Diagnosis of Learning Disabilities in Postsecondary Institutions.

Abstract

This report summarizes results of a survey conducted to determine which instruments are being used in the diagnostic process at a postsecondary level to assess students' learning strengths and weaknesses and determine the presence of a specific learning disability. In addition, characteristics of diagnostic programs at postsecondary settings were reviewed and the authors offer suggestions about improving diagnostic procedures. Individuals with learning disabilities are attending college in increasing numbers. In the past, many of these individuals were encouraged to enroll in vocational programs or were not assisted in pursuing higher education. However, it is now recognized that students with learning disabilities can successfully pursue education beyond high school. The growing number of programs have raised many issues such as how to best integrate individuals with learning disabilities into higher education. Support programs for these students have evolved with many philosophical differences and varying types of support services. One of the services offered by some colleges is diagnostic testing. Institutions that have programs that provide this service frequently evaluate students experiencing academic difficulty who have never previously been diagnosed as having a learning disability. At some institutions, all incoming freshmen with learning disabilities are reevaluated to assess students' current levels of functioning. Levinson (1986) suggested that one of the major purposes of the educational components of college learning disabilities (LD) programs should be assessment and identification. Very little, however, has been written about the diagnosis of learning disabilities in college students. Few writers in recent literature have described or prescribed a test battery appropriate for assessing these students. Mangrum and Strichart (1984) reported that there is not a standard set of tests used by college learning disability programs, but they did list frequently used tests. Scheiber and Talpers (1985) described some assessment tools typically used in a test battery for college students. Hoy and Gregg (1986a) supported the notion of a comprehensive psycho-educational evaluation and discussed the components of such a procedure. Research is extremely limited in the area of diagnosing college-age students as having learning disabilities. Epps, Ysseldyke and McGue (1984) found that among college-age students in their study, school personnel were unable to diagnose learning disabled students reliably. Aaron and Philips (1986) found that dyslexic college students have poor mastery of grapheme-phoneme conversion skills. Other characteristics such as slow reading and poor spelling have also been noted. Hoy and Gregg (1986b) discussed the usefulness of the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery (Woodcock &Johnson, 1977) cluster scores. They suggested that these scores should not be interpreted at face value and that the pattern of cluster scores should be examined before confirming a deficit or strength. Limited research about the diagnosis of college-age students reflects the recency of the field, and stands in contrast to the abundance written about the diagnosis of learning disabilities in children. This project was designed to investigate the diagnostic testing component offered by college LD programs. The purpose of the study was to survey postsecondary schools to determine what instruments are used to document the presence of a learning disability. It was determined by the authors that the results of the survey could provide useful descriptive information about the state of the art in the diagnosis of learning disabilities in adults in higher educational settings.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.