How Many U.S. High School Students Have a Foreign Language Reading "Disability"? Reading Without Meaning and the Simple View.

Conventional wisdom suggests that students classified as learning disabled will exhibit difficulties with foreign language (FL) learning, but evidence has not supported a relationship between FL learning problems and learning disabilities. The simple view of reading model posits that reading comprehension is the product of word decoding and language comprehension and that there are good readers and 3 types of poor readers-dyslexic, hyperlexic, and garden variety-who exhibit different profiles of strengths and/or deficits in word decoding and language comprehension. In this study, a random sample of U.S. high school students completing first-, second-, and third-year Spanish courses were administered standardized measures of Spanish word decoding and reading comprehension, compared with monolingual Spanish readers from first to eleventh grades, and classified into reader types according to the simple view of reading. The majority of students fit the hyperlexic profile, and no participants fit the good reader profile until they were compared with first- and second-grade monolingual Spanish readers. Findings call into question the practice of diagnosing an FL "disability" before a student engages in FL study.

The identification and performance of gifted students with learning disability diagnoses: a quantitative synthesis.

Much has been written about gifted students with learning disabilities, but there have been few large-scale empirical investigations, and the concept has proven controversial. The authors reviewed the available empirical literature on these students, focusing on (a) the criteria by which the students were identified and (b) the students' performance on standardized tests of ability and achievement. In addition, the test scores of these students were aggregated to determine typical performance levels. A total of 46 empirical articles were reviewed, and major findings included wide variability in identification criteria across studies, frequent reliance on dubious methods of learning disability identification, and a lack of academic impairment among the identified students. Implications for the "gifted/LD" category are discussed.

College students with learning disability diagnoses: who are they and how do they perform?

The purpose of this study is to provide an up-to-date review of the literature on postsecondary students classified as having learning disabilities (LD). The review focused on the criteria by which students were classified as LD and the cognitive and achievement characteristics of the participants. From almost 400 studies, only 30% were empirical (data-based) investigations reporting original data. Findings showed that a wide range of criteria was used to classify students as LD, although various discrepancy criteria and registration with university offices of disability services were most often cited. Participants' mean scores on standardized intelligence and achievement tests were in the average range but somewhat lower than those of other college students. Generally, the findings show a lack of consensus among diagnosticians and researchers about how LD should be diagnosed and also show that college students classified as LD tend to have average achievement, despite scoring below their classmates.

Objective criteria for classification of postsecondary students as learning disabled: effects on prevalence rates and group characteristics.

This study examined the consequences of classifying postsecondary students as learning disabled (LD) using five objective sets of criteria: IQ-achievement discrepancies (1.0 to 1.49 SD, 1.5 to 1.99 SD, and >or= 2.0 SD), DSM-IV criteria, and chronic educational impairment beginning in childhood. The participants were 378 postsecondary students from two universities who had been previously classified as LD and were receiving instructional and/or testing accommodations. The agreement between diagnostic models was often low, both in terms of the proportion of students identified as well as which students were identified by the models. The discrepancy models identified the largest proportions of students as LD (10% to 42%), whereas fewer than 10% of participants met either of the other sets of criteria, and 55% of the participants were not classified as LD by any of the models. Implications for further research and practices in postsecondary settings are discussed.

Is there a "disability" for learning a foreign language?

Recently, talk of a new type of learning disability (LD)--a foreign language learning disability, or FLLD--has made its way into the LD and foreign language (FL) literature. However, no empirical evidence has been published to support the concept of a "disability" for FL learning by those professionals who use the term. In this article, the author takes the position that there is not a distinct "disability" that can be called an FLLD. He reviews several years of research evidence indicating that any proposal for such a distinct entity is problematic. To support his position, he reviews problems with the current definition and diagnostic criteria for LD. He then cites the many difficulties inherent in the development and use of (a) a logically consistent, easily operationalized, and empirically valid definition of and (b) diagnostic criteria for the FLLD concept. The author then discusses how FL learning problems occur along a continuum of very strong to very poor language learners, and he explains how the proponents of an FLLD misuse the concept of FL aptitude. Finally, the author cites implications resulting from the research evidence on FL learning problems and use of the term FLLD.

Native language predictors of foreign language proficiency and foreign language aptitude.

Fifty-four students were tested at specific time intervals over 10 years to determine best native language (NL) predictors of oral and written foreign language (FL) proficiency and FL aptitude. All participants completed two years of Spanish, French, or German. Each was administered measures of NL literacy, oral language, and cognitive ability in elementary school. A measure of FL aptitude was administered at the beginning of ninth grade and FL proficiency was evaluated at the end of the 10th grade. Among the variables, NL literacy measures were the best predictors of FL proficiency, and NL achievement and general (verbal) intelligence were strong predictors of FL aptitude. Results suggest that indices of NL literacy as early as first grade are related to FL proficiency and FL aptitude nine and 10 years later. Findings provide strong support for connections between L1 and L2 skills, and for speculation that "lower level" skills in phonological processing are important for written language development and oral proficiency in a FL.

Weak and strong novice readers of English as a foreign language: effects of first language and socioeconomic status.

This study examined individual differences among beginning readers of English as a foreign language (EFL). The study concentrated on the effects of underlying first language (L1) knowledge as well as EFL letter and vocabulary knowledge. Phonological and morphological awareness, spelling, vocabulary knowledge, and word reading in Hebrew L1, in addition to knowledge of EFL letters and EFL vocabulary, were measured. The study also investigated the effect of socioeconomic background (SES) on beginning EFL readers. Participants included 145 fourth graders from three schools representing two socioeconomic backgrounds in the north of Israel. The results indicate that knowledge of English letters played a more prominent role than knowledge of Hebrew L1 components in differentiating between strong and weak EFL readers. The Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis was supported by L1 phonological awareness, word reading, and vocabulary knowledge appearing as part of discriminating functions. The presence of English vocabulary knowledge as part of the discriminant functions provides support for English word reading being more than just a decoding task for EFL beginner readers. Socioeconomic status differentiated the groups for EFL word recognition but not for EFL reading comprehension.

College students classified with ADHD and the foreign language requirement.

The conventional assumption of most disability service providers is that students classified as having attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) will experience difficulties in foreign language (FL) courses. However, the evidence in support of this assumption is anecdotal. In this empirical investigation, the demographic profiles, overall academic performance, college entrance scores, and FL classroom performance of 68 college students classified as having ADHD were examined. All students had graduated from the same university over a 5-year period. The findings showed that all 68 students had completed the university's FL requirement by passing FL courses. The students' college entrance scores were similar to the middle 50% of freshmen at this university, and their graduating grade point average was similar to the typical graduating senior at the university. The students had participated in both lower (100) and upper (200, 300, 400) level FL courses and had achieved mostly average and above-average grades (A, B, C) in these courses. One student had majored and eight students had minored in an FL. Two thirds of the students passed all of their FL courses without the use of instructional accommodations. In this study, the classification of ADHD did not appear to interfere with participants' performance in FL courses. The findings suggest that students classified as having ADHD should enroll in and fulfill the FL requirement by passing FL courses.

Students classified as LD who petitioned for or fulfilled the college foreign language requirement-are they different? A replication study.

This replication study compared 86 petition students who received course substitutions for the college foreign language (FL) requirement with 40 nonpetition students who fulfilled the FL requirement by passing FL courses on cognitive and academic achievement measures and graduating grade point average. The results showed significant differences between the two groups, favoring the nonpetition group on one measure, the American College Testing (ACT) score, when IQ was used as a covariate; however, no significant group differences remained when ACT score was used as a covariate. More than half of the 126 petition and nonpetition students did not meet a minimum criterion for classification as learning disabled (LD), and more than half of both groups (54% and 63%, respectively) were not classified as LD before enrolling in college. Sixty percent of the petition students either had not taken an FL course in college or had achieved only grades of withdrawal before petitioning for substitution of the FL requirement. Implications addressed include petition students' persistence in fulfilling the FL requirement, students' use of instructional accommodations and services, criteria used to classify students as LD, use of the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT), and why some students classified as LD pass FL courses and other students classified as LD do not.

Students classified as LD who received course substitutions for the college foreign language requirement: a replication study.

This replication study examined whether 158 college students classified as learning disabled (LD) who were granted course substitutions for the foreign language (FL) requirement would display significant cognitive and academic achievement differences when grouped by levels of IQ-achievement and achievement-achievement discrepancy and by level of performance on an FL aptitude test (Modern Language Aptitude Test; MLAT), phonological/orthographic processing measures, and in FL courses. The results showed that there were few differences among groups with differing levels of IQ-achievement or achievement-achievement discrepancy (i.e., < 1.0 SD, 1.0-1.49 SD, and > 1.50 SD) on MLAT and American College Testing (ACT) scores, graduating grade point average (GPA), or college FL GPA. The results also showed that between groups who scored at or above versus below the 15th percentile (i.e., < 1.0 SD) on the MLAT, there were no differences on measures of graduating GPA, college FL GPA, native language skill, ACT score, and Verbal IQ. Demographic findings showed that 44% of these petition students met a minimum IQ-achievement discrepancy criterion (> or = 1.0 SD) for classification as LD. These findings suggest that many traditional assumptions about LD and FL learning are likely to be false.