Fletcher, J. M., Coulter, W. A., Reschly, D. J., & Vaughn, S. (2004). Alternative approaches to the definition and identification of learning disabilities: Some questions and answers. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(2), 304-331.
The authors of this theoretical research article argued for education to abandon the IQ-discrepancy model when diagnosing and providing intervention for students with learning disabilities. Instead, the authors favored providing interventions first for students struggling in the classroom, and qualifying them for special education services only after these intervention measures have been implemented.
The authors proposed alternatives to the way in which education qualifies students with learning disabilities for special education services. They suggested early intervention, especially in the area of reading, for those students struggling in the classroom. The Response To Intervention (RTI) model is mentioned as an approach to providing additional support to those students. Only after adequate proof of intervention has taken place, will the student be referred for special education services unique to their learning disability. The authors also identified the importance of monitoring students’ progress over time to measure growth. They concluded that the IQ test is not an appropriate way for education to qualify students with learning disabilities for special education, but that educators will need to be better prepared to employ RTI intervention strategies in the classroom.
The argument in this article is dated in regard to the fact that today most schools have already implemented the RTI process as an alternative way of identifying and referring students with learning disabilities for special education services. Educators must be aware of the range of abilities in a classroom among students and the importance of using differentiated instruction to focus on students’ needs. By incorporating differentiated instruction into daily lessons, educators can provide additional support for all students, not just those qualified under special education services.
The authors of this theoretical research article argued for education to abandon the IQ-discrepancy model when diagnosing and providing intervention for students with learning disabilities. Instead, the authors favored providing interventions first for students struggling in the classroom, and qualifying them for special education services only after these intervention measures have been implemented.
The authors proposed alternatives to the way in which education qualifies students with learning disabilities for special education services. They suggested early intervention, especially in the area of reading, for those students struggling in the classroom. The Response To Intervention (RTI) model is mentioned as an approach to providing additional support to those students. Only after adequate proof of intervention has taken place, will the student be referred for special education services unique to their learning disability. The authors also identified the importance of monitoring students’ progress over time to measure growth. They concluded that the IQ test is not an appropriate way for education to qualify students with learning disabilities for special education, but that educators will need to be better prepared to employ RTI intervention strategies in the classroom.
The argument in this article is dated in regard to the fact that today most schools have already implemented the RTI process as an alternative way of identifying and referring students with learning disabilities for special education services. Educators must be aware of the range of abilities in a classroom among students and the importance of using differentiated instruction to focus on students’ needs. By incorporating differentiated instruction into daily lessons, educators can provide additional support for all students, not just those qualified under special education services.