Learning Disabilities Research Research Articles

Grants for learning disabilities research, programming

Grants for learning disabilities research, programming

Corrigendum to Child Skills and Teacher Qualifications: Associations with Elementary Classroom Teachers’ Reading Instruction for Struggling Readers

Learning Disabilities Research & PracticeEarly View CORRIGENDUM Corrigendum to Child Skills and Teacher Qualifications: Associations with Elementary Classroom Teachers’ Reading Instruction for Struggling Readers First published: 26 May 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12309Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. Early ViewOnline Version of Record before inclusion in an issue RelatedInformation

Corrigendum to Home Literacy Environments and Foundational Literacy Skills for Struggling and Nonstruggling Readers in Rural Early Elementary Schools

Learning Disabilities Research & PracticeEarly View CORRIGENDUM Corrigendum to Home Literacy Environments and Foundational Literacy Skills for Struggling and Nonstruggling Readers in Rural Early Elementary Schools First published: 29 May 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12310Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. Early ViewOnline Version of Record before inclusion in an issue RelatedInformation

Issue Information (Aims and Scope, Subscription and copyright info, TOC and Editorial Board)

Learning Disabilities Research & PracticeVolume 38, Issue 2 p. 81-84 Issue InformationFree Access Issue Information (Aims and Scope, Subscription and copyright info, TOC and Editorial Board) First published: 31 May 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12282AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Volume38, Issue2May 2023Pages 81-84 RelatedInformation

Processing Speed is Related to the General Psychopathology Factor in Youth

The relationship between the p factor and cognition in youth has largely focused on general cognition (IQ) and executive functions (EF). Another cognitive construct, processing speed (PS), is dissociable from IQ and EF, but has received less research attention despite being related to many different mental health symptoms. The present sample included 795 youth, ages 11–16 from the Colorado Learning Disabilities Research Center (CLDRC) sample. Confirmatory factor analyses tested multiple p factor models, with the primary model being a second-order, multi-reporter p factor. We then tested the correlation between the p factor and a latent PS factor. There was a significant, negative correlation between the p factor and PS (r(87) = -0.42, p < .001), indicating that slower processing speed is associated with higher general mental health symptoms. This association is stronger than previously reported associations with IQ or EF. This finding was robust across models that used different raters (youth and caregiver) and modeling approaches (second-order vs. bifactor). Our findings indicate that PS is related to general psychopathology symptoms. This research points to processing speed as an important transdiagnostic construct that warrants further exploration across development.

Whose uncertainty? Learning disability research in a time of COVID-19

ABSTRACT UK government responses to COVID-19 have intensified experiences of uncertainty for people with learning disabilities. The pandemic has eroded the support people receive, previously weakened by austerity measures. In research, COVID-19 related uncertainty has led to some reworking of methods and intensive contingency planning. This was to fulfil funding requirements and was underpinned by research teams’ commitment to continuing research with people with learning disabilities not despite, but because of the pandemic. This is in a context where people with learning disabilities have been systemically excluded from research participation. Here, we reflect on these processes in relation to a project exploring how to improve the support for older people with learning disabilities. We consider the distribution of uncertainty in relation to conducting research during this time and ask whose uncertainty is attended to in these mid- and post-pandemic methodological debates and why. We suggest pandemic ‘disruption’ has created space for critical reflection allowing methodological creativity and consideration of in between strategies of trust, intuition, and emotion. We caution against the re-constraining of this space, instead arguing for continuing flexibility and creativity, where uncertainties are shared rather than used as a tool of control or dismissal of claims to support.

New Directions in the Study of Neurodevelopmental Disorders

The Conference at the University of Oviedo, Spain, within the 44th Annual Meeting of the International Academy for Research in Learning Disabilities, was an excellent opportunity to share knowledge, explore perspectives and reflect on the study of neurodevelopmental disorders in Europe and elsewhere in the world. The William M. Cruickshank Memorial Keynote Address, New Directions in the Study of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, covered a broad range of topics relevant to cognition, intelligence, and achievement. It also provided the opportunity to present parts of our current work pertinent to the study of neurodevelopmental dysfunctions and the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action (MSCA) ITN Neo-PRISM-C project. The presentation began by focusing on what we study and how and why we study what we study about neurodevelopmental disorders. This was followed by a discussion about the brain and (learning) behaviour, accompanied by some relevant evidence on the neurological basis for reading difficulties, particularly the phonological and visual deficits pathways in the framework of the magnocellular deficit theory. The session concluded with a discussion of the comorbidity of various disorders and the use of the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework as an alternative to the traditional diagnostic categories for the study of neurodevelopmental disorders. Examples of how neuroscience research can contribute to this endeavour were also provided.

Grants for learning disabilities research, programming

Corporate Philanthropy ReportVolume 38, Issue 3 p. 15-16 Grant Alerts Grants for learning disabilities research, programming First published: 08 February 2023 https://doi.org/10.1002/cprt.31549Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume38, Issue3March 2023Pages 15-16 RelatedInformation

Lived experience research in learning disabilities: The understanding inequalities project from a service user's perspective

AbstractBackgroundPeople with learning disabilities are often left behind and ostracised in life, education, employment and in research. This article describes the importance and value that people with learning disabilities can bring when participating in co‐production and lived experience research. The article reports on the inequalities and barriers that people living with learning disabilities have in accessing health and social care services and hospitals and makes recommendations for improving services and people's experiences of services. The intertwining of subject (inequalities and barriers of access) and process (lived experience research and co‐production) leads to more comprehensive knowledge and understanding of learning disabilities.MethodsCo‐production events were held with people with learning disabilities, facilitated by the co‐author (Tom Kerridge). Tom and a service user researcher (Ben Gray) with Asperger's syndrome and schizophrenia thematised transcripts and made recommendations, in Ben's case with the insight of lived experience of learning disabilities and mental health problems.FindingsA series of recommendations are made based on the insight of a lived experience perspective. For example: to have a grass roots learning disabilities champion, lived experience peer mentors and supporters, training via a film made by people with learning disabilities, the involvement of Learning Disabilities Research Ambassadors to conduct phase two of the research as well as other recommendations.ConclusionsLived experience research and co‐production are at the heart and centre of contemporary research in health and social care. Participation can change feelings of exclusion and stigma into feelings of being valued, accepted and being able to make a difference.

Issue Information (Aims and Scope, Subscription and copyright info, TOC and Editorial Board)

Learning Disabilities Research & PracticeVolume 37, Issue 4 p. 237-240 Issue InformationFree Access Issue Information (Aims and Scope, Subscription and copyright info, TOC and Editorial Board) First published: 02 January 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12252AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume37, Issue4November 2022Pages 237-240 RelatedInformation

Interdisciplinary Notes on the Dual Nature of Disability: Disrupting Ideology–Ontology Circuits in Racial Disparities Research

Research on racial and linguistic disparities in disability identification must be grounded on the dual nature of disability as an object of protection and a tool of stratification. This dual nature requires a situated research approach to understand the stratifying power of disability—Who is targeted? Where? How? By whom and to what consequences? I contrast this perspective with the traditional research approach that privileges a deficit and colorblind framing of racial disparities. The application of a colorblind ideology enables researchers to envision students of color as innately damaged and in need of remediation; thus, forming ideology–ontology circuits. I offer three strategies to disrupt these circuits in future learning disabilities research, namely the elimination of colorblind research strategies, the adoption of a historical imagination, and the discontinuation of Black and Brown abstractions.

CEC division for learning disabilities 2021 award winners

Learning Disabilities Research & PracticeVolume 37, Issue 3 p. 155-155 Editorial CEC division for learning disabilities 2021 award winners First published: 12 October 2022 https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12291Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume37, Issue3Special Issue: Intervention for English LearnersAugust 2022Pages 155-155 RelatedInformation

Compounding Effects of Domain-General Cognitive Weaknesses and Word Reading Difficulties on Anxiety Symptoms in Youth

This study examined whether domain-general cognitive weaknesses in processing speed (PS) or executive functioning (EF) moderate the relation between word reading scores and anxiety such that lower word reading scores in combination with lower cognitive scores are associated with higher anxiety symptoms. The sample consisted of 755 youth ages 8–16 who were recruited as part of the Colorado Learning Disabilities Research Center twins study. Lower scores on PS (R2 = .007, p = .014), EF (R2 = .009, p = .006), and word reading (R2 = .006–.008, p = .010–.032) were associated with higher anxiety scores. In addition, the word reading × cognitive interactions were significant such that lower scores on PS (R2 = .010, p = .005) or EF (R2 = .013, p = .010) combined with lower word reading were associated with higher-than-expected anxiety symptoms. Results suggest that weaknesses in PS, EF, and word reading are modestly associated with higher anxiety symptoms, and these anxiety symptoms may be compounded in youth with both PS or EF weaknesses and word reading difficulties. These findings can guide assessment approaches for identifying youth with word reading challenges who may be at increased risk for anxiety.

The reading profiles of late elementary English learners with and without risk for dyslexia.

Few studies have systematically investigated the reading skill profiles of English learners (ELs) in late elementary school, a critical developmental period for language and literacy and the most common grades for initial identification with specific learning disabilities (O'Connor et al.,Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(3), 98-112, 2013). We investigated the reading skill profiles of 331 ELs in 3rd and 4th grades, including ELs with and without risk for dyslexia due to significant deficits in word and pseudo-word reading accuracy and fluency. We utilized latent profile analysis and factor mixture modeling to investigate (1) the nature and distribution of reading skill profiles; (2) whether these profiles were associated with differences in reading comprehension growth across one academic year; and (3) the stability of reading profiles across an academic year. We selected a two-class solution (reading disabled and typically developing) based on model fit indices, theoretical considerations, pattern of results across profile-solutions and time-points, and parameterizations, making the approach stronger and more generalizable. These classes demonstrated clear, consistent differences in performance across reading component skills, with the RD class scoring consistently below the TD class across code-based and meaning-based domains of reading. Across the year, the TD class demonstrated significantly higher patterns of growth in reading comprehension (χ2 (1) = 206.21, p < 0.001). Class membership was largely stable (97% of participants maintain class membership). These results suggest that ELs with risk for dyslexia demonstrate multiple component skill deficits that may require long-term, comprehensive, intensive interventions to remediate.

Reviewing Manuscripts Reporting Findings From Single-Case Research Design Studies

This article, part of the Learning Disability Quarterly special series dedicated to single-case research design (SCRD), summarizes the review process and outlines how to provide high-quality SCRD study manuscript reviews. We offer recommendations for the entirety of the review process, including accepting the role of reviewer, evaluating quality of SCRD studies, and, finally, adhering to reporting standards with focused attention on the applied nature of the engaging work that encompasses research in learning disabilities. In addition, we discuss (a) participant and setting description, (b) implementation of particular designs, (c) measurement procedures for dependent variable(s), (d) providing evidence of reliability, (e) graphic display of time-series data, (f) descriptions of results, and (g) acknowledgment of design limitations. We describe the challenges facing SCRD researchers and reviewers engaging in learning disabilities research within applied settings, identify fatal flaws that authors cannot address, and point out omissions that researchers can address through the revision process. Implications for practice, resources, and future directions are shared.

Grants for learning disabilities research, programming

Corporate Philanthropy ReportVolume 37, Issue 3 p. 14-15 Grant Alerts Grants for learning disabilities research, programming First published: 10 February 2022 https://doi.org/10.1002/cprt.31210Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume37, Issue3March 2022Pages 14-15 RelatedInformation

Letter from Editor

Learning Disabilities Research & PracticeVolume 36, Issue 3 p. 183-183 Editorial Letter from Editor Linda H. Mason, Corresponding Author lhmason12@gmail.com Email: lhmason12@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this author Linda H. Mason, Corresponding Author lhmason12@gmail.com Email: lhmason12@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this author First published: 14 September 2021 https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12261Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume36, Issue3Special Issue: Self‐Regulated Strategy Development: A Framework for Effective Instruction across the Content AreasAugust 2021Pages 183-183 RelatedInformation

Madhouse

Until the very end of the twentieth century the history of learning difficulties was subsumed into other histories, of psychiatry, of special education and, indeed, of disability. Initiatives to enable people with learning difficulties and their families to record their own histories and contribute to the historical record are both recent and powerful. Much of this work has been led or supported by The Open University’s Social History of Learning Disability Research (SHLD) group and its commitment to developing “inclusive history.” The article tells the story of the Madhouse Project in which actors with learning difficulties, stimulated by the story of historian activist Mabel Cooper and supported by the SHLD group, learned about and then offered their own interpretations of that history, including its present-day resonances. Through a museum exhibition they curated, and through an immersive theatre performance, the actors used the history of institutions to alert a wider public to the abuses of the past, and the continuing marginalization and exclusion of people with learning difficulties. This is an outstanding example of history’s potential to stimulate activism.

“Everyone has a story to tell”: A review of life stories in learning disability research and practice

Accessible summaryThis paper considers what we know about the life stories of people with learning disabilities.It was inspired by one of the authors sharing his own life story.It explores what a life story is.It discusses how life stories help us to understand more about people's lives and historyIt reviews what we know about how people with learning disabilities can record their stories, including people with high support needsWe know life stories can help people to get good support and person‐centred careBut we found that people's stories are often lost when there are big changes in their livesWe found that staff may not have the skills or confidence to support people to tell and record their storiesWe think it is important to find out how life stories can be used to support better care for more people.​AbstractIn this paper, the authors review life stories in learning disability research and practice since the 1960s. Although there is consistent evidence of their value in giving people a voice and an identity beyond the service label, they are not widely used in the provision of health and social care. This is despite long‐standing policy commitments to person‐centred practice. The paper explores possible barriers to the use of life story work and what further research is needed if they are to be more widely and effectively used in practice.

A Decade Review of Single‐Case Graph Construction in the Field of Learning Disabilities

AbstractSingle‐case research designs (SCRDs) are rigorous methods used to investigate the effects of interventions on socially important outcomes. A hallmark of SCRDs is repeated measurement of observable behavior presented in time‐series graphs. The construction of time‐series graphs can inflate Type I or Type II errors made via visual analysis. In the current investigation, we included all SCRDs published in four flagship journals in the field of learning disabilities (Journal of Learning Disabilities, Learning Disabilities Quarterly, Learning Disabilities Research &amp; Practice, Journal of Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal) over the last decade. A total of 47 studies including 315 graphs were included. Our findings suggest that ordinate scaling was appropriate across a majority of graphs; graphs, however, did not adhere to recommendations for x:y ratio or DPPXYR.