The stability of ability/achievement discrepancy levels in learning disabled children

The conservative political and economic climate has caused educators to consider various means of reducing the numbers of children served as learning disabled (LD). This is further complicated by the lack of concensus as to criteria for the identification of LD children. The focus of the present study is to examine the stability of ability/achievement discrepancies in LD children over a three year interval. The two quantitative methods used to compute these discrepancies were that proposed by Harris (1955), and a reliability adjusted procedure (RAP) adapted from a formula proposed by Anastasi (1982).
The results of this study indicate that quantitative methods of assessing ability/achievement discrepancies can be moderately stable over a three year interval. They tended to be conservative in the numbers of subjects they targeted, and can be used to lend objectivity to the identification of LD children. They should be used only in concert with a variety of other selection criteria, however. The implications of these findings for clinical application and future research were discussed.