Statistics/Kids with LD achieving grade-level standards

:) Hey there Charolett.

In my opinion as a mom of a LD child…..I question that info GREATLY!!!

Now I think the earlier a LD is Dx’d the better the chances for a higher level of achievement….but DEPENDING on the LD….I highly question that all LDs can be remediated if caught early enough.

FYI….check the references for that article.

Take care Charolett and good luck,
LAN

:!: Soooo sorry Charolett…you said 90%. Please excuse me. :cry:

90%…hmmmm…possible…like I said„,depending on the LD. I think a parental role plays a HUGE part in the outcomes as well.

Once again„,I’m sorry. Take Care
LAN

As a hair -splitter, I think one of the problems with the early ID set is that your really may not be certain which ones will grow into a full-blown LD until they have had the chance to turn into a full-blown LD.

When my school, where I taught for 10 years, implemented a strong sequentially-based reading program some years ago, the referrals to sped. and the ultimate placements dropped noticeably.

The students who did land in resource were generally genuinely LD. I mean they had real problems.

This has lead me to some speculation. I generally found that all of my students appeared to have what I would characterize as two or more deficits. Perhaps not all would agree with me. I think there may be students who evidence some early difficulties that good first instruction takes care of effectively. W/o good first instruction many of these youngsters would fall behind and fail. I suspect this may be a group who have fewer processing deficits, though they may well have a processing deficit.

So, my suspicion is that when you attempt to make a fast, early identification based off of some measures like phonemic awareness tests, you may end up with:

1. Students who really don’t have a deficit so much as they have a paucity of experience. When exposed over a year or two they will get up to speed.

2. Students who have that single deficit, but normal processing in virtually all other areas that they can use to bolster their performance while the strong early reading program effectively deals with their single deficit.

So, perhaps the 10% that don’t “catch-up” are the real LD students in the end. The others may just be students who need more explicit instruction and who are slower starters, but do get there before too long. Whereas the “intiutive” readers get there no matter what we do and no matter how we teach.

I also wonder what catch up to grade level means.

My son is 10. He was identitified in K. He is Anitya’s kids with multiple processing issues. After tons of intervention on our part, he is doing amazingly well. He passed Florida’s high stake testing last year (and did not the year before) and so you could say he is on grade level.

Yet, my husband and I are finally accepting that he will be our high need kid all the way through school. It takes him three hours to do homework that the well organized girl down the street does in one. If he doesn’t study spelling words the weekend before the test, he gets a C or a D on it. If he does, he will ace the test. It takes him longer to learn things than other kids—he needs more repetition and he reads slower. He also writes slower than other kids.

So is he in the 90% that catch up if they are identiified early or the 10% who do not?

Beth