History Of Learning Disability Research Articles

Clinical characteristics of schizophrenia associated with velo-cardio-facial syndrome

Velo-cardio-facial syndrome (VCFS) is caused by a microdeletion in the long arm of chromosome 22 and is associated with an increased frequency of schizophrenia and bipolar mood disorder. The purpose of this study was to investigate the genetic, physical, developmental and psychiatric features of schizophrenic patients with VCFS microdeletion. It describes the clinical findings in four schizophrenic inpatients with the characteristic chromosomal deletion. The four patients displayed delayed motor development, language deficits, learning disabilities, mental retardation, early age of onset, chronic and disabling course of illness and poor response to classical neuroleptic drugs and electroconvulsive therapy. Two patients benefited from treatment with clozapine. We suggest that schizophrenic patients with a history of delayed motor development, early onset of the disorder, history of learning disability, mental retardation, congenital cardiac anomalies and/or hypernasal speech should be screened for the velo-cardio-facial syndrome deletion. The implications of this study for psychiatric phenotype, nosology, disease mechanism, and possible new treatments in the future are discussed.

Ethical Dilemmas in Historical Research with People with Learning Difficulties

This paper discusses the ethics of historical research with people with learning difficulties, and in particular those issues which arise in both oral and archival history. Pioneers in the work of collecting the life stories of people with learning difficulties debated some of the issues around biographical and autobiographical methods (Bogdan & Taylor, 1982). The history of learning disability has, however, until comparatively recently been a neglected subject. The histories that have existed have been written predominantly from an official viewpoint, have not included the views of people with learning difficulties themselves, and have tended therefore to be partial accounts (Kanner, 1964). A new development of the 1980s and 90s, however, has been the growing interest by people with learning difficulties in reclaiming their histories (Cooper, 1997; Barron, 1996; Lewis, 1997). Historians who have been supporting them have suddenly been faced with new ethical dilemmas which are only just beginning to be discussed in the literature (Potts & Fido, 1991; Atkinson et al., 1997; Rolph, 1998). In the following sections, I will highlight some of the issues which occur in this new historical research, and which particularly concerned me in my own research. I then discuss the methods adopted in an attempt to solve them.

Dorothy Atkinson, Mark Jackson and Jan Walmsley (eds), Forgotten lives: exploring the history of learning disability, Kidderminster, British Institute of Learning Disabilities, 1997, pp. xii, 144, illus., £18.95 (+£1.00 p&p) (paperback 1-87391-84-4). Distributed worldwide by: Plymbridge Distributors Ltd, Estover House, Plymouth, UK, OL6 7PZ.

Dorothy Atkinson, Mark Jackson and Jan Walmsley (eds), Forgotten lives: exploring the history of learning disability, Kidderminster, British Institute of Learning Disabilities, 1997, pp. xii, 144, illus., £18.95 (+£1.00 p&p) (paperback 1-87391-84-4). Distributed worldwide by: Plymbridge Distributors Ltd, Estover House, Plymouth, UK, OL6 7PZ. - Volume 42 Issue 4

Modifiability

This study examined the use of dynamic mediation procedures for assessing language modifiability of bilingual students with a previous history of learning disabilities. Pre- and post-mediation measures included students' language scores as well as behavioral observations of language learning and modifiability during mediation. The investigation also explored the use of a qualitative approach describing students' response attempts pre- and post-mediation. Results indicated significant improvement in students' language scores as well as significant changes in the quality of their responses after mediation. The dynamic procedures proved useful in describing their language learning needs and responsiveness to intervention.

Factors predisposing to suspected offending by adults with self-reported learning disabilities.

This study investigated factors contributing to suspected offending behaviour by adults with a history of learning disabilities taken into custody at a city police station. Adults charged with offences, and/or leaving custody, during a defined period, were identified as having a possible learning disability using a four-item questionnaire (Lyall et al. 1995 a). A comparison group, of similar age, sex and IQ, was identified from a database of young people with learning difficulties. Information was obtained on interview about each individual's medical, psychiatric, social and family histories and psychological assessments were undertaken. In contrast to the comparison group, those in the 'offending' group were more likely to have a history of the following: losing contact with their father, forensic contact in one or more family members, past homelessness, illicit drug use, experiencing an excess of recent life events, self-reported behavioural problems at school, truancy, childhood police contact and contact with probation services. All had histories of repeated offending. There was also an increased rate of drug/alcohol dependence. Only two subjects in the study group had a full-scale IQ below 70. These differences would suggest that the presence of childhood behavioural problems, offending behaviour by other family members, family separation and other social disruption and the development of drug and alcohol related problems are potentially the most important factors in trying to understand why one group engaged in criminal behaviour. The offending group had many characteristics in common with general offending populations.

The prevalence of fragile-X syndrome in an institution for people with learning disability.

The prevalence of Fragile-X syndrome in those with learning disability has been reported. There is little agreement regarding the prevalence rate which varies between 0% and 16%. We report a study investigating the prevalence of Fragile-X syndrome in two institutions for those with learning disability, using DNA testing. We found a rate of 0.7%, which is one of the lowest record rates. We also found that physical signs could be used as a reliable discriminator to determine those likely to have the disorder. We conclude that indiscriminate mass screening of those with learning disability for the Fragile-X syndrome is probably not useful because, in adults, physical signs and a family history of learning disability can predict those likely to have the disorder.

The 5-HT 2A antagonist MDL 100 907 blocks dizocilpine-induced increases in the firing rate of A10 dopamine neurons

This article highlights issues of misdiagnosis in an African-American, adult clinical population by doing point prevalence, record review study within a comprehensive community mental health center.Psychiatric evaluations of 330 patients were reviewed and clinically identifiable variables of: a) childhood Intellectual Disability (ID), special education, Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD), or Autism/Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD); b) head injury causing Organic Brain Syndrome (OBS) or Temporal Lobe Epilepsy (TLE); c) a history of chronic substance abuse prior to the development of psychiatric symptoms; or d) childhood trauma causing Anxiety, Depression, and Panic Disorders were tabulated.Two hundred and twenty patients, who were free of the four variables, had a single psychiatric diagnosis and 18 had multiple co-morbid diagnoses. More than 25% (92/330) of the patients had the four variables in their histories. Four of the 92 patients had more than one variable in their history. Of the remaining 88 cases, 42 had psychiatric issues beginning in childhood (28 had history of ID, 4 had history of learning disabilities, 3 had history of ADHD, 7 had histories of Autism/PDD); 9 had histories of OBS or TLE; 20 had histories of substance abuse; and 18 had histories of extensive childhood trauma).Careful attention to common issues in African-Americans can inform the psychiatric diagnostic process pointing to prevention or treatment considerations that would benefit the African-American community at large.

Episodic psychic symptoms in the general population.

The frequency of some episodic psychic symptoms (dysmnesic, perceptual, and experiential) was determined in a 2,500-subject general population sample. Correlations with some risk factors eventually associated with nervous system dysfunctions (seizure history, head injury, car accident, hospitalization, febrile illness, and birth injury) were calculated. Subjects with one or several risk factors were more likely to report episodic psychic phenomena in daily life. Significant correlations of episodic psychic phenomena with sleep disorders, headache, allergies, and a history of learning disabilities were observed. We propose that some subclinical dysfunctions can be associated with the appearance of episodic psychic phenomena in otherwise normal subjects.

Cognitive deficits in spinal cord injury: epidemiology and outcome.

Cognitive deficits are common among patients with acute spinal cord injury (SCI), but reported prevalence figures vary because of different methods of study. Factors associated with cognitive deficits in patients with SCI include age, educational background, history of learning disability, chronic alcohol and substance abuse, and concomitant or recurrent traumatic brain injury. Psychologic testing of patients with and without cognitive deficits indicates that impaired psychosocial adjustment and adaptation are more frequent in SCI patients who have evidence of cognitive deficits. Various associations have been found between neuropsychologic test performance and major depression. Cognitive functioning and premorbid educational level appear to be associated with medical stability, the patient's ability to assimilate the necessary skills for survival and adaptation after SCI, and readmission patterns after discharge for initial inpatient rehabilitation.

Background factors and preschool test scores as predictors of reading: a nine-year longitudinal study

Approximately 400 children were first tested at 4, and background factors were ascertained at that time. Further testing included a kindergarten reading readiness test and reading tests at grades 3 and 8. The best preschool predictors of reading were naming tests for boys, and general verbal ability for girls. At the kindergarten level a quantitative test surpassed tests of phonemic awareness and language in predicting reading, for both boys and girls. Family history of learning disability and preschool test behavior contributed to prediction of reading. Effects of birth order were strongest at the preschool level, and handedness had its only effects at that level. Relationships of some factors to reading differed by gender. Socioeconomic status had significant effects only for boys, and a speech delay only for girls. Conclusions were that some background factors may contribute to the preschool prediction of reading, and particularly to the prospective identification of poor readers.

The New, Improved Holy Grail

After five years as Editor of LDQ, this is my final issue. Leaving editorship brings mixed emotions. Certainly, there is a sense of relief no more deadlines and so much more free time. I'm not sure how I'll while away hours. (I'm too old to hang on street corners again!) On other hand, I'll miss privilege of associating with Kirsten McBride, marvelous Associate Editor 6f LDQ, Board of Reviewers who reaffirmed my faith in gentle art of nagging, CLD Executive Board who provided editorial freedom that is essential to producing a quality journal, and of course, scholars who submitted their work to LDQ. So much for pleasant, temperate portion of this piece. I have mellowed somewhat over past five years, but not so much that I don't intend to use my editorial prerogative one final time to share a few of my impressions about field. I'll begin by saying that I'm no pessimist. In my tenure as editor of LDQ, I have read some excellent work by some very able people. When I reflect upon our relatively recent beginnings as a profession, I think our fund of knowledge about learning disabilities and issues that relate to education of learning disabled has increased substantially. When I become impatient, I remind myself that acquiring information that pertains to something as complex as functioning of human brain is obviously a slow, difficult process. We should expect false starts, blind alleys, and a certain amount of chaff among wheat. However, despite my positive attitude about fruitful efforts of many fine scholars, I am deeply disturbed by a pattern within field that appears to create endless mischief. As I see it, a serious impediment to systematic acquisition of valid information stems from constant pressure in this applied discipline to provide simple, yet solutions to complex problems and to do so quickly. I have come to regard responses to this pressure as learning disabilities version of search for Holy Grail. The search in learning disabilities for Holy Grail is similar in many ways to legendary quest of Knights of Camelot motivated by good intentions and a sincere belief in all-powerful qualities of Grail. In world of LD, those who think they've found Grail are fervent champions of its magic, dwelling exclusively upon its benefits, not only to handicapped learners, but often to society as a whole. The skepticism of disbelievers may be viewed as negativism, defensiveness or ignorance certainly, their ideas are not regarded as sensible or important enough to raise doubts in minds of believers. Caution characterized by careful, objective research and a critical examination of events is not necessary when a true answer has been found. Indeed, funding sources may provide financial resources only to those persons or institutions whose activities are designed to substantiate perfection of the solution. Usually, it is passage of time which tarnishes glow of perfection. As problems persist, number of believers diminish until field is once again readied for discovery of new, improved Holy Grail. As I think back over history of learning disabilities I can identify a parade of Holy Grails which have lost their magic. I see no point in enumerating them. I prefer to direct attention to new perfect solution not only to problems facing learning disabled, but to those existing in whole of special education. I refer to Regular Education Initiative (REI), approach to special education that maintains that regular classroom should be primary site for services to handicapped learners. This particular Holy Grail lay for years under noses of educators, yet it could not be found until imperfections of previous perfect solution, so-called pull out model for special services, were revealed. Primary among those imperfections were stigmatizing effects of labeling and segregation, inability of special teachers to remediate or cure problems limiting learning and, last but certainly not least, cost involved in special education programs. According to its champions, REI will solve those problems plus a few I haven't mentioned. The regular class will become optimal learning environment for most children those qualifying for special educa-

Writing the History of Learning Disabilities: Some First Accounts

Writing the History of Learning Disabilities: Some First Accounts

The prediction of good and poor reading before kindergarten entry: a nine-year follow-up.

A year-group of children was followed from before kindergarten entry to late 8th grade. The Holbrook Screening Battery, admininstered at age 4, correctly predicted 89% of good readers and 75% of poor readers at grade 8. The 12 poorest readers were 4.1 years below grade level and 6.9 years below the mean of the group, in spite of early identification and special help. Their progress was compared with that of two groups who had appeared to be at risk, but who were average readers at grade 8. The main characteristics differentiating poor readers from good were birth history, family history of learning disability, birth position, speech delay, and socioeconomic status.

History, Politics, and the General Education Initiative: Sleeter's Reinterpretation of Learning Disabilities as a Case Study

A general education initiative has recently been suggested as a solution for problems related to special education eligibility and management of mildly handicapped students. This approach treats mildly handicapped students as failures of regular education to be dealt with by more effective instructional procedures delivered through regular education. The general education initiative, however, ignores the essential nature of mildly handicapping conditions, which is well illustrated in Sleeter's (1986) reinterpretation of the history of learning disabilities. Sleeter suggested that beginning in the late 1950s, school reform increased school failure, and that the category of learning disabilities was created to explain the failure of white middle class children. It is argued here that this interpretation is fallacious and that the category of learning disability is best viewed as the culmination of a long series of events resulting in service arrangements for particular children. It is also argued that Sleeter's suggestion that the learning disability category was established to discriminate against minorities is incorrect since the presumed ethnic imbalance of early classes for learning disabled students is of little consequence and the concurrently developing compensatory education programs represented a substantial investment in the school prablems of minority children. It is concluded that the fundamental problems of the field of learning disabilities and, by extension, other mildly handicapping conditions, are the consequence of their politicization and not of political pressures for their establishment.

Learning disabilities: the social construction of a special education category.

This article reinterprets the history of learning disabilities, situating it in the context of the movement to reform education after Sputnik. After Sputnik, standards for reading achievement were raised and students were tested more rigorously and grouped for instruction based on achievement level. Students unable to keep up with raised standards were placed into one of five categories. Four of the categories were used primarily to explain the failures of lower class and minority children; learning disabilities was created to explain the failures of white middle class children in a way that gave them some protection from the stigma of failure. Events during the late 1960s and early 1970s prompted a shift in the use of a category of learning disabilities, and subsequently in the category's membership. Implications of this reinterpretation for today's education reform movement are suggested.

Prior history of learning disabilities in Reye's syndrome survivors.

Twenty-six children, ages nine-18, who had recovered from Reye's syndrome were tested for possible memory deficits. In reviewing school histories, an unexpected finding was the disproportionately high number of students who were Learning Disabled before contracting Reye's syndrome. Seven of the children had been receiving special education services for being Learning Disabled and another two were viewed by their schools as being hyperactive. This is 10 times the expected incident rate. This group of Learning Disabled students did not score significantly worse on any measure than did the other children who had Reye's syndrome.

Learning Disabilities, Dyslexia, and Vision

POLICY The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Ophthalmology, and the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus upport the position that a child or adult with dyslexia or a related learning disability should receive: (1) early medical, educational, and/or psychological evaluation and diagnosis; and (2) remediation with educational procedures of proven value, demonstrated by valid research. BACKGROUND Dyslexia and related learning diabilities have become matters of increasing public attention. A child's or adult's inability to read with understanding is a major obstacle to school learning and may have far-reaching social and economic implications. The normal and appropriate concern of parents for the welfare of their children and of society for its disadvantaged children and young adults has fostered a proliferation of purportedly diagnostic and remedial procedures, many of which are controversial. Research has shown that deficient visual perception of letters or words accounts for inability to read in only a small minority of children; the majority suffer from a variety of linguisting defects.1,2 Therefore, the diagnosis and treatment of dyslexia and associated learning disabilities have recently been reviewed with the following conclusions endorsed by the three societies named above. EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS 1. Learning disabilities, including the dyslexias, as well as other forms of learning underachievement, often may require a multidisciplinary approach from medicine, education, and psychology in evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment. Certain problems may be detected during early childhood through the use of screening techniques by educational specialists. Children with potential problems include those with language defects, emotional problems, or a family history of learning disability.

Concerns of secondary students with a history of learning disabilities: a pilot study.

was administered to 21 subjects, aged 15 to 17 yr. Ten of the subjects had histories of identified learning disabilities since at least Grade 6 and had been receiving remedial educational services. There were no other identified handicaps or medical problems. The Scholastic Testing Service Youth Inventory is a problems checklist (167 items) giving subjects an opportunity to express personal, social, and academic concerns. Alternative responses to each item permit the subject to indicate the intensity of the concern: serious, moderate, occasional or non-existent. Subjects were tested simultaneously, and the 167 items were read aloud by the examiner to compensate for deficient reading skills. A two-tailed t test was performed to compare the mean responses to each of the 167 items. Fourteen items were identified as statistically significant and indicative of the problems of the learning disabled subjects. These items were: I am a slow reader (t 4.31, df = 19, p < .01); I have trouble taking notes in class (t = 2.81, df = 19, < .05); I have trouble keeping up with my homework (t = 2.25, df = 19, P < .05); I would quit school now if I could (t = 2.49, df = 19, p < .05); I have trouble writing good essays (t = 2.49, df = 19, p < .01); I wish my teachers would make assignments more clear (t = 4.25, df = 19, p < .01); I would like to take courses that are not offered in my school (t = 2.64, df = 19, p < .05) ; I need more information about trade schools (t = 2.98, df = 19, p < .01); I have trouble keeping my temper (t = 2.27. df = 19, p < .05); I am too nervous (t = 2.17, df = 19, p < .05); I am always thinking up alibis (t = 3.01, df = 19, fl < .01); I get sick too often (t = 2.91, df = 19, p < .01); I want to become a leader in my group (t = 2.35, df = 19, p < .05); Many people

Learning Disability

A conceptual model for the natural history of learning disabilities as a health threat will be presented. The model illustrates the multitude of individual and environmental factors influencing the subsequent physical and mental well-being of disabled learners as well as the professional interaction and interdisciplinary cooperation needed to limit if not prevent the societal impact of learning disabilities.

Familial Patterns in Children With Neurologically Based Learning Disabilitie

Five hundred fifty-six children with the neurological learning disability syndrome were studied. Data were collected on prenatal and perinatal difficulties, medical problems, and family history of similar learning disabilities (for mother, father, sibling or siblings). In the total study, 29.6 percent of the children had a positive family history of similar learning difficulties. The data from September 1967 to September 1969 were more complete and accurate. In this group, 39.4 percent of the children had such a positive family history. In each of the families with a positive history of learning disabilities the history suggestive of central nervous system stress was made less significant by the total family data. This stress was not a contributing factor in producing this syndrome. Even though there was a history of prenatal, perinatal, or postnatal difficulties, siblings without a history of such difficulties also had learning disabilities. This study strongly suggests that the etiologic factor with some of the children with this syndrome is an inherited central nervous system dysfunction rather than brain damage.