorded technical and statistical information is a serious concern. Without such information, a practitioner could not use the Item Analysis of SIT with confidence. (Author)

This response to a paper by Linda Siegel (EC221505) discusses research on the relationship between social skills and Intelligence Quotient or academic performance. The research indicates that it is erroneous to assume that Intelligence Quotient or academic achievement account for the social problems of children with learning disabilities. (JDD)