Learning Disabilities Assessment: Issues and Implications
A White Paper from the Chancellor’s Office LD Field Advisory Committee
Introduction
Historically, the California Community Colleges (CCC) have provided opportunities for postsecondary education unparalleled anywhere in the United States or in the world. Students,
regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status, or disability could obtain a highquality education to meet the multiple missions of the California Community College system:
workforce training, basic skills education, and preparing students for transfer to four-year
colleges and universities. The current economic crisis, which has been called the worst since
the Depression, has had a significant, negative effect on the ability of the colleges to meet their
mission and to provide an affordable, quality education for all students who can benefit from
instruction. This quality education incorporates the provision of necessary student services to
support academic success, especially for students with challenges in the educational setting,
including those with disabilities.
While all programs within the CCC’s have experienced severe cutbacks in funding, there have
been disproportionate cuts to categorical programs, such as Extended Opportunity Programs
and Services (EOPS) and Disabled Students Programs and Services (DSPS), which are
designed to serve the state's most disadvantaged students by providing financial aid and
support services. Cuts to those programs ranged from 38% to 52%, and while it was hoped that
a significant portion of these cuts would be backfilled by one-time federal American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, that allocation was substantially less than anticipated.
The Chancellor’s Office, in an effort to provide the colleges with greater flexibility in allocating
their limited funds, disseminated a document entitled “Administrative Relief for Student Services
Categorical Programs,” in October 2009. This document outlined the administrative
modifications to Title 5 that may be implemented while meeting the requirements of current law
and categorical program regulations. However, there are some federal and state mandates
which cannot be overridden, particularly with regard to students with disabilities. According to
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as
well as state law (Gov. Code Sec. 11135 et. seq.), it is a college responsibility to provide
disability-related auxiliary aids and services and other reasonable accommodations to meet the
needs of students with disabilities. Nothing in the law states that DSPS is responsible for
providing these services; rather, it is a college responsibility. Provisions of the ADA require that
all resources of a public institution are to be considered available to meet the needs of eligible
students with disabilities.
Given these restrictions on relief from mandates, colleges have been looking at ways to reduce
costs while remaining within the provisions of the law. As a result, in regard to serving students
with disabilities, many colleges have been differentiating between services which are mandated
by state and federal laws, such as the ADA and Section 504, and those which are permitted but
not required by regulations pertaining to students with disabilities. The two areas being
scrutinized most intensely as non-mandated services are special classes for students with
disabilities and assessment to determine eligibility for students with learning disabilities (LD).
This paper presents considerations for colleges to review when deciding to reduce or eliminate
learning disability assessment in light of the role it plays in supporting community college
instruction and, most of all, student success. Several issues are explored in this paper so that
1
in making decisions about which services to fund and which services to cut, college
administrators will have access to information which is germane to this concern.
The Dilemma of LD Assessment
Title 5 Regulations (Sections 56032 – 56042) define the disability categories for which the
CCC’s may claim reimbursement to offset the direct excess costs of providing support services
to students with disabilities. These categories include Physical Disability, Communication
Disability, Learning Disability, Acquired Brain Injury, Developmentally Delayed Learner,
Psychological Disability, and Other Disability. Students with these disabilities must present
documentation from an appropriate professional that they have a condition which meets the
relevant definition of disability. In all cases except LD, students generally can obtain such
documentation from a qualified professional or another agency. In the case of LD, some
students may have documentation from K-12, another college, or an alternate source.
However, many students have never been assessed and only are referred for assessment,
often by faculty, when their previous “self-compensating” skills fail as the academic rigor at the
college level increases.
This situation creates a dilemma in terms of student access to accommodations and support
services. Those who have adequate prior documentation or who can afford a private evaluation
by a learning disabilities specialist or psychologist to verify a learning disability at a cost of $500
to $5000 are eligible to receive the assistance they need to maximize their success in the
CCC’s. Those who were never previously identified or who cannot afford a private evaluation
must rely on the assessments offered in the CCC’s to document their need for
accommodations. The University of Georgia Education Policy & Evaluation Center (UGA), in
their Review and Evaluation Study of the California Community Colleges Learning Disabilities
Eligibility Model (September 2009) reported that 51% of the student survey participants had not
been identified as LD or received any services for their learning disabilities prior to attending a
college in the CCC system, concluding that, “many students entering postsecondary institutions
in California will not have documentation to access accommodations necessary for their
academic success.” Based on the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO)
Data Mart reports, in 2008-09, the CCC’s served 24,528 students with learning disabilities.
According to UGA’s findings, more than 12,000 students would not have been identified as
eligible for accommodations and support services if LD assessment had not been available in
the colleges. It becomes important, therefore, to examine the role of LD assessment as it
impacts students, faculty, and DSPS programs.
Learning disability is defined in Title 5 as a persistent condition of presumed neurological
dysfunction which may exist with other disabling conditions. This dysfunction continues despite
instruction in standard classroom situations. To be categorized as learning disabled, a student
must exhibit:
(a) Average to above-average intellectual ability;
(b) Severe processing deficit(s);
(c) Severe aptitude-achievement discrepancy (ies); and
(d) Measured achievement in an instructional or employment setting.
The standard process for determining whether a student meets the Title 5 criteria for learning
disability services is a comprehensive educational evaluation which addresses each of the
components above. This evaluation is usually conducted by a qualified learning disabilities
specialist who uses the results, not only to determine students’ eligibility, but also to identify
2
their educational limitations and to recommend accommodations and support services that will
compensate for those limitations and enhance their likelihood of successfully completing their
educational goals.
The Role of LD Assessment in Student Success
An examination of quantitative and qualitative data may be useful in evaluating the role of LD
assessment in student success. Multiple data sources, including Management Information
Systems (MIS), college Program Reviews, and individual campus research studies have
documented that students receiving services for learning disabilities perform as well or better
than their non-disabled peers on commonly used measures of student success. A few
examples follow to illustrate this point.
MIS data from 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 may be used to compare students with learning
disabilities to the general CCC student population on a number of variables related to student
success (see Table 1). An examination of persistence rates from Fall 2007 to Spring 2008
shows that students with LD had a persistence rate of 83% compared to a rate of 65% for the
general student population. Looking at persistence through one more semester to Fall 2008,
the persistence rate for LD students was 66% compared to 49% for the general student
population. In both cases, LD students demonstrated higher persistence rates than in the
general student population. Retention rates for the two groups were nearly identical, with 85%
for LD students and 86% for the general student population. Completion rates for degree
applicable courses were 66% for both groups. Completion rates for Basic Skills courses were
45% for LD students compared with 36% for the general student population. Completion rates
for workforce development courses were 72% for LD students compared with 69 % for the
general student population. The data support the conclusion that LD students performed as
well or better than their college peers on various measures of student success. Table 2 shows
the statistics pertaining to CCC students participating in a cohort study for 2007-2008. These
data also demonstrate that LD students performed as well or better than their cohort peers on
every variable except for transfer to 4-year institutions. The MIS data from 2008-2009 are
represented in Tables 3 and 4 and show patterns which are comparable to the data from the
previous year, e.g., LD students perform similarly to their peers on measures of student
success.
The MIS data from the disability category known as "Other" were also compared to the data
from the general CCC student population. This category includes all other verifiable disabilities
and health related limitations that adversely affect academic performance but do not fall into any
of the other disability categories. Other disabilities include conditions having limited strength,
vitality, or alertness due to chronic or acute health problems. Examples are environmental
disabilities, heart conditions, tuberculosis, nephritis, sickle cell anemia, hemophilia, leukemia,
epilepsy, acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), diabetes, etc. While LD does have its
own category, many LD students are being included in the Other category because they have a
prior history of disability and continue to manifest educational limitations in the community
college setting. In the absence of current assessment information to verify their qualification for
services to students with learning disabilities, many colleges are serving these students under
Other. An examination of the MIS Other data shows that the persistence and retention rates are
virtually identical to the rates of LD students, though their course completion rates lag behind
those of both the general student population and students identified as LD. However, it is not
possible to determine what percentage of the Other category is made up of students with
learning disabilities, so these data are limited in their usefulness. To clarify questions pertaining
3
to the Other category, the Chancellor's Office will be exploring these issues in a separate
contract.
Data from a number of individual colleges note the same trends as the statewide data from MIS.
At Santa Barbara City College, LD students had average term GPA’s and semester retention
rates that were comparable to those of their non-disabled peers. Their persistence rates in four
out of the five reported semesters ranged from 3.6 to 11.5% higher, and their degree/certificate
completion rates for the five reported semesters ranged from 16.3 to 22.2% higher than those of
their non-disabled peers. At Diablo Valley College, the success and retention rates of LD
students mirror those of students without disabilities. College of Alameda found that students
who use DSPS services:
 Earn grades comparable to peers
 Complete courses at a rate significantly higher than college peers
 Drop courses at a significantly lower rate
 Persist in courses (enroll next semester) at a significantly higher rate
Although their data was not specific to LD, it is most likely representative of LD students who
make up almost 25% of students in their DSPS program.
While these statistics cannot substantiate a cause and effect relationship between LD and
student success, LD support services provided throughout the CCC system almost certainly
represent a contributing factor in the success rates of students who have been identified as
eligible for these services. Since more than half of the 24,528 LD students in the CCC system
had their eligibility determined by the statewide LD assessment process, the role of LD
assessment in student success is significant.
Quantitative data provides valuable information in understanding the role of LD assessment in
student success; however, qualitative data can offer another perspective on this issue. The
following commentary, written by a student with dyslexia who went through the LD assessment
process at a community college, offers a student perspective on the role of LD assessment in
academic success.
I have a learning disability that has taken me to misplacements in the hallways of
my brain and the hallways of various educational offices. During my younger
educational years in school, my time and energy for learning were consumed by the
lack of and support for an accurate diagnosis. I felt as though I wore a mask by
developing coping skills to barely squeak by from one grade level to the next. What
I did not know was there is a name as well as a process that could have empowered
me to deal with my learning disability. After a constant struggle in elementary and
high school classes, I attempted higher education immediately upon graduating high
school. In 1977, when I entered college for the first time, there was no learning
disability assessment available. During my first semester, one of my college
professors told me to “go home and become a wife and mother.” He went on to tell
me that I would not cut it in college. I lived the next 30 years believing what that
college professor told me. By the time I reached the age of 49 and realized that I
have the ability to connect with and educate others, especially those who struggle
with learning disabilities, I found the courage to return to higher education to seek a
degree in elementary education.
Upon entering Mt. San Jacinto College at 49 years of age in 2007, I discovered
there was an extremely valuable program, the Assessment for Learning Disabilities
(LD). Unlike the professor I encountered many years previously, I was fortunate
4
enough to be approached by a professor who herself had the education to detect
that I was a candidate for Assessment for Learning Disabilities. My English
professor recognized that I was not aware of the accommodations available for
those with learning disabilities and referred me for assessment. Through this
assessment, the confusion and misplacements of so many years were finally
diagnosed as dyslexia. In addition to the translation of information going into my
brain I also struggle with the outputs from my brain to my hand and the words from
my brain to my mouth which are not always in proper order. As I went through the
LD assessment process to determine my abilities (instead of lack of abilities) I found
new strength in understanding the complexities of dyslexia that was and always will
be a part of who I am. Through the tremendously valuable LD assessment process
I have learned new skills to manage my abilities and finally continue my education. I
had to learn to stop masking my disability, and through accommodations made
possible from an accurate diagnosis, I was assisted with many new tools to succeed
at the college level. Some examples of LD accommodations I use to succeed in my
college courses are 1) the aid of a note-taker so I can read their notes comparing
them with mine; 2) the testing center is available which I use as an aid to not disturb
other students while I speak out loud since I am an auditory learner; 3) letters for me
to present to my instructors which explain the strengths and weaknesses of my
learning styles; and 4) the use of a tape-recorder in lecture courses. These are just
a few of the LD accommodations that have assisted me in improving my confidence
and my ability to learn the educational material which has resulted in improving my
grades. I now feel that obtaining a higher education is a possibility that is available
to me. I am now able to manage the frustration that comes about when I get
overwhelmed with new material and information.
LD Assessment Needed for Student Transfer to Four Year Schools, Licensure, and Other
Standardized Examinations
The student above, like many others in the CCC system, plans to transfer to a four-year
institution to pursue more advanced degrees. In order to receive accommodations in that
setting, LD students must provide comprehensive documentation of their learning disabilities
and of the educational limitations imposed by those disabilities. Community college LD
Specialists have worked with LD Specialists from the University of California (UC) and the
California State University (CSU) campuses to agree on what type of documentation is needed
to ensure a seamless transition for students with LD. The CCC LD assessment process
provides this documentation so that LD students can continue to receive the accommodations
that allow them to be successful in post-secondary education.
In addition, many students from the CCC’s are required to take high-stakes tests as they
transition to academic, vocational, and professional areas. Examples of these tests are the
licensure exams for Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVN), Registered Nurses (RN), and
psychiatric technicians, the Graduate Record Exam (GRE), the Law School Admission Test
(LSAT), the California Basic Educational Skills Test (CBEST), the Armed Services Vocational
Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and many others. Students with learning disabilities are entitled to
use appropriate accommodations on these exams as long as they provide documentation of
their disability. The CCC LD assessment provides the documentation that enables students
with LD to access needed accommodations on these high-stakes tests. LD assessment
increases the likelihood of success for students with learning disabilities during their community
5
college experience as well as in their preparation for transfer and for transition to vocational and
professional endeavors.
The Role of LD Assessment in Supporting Faculty and Advancing Students through their
Academic Plans
Ever since DSPS programs were established at the CCC campuses, DSPS Coordinators,
Counselors, and LD Specialists have worked diligently to provide outreach to faculty regarding
students with disabilities. The increase in faculty awareness has resulted in collaborative efforts
which have enhanced academic success for these students. In-service programs and
communication between DSPS staff and faculty have been so successful that faculty, especially
those in English and math, have become a major source of referrals for students with learning
disabilities. Referrals of students for LD assessment have increased as faculty have noted
improved performance in those students who are using accommodations. Students who go
through the LD assessment and subsequently start using appropriate accommodations are
more likely to complete classes successfully and continue advancing through their educational
plans. Conversely, students who are not assessed and who, therefore, are unable to access
needed accommodations, are less likely to succeed in their classes and tend to repeat them,
taking up seats which may prevent other students from enrolling in those classes. This is of
special concern during the current budget crisis, when fill rates are high and space in classes is
at a premium. If LD assessment is not available, faculty have few options for getting students
the specialized help they may need.
The Role of LD Assessment in DSPS Programs
The DSPS allocation is based, in large part, on the weighted number of students served. In
fact, after the base allocation has been distributed, 90 percent of the remaining funds are
allocated on the basis of the numbers of students served, weighted by disability group. Weights
are assigned to each disability category and range from 0.38 for psychological disabilities to
4.87 for deaf and hard of hearing. The differentiation in weights is based on the recognition that
certain disability groups require more in-depth services than other groups. The weighting factor
for LD is 3.15, the third highest of the nine disability categories. One reason for the high
weighting for LD is to provide sufficient funds to cover the cost of LD assessment, which has a
significant impact on the overall DSPS budget. The weighted student count (WSC) dollar value
is $400, so this part of the allocation is determined by multiplying the number of students in
each disability category by the weighting factor for that disability, and multiplying that product by
$400. If colleges choose to reduce or eliminate LD assessment, the number of LD students
being served through DSPS drops dramatically, with a corresponding drop in the DSPS
allocation. As a result, many colleges have had to reduce DSPS staff, which has had a
deleterious effect on student access to services. It is not uncommon for students to face a sixweek wait to see a counselor. And for colleges that have reduced their LD assessment, wait
lists for testing may be several months long. The ensuing lack of services and accommodations
leads to higher failure rates among students with disabilities, a result that is inconsistent with
most college mission statements, which focus on outreach to and inclusion of all populations
and providing accessible, comprehensive and quality educational programs and services to
diverse student populations.
6
Other Considerations Pertaining to LD Assessment
There is a common misconception that all students who are referred for LD assessment must
go through an extensive battery of tests in order to determine their eligibility for LD services. In
reality, not all students who are referred for assessment are required to go through the complete
testing process. Whenever possible, existing documentation from other sources, both public
and private, may be evaluated to determine student eligibility for LD services. If the outside
assessment is sufficiently comprehensive to determine eligibility using the criteria of the
statewide LD Eligibility & Services Model (LDESM), no additional assessment is required. In
addition, some students referred for LD assessment are able to provide documentation of
another disability for which accommodations similar to those provided to LD students are
available. In this case, no assessment is conducted since the students are able to access
appropriate accommodations with their existing disability documentation.
Frequently, a student referred for LD testing brings in an outside assessment of LD, but the
documentation is missing one or more elements needed to determine eligibility. In such cases,
a partial assessment may be completed to obtain the missing information that will enable the LD
Specialist to determine whether the student meets the eligibility criteria of the LDESM. This
abbreviated evaluation takes significantly less time to complete, and eligible students are
quickly matched with the accommodations they need to compensate for their educational
limitations.
Many high school students have received special education services in the past but do not have
current enough assessment information to be used as outside assessment documentation in the
LDESM. Because these students have a history of disability and continue to manifest
educational limitations, they are entitled to appropriate accommodations under the ADA. To
ensure that these students receive the help they need in a timely manner, they may be served
under the “Other” disability category, rather than waiting to be assessed for learning disability
eligibility. Ideally, their testing would be updated as time and funding allow, especially if they
are planning to transfer to a four-year institution, which will require a more current evaluation.
The full assessment procedure is used only for students who have no previous LD assessment,
no history of LD services, and no other verifiable disability for which academic accommodations
can be provided. The various options for determining eligibility offer flexibility which
substantially reduces the number of students who need to go through the entire LD assessment
battery. In addition, these options provide a faster pipeline for students to receive the
accommodations they need in order to enhance their academic success.
Even though most colleges do not offer LD assessment to students who have adequate prior
documentation of learning disability or to those who provide verification of another disability for
which accommodations may be authorized, there are often more students seeking assessment
than there are resources for providing it. As a result, many colleges have developed criteria for
prioritizing which students are most in need of LD assessment. The following example
illustrates this prioritization:
After the Learning Disability Specialist has reviewed the LD Intake Screening,
interviewed the student and determined that LD indicators are present, testing
priority is as follows:
7
1. Students without prior documentation of disability who think they may
have a learning disability or who have been told by instructors that
they may have a learning disability and should be tested.
2. Students who bring in outside assessment of LD from K-12, but the
documentation is missing one or more elements needed to determine
eligibility. Such students may be claimed as “Other” until LD
assessment confirms eligibility.
3. Students requesting accommodations that are not supported by
existing documentation of their disability on file (e.g. cannot match
requested accommodation with documented educational limitation).
4. Students with out of date (3 or more years old) assessments planning
to transfer.
Note:
If a student presents documentation of a physical, sensory, or psychological
disability which allows us to provide the accommodations the student and
counselor determine to be appropriate and necessary, we do not test just to be
able to count the student as LD, even though the weighted student count is
higher and therefore the funding would be higher.
According to Title 5, Testing for LD is a method of determining eligibility for
services and accommodations through DSPS. If a student is eligible for the
services and accommodations which have been determined necessary for
college success, based on the educational limitations resulting from their already
documented disability, we do not test.
The statewide DSPS Coordinator has stated that colleges may be justified in excluding from LD
assessment as a matter of policy the two groups mentioned above: those who are eligible to
receive accommodations based on another verified disability and those whose prior
documentation of LD is sufficiently comprehensive to meet the criteria of the LDESM.
Summary and Conclusions
The issue of providing LD assessment in the community colleges is a controversial one. On
one hand, there are costs associated with providing LD assessments. On the other hand, for
many students with learning disabilities, it is their only avenue for accessing the
accommodations they need to be successful in completing their educational programs. By
screening out those students who have existing documentation of LD and those who are eligible
to receive appropriate accommodations for other disabilities, the number of students needing
LD assessment can be reduced significantly. For the remaining group of students seeking LD
assessment, colleges are encouraged to prioritize testing to ensure that those with the most
urgent need are provided with the opportunity to discover whether an undiagnosed learning
disability may be contributing to their lack of success in the academic setting. For those who
qualify for LD services, the provision of accommodations may spell the difference between
success and failure. LD assessment ensures access; access makes possible success.
Written by Marcia Krull, LD Specialist (Retired), on behalf of the LD Field Advisory Committee for the CCC
Chancellor's Office, Jan. 21, 2011
8
Table 1
Comparison of Student Success Variables Fall 2007 - Spring 2008
Persistence Persistence
Retention
Course
Course
Course
F07 - S08
F07 - F08
Attempted
Completion Completion Completion
vs.
Degree
Basic
Workforce
Completed
Applicable
Skills
Development
Enrollments
LD
0.83
0.66
0.85
0.66
0.45
0.72
Gen
CCC
Pop
0.65
0.49
0.86
0.66
0.36
0.69
Rates shown represent percentages of students in each category.
Rates are rounded to nearest hundredth.
Table 2
Comparison of Academic Success for LD and General CCC Students in Cohort Study
2007-2008
% of Total
% of Total
General CCC LD Students
CCC
LD Students
Population
in Cohort
Students in
Cohort
TOTAL COHORT
STUDENTS
6,219
490,586
DEGREE EARNED
735
35,702
0.118
0.073
CREDIT
CERTIFICATE
EARNED
418
14,867
0.067
0.030
NON-CREDIT
CERTIFICATE
EARNED
5
47
0.001
0.001
TRANSFER
PREPARED
978
51,002
0.157
0.104
TRANSFER
DIRECTED
687
54,305
0.110
0.110
TRANSFERED TO
4-YR
955
115,835
0.154
0.236
Rates are rounded to nearest thousandth.
9
Table 3
Comparison of Student Success Variables Fall 2008 - Spring 2009
Persistence Persistence
Retention
Course
Course
Course
F08 - S09
F08 - F09
Attempted
Completion Completion Completion
vs.
Degree
Basic
Workforce
Completed
Applicable
Skills
Development
Enrollments
LD
0.83
0.84
0.84
0.66
0.37
0.69
Gen
CCC
Pop
0.66
0.48
0.86
0.67
0.46
0.72
Rates shown represent percentages of students in each category.
Rates are rounded to nearest hundredth.
Table 4
Comparison of Academic Success for LD and General CCC Students in Cohort Study
2008-2009
% of Total
% of Total
General CCC LD Students
CCC
LD Students
Population
in Cohort
Students in
Cohort
TOTAL COHORT
STUDENTS
5,167
383,501
0.128
0.084
DEGREE EARNED
663
32,122
0.061
0.035
CREDIT
CERTIFICATE
EARNED
316
13,282
0.001
0.001
NON-CREDIT
CERTIFICATE
EARNED
4
93
0.166
0.122
TRANSFER
PREPARED
857
46,969
0.112
0.126
TRANSFER
DIRECTED
581
48,269
0.141
0.211
TRANSFERED TO
4-YR
731
80,823
0.128
0.084
Percentages are rounded to nearest thousandth.
10