UNDERSTANDING THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY
What Is A Specific Learning Disability?
Specific Learning Disability – “Specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of
the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or
written, which manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell,
or do mathematical calculations.
Such terms includes such conditions as perceptual
disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.
Such term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or
motor disabilities, of mental retardations, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental,
culture, or economic disadvantage.” - NASP postion statement (definition of SLD in IDEA
2004).
*Based on this definition, it is understood that a measure of basic psychological processes will
be measured.
What Is The Criteria For Determining A Specific Learning Disability?
According to the law, the criteria adopted by the state –
1) Must not require the use of a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and
achievement for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability
2) Must permit the use of a process based on the child’s response to scientific,
research-based intervention; and
3) May permit the use of other alternative research-based procedures for determining
whether a child has a specific learning disability
Oregon has adopted the following:
1) They do not require severe discrepancy, but they also do not prohibit the use of a
discrepancy model(?) (states are allowed to do this – communique article)
2) They do permit the use of a process based on the child’s response to scientific,
research-based intervention; and
3) They do permit the use of other alternative research-based procedures for
determining a specific learning disability.
What Are Other Alternative Research-Based Procedures For Determining A Specific Learning
Disability?
It seems that the research in this area is sparse. *According to the Communique article, “The
intent is to allow for flexibility as practice continues to be informed by scientific research”.
Examples: Concordance-Discordance theory or Achievement/discrepancy Model, Multi-tiered
model procedure (NASP)
Although there may not be many research-based procedures, the law states that in order for a
child to be found eligible, they must meet this criterion as part of the eligibility process (if not
using RTI):
Exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or
both, relative to age, Oregon grade-level standards, or intellectual development,
that is determined to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning
disability.
Therefore, an assessment that addresses each of these areas (i.e., performance and
achievement in the areas of age, Oregon grade-level standards, and intellectual development)
would need to be conducted to satisfy all areas outlined and to be considered comprehensive.
The law states that with respect to all special education evaluations, “The child is assessed in
all areas related to the suspected disability…”
How Do We Operationalize Definitions In This Statement?
Pattern – www.dictionary.com defines pattern as “A combination of qualities, acts, tendencies,
etc., forming a consistent or characteristic arrangement”
Communique article states, that in order to determine a pattern of strengths and weaknesses,
there needs to be an “examination of profiles across different tests”
Therefore, a pattern is a collection of measures/data that show consistency (e.g., across time,
setting, rating).
Performance- “presumably refers to functioning in the classroom setting” – Communiqué
article.
Achievement- attainment level of academic skills.
Age- chronological age
Oregon Grade-Level Standard- those defined by the state for each grade level
Intellectual Development- …
Strength – There area two types of strengths: 1) Relative
Strengths
Normative Data
Relative Strength
In profile of abilities, a skill
that
is
statistically
and
clinically higher than other
abilities on normative tests
and rating scales
Normative Strength
Ability that is statistically
higher than other same-aged
peers (1 standard deviation?)
on normative tests and rating
scales.
Strengths, and 2) Normative
Curriculum-Based
Data that show the child is
doing substantially better in
an
area
of
achievement
compared to the profile of the
student’s other skills.
Data that show the child is
exceeding
age/grade
level
achievement in an area of
academics.
Weakness – There area two types of weaknesses: 1) Relative Weaknesses, and 2) Normative
Weaknesses
Normative Data
Curriculum-Based
Relative Weakness
In profile of abilities, a skill Data that show the child is
that
is
statistically
and doing substantially weaker in
clinically lower than other an
area
of
achievement
abilities on normative tests compared to the profile of the
and rating scales
student’s other skills.
Normative Weakness
Ability that is statistically Data that show the child is
lower than other same-aged below
age/grade
level
peers (1 standard deviation?) achievement in an area of
on normative tests and rating academics.
scales.
Types of Assessments in Each Area
AGE
PERFORMANCE
(more
classroombased)


ACHIEVEMENT
(more skill-based)

Observation in the
student’s learning
environment
Achievement
/
Behavior
Rating
Scales
Standardized,
norm-referenced
achievement tests.
OREGON
GRADELEVEL STANDARD
 Work Samples
 Report
Card
grades
 CBMs
 Other curriculum
assessments
INTELLECTUAL
DEVELOPMENT
 Cognitive
Assessment
in
comparison
to
performance data
in the classroom



OSAT
Criterion-based
measures
for
grade level
Cognitive
Assessment
comparison
skill-based
achievement
measures.
in
to
**According to the criterion statement, the student only needs to exhibit a pattern of strength
and weakness in one of the following boxes to meet the requirement. However, it must be
relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability.