While many schools use an IQ-Achievement Discrepancy model to identify the presence of a learning disability, that is students with learning disabilities show an unexpected gap between their potential and achievement, there is a push for schools to use a Response to Intervention (RTI) method to identify learning disabilities (LD). In RTI, students who do not respond to intensive intervention would be identified as disabled. Advantages and disadvantages exist for both methods.

IQ-Achievement Discrepancy

Though there is a movement against the discrepancy model, some educators say it has a valid basis — it documents the unexpected underachiever. Other educators say that though the model is flawed, we should use it but with greater integrity.

However, arguments against the discrepancy method abound. One argument is that the high number of students identified as LD through this method is suspect. Also, results aren’t consistent: one state, and even districts, may have a high number of students with LD while another has few. Some research has even shown that the same team using the discrepancy model will not identify the same students as having LD.

One of the most pressing arguments against the discrepancy model is its "wait and fail" aspect. Students must be in third or fourth grade to have a discrepancy large enough to be identified as disabled.

The discrepancy model is further criticized because IQ tests can be biased against certain racial groups or those who are indigent.

Response to Intervention

At first glance, RTI seems to address the wait to fail concern. With RTI, low achievers are identified as quickly as possible and provided intensive and validated instruction.

However, RTI also raises concerns. First, because we do not have effective measures for children in preschool, RTI can present its own version of wait to fail. Second, there is no guarantee that a student who responds to interventions will continue to progress when he or she returns to the general education classroom.

Other questions exist as to how RTI will be implemented. For example, how long should a child receive interventions and how extensive must non-responsiveness be before a student is identified as disabled? Another concern is that few intervention strategies exist for academic areas other than reading or for students at the middle or high school levels.

Even selecting intervention strategies could be problematic. Problem solving interventions allow special education teachers to individualize by selecting the interventions to use but may compromise the program’s integrity. With standard protocol interventions, which involve a teaching package, teachers lose the ability to individualize.

In addition, teachers will need to teach, test, and keep data in ways they are neither accustomed nor trained to do.

Finally, educators say RTI is untested and we don’t know how to scale it to a national level. Thus far, RTI for reading has been implemented in only a handful of states.

CEC's Position

For the reauthorization of IDEA, CEC said more research needs to be done before moving to RTI to identify LD. Our comments included the following:

• The use of research-based interventions in early reading offers a real opportunity for more at-risk students, including many with LD, to acquire needed beginning literacy skills. However, the use of scientific research-based intervention cannot determine whether a child is or is not learning disabled. Instead, students who do not display meaningful gains and who appear to be unresponsive to intervention are candidates for referral for special education evaluation.
• Insufficient data are available regarding the long-term effects of RTI on student outcomes.
• The ability-achievement discrepancy formula should not be used as the sole criterion to determine eligibility. However, discrepancy remains a hallmark of specific learning disabilities.
• CEC supports using methods other than the discrepancy formula. However, there are no research-based alternatives that have been sufficiently validated at this time.
• Non-responsiveness to intervention should trigger a multi-disciplinary evaluation and should not, in itself, be considered an indication of a specific learning disability.

Adapted from "Changing the Way We Identify Learning Disabilities," CEC Today, Jan-Feb-March 2004.

Learning Disabilities

Individuals with LD generally have average or above average intelligence, yet they often do not achieve at the same academic level as their peers. Weaker academic achievement, particularly in reading, written language, and math, is perhaps the most fundamental characteristic of  LD. Significant deficits often exist in memory, metacognition, and social skills as well.

Reading

Individuals who have LD in reading have difficulties decoding or recognizing words (e.g., letter/sound omissions, insertions, substitutions, reversals) or comprehending them (e.g., recalling or discerning basic facts, main ideas, sequences, or themes). They also may lose their places while reading or reading in a choppy manner.

Another term used for reading disabilities is dyslexia. Dyslexia is best understood as a type of reading disability. During early childhood, children with dyslexia have difficulties learning spoken language. Later they have trouble decoding and spelling words and, consequently, are likely to experience comprehension problems also. A reading disability affects every aspect of an individual's life, from the early years of school when children learn to read, to later years when students are expected to read in order to learn specific content, and into the community, home, and workplace where every person needs to acquire and understand written information.

Written Language

For students with LD, problems in written language can occur in handwriting, spelling, sentence structure, vocabulary usage, volume of information produced, and organization of written ideas.  Many students with LD in reading also have difficulty writing, since both areas are language-based.

Math

Poor math achievement may appear in difficulties differentiating numbers and copying shapes, recalling math facts, writing numbers legibly or in small spaces, and relating math terms to meaning. Other weak areas may include abstract reasoning and metacognition, including identifying, using, and monitoring the use of algorithms to solve math problems.

Memory

Some people with LD have weaknesses in working memory. They have difficulty processing information so that it can be stored in long-term memory. Difficulties in working memory can lead to difficulties in long-term memory when a person needs to search for and retrieve knowledge.

Metacognition

Individuals with LD may have deficits in metacognition, the awareness of how one thinks and the monitoring of one's thinking.  Many individuals with LD do not know many effective cognitive strategies for acquiring, processing, storing, and demonstrating understanding of information.

Social and Behavioral Characteristics

Students with LD may demonstrate social or behavioral challenges. Some exhibit fewer socially acceptable behaviors than peers, are unable to predict consequences for behaviors, misinterpret social cues, or are less likely to adapt their behavior to different social situations. Coupled with academic weaknesses, this experience can lead to lowered self-perceptions of competence or worth. Others who have LD have difficulty sitting at a desk for long periods to attend to tasks and may develop social or behavioral problems in response to their frustration with learning tasks.

Prevalence

More than 50 percent of the students receiving special education services in the United States have LD. The number of students identified as having LD and receiving special education services has more than doubled since the original passage of IDEA in 1975. Some educators estimate that between 5 and 10 percent of children between ages 6 and 17 have LD.

Program Options

Most students with LD receive the majority of their education in the general education classroom. However, a continuum of school services should be available to meet each individual student's needs. Support in the general education classroom can exist in the form of a special educator co-teaching with or serving as a consultant to the general educator. Students may also receive services in a resource room or a special classroom. In addition, special schools are available for students whose needs cannot be met in the regular school. The Individualized Education Program team determines where a student with learning disabilities will receive special education services.

This publication is a product of the ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. ERIC Digests are in the public domain and may be freely reproduced and disseminated, but please acknowledge your source. This publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract no. ED-99-CO-0026. The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of OERI or the Department of Education.