The rise in popularity of Response to Intervention (RTI) as a method of identifying Learning Disabilities (LD) is partially due to the psychometric and theoretical issues inherent to the use of IQ tests in the once popular discrepancy method of identification. However, both RTI and discrepancy theories have their shortcomings, and criticisms directed at either method are usually applicable to both. This conceptual article puts forward a justification for using tests of the cognitive processes that are implicated in LD as a better method of LD identification. Although the unsuitability of the discrepancy method to accurately identify LD students is well established, it does represent the construct of LD well. Therefore, the discrepancy method can be used as an effective baseline measure against which improved identification procedures based on cognitive processes can be measured. Once these cognitive processes are more clearly defined, tests of these processes offer promise for LD identification.
AltaracM., & SarohaE. (2007). Lifetime prevalence of learning disability among US children. Pediatrics, 119, S77. doi:10.1542/peds.2006–2089
2.
AnastasiouD., & PolychronopoulouS. (2009). Identification and overidentification of specific learning disabilities (dyslexia) in Greece. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 55–69.
3.
AndreassenA.E., KnivsbergA.M., & NiemiP. (2006). Resistant readers 8 months later: Energizing the student's learning milieu by targeted counselling. Dyslexia, 12, 115–133.
4.
BaddeleyA.D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5.
BarnesM.A., & Wade-WoolleyL. (2007). Where there's a will there are ways to close the achievement gap for children with learning difficulties. Orbit, 37(1), 9–13.
6.
BekebredeJ., van der LeijA., & ShareD.L. (2009). Dutch dyslexic adolescents: Phonological-core variable-orthographic differences. Reading and Writing, 22, 133–165.
7.
BerkeleyS., BenderW.N., PeasterL.G., & SaundersL. (2009). Implementation of response to intervention: A snapshot of progress. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(1), 85–95.
8.
BerningerV.W., & HoldnackJ.A. (2008). Nature-nurture perspectives in diagnosing and treating learning disabilities: Response to questions begging answers that see the forest and the trees. In E.Fletcher-Janzen & C.R.Reynolds (Eds.), Neuropsychological perspectives on learning disabilities in the era of RTI (pp. 66–81). Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons
9.
BerningerV.W., RaskindW., RichardsT., AbbottR., & StockP. (2008). A multidisciplinary approach to understanding developmental dyslexia within working-memory architecture: Genotypes, phenotypes, brain, and instruction. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33(6), 707–744.
10.
CahanS., FonoD., & NirelR. (2010). The regression-based discrepancy definition of learning disability: A critical appraisal, Journal of Learning Disabilities45(2), 170–178. doi:10.1177/0022219409355480
11.
CaoF., BitanT., & BoothJ.R. (2008). Effective brain connectivity in children with reading difficulties during phonological processing. Brain & Language, 107, 91–101.
12.
CaylakE. (2010). The studies about phonological deficit theory in children with developmental dyslexia: Review. American Journal of Neuroscience, 6, 1–12.
13.
ChungK.K.H., & HoC. S.-H. (2010). Second language learning difficulties in Chinese children with dyslexia: What are the reading-related cognitive skills that contribute to English and Chinese word reading? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 195–211.
14.
ConeT., & WilsonL. (1981). Quantifying a severe discrepancy: A critical analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 359–371.
15.
CottonS.M., CrewtherD.P., & CrewtherS.G. (2005). Measurement error: Implications for diagnosis and discrepancy models of developmental dyslexia. Dyslexia, 11(3): 186–202.
16.
CoutinhoM.J., OswaldD.P., & BestA.M. (2002). The influence of sociodemographics and gender on the disproportionate identification of minority students as having learning disabilities. Remedial & Special Education, 23(1), 49–59. doi:10.1177/074193250202300107
17.
Davis-KeanP.E. (2005). The influence of parent education and family income on child achievement: The indirect role of parental expectations and the home environment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 294–304.
18.
DesrochesA., ConeN.E., BolgerD.J., BitanT., BurmanD.D., & BoothJ.R. (2010). Children with reading difficulties show differences in brain regions associated with orthographic processing during spoken language processing. Brain Research, 1356, 73–84. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2010.07.097.
19.
DombrowskiS.C., KamphausR.W., & ReynoldsC.R. (2004). After the demise of the discrepancy: Proposed learning disabilities diagnostic criteria. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35(4), 364–372.
20.
ElliottJ., & GibbsS. (2008). Does dyslexia exist? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(3–4), 475–491.
21.
FanX., & ChenM. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 1–22.
22.
FletcherJ.M., CoulterW.A., ReschlyD.J., & VaughnS. (2004). Alternative approaches to the definition and identification of learning disabilities: Some questions and answers. Annals of Dyslexia, 54(2), 304–331. doi:10.1007/s11881-004-0015-y
23.
FletcherJ.M., & VaughnS. (2009). Response to intervention models as alternatives to traditional views of learning disabilities: Response to commentaries. Child Development Perspectives, 3(1), 48–50.
24.
FrancisD.J., FletcherJ.M., StuebingK.K., LyonG.R., ShaywitzB.A., & ShaywitzS.E. (2005). Psychometric approaches to the identification of LD: IQ and achievement scores are not sufficient. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(2), 98–108.
25.
FrijtersJ.C., LovettM.W., SteinbachK.A., WolfM., SevcikR.A., & MorrisR.D. (2011). Neurocognitive predictors of reading outcomes for children with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 150. doi:10.1177/0022219410391185.
26.
FuchsD., & FuchsL.S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 92–99.
27.
FuchsD., FuchsL.S., ComptonD.L., BoutonB., CaffreyE., & HillL. (2007). Dynamic assessment as responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 58–63.
28.
FuchsL.S., FuchsD., & HollenbeckK.N. (2007). Extending responsiveness to intervention to mathematics at First and Third Grades. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22(1), 13–24.
29.
GathercoleS.E., BriscoeJ., ThornA., TiffanyC., & TeamA.S. (2008). Deficits in verbal long-term memory and learning in children with poor phonological short-term memory skills. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(3), 474–490.
30.
GeorgiouG.K., ParillaR. & LiaoC.H. (2008). Rapid naming speed and reading across languages that vary in orthographic consistency. Reading and Writing, 21, 885–903.
31.
GrigorenkoE.L. (2001). Developmental dyslexia: An update on genes, brains and environments. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(1), 91–125.
32.
GrigorenkoE.L. (2009). Dynamic assessment and response to intervention: Two sides of one coin. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(2), 111–132.
33.
GustafsonS., & SamuelssonS. (1999). Intelligence and dyslexia: Implications for diagnosis and intervention. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 40(2), 127–134.
34.
HamalainenJ.A., LeppanenP., EklundK., ThomsonJ.B., RichardsonU., GuttormT. K., . . . LyttinenH. (2009). Common variance in amplitude envelope perception tasks and their impact on phoneme duration perception and reading and spelling in Finnish children with reading disabilities. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 511–530.
35.
HirvonenR., GeorgiouG., LerkkanenM., AunolaK., & NurmiJ. (2010). Task-focused behaviour and literacy development: A reciprocal relationship. Journal of Research in Reading, 33(3), 302–319.
36.
HiscockM., & KindsbourneM. (2008). The education empire strikes back: Will RTI displace neuropsychology and neuroscience from the realm of learning disabilities. In E.Fletcher-Janzen & C.R.Reynolds (Eds.), Neuropsychological perspectives on learning disabilities in the era of RTI (pp. 54–65). Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
37.
HoC.S.-H., ChanD.W.O., LeeS.H., TsangS.M., & LuanV.H. (2004). Cognitive profiling and preliminary sub typing in Chinese developmental dyslexia. Cognition, 91(1), 43–75.
38.
HoldnackJ.A., & WeissL.G. (2006). Idea 2004: Anticipated implications for clinical practice-integrating assessment and intervention. Psychology in the Schools, 43(8), 871–882.
39.
HudsonR.F., HighL., & OtaibaS.A.L. (2007). Dyslexia and the brain: What does current research tell us? Reading Teacher, 60(6), 506–513.
40.
IngvarM., af TrampeP., GreitzT., ErikssonL., Stone-ElanderS., & von EulerC. (2002). Residual differences in language processing in compensated dyslexics revealed in simple word reading tasks. Brain & Language, 83, 249–267.
41.
JeffriesS., & EverattJ. (2004). Working memory: Its role in dyslexia and other specific learning difficulties. Dyslexia, 10, 196–214.
42.
JohnstonR.S., & MorrisonM. (2007). Toward a resolution of inconsistencies in the phonological deficit theory of reading disorders: Phonological reading difficulties are more severe in high-IQ poor readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(1), 66–79.
43.
KaneM.T. (2001). Current concerns in validity theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38(4), 319–342.
44.
KatzirT., KimY.S., WolfM., MorrisR., & LovettM.W. (2008). The varieties of pathways to dysfluent reading: Comparing subtypes of children with dyslexia at letter, word, and connected text levels of reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 47–66. doi:10.1177/0022219407311325
45.
KirbyJ.R., GeorgiouG., MartinussenR., & ParrilaR. (2010). Naming speed and reading: From prediction to instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(3), 341–362.
46.
LaasonenM., OinonenS., SandbackaM., SalakariA., & ServiceE. (2012). Phonological and sensory short-term memory are correlates and both affected in developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing, 25(9), 2247–2273.
47.
LinklaterD.L., O'ConnorR., & PalardyG.J. (2009). Kindergarten literacy assessment of English only and English language learner students: An examination of the predictive validity of three phonemic awareness measures. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 369–394.
48.
LinverM.R., Brooks-GunnJ., & KohenD. (2002). Family processes as pathways from income to young children's development. Developmental Psychology, 38, 719–734.
49.
LukanenokK. (2011). Relationship between rapid naming speed and reading speed as a marker of reading difficulties of Estonian children from 6 to 8 years. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 13(1), 113–128. doi: 10.2478/v10099-011-0009-x
50.
MachekG.R., & NelsonJ.M. (2007). How should reading disabilities be operationalized? A survey of practicing school psychologists. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22(2), 147–157. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00239.x
51.
MarderC., & D'AmicoR. (1992). How well are youth with disabilities really doing? A comparison of youth with disabilities and youth in general. Washington, DC: Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs.
52.
MatherN., & SchrankF.A. (2001). Use of the WJ III Discrepancy Procedures for Learning Disabilities Identification and Diagnosis (Woodcock-Johnson III Assessment Service Bulletin No. 3). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing
53.
McLeodJ. (1979). Educational under-achievement: Toward a defensible psychometric definition. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 42–50.
54.
McNamaraJ.K. & WilloughbyT. (2010). A longitudinal study of risk-taking behavior in adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(1), 11–24. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00297.x
55.
MetsalaJ.L., SweetA.P., & GuthrieJ.T. (1996). How children's motivations relate to literacy development and instruction. The Reading Teacher, 49(8), 660–662.
O'DonnellP.S., & MillerD.M. (2011). Identifying students with specific learning disabilities: School psychologists’ acceptability of the discrepancy model versus response to intervention. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 22(2)83–94. doi:10.117/1044207310395724
58.
O'ShaughnessyT.E., & SwansonH.L. (1998). Do immediate memory deficits in students with learning disabilities in reading reflect a developmental lag or deficit?: A selective meta-analysis of the literature. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21(2), 123–148.
59.
ReschlyD.J., & HospJ.L. (2004). State SLD identification policies and practices. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27(4), 197–213.
60.
ReynoldsC.R. (1984). Critical measurement issues in learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 18(4), 451–476.
61.
ReynoldsC.R. (2008). RTI, neuroscience, and sense: Chaos in the diagnosis and treatment of learning disabilities. In E.Fletcher-Janzen & C.R.Reynolds (Eds.), Neuropsychological perspectives on learning disabilities in the era of RTI (pp. 14–27). Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
62.
ReynoldsC.R., & ShaywitzS.E. (2009). Response to intervention: Prevention and remediation, perhaps. Diagnosis, no. Child Development Perspectives, 3(1), 44–47.
63.
RiccioC.A. (2008). Compatability of neuropsychology and RTI in the diagnosis and assessment of learning disabilities. In E.Fletcher-Janzen & C.R.Reynolds (Eds.), Neuropsychological perspectives on learning disabilities in the era of RTI (pp. 82–98). Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
64.
RichardsT.L., & BerningerV.W. (2008). Abnormal fMRI connectivity in children with dyslexia during a phoneme task: Before but not after treatment. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21, 294–308.
65.
RobertsJ.E., RabinowitchS., BryantD. M., BurchinalM.R., KochM.A., & RameyC. (1989). Language skills of children with different preschool experiences. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32, 773–786.
66.
RutterM., & YuleW. (1975). The concept of specific reading retardation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 16(3), 181–197.
67.
SavageR., & FredericksonN. (2006). Beyond phonology: What else is needed to describe the problems of below-average readers and spellers? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 399–413.
68.
SchiffR., & RavehM. (2006). Deficient morphological processing in adults with developmental dyslexia: Another barrier to efficient word recognition? Dyslexia, 13, 110–129.
69.
SchuchardtK., MaehlerC., & HasselhornM. (2008). Working memory deficits in children with specific learning disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 514. doi:10.1177/0022219408317856
70.
ScruggsT.E., & MastropieriM.A. (2002). On babies and bathwater: Addressing the problems of identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(3), 155.
71.
ShaywitzS.E., & ShaywitzB.A. (2004). Reading disability and the brain. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 6–11.
72.
SiegelL.S., & RyanE.B. (1989). The development of working memory in normally achieving and subtypes of learning disabled students. Child Development, 60, 973–980.
73.
SilverC.H., RuffR.M., IversonG.L., BarthJ.T., BroshekD.K., . . . ReynoldsC.R. (2008). Learning disabilities: The need for neuropsychological evaluation. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 23(2), 217–219.
74.
SnowlingM.J. (1980). The development of grapheme-phoneme correspondence in normal and dyslexic readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 29(2), 294–305.
75.
SpagnaM.E. (1998). Dyslexia marker variables: Reviving a system for reporting sample characteristics in learning disabilities research. Remedial and Special Education, 19(5), 291–299.
76.
SpeeceD.L. (2008). Learning disabilities in the USA: Operationalising a construct. In L.Florian & M.J.McLaughlin (Eds.), Disability classfication in education: Issues and perspectives (pp. 69–82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
77.
StanovichK.E., & SiegelL.S. (1994). Phenotypic performance profile of children with reading disabilities: A regression-based test of the phonological-core variable-difference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 24–53
78.
SternbergR.J., & GrigorenkoE.L. (2002). Difference scores in the identification of children with learning disabilities it's time to use a different method. Journal of School Psychology, 40(1), 65–83.
79.
StoodleyC.J., RayN.J., JackA., & SteinJ.F. (2008). Implicit learning in control, dyslexic, and garden-variety poor readers, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1145, 173–183.
80.
StuebingK.K., FletcherJ.M., LeDouxJ.M., Reid LyonG., ShaywitzS.E., & ShaywitzB.A. (2002). Validity of IQ-discrepancy classifications of reading disabilities: A meta analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 469. doi:10.3102/00028312039002469
81.
SwansonH.L., ZhengX., & JermanO. (2009). Working memory, short term memory, and reading disabilities: A selective meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(3), 260–287.
82.
TanakaH., BlackJ. M., HulmeC., StanleyL.M., KeslerS.R., . . . HoeftF. (2011). The brain basis of the phonological deficit in dyslexia is independent of IQ. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1442. doi: 10.1177/0956797611419521
83.
TaylorM.J., & BaruschA.S. (2004). Personal, family, and multiple barriers of long term welfare recipients. Social Work, 49(2), 175–183.
84.
TorppaM., LyytinenP., ErskineJ., EklundK., & LyytinenH. (2010). Language development, literacy skills, and predictive connections to reading in Finnish children with and without familial risk for dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(4), 308–321.
85.
Van den BroeckW. (2002). Will the real discrepant learning disability please stand up? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(3), 209–213
86.
Van Der HeydenA.M. (2011). Evolving standards of diagnostic accuracy in predicting and avoiding academic failure. Advances in Learning and Behavioural Disabilities, 24, 59–78. doi:10.1108/S0735-004X(2011)0000024005
87.
van der LelyH.K.J., & MarshallC.R. (2010). Assessing component language deficits in the early detection of reading difficulty risk. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(4), 357–368.
88.
VolkerM.A., LopataC., & Cook-CottoneC. (2006). Assessment of children with intellectual giftedness and reading disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 43(8), 855–869.
89.
WillburgerE., FusseneggerB., MollK., WoodG., & LanderlK. (2008). Naming speed in dyslexia and dyscalculia. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 224–236.
90.
WillisJ.O., & DumontR. (2006). And never the twain shall meet: Can response to intervention and cognitive assessment be reconciled? Psychology in the Schools, 43(8), 901–908.
91.
WillsonV.L., & ReynoldsC.R. (2002). Misconceptions in Van den Broeck's representation of misconceptions about learning disability research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(3), 205–208.
92.
WolfM., & BowersP.G. (1999). The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 415–438.
93.
WongS.W.L., & HoC.S.-H. (2010). The nature of the automatization deficit in Chinese children with dyslexia. Child Neuropsychology, 16, 405–415.
94.
WoolleyG. (2007). A comprehension intervention for children with reading comprehension difficulties. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12(1), 43–50.
95.
ZabelR.J., & NigroF.A. (1999). Juvenile offenders with behavioural disorders, learning disabilities, and no disabilities: Self-reports of personal, family, and school characteristics. Behavioural Disorders, 25(1), 22–40.
96.
ZeffiroT., & EdenG. (2000). The neural basis of developmental dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 50, 3–30
