The present study was an attempt to look at the empirical classification of children's learning disabilities based on neuropsychological variables at differing IQ levels. Subjects were divided into four groups based upon Full Scale IQ (i.e., 70-79, 8089, 90-99, 100-110). Subsequent clustering of the test data within each group suggested that while the students in the 70-79 IQ range were represented by a single impaired cluster, each of the other IQ groups had both a moderately impaired cluster and a non-impaired cluster. The study attempted to respond to criticisms of previous research by using a large sample of subjects (N = 928), utilizing a broad range of subjects with a representative sample of abilities, and applying an interpretable structure to the cluster analysis (i.e., neuropsychological variables within IQ levels). The present research further offered a perspective on programming by way of neuropsychological functioning. As such, the results argued for placement procedures for learning disabled children that are apart from those formulas relative to achievement and intelligence. / Department of Educational Psychology

The purpose of this study was to determine if distinct subgroups of learning disabled children could be identified using a single, recently developed, instrument--the Differential Ability Scales (DAS). Ward's method of cluster analysis was used to group 83 school-verified learning disabled children from the standardization sample.These children were classified using the core, diagnostic, and achievement subtests of the DAS. Achievement subtest scores were transformed into T-scores with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 to provide scores on the same scale as the core and diagnostic subtests. Using similar units allowed all scores to contribute more equally during the clustering (Romesburg, 1984).The following six subgroups were identified: (a) generalized, (b) high functioning, (c) normal, (d) underachievement, (e) borderline, and (f) dyseidetic. Not all subgroups displayed the expected discrepancy between intelligence and achievement associated with the current definitions of LD. One subgroup had what might be described as a "normal" diagnostic profile on the DAS. These results were consistent with those of prior subtyping research (Lyon & Watson, 1981; Lyon et al., 1981) where "normal" subgroups were found. Another subgroup obtained General Conceptual Ability scores within the borderline range. Overall, children in this subgroup displayed consistently low scores on all the DAS subtests and achievement commensurate with general ability. In subsequent discriminant analyses, both achievement and diagnostic subtests were necessary for accuracy in classification.This study provided evidence as to the DAS's ability to differentially diagnose the learning disabled and provided distinct profiles for LD subgroups. Administration of the diagnostic subtests along with the score and achievement subtests can provide the clinician with valuable diagnostic information for LD. / Department of Educational Psychology

The present investigation considered the utility of traditional psychoeducational measures in the prediction of neuropsychological impairment in learning disabled children. The subjects were 368 learning disabled children ranging in age from 9 to 14, with a mean age of 10.68 years, and a standard deviation of 1.62. In addition to traditional psychoeducational measures, each subject was administered the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Battery for Older Children (HRNB-C). Subjects were considered impaired or nonimpaired on the basis of their score on the HRNB-C. A Discriminant Analysis was utilized to investigate what variables from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R), Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised (WRAT-R) and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R) would be used to predict the subjects' neuropsychological status. It was found that 12 variables added significantly (R < .05) to the prediction of impairment, with Arithmetic and Block Design subtests the most prominent predictors. A Regression Analysis was used to consider the subjects' score on the HRNB-C in a continous fashion. The regression equation that emerged showed the Performance Scale of the WISC-R to be the best predictor of the impairment index.MANOVA and ANOVA statistics were used to investigate the differences between the groups. Results indicated that there was a significant main effect for gender. Males tended to score higher than females on visual spatial tasks. General cognitive skills were lower in females than males. Overall, females tended to be more neuropsychologically impaired than males. / Department of Educational Psychology

This research study was designed to investigate whether authentic assessment in written language is a valid assessment tool for students with and without learning disabilities. Teacher judgements were used to evaluate students' authentic writing assessments gathered from the classroom. Students' report card grades, authentic writing assessments, and two standardized writing assessments, the Test of Written Language- Revised and Written Language Assessment, were correlated to provide evidence of the validity of authentic assessment practices in written language.

The purpose of this study was to determine reliability estimates of authentic assessment for fourth-grade narrative and descriptive writing samples for students with and without learning disabilities. Three types of reliability estimates were established: (a) inter-rater, (b) score stability, and (c) alternate-form. The research design involved 40 teachers, trained in holistic scoring by Education Service Centers 10 and 11 in Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas, who scored 16 writing samples. Approximately 2 weeks later the teachers rescored 8 of the same writing samples. In addition to scoring the writing samples, the teachers also completed a demographic questionnaire. The writing samples, which consisted of eight narrative and eight descriptive writings, were selected based upon teachers' holistic scores and scores from 1993 writing sample of the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills. Based upon these scores, two narrative and descriptive writings of above-average, average, and below-average writings were selected. In addition, two narrative and descriptive writing samples of students with learning disabilities in written language were selected.

The purpose of the study was to establish diagnostic validity for a modified version of the Classroom Adjustment Rating Scale (CARS). To do this, two a priori multivariate contrasts were specified in order to detect differences on the three CARS scales between three groups of pupils. Subjects were 170 normal (NORM), 125 Learning Disabled (LD), and 48 Emotionally Handicapped (EH) elementary age boys who were rated by their classroom teachers. The original CARS was modified by maintaining and adding items that had high correlations with the original three scales of Acting-Out, Shy-Anxious, and Learning Problems. Results with both the CARS and modified CARS (MCARS) indicated a significant multivariate contrast between the NORM group and a weighted combination of the LD and EH groups. Also, a significant multivariate contrast between the LD and EH group resulted for the CARS and MCARS. Follow-up with discriminant analysis found 71.4% of all boys correctly classified by the original CARS scales. However, the MCARS scales resulted in only a slight improvement in overall correct classification, with 72.3% of boys correctly classified. Teacher-judged intelligence, social class, and prosocial classroom behavior were included as possible biasing variables. It was found that the set of prosocial items had considerable impact on the ratings of EH boys, thus demonstrating the importance of including positive behaviors on a rating scale.