V. Dion Haynes
Washington Post
Dear Mr. Haynes,
In your article about changes in the administration of special education in Washington (DC, US), entitled “Special-Ed Getting New Computer System, Staff” appearing 27 February 2008 on page B04,” you used the term “Learning Disabilities” as a generic reference for students with various other, legally recognized disabilities. Here is an extract (my underlining):
For years, city and school officials have criticized programs provided by the D.C. schools’ special education office, which serves 9,400 students with physical or learning disabilities. The school system spends about $137 million a year on private school tuition for about 2,400 children it cannot serve in the public schools.
Specific Learning Disabilities is a specific category of disability under US federal law (Public Law 108-446, 108th Congress), and it is expressly differentiated from mental retardation, emotional disturbance, and other disabilities. It is not a generic term and should not be used to refer to multiple categories of disabilities. Although it may seem trivial to some, this difference is important to many. Using the term “learning disabilities” as a generic obscures important differences in students and may even undermine efforts by parents and educators to seek services for students who have learning disabilities, emotional or behavioral disorders, intellectual disabilities, autism, and speech-language disorders (among others).
I hope that this note is helpful. Thank you for your reporting of the substantive content in your article (which I’ve covered elsewhere).
John Wills Lloyd, Ph.D.
Editor, LD Blog
Professor, University of Virginia
Lehigh University will offer a conference on special education law in May under the title, “Special Education Law: A Roadmap of Reality, Resolution, and Remedies.” The special one-day meeting, which is the 36th annual installment in the series, features many interesting topics including a keynote by Perry Zirkel, noted authority on legal issues in Learning Disabilities and related areas of special education.
The conference is scheduled for 9 May 2008 and will be held in Bethlehem (PA, US). Link to the agenda for the conference.
Joanne Jacobs has a post entitled “The illiterate teacher” about author John Corcoran who reports in a book that he “taught high school social studies, bookkeeping and P.E. for 17 years despite being illiterate.” Ms. Jacobs reported that Mr. Corcoran, who’s book is The Teacher Who Couldn’t Read, also funds a foundation that promotes reading instruction. According to the John Corcoran Foundation Web site, Mr. Corcoran has also written another book, Bridge to Literacy: No Child - or Adult Left Behind.
Link to Ms. Jacob’s post. See also the John Corcoran Foundation Web site.
Joe Torgesen, Barbara Foorman, and Richard Wagner of the Florida Center for Reading Research published an excellent overview of dyslexia that is readily available for public download. Although the title, “Dyslexia: A Brief for Educators, Parents, and Legislators in Florida,” makes it sound as if it is only applicable to people in a specific geographical area bounded by arbitrary marks on maps, this paper will be useful to millions of people.
In the document, Torgesen and his eminent colleagues address questions such as these: What is Dyslexia? What type of instruction is most effective for students with dyslexia? and Can reading difficulties in dyslexic students be prevented? How effective is remedial instruction for older students with dyslexia? The writing is clear as well as clearly well-informed.
This document will be valuable to people in PreK-12 schools, students studying education and the professors who should be teaching them the contents of the document; parents who are seeking straight talk with the authority of firm scientific underpinnings; and advocates who can benefit by distributing a tightly reasoned and written document to help explain concepts to constituents.
Snag a free copy from the Florida Center for Reading Research.
The National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD) has scheduled a panel discussion about prevention of Learning Disabilities. Entitled “RTI Goes to Pre-K: A Comprehensive System for Early Intervention to Promote School Readiness,” the discussion is slated for 11-noon on Wed. 30 January 2008 in HC-6 U.S. Capitol Building, Washington (DC, US).
Participants will discuss the most recent data that supports [sic] the need for universal early literacy screening and supportive services before children enter kindergarten and will specifically discuss the impact of a new program — Recognition and Response — on students in preschool and will highlight key policy recommendations.
Continue reading ‘NCLD panel on early early intervening services’
Brain Gym (Skeptic’s Dictionary)
Wheeeheee! Over on the Skeptic’s Dictionary, Robert T. Carroll has a take-down and pin of Brain Gym. The contemporary incarnation of some ideas that were thoroughly discredited in Learning Disabilities in the 1970s, Brain Gym is making something of a splash. Shoot, it even appeared in one of my Curry School colleague’s classes for a while, as I understand.
Professor Carroll’s indictment of Brain Gym presents a good opportunity to make an important point. The problem with Brain Gym and many of its siblings is not that the activities might not be worthwhile, it’s that the advocates over-reach so substantially. Shoot, I’m glad to advocate that we teach kids who might fit the clumsy category how to walk, move, dance, play basketball, and etc. I just don’t want people to be sold a bill of goods about how doing so will improve those children’s reading, etc.
Read Professor Carroll’s analysis. Need info on the research about the benefits of perceptual-motor training? Here’s a link to a meta-analysis.