Abstract

This article examines the problem of definition in learning disabilities. First, the focus is on the nature of definition. It is suggested that available definitions of LD are not real in the Aristotelian sense of providing an essence. Rather, they are best viewed as providing stipulative meaning by representing information agreed upon by particular groups. What is stipulated, however, cannot be considered either true or false but only useful for practical purposes. Practice requires operational definitions, which are also fraught with conceptual difficulties. Such difficulties are illustrated in a discussion of discrepancy. It is also suggested that operational definition is too narrowly focused and should be expanded by considering operational interpretations, based on the best available knowledge. Finally, an example is provided of how operational interpretations may be combined into a more comprehensive operational definition for classifying learning disabilities.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.