IQ not needed for screening LD students To: The LOOP:;, education-consumers@tricon.net From: "James Kilpatrick" Subject: IQ not needed for screening LD students Date sent: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 12:28:29 -0600 > > ------------------------- > >Hey, Jimmy-- > >I read a wonderful article yesterday in the "Perspectives" magazine from >IDA. Artile entitled, "IQ-Discrepancy: An Inadequate and Latrogenic Conceptual >Model of Learning Disabilities" by Jack M. Fletcher, Ph.D. out of U of >TX--Houston, Dept of Pediatrics and Center for Academic and Reading Skills. >Do you know him? > >In a nutshell, this article states that per research done by Frankenberger >and Fronzaglio in 1991, 34 states require use of an IQ test to prove >discrepancy >between ability & achievement. Since the IQ test has not proven in research >to be an effective way of determining what programs can help children learn >to read, the full-scare score arrived at is a waste of time that could >have been spent the 60-90 minutes used on assessements that can test how >a child learns to read and point to possible remedial program needs. Further, >many states use a "standard deviation formula" (in my state is is two standard >d's below the norm) to prove that the child has significant discrepancy >between intellect & achievement (ability to learn vs current achievement >in learning). By the time the student meets the deviation requirements, >and can be provided serviced under IDEA, they are in late second or early >third grade. They feel they have failed and now we need to shore them up >emotionally and resistance to learn for fear of further failure. > >The children at risk for reading failure, including those with LD, do not >have to be identified as learning disabiled and placed in special education >classrooms in order to learn to read. What we do have to have is 1) Nationwide >knowledge in our public schools of how to assess reading remedial needs >of students; 2) Knowledge and direct instructional ability by all our regular >educators of phonology/phonological awareness; sound-symbol association; >syllable instruction; morphology; syntax; semantics. Further, teaching >must be diagnostic (because children cannot be "cookie cut" and achieve >reading mastery); multi-sensory; systematic and cumulative; and analytic. >A one semester course in reading with these principals along with a practicum >would prepare teachers effectively. > >Some students may need to stay on the phonemic section intensly for a long >time and others would move ahead quickly. I contend that Lyn, > >> Send the info I will be happy to help. If you want I >> will speak with the resouce teacher about some suggestions. >> It is very important to do something now and over the summer. >> We all most work together on this. > >> Jimmy Kilpatrick jimmyk@newmail.tenet.edu 1723 Westheimer >> Houston, Texas 77098-1611 713 520-9715 phone 713 520-7214 >> fax > > ------------------------- > >This is an automatically-generated notice. If you wish to respond to this >message, please post your response directly to the Parenting a Child with >Learning Disabilities at . > Thank you! > Jimmy Kilpatrick Phone 713 520-9715 Coordinator of Community Programs Fax 713 520-7214 Advisor for Reading and Reading Disabilities University of Texas at Austin Home 281 265-2368 Charles A. Dana Center Mobile 281 536-4713 1723 Westheimer Road Houston,Texas 77098-1611