Gerald,

As the co-author of a Focus on Basics paper on the Incidence of  
special learning needs in Correctional Education programs, our data  
also supports the information you outlined in your message:

Certainly the information should give cause to think about several  
issues:

What does the data imply about screening for differences?

Does the data support the need for complete LD diagnosis or support a  
more holistic systems piece that changes the nature of instruction,  
moves the student into a role as the "owner of learning" provides  
simple and effective interventions that the student can use in  
everyday life and moves the student into a self sufficient advocate  
for their needs?

Does the data illuminate the vast differences between those that may  
need a diagnosis and the apparent majority that simple need a  
different way to be supported in their efforts to learn?

I am sure there are many other questions that the data should prompt  
us to generate, certainly food for thought!

Alan Toops
Executive Director
Ohio Literacy Network


On Apr 30, 2007, at 9:14 PM, Gerald Frisby wrote:


> An incredible experience!! Thanks to all of you.

>

>>>> <PowerPath at aol.com> 4/30/2007 10:53 AM >>>

> Rochelle - and LD Listserv Participants:

> Many thanks to all of the listserv readers that contacted me  

> personally

> about

> the study on the incidence of special learning needs that I began to

> share

> prior to the great Washington State dialogue.  It was great to hear

> from so many

> of our colleagues that are interested in knowing who, how many, and

> what are

> the tangible learning issues/challenges of the participants we serve.

>

> In light of the LD Listserv conversations of the past month and the

> discussion re: Washington state's service delivery system for LD, I

> wanted to continue

> sharing the incidence of special learning needs from our study of

> nearly

> 5,000 the adult basic, literacy, and one-stop participants, from 13

> states, 108

> programs, 2003 - 2006.

>

> A quick review of some of the key descriptive statistics derived from

> personal interviews with nearly 5,000 participants (see LD listserv

> #1074 for

> additional descriptive statistics) includes:

>

> o  20% employed  /  45% receiving public assistance

>

> o  20% stated they had a disability

> o  34% stated they had been tested for LD

> o  39% were told they had a LD

> o  41% stated they were in special education or had  been given  

> special

> help

> in school

>

> o  26% stated they had health problems that could interfere with their

>

> learning

> o  31% had family members with LD

>

> o  33% read at 8.0 and above

> o  38% read below 3.9

>

> o   Nearly 40% have previously entered and left an adult education

> program

> without accomplishing their goals

>

> The incidence of special learning needs, derived from  

> administration of

>

> standardized screenings include:

>

> o  Over 45% of the participants were found to have visual function

> weakness

> and in need of a referral to a vision specialist.  Participants were

> screened

> with their glass on.   The greatest weakness was noted in binocularity

> - using

> the two eyes together …alignment, focusing, moving, working together

> for

> sustained reading or other visually-dominated tasks.

>

> o  About 40% were identified as having a hearing loss in one or both

> ears (on

> a pure tone sweep frequency screening).

>

> o  Nearly 80% were identified as having attention difficulties  

> (mild to

>

> severe).  This includes aspects of attention difficulties such as:

> impulsivity,

> distractibility, hyperactivity, short attention span, over  

> sensitivity,

>

> difficulties focusing and completing tasks, need for stimulation,

> social immaturity,

> and need for supervision.

>

> o  Ninety (90%) percent of the participants have mild to severe visual

> stress

> syndrome.  Participants responded to as series of questions and tasks

> that

> target how light affects vision for academic work and daily tasks. Two

> thirds -

> 66%  -- identified as moderate to severe symptoms.  Visually stress

> syndrome

> was previously referred to as scotopic sensitivity or light

> sensitivity.

> Participants' responses indicated that words move on the page, swirl,

> go in and

> out of focus, eyes water and want to close when reading black letters

> on white

> pages under bright overhead lighting.  Most participants want to turn

> off

> bright overhead lights and prefer low indirect light for reading,

> academic work,

> in an employment situation, and for daily tasks.

>

> o  45% demonstrated weaknesses in visual motor integration - i.e.,

> copying

> o  38% demonstrated weaknesses with auditory comprehension (facts and

> inferences)

> o  46% demonstrated weaknesses with short-term auditory memory (random

>

> numbers and words in context)

>

> What questions about service delivery, special learning needs, and

> learning

> disabilities need to be asked in light of the LD listserv dialogue of

> the last

> few weeks and the upcoming conversation on service delivery for LD in

> Washington State?

>

> If:

> o  learning and demonstrating knowledge of academic/employment

> information

> and skills,

> o  acquiring critical thinking, planning, organization, time

> management,

> setting priorities, and transferring learning from one situation to

> another,

> o  knowing when and how to implement needed accommodations and  

> learning

>

> strategies,

> o  personally knowing how to ask for what is needed to succeed,

> o  incorporating the elements for building participants who will

> persist in

> our programs (see John Cummings & NCSALL research on persistence)

> ……is what adult basic and literacy education is about…

>

> Then, what must a service delivery system (and its staff) do to

> identify and

> address ALL of the special learning needs...many which may be the

> underlying

> issues of what looks like LD?  This obviously isn't about a few of the

>

> participants…but…almost all of our adult basic/literacy participants!

>

> This really is about OUR - as an educational system's -  'second

> chance' to

> help participants thrive, succeed, persist, and make successful

> transitions to

> post secondary education and sustained employment.    What is the cost

> OUR not

> being successful?

>

> Laura P. Weisel, Ph.D.,

> The TLP Group

> PO Box 21510

> Columbus, OH  43221

> 614.850.8677

> dr.weisel at powerpath.com

>

>

>

> **************************************

>  See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

> ----------------------------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Learning Disabilities mailing list

> LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities