Students classified as LD and the college foreign language requirement: a quantitative analysis

This study was conducted to determine whether students classified as learning disabled (LD) who were permitted to substitute courses for the college foreign language (FL) requirement at one university would display significant cognitive and academic achievement differences when grouped by level of discrepancy between IQ and achievement, by discrepancy between achievement according to different measures, and by level of performance on phonological-orthographic processing measures, on the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT), and in FL courses. Results showed that there were no differences among students with different levels of discrepancy (i.e., < 1.0 SD, 1.0-1.49 SD, and > 1.50 SD) on MLAT and American College Testing (ACT) scores, graduating grade point average (GPA) or college FL GPA. Results also showed that among students who scored below versus at or above the 25th percentile on phonological-orthographic processing measures, there were no differences on measures of IQ, ACT, MLAT, and GPA, as well as most measures of academic achievement. Implications for the use of the LD label to grant FL course substitutions or waivers, use of the MLAT in the diagnostic and course substitution/waiver process, and the validity and reliability of traditional criteria for the classification as LD are discussed.     

Students classified as LD who petitioned for or fulfilled the college foreign language requirement-are they different? A replication study

This replication study compared 86 petition students who received course substitutions for the college foreign language (FL) requirement with 40 nonpetition students who fulfilled the FL requirement by passing FL courses on cognitive and academic achievement measures and graduating grade point average. The results showed significant differences between the two groups, favoring the nonpetition group on one measure, the American College Testing (ACT) score, when IQ was used as a covariate; however, no significant group differences remained when ACT score was used as a covariate. More than half of the 126 petition and nonpetition students did not meet a minimum criterion for classification as learning disabled (LD), and more than half of both groups (54% and 63%, respectively) were not classified as LD before enrolling in college. Sixty percent of the petition students either had not taken an FL course in college or had achieved only grades of withdrawal before petitioning for substitution of the FL requirement. Implications addressed include petition students' persistence in fulfilling the FL requirement, students' use of instructional accommodations and services, criteria used to classify students as LD, use of the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT), and why some students classified as LD pass FL courses and other students classified as LD do not.     

Comparison of students classified as LD who petitioned for or fulfilled the college foreign language requirement

In this study, we compared the cognitive, academic achievement, and demographic profiles of 46 students from one university who had been classified as learning disabled (LD) and had received permission to substitute courses for the university's foreign language (FL) requirement (petition group) with the profiles of 21 students from the same university who had been classified as LD and had fulfilled the university's FL requirement by passing FL courses (nonpetition group). Results showed no significant differences between the two groups on measures of reading, mathematics, written language, American College Testing score, and graduating grade point average when IQ was used as a covariate. More petition than nonpetition students had at least a 1.0 SD discrepancy between IQ and achievement and had been referred only for FL learning problems. More nonpetition than petition students had taken an FL in college and received accommodations in the FL. The two groups together appeared to constitute a heterogeneous group of learners, with more than half failing to meet a minimum discrepancy criterion for classification as LD. The discussion addresses the classification system for LD, the process for determining the presence of FL learning problems and how to address them, and directions for further research.     

Students classified as LD and the college foreign language requirement: replication and comparison studies

Two studies examined students classified as having learning disabilities (LD) who had received course substitutions for the college foreign language (FL) requirement. In the first study, 42 students at one university were divided into groups and compared on measures of IQ, academic achievement, FL aptitude, college grade point average (GPA), and FL and English grades. Findings showed that most of the 42 students had been classified as LD in college after experiencing problems in FL courses. Comparisons based on students' performance on measures of FL aptitude, native language skill, and performance in FL courses showed few significant group differences. In the second study, the 42 students from the first study were compared with 86 students at another university who had also been classified as LD and received course substitutions for the college FL requirement. Comparisons on demographic information and measures of IQ, academic achievement, FL aptitude, college GPA, and FL GPA showed few significant differences between the two groups. Both studies suggest that students classified as LD at different universities exhibit similar demographic, cognitive, academic achievement, and FL aptitude profiles and that educators should not make the a priori assumption that students classified as LD require course substitutions for the FL requirement or experience problems with FL learning.     

Evidence‐Based Accommodation Decision Making at the Postsecondary Level: Review of the Evidence for Foreign Language Learning

Abstract This article reviews empirical evidence related to college students classified as learning disabled (LD) and foreign language (FL) learning by examining whether there are differences between: (a) students classified and not classified as LD enrolled in FL courses; (b) LD students with and without IQ‐achievement discrepancies and FL aptitude, proficiency, and achievement; and (c) students classified as LD who pass FL courses or receive course substitutions. Findings show that there are no cognitive and achievement differences between students classified as LD and non‐LD students enrolled in FL courses or between students classified as LD who pass FL courses or receive course substitutions. Findings have shown that there are no differences in FL outcomes between students classified as LD with and without discrepancies. Research findings over several years show that classification as LD is unimportant for determining whether or not a student will exhibit FL learning problems or fail FL courses.     

Extrinsic and intrinsic factors in graduation and academic failure among LD college students

A group of 110 LD college students were compared to a random stratified sample (RSS) of 153 peers attending the same moderately selective college between 1980 and 1988. The LD students received comprehensive, highly coordinated support services for at least one semester. The groups were matched on gender, college experience, semester, and year of entry to the college. The LD and RSS groups were compared on high school preparation and performance, ACT and college performance, and graduation and academic failure rate. Although the LD students’ high school records, ACT scores, and college performance were inferior to that of the RSS group, they graduated at the same rate and within the same time frame. Neither was there any significant difference in the academic failure rate. Closer examination of the LD graduates and academic failures’ performance showed that in spite of the similarities in intellectual abilities, academic achievement, and aptitude-achievement discrepancy, two factors differentiated between the LD graduates and non-graduates: oral language abilities and motivation and attitude toward the teaching-learning process. These two factors accounted for 60 percent of the variance in graduation status. This research was supported in part by grants from the Butz and Thorn River Foundations.     

One-year experimental study of the ACT objective test with non-traditional students

The Curriculum Committee of the General College (GC) at the University of Minnesota selected the ACT Objective Test to assess general educational outcomes, educational gains, and to provide an individual assessment of academic achievement for graduating Associate of Arts degree candidates.Data analyses to assess general educational outcomes revealed that GC Associate of Arts degree candidates scored significantly lower than an ACT national sample on total score and four out of six subscores.Data analyses to assess educational gains revealed no significant differences between three comparison groups of GC students: Associate of Arts candidates, GC sophomores, and GC freshman; although there was a significant difference on grade-point average (GPA).Finally, data analyses to assess ethnic group performance revealed significant differences between four ethnic groups, although there were no significant differences on GPA. In addition, it was discovered that the relationship between total score and GPA was strongly positive for the Black and Caucasian groups but was negative for the Asian and Other groups.Thus, since the ACT Objective Test did not provide an adequate measure of educational gains, and it appears that the ACT Objective Test might possibly be a culturally biased instrument, it was decided to discontinue use of the ACT Objective Test in the General College after the one-year experimental period.Gloria B. Wood received her Ph.D. in Counseling Psychology from the University of Minnesota. She teaches psychology and career planning to a predominantly nontraditional and under-prepared college population. Her research interests include: cognitive development and learning styles; the psychological and motivational variables related to academic performance; and variables related to career assessment and development.     

Life adjustments of college freshmen with and without learning disabilities

This paper reports the results of a study comparing college freshmen with learning disabilities (LD) and freshmen with no learning disabilities (NLD). Four data collections over one academic year were completed on a total of 72 students (LDn=39; NLDn=33). Results of the study indicated differences between groups in their initial choice of living accommodations and in the changes made over the year: the overall trend was for students with LD to become more dependent on their families, while students with NLD were becoming less dependent on their families. With regard to academics, students with LD reported spending significantly less time in study and course preparation, as well as greater pessimism about success in coursework. Despite their pessimism, the actual GPA attainment of students with LD was similar to that of NLD peers. Whereas both groups initially predicted it would be easy to adjust to the academic and social nature of college, students with learning disabilities ultimately reported being dissatisfied with the social climate on campus. No differences were found between LD and NLD students regarding their motivation for attending college, or their plans for final degree attainment.     

College students classified with ADHD and the foreign language requirement

The conventional assumption of most disability service providers is that students classified as having attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) will experience difficulties in foreign language (FL) courses. However, the evidence in support of this assumption is anecdotal. In this empirical investigation, the demographic profiles, overall academic performance, college entrance scores, and FL classroom performance of 68 college students classified as having ADHD were examined. All students had graduated from the same university over a 5-year period. The findings showed that all 68 students had completed the university's FL requirement by passing FL courses. The students' college entrance scores were similar to the middle 50% of freshmen at this university, and their graduating grade point average was similar to the typical graduating senior at the university. The students had participated in both lower (100) and upper (200, 300, 400) level FL courses and had achieved mostly average and above-average grades (A, B, C) in these courses. One student had majored and eight students had minored in an FL. Two thirds of the students passed all of their FL courses without the use of instructional accommodations. In this study, the classification of ADHD did not appear to interfere with participants' performance in FL courses. The findings suggest that students classified as having ADHD should enroll in and fulfill the FL requirement by passing FL courses.     

Integration Factors Related to the Academic Success and Intent to Persist of College Students with Learning Disabilities

Despite increased enrollment, outcomes such as grade point average (GPA), persistence, and graduation rates for college students with learning disabilities (LD) continue to lag behind those of their nondisabled peers. Reasons for the differences vary but may include academic and social integration, factors identified as important to the success of college students in general. This research investigated the relative influence of background characteristics, precollege achievement, and college integration variables on the academic success and intent to persist of college freshmen and sophomores with LD. While academic and social integration were not unique predictors of college GPA, both integration variables were unique predictors of intent to persist. The findings suggest that beyond high school achievement and background characteristics, college experiences as captured by academic and social integration are promising constructs to help explain the persistence of college students with LD. Implications for future research and practices for high school and college personnel are discussed.     

Academic underachievement among children with epilepsy: proportion exceeding psychometric criteria for learning disability and associated risk factors

This study assessed rates of learning disabilities (LD) by several psychometric definitions in children with epilepsy and identified risk factors. Participants (N = 173, ages 8-15 years) completed IQ screening, academic achievement testing, and structured interviews. Children with significant head injury, chronic physical conditions, or mental retardation were excluded. Using an IQ-achievement discrepancy definition, 48% exceeded the cutoff for LD in at least one academic area; using low-achievement definitions, 41% to 62% exceeded cutoffs in at least one academic area. Younger children with generalized nonabsence seizures were at increased risk for math LD using the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition; age of seizure onset and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were risk factors for reading and math LD using low-achievement definitions. Writing was the most common domain affected, but neither ADHD nor seizure variables reliably identified children at risk for writing LD. Although children with earlier seizure onset, generalized nonabsence seizures, and comorbid ADHD appear to be at increased risk for some types of LD by some definitions, these findings largely suggest that all children with epilepsy should be considered vulnerable to LD. A diagnosis of epilepsy (even with controlled seizures and less severe seizure types) should provide sufficient cause to screen school-age children for LD and comorbid ADHD.     

Students with learning disabilities in higher education: academic strategies profile

This study compared 191 college students with learning disabilities (LD) and 190 students without LD in four main areas: academic difficulties, learning strategies, functioning during examinations, and students' perception of factors that help or impede their academic success. Analysis of the personal data of students with and without LD revealed no significant differences between groups on grade point average, number of courses taken, and family status, but students with LD reported having more difficulties in humanities, social sciences, and foreign language than students without LD. Regarding academic strategies, students with LD devised unusual strategies and preferred additional oral explanations or visual explanations, whereas nondisabled students preferred more written examples. These differences indicated that students without LD used more written techniques than did students with LD. During examinations, the students with LD had difficulty concentrating and were concerned about lack of time. They experienced stress, were nervous, and felt more frustrated, helpless, or uncertain during examinations than students without LD. The implications for college students with LD are discussed.     

College Students With ADHD and LD: Effects of Support Services on Academic Performance

Two relatively common disabilities reported by college students are attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and learning disabilities (LD). Many questions remain regarding how best to support these students and whether services such as advising, coaching, and tutoring lead to significant academic gains. The current study examined the effect of support services on the GPA of students with LD and/or ADHD at a campus that specifically serves this population by tracking students’ support service usage and GPAs over a 5‐year period. Results indicate that although most students who choose to receive coaching support experience academic gains, it is students with ADHD who obtain the greatest gains in GPA as a result of this support. Additionally, although tutoring can be of benefit to all students, significant GPA gains were obtained only for students with an LD diagnosis. Thus, there is a need to provide targeted supports aimed at addressing students’ specific areas of challenge.     

Correlates of College Retention and GPA: Learning and Study Strategies,Testwiseness, Attitudes,and ACT

This study assessed unique contributions of learning, study, and test-taking strategies; students' attitudes about college; and ACT scores, and linked them to college GPA and to retention. Although several variables contributed significantly to GPA, only GPA made a significant unique contribution to attrition and retention. This suggests that learning and study strategies and students' college attitudes affect attrition indirectly through GPA.     

Cognitive, academic, and attitudinal predictors of the grade point averages of college students with learning disabilities

This study examined cognitive, academic, and attitudinal predictors of college grade point average (GPA) among college students with learning disabilities (LD). The study population included 84 youth who attended a large private university in the midwestern United States. Measures of cognitive and academic functioning, along with a self-report measure of study habits and study attitudes, were used to predict college GPA. The results indicated that Full Scale IQ and one factor on the self-reported study habits scale accounted for a significant amount of variance in students' college GPA. These findings suggest that variables other than traditional cognitive and academic skills are important for determining the performance of youth with LD during college. The implications of these findings for future research efforts and practice are discussed.     

Predicting response to early reading intervention from verbal IQ, reading-related language abilities, attention ratings, and verbal IQ-word reading discrepancy: failure to validate discrepancy method

Additional analyses of a previously published study addressed three questions about growth in word reading during early reading intervention: (1) How well do Verbal IQ, reading-related language abilities (phonological, rapid naming, and orthographic), and attention ratings predict reading growth? (2) How well do language deficits predict reading growth? and (3) How well does Verbal IQ-word reading discrepancy predict reading growth? Univariate analyses showed that Verbal IQ, phonological skills, orthographic skills, rapid automatized naming (RAN), and attention ratings predicted the response to early intervention, but multivariate analyses based on a combination of predictors for real-word reading and pseudoword reading showed that Verbal IQ was not the best unique predictor. Students with double or triple deficits in language skills (RAN, phonological, and orthographic processing) responded more slowly to early intervention than students without language deficits. Verbal IQ-word reading discrepancy did not predict the response to early intervention in reading. Overall results supported the use of reading-related language and attention measures rather than IQ-achievement discrepancy in identifying candidates for early reading intervention.     

The success of college students with learning disabilities: factors related to educational attainment.

This study reports on the educational attainment of 62 college students with learning disabilities as compared to a sample of 58 peers matched on gender and ACT composite score (+/- 1 point or exact match). All students were native English speakers and were enrolled as degree candidates in a small, competitive, private, midwestern college. Groups were compared on age, high school preparation and performance, college grades, GPA at the end of each year of study, graduation and academic failure rate, and time taken to complete degree. Factors that may have influenced outcomes are discussed as are implications for college admissions officers, college students with learning disabilities, service providers, and academic advisors.     

阅读困难诊断标准与模式的“后智力—成就差异”趋势

阅读困难是学习困难研究中最受关注的一个领域,对整个学习困难研究领域具有重要影响。对阅读困难的有效诊断是阅读困难的研究和干预的基础。在阅读困难的诊断中,曾经广泛应用的智力—成就差异标准与模式在有效性、敏感性以及对干预的指导意义等方面存在严重不足,受到越来越多研究者和实践者的屏弃。目前,核心技能缺陷和干预—应答两类诊断标准和模式日益受到关注和采纳。我国迄今较少系统研究阅读困难的诊断标准与模式,不过,有关汉语阅读困难的初步研究鉴别出语音缺陷、快速命名缺陷和语素技能缺陷,为发展和应用核心技能标准和模式提供了重要基础,也为建立干预—应答模式提供了参考。确立汉语阅读困难诊断的核心技能与干预—应答标准与模式还有待系统和深入的研究。     

Predictors of university academic performance in Colombia

This chapter describes the available information about the prediction of college performance in Colombia (South America). Before graduating from high school, students must take a national examination which includes 400 questions grouped into four major areas: sciences (biology, chemistry, and physics), social sciences, language (verbal aptitude and Spanish), and mathematics (mathematical attitude and mathematical knowledge). ICFES scores are used as a major criterion for university admission. Existing research suggests that the correlations between ICFES scores and GPAs tend to be quite small and vary widely from one academic program to another. Other variables (e.g., high school grades) are better predictors of college GPA, quite likely because the same set of personal and socio-cultural variables are needed for both high school and college success.     

Direct and indirect measures of writing for nonlearning disabled and learning disabled college students

Direct and indirect measures were used to compare the written language abilities of three groups of college students: two with learning disabilities and one without learning disabilities. Main effects were found for group, but not gender. Differences between nonlearning disabled students (NLD) and those with learning disabilities (LD) in writing were evident on both types of measures. Performance by LD students with disabilities in an area other than writing differed depending on the type of measure and often was no different from either of the other two groups. The combined use of direct and indirect measures appeared most effective for examining the complexities of writing produced by all groups.