Social Perceptions of Students with Learning Disabilities Who Differ in Social Status

As a group, students with learning disabilities (LD) have social difficulties. One possible explanation for these difficulties is the unique way they process social information. Although students with LD may differ from their nondisabled peers in their social cognition, investigators have suggested the presence of subgroups within the population of students with LD who may differ in their social competence and, thereby, shed light on the source of the difficulties. The present exploratory study examined how two subgroups of students with LD in inclusive settings, students with high and low social status, perceive social situations. Using a sociometric technique, three students with LD receiving high social‐status ratings and three students with LD receiving low social‐status ratings were identified. A qualitative approach was used to gather and evaluate data from the participants and their teachers. Results suggested differences between the two subgroups in their (1) sensitivity to cues in the environment, (2) interpretation of social situations in relation to their own experiences, and (3) levels of self‐control. Implications of these findings for practice and future research are discussed.     

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.     

The Development of Measures of Individual Differences in Self-Regulatory Control and Their Relationship to Academic Performance

Two studies are reported describing the development and validation of the Strategic Flexibility Questionnaire (SFQ): a self-report instrument aimed at eliciting students’ beliefs about the need for, and conditional nature of, self-regulatory control over learning. In Study 1, 281 first-year university education students completed a 40-item pilot questionnaire. Factor analysis of responses revealed a 21-item instrument indicating three types of control beliefs: adaptive executive control, inflexible executive control, and irresolute executive control. In Study 2, the predictive validity of these conceptions was tested against the academic performance of 105 third-year university education students. Results indicated that students reporting adaptive executive control beliefs were more successful academically, while those students reporting inflexible or irresolute control beliefs were significantly less successful academically.     

Children are not Meant to be Studied …

The project of studying children in order to understand them, which lies at the heart of contemporary thinking about children and their education, is misconceived. It rests, jrst of all, upon a false belief that we can only come to know something properly by deliberately and systematically pursuing knowledge of it. Secondly, it offers a paradigm of knowing children which justifies parents and teachers in not giving themselves to children. By re-interpreting the problems that adults experience with children as technical, as arising from lack of information about them, it ignores the personal and moral dimension of adults' relations with children and thus further alienates them from one another.