This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Stuebing, K. K. Articles by Shaywitz, B. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Validity of IQ-Discrepancy Classifications of Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis

University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston

G. Reid Lyon

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Sally E. Shaywitz and Bennett A. Shaywitz

Yale University

According to federal regulations, children with reading difficulties are eligible for special education services under the learning disability category if they display reading skills that are significantly lower than their scores on intelligence (IQ) tests. Children who are poor readers but do not display this discrepancy are not eligible for special education. A meta-analysis involving 46 studies addressing the validity of this classification of poor readers revealed substantial overlap between the IQ-discrepant and IQ-consistent poor readers. Aggregated effect sizes were in the negligible range for the Behavior (–.05) and Achievement (–.12) domains but in the small range for the Cognitive Ability domain (.30). The latter effects were heterogeneous, with larger estimates showing higher performance by the IQ-discrepant poor readers. The size of the effects could be largely explained by the selection criteria used to form groups, indicating that variation in group definitions across studies accounted for variability in effect size estimates. These results provide little evidence supporting the validity of the IQ-discrepancy classification fundamental to public policy concerning students with learning disabilities and cast doubt on the need for IQ tests in identifying these students.

Key Words: IQ-discrepancy • IQ tests • learning disabilities • meta-analysis • reading disabilities

American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 39, No. 2, 469-518 (2002)
DOI: 10.3102/00028312039002469


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. J. Blanchett, J. K. Klingner, and B. Harry The Intersection of Race, Culture, Language, and Disability: Implications for Urban Education Urban Education, July 1, 2009; 44(4): 389 - 409. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. A. Lange, G. Mulhern, and J. Wylie Proofreading Using an Assistive Software Homophone Tool: Compensatory and Remedial Effects on the Literacy Skills of Students With Reading Difficulties J Learn Disabil, July 1, 2009; 42(4): 322 - 335. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. K. Katusic, R. C. Colligan, A. L. Weaver, and W. J. Barbaresi The Forgotten Learning Disability: Epidemiology of Written-Language Disorder in a Population-Based Birth Cohort (1976-1982), Rochester, Minnesota Pediatrics, May 1, 2009; 123(5): 1306 - 1313. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y.-J. Liu, A. A. Ortiz, C. Y. Wilkinson, P. Robertson, and M. I. Kushner From Early Childhood Special Education to Special Education Resource Rooms: Identification, Assessment, and Eligibility Determinations for English Language Learners With Reading-Related Disabilities Assessment for Effective Intervention, June 1, 2008; 33(3): 177 - 187. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. S. Daniel, A. K. Walsh, D. B. Goldston, E. M. Arnold, B. A. Reboussin, and F. B. Wood Suicidality, School Dropout, and Reading Problems Among Adolescents J Learn Disabil, December 1, 2006; 39(6): 507 - 514. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. J. Lovett and L. J. Lewandowski Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities: Who Are They? J Learn Disabil, December 1, 2006; 39(6): 515 - 527. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. D. Sideridis, P. L. Morgan, G. Botsas, S. Padeliadu, and D. Fuchs Predicting LD on the Basis of Motivation, Metacognition, and Psychopathology: An ROC Analysis J Learn Disabil, June 1, 2006; 39(3): 215 - 229. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. M. Batsche, K. A. Kavale, and J. F. Kovaleski Competing Views: A Dialogue on Response to Intervention Assessment for Effective Intervention, January 1, 2006; 32(1): 6 - 19. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Vaughn and L. S. Fuchs A Response to "Competing Views: A Dialogue on Response to Intervention": Why Response to Intervention Is Necessary but Not Sufficient for Identifying Students With Learning Disabilities Assessment for Effective Intervention, January 1, 2006; 32(1): 58 - 61. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. M. Fletcher, C. Denton, and D. J. Francis Validity of Alternative Approaches for the Identification of Learning Disabilities: Operationalizing Unexpected Underachievement J Learn Disabil, December 1, 2005; 38(6): 545 - 552. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. A. Kavale Identifying Specific Learning Disability: Is Responsiveness to Intervention the Answer? J Learn Disabil, December 1, 2005; 38(6): 553 - 562. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. J. Francis, J. M. Fletcher, K. K. Stuebing, G. R. Lyon, B. A. Shaywitz, and S. E. Shaywitz Psychometric Approaches to the Identification of LD: IQ and Achievement Scores Are Not Sufficient J Learn Disabil, April 1, 2005; 38(2): 98 - 108. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Xiangdong Yang, J. Shaftel, D. Glasnapp, and J. Poggio Qualitative or Quantitative Differences?: Latent Class Analysis of Mathematical Ability for Special Education Students Journal of Special Education, February 1, 2005; 38(4): 194 - 207. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. P. Waber, M. D. Weiler, P. W. Forbes, J. H. Bernstein, D. C. Bellinger, and L. Rappaport Neurobehavioral Factors Associated with Referral for Learning Problems in a Community Sample: Evidence for an Adaptational Model for Learning Disorders J Learn Disabil, October 1, 2003; 36(5): 467 - 483. [Abstract] [PDF]