Competing Paradigms in Learning Disabilities Classification by Schools and the Variations in the Meaning of Discrepant Achievement

In order to examine the congruence of three paradigms that classify children as learning disabled, a sample of 76 students was divided according to their ranking based on three separate sets of criteria. The initial sample was randomly selected from second-, third-, and fourth-grade students who had been referred by their classroom teacher to a Student Study Team (SST) for intervention and determination of special education eligibility. The conceptual paradigms were operationalized with data collected from the teacher (classroom reading assessments), the students (IQ and achievement scores), and the SST (placement decision). Congruence was moderate between SST placement decisions and discrepancy-based determination of learning disability and between SST decisions and severity of academic referral. Little congruence was found between severity of academic referral and discrepancy-based learning disabilities. Examination of mean differences between the groups created by the paradigms revealed that nondiscrepant students who were nonplaced were frequently high in problem behaviors, whereas discrepant students who were nonplaced were most frequently lower achieving girls without problem behaviors. Students with a severe academic referral who did not meet the learning disabilities criteria had a less than 50% chance of placement. All of the nondiscrepant placed students were boys. This group did not differ significantly from learning disabled placed students, except by IQ. The teacher's perception of the severity of the academic referral created the most hornogeneous group of students. The separation of students into learning disabled or nondiscrepant groups demonstrated the similarities, rather than the differences, between the groups. Conclusions regarding the weighting of behavior and achievement discrepancy versus aptitude and achievement discrepancy are discussed in light of developing criteria for reading disabilities in the learning disabilities field.