Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
School Psychology International
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Janzen, H. L.
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Diagnosis and Predictability of Learning Disabilities

Henry L. Janzen

Frederic J. Boersma

Robert Fisk

University ofAlberta, Canada

James Chapman

Massey University, New Zealand

Two studies were completed to determine predictability of group membership in learning disability and normally-achieving categories with a psycho-educational test battery measuring intelligence, achievement, visualmotor perception and personality constructs. Study 1 included upper elementary students in grades four to six (controls = 211, learning disabled (LD) = 25). Study 2 included grade three children (controls = 73, LD = 70). Several additional psycho-educational measures were added in Study 2 following the analysis of results in Study 1. A linear regression analysis revealed that, in Study 1, only 35 per cent of the total variance was accounted for in predicting group membership (LD vs controls). In Study 2, however, variance estimates increased to 77 per cent when new data were entered into the equation. The findings support the clause of discrepancy in identifying LD students and agree with previous research findings that tests used for a differential diagnosis of learning disabilities provide little evidence for prediction of group membership. Further study is recommended to examine the heterogeneous nature of learning disabilities.

School Psychology International, Vol. 4, No. 3, 129-140 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/0143034383043002


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
School Psychology InternationalHome page
S. Dickerson Mayes and S. L. Calhoun
Challenging the Assumptions About the Frequency and Coexistence of Learning Disability Types
School Psychology International, October 1, 2007; 28(4): 437 - 448.
[Abstract] [PDF]