Discrepancy between definitions of learning disabilities and school practices: an empirical investigation.

Students referred by general education teachers to school study teams (SSTs) were evaluated for learning disabilities (LD) eligibility. We classified children as LD on the basis of a WISC-III Full Scale IQ of 82 or higher and a 22-point discrepancy between IQ and any WRAT-R achievement score. Research decisions were then contrasted with actual school-based decisions regarding the child as LD. Over half of the students referred to SSTs were certified by the schools as LD, yet less than half of these school-certified students with LD evidenced the aptitude-achievement discrepancy required by the state. Examination of the cases called LD by the schools revealed that children were classified as LD on the basis of low absolute achievement, regardless of whether or not a discrepancy existed. Moreover, in cases where a discrepancy was found but the school did not classify the child as LD, that child evidenced significantly higher achievement, despite exhibiting the requisite 22-point discrepancy. The school-identified students with LD constituted an extremely heterogeneous group, including students with mental retardation along with a substantial number who failed to qualify for any special education services. Findings are discussed in terms of the discrepancy between criteria specified in state regulations and what the committee members at the school site seemed to use in classifying children with LD.