The legitimacy of using the criterion of low reading achievement in the study of learning and memory skills with learning

The objective of this study was to investigate the legitimacy of using the criterion of low reading achievement in the study of learning and memory skills in learning disabled children. The subjects were 60 students (35 non-disabled, 15 low reading, and 10 learning disabled) enrolled in grades 10-12 of a northern Colorado high school. A series of 13 tests of learning and memory was administered to each subject. A MANOVA and post-hoc comparisons of means indicated many similarities in the performance of learning disabled . and low reading subjects, but also identified some significant differences between these two groups, particularly in tasks involving visual input and/or visual processing. These results point to a need to specify very carefully the criteria used in samole selection, and to limit conclusions about research findings to the particular population studied. In recent years, many researchers have directed their efforts toward the study of cognitive processing skills in learntng disabled thildren. A close look at the methodologies of these studies indicates variability in ethe particular samples used. In some studies, children are samnled who have been specifically identified by their school as being learning disabled -that is, they are children of normal intelligence who exhibit difficulties in a certain area of perception or cognitive processing. In,other studies, the sample is selected on the basis of a different criter(tolli, most typically low reading achievement. We refer you to several reviews illustrating this point: Harber (1981), Kavale and Rye (1981); Olson and Mealor (1981), and Torgeson and Dice (1980). It is often assumed that all such research studies address the problems of the "learning disabled" child, regardless of the criterion used in selecting the sample. In the present study, learning disabled children (as defined by perceptual and/or processing difficulties) and low readers were compared with each other, and with normal children, in a variety of learning and memory tasks, to determine whether the learning disability--low reading equivalence is in fact a viable one.