Seeing the stories by Ms. Gifty Quarcoo from Africa reminded me that the special issue of Learning Disabilities Research & Practice (LDR&P) on international perspectives on Learning Disabilities is progressing toward publication. I don’t see an previous references to it in entries here on LD Blog, so let me note it here.
A marvelous group of scholars from different parts of the Earth have contributed to a special issue of LDR&P. Here is an alphabetical list of the contents of the issue.
- Abosi, O. (In press). Educating children with learning disabilities in Africa. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3).
- Correia, L. M., & Martins, A. P. L. (In press). Specific learning disabilities and the Portuguese educational system. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3).
- Gumple, T. P., & Sharoni, V. (In press). Current best-practices in learning disabilities in Israel. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3).
- Jiménez, J. E., & Cadena, C. G. (In press). Learning disabilities in Guatemala and Spain: A cross-national study of the prevalence and cognitive processes associated with reading and spelling disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3).
- Jung, D. Y. South Korean perspectives on learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3).
- Thygesen, R. (In press). Students with learning disabilities: An update on Norwegian educational policy, practice, and research. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3).
- Tzeng, S.-J. (In press). Learning disabilities in Taiwan. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(3).
Along with my colleagues, Clay Keller and Li-Yu Hung, I was pleased to be able to act as editor for the special issue. I hope that it will help people around the world gain greater understanding of Learning Disabilities. Thanks to Charlie Hughes, editor of LDR&P, and the Division for Learning Disabilities for allowing us to assemble this fine set of articles.
Dore some more
In case you missed it (I did), the Dore program was embroiled in a bit more controvery in the winter of 2007, enough to merit an editorial in Nature Neuorscience. The editorial recounts the resignation of members of the professional editorial board of Dyslexia over publication of two studies of the Dore treatment, points out problems of potential conflict of interest, describes the theory and practice of the Dore program, reports the two studies that form the base for the controversy, and recounts selected aspects of the scholaraly criticisms of the studies. The spoon that stirs the controversy, however, is that non-scientific factors are interferring with orderly analysis. According to Nature Neuorscience, at least two people who have said that the scientific evidence for the program’s effectiveness is weak have been subjected to legal pressure to withdraw their criticisms.
Nature Neuorscience goes on to indicate that questions about the usefulness of any treatment should be determined in an orderly scientific manner, not as a consequence of political or other unfalsifiable methods. If decisions are based on commerical or legal interests, consumers will not be able to depend on researchers for honest opinions.
Nature Neuroscience, by the way, is a relatively new journal (it’s only 10 years old) that rose rapidly to the top echelon of scholarly publications in neurosciences. It routinely ranks in the top five among its peers for its “impact factor,” a measure reflecting the relative frequency articles published in a particular journal are cited by in other publications.
Link to the editorial (access probably costs unless you’re hitting it from a university that has rights to it). Links to previous posts on LD Blog are here and here. Also see the many entries Liz Ditz has on this subject.