As a result of the upcoming Federal reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), practitioners and researchers have begun vigorously debating what constitutes evidence-based assessment for the identification of specific learning disability (SLD). This debate has resulted in strong support for a method that…

Methods of identifying poor test-related motivation using the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Digit Span subtest are based on identification of performance patterns that are implausible if the test taker is investing full effort. No studies to date, however, have examined the specificity of such measures, particularly when evaluating persons…

The article reviews the origins of the intelligence testing movement in the U.S., discusses the difficulties inherent in measuring intelligence, and considers alternatives to current LD identification procedures. (CL)

A review of the literature regarding the utility of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) with learning disabled (LD) students was conducted. It is concluded that the WISC-R can be an adjunct to LD diagnosis and one step in educational planning for the LD student. (Author)

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…

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 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…

This study examined differences between Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III) and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) scores for 40 elementary students with learning disabilities. WISC-III Full Scale, Verbal, and Performance scores were lower than comparable WISC-R scores by one-third to one-half a…

Evaluates the utility of the Bannatyne recategorization of WISC-R subtest scores for diagnosing and prescribing instruction for reading/learning disabled children. Concludes that the use of such scores is not warranted. (FL)

Examines the Symbol, Search, Coding, Arithmetic, and Digit Span (SCAD) subtests of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd ed.) (WISC-III) by comparing 363 students with learning and emotional disabilities to the WISC-III normative sample. Results indicate that the SCAD profile is neither a valid diagnostic indicator nor an important…

The Learning Disability Index (LDI) was validated by an examination for mean profiles and demographic characteristics of high and low LDI subsets of the standardization sample of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised. The LDI continuum was found to measure Third Factor strengths/weaknesses as much as verbal-performance…

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…