Children with Learning Disability: Theory, Concept and Learning Programs - Literature review Example

Children with Learning Disability: Theory, Concept and Learning Programs Introduction Children are perceived to have learning disability if they havea greater difficulty knowing or learning compared with the majority of the children of their age. They may also have a condition that thwarts or hinders them from using the current and usual educational facilities provided to other children their age, and they need special educational facilities. Early identification and intervention of children with special education needs can allow them to reach their full potential. This should be aided by teachers’ beliefs and school’s practice to provide the children normal educational experience. Teachers have a significant role in identifying children with special education needs (SEN) (Anders et al., 2011). Children with learning disability are also called children with special education needs (SEN). The term “special” means “settings developed for ‘other’ children based on the premise that their difference requires specialist treatment in a segregated setting” (Thomas & Loxley, 2001 as cited in Nind, Flewitt, & Payler, 2011, p. 359). The term “special education needs” (SEN) may also refer to children who “have a learning difficulty which calls for special educational provision to be made for them” (Department for Education and Skills, 2001 as cited in Anders et al., 2011, p. 422). Learning disabilities (LD) affect learning in the different phases in one’s life. There are language delays or language insufficiencies in early childhood that may hamper formal schooling. LD also occur despite an individual’s culture or socioeconomic status (Hammill Institute on Disabilities, 2011). Specific Learning Disability (SLD) is a type of disability, one among the 13 disabilities, wherein one student can apply for special services in the United States. This is under the program for children with disabilities known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004 as cited in Hammill Institute on Disabilities, 2011, p. 237). SLD refers to developmental disorders that unfavorably affects learning but may not refer to intellectual disability or hearing impairment. Other learning difficulties identified by IDEA include: listening difficulty, verbal language, reading skills and fluency, reading comprehension, and so on. The US K-12 program is in line with Piaget’s theory of the child’s social interaction. For example, the No Child Left Behind Act provides program for disabled students to grow and learn along with non-disabled students; it promotes the program that no child is left behind including the most vulnerable sector, the students with disability, and this is a long process of learning from Kinder to Grade 12. There is a common agreement in the scientific community that LD results from “atypical cognitive and linguistic processes that interfere with learning, but controversies exist about assessment, identification, and prevalence because of the complex nature of these processes” (Hammill Institute on Disabilities, 2011, p. 239). Types of learning disabilities include dyslexia, reading disorder, dyscalculia, math disability, dysgraphia, and disorders of written expression, which all need special educational provision in order for a child with LD to adjust to his/her situation and acquire learning the way other children do. LD can be present along with other disabilities. Children with LD may also exhibit social-emotional, behavioral, or attention-deficit disorder, which may either coexistent or secondary to LD. In this kind of disability, the cognitive processes affect the individual’s learning processes; thus, SEN is reliant on those characteristics. Deficits of language and communications are primary characteristics of LD. (Hammill Institute on Disabilities, 2011, p. 238) Objectives The objectives for this essay are: 1. To provide an understanding of Piaget’s theory in relation to child development 2. To examine Piaget’s theory and how the theory application can help children with learning disability 3. To know the agreed definition of learning disability by researchers and scholars 4. To find out early signs of learning disability 5. To find out the difficulties experienced by children with LD and how to minimize the difficulties by way of effective learning 6. To determine the different classifications of learning disability 7. To study the successful learning techniques for children with learning disability 8. To know and define the tools, programs, and learning educational needs for children with learning disability and how these should be introduced in schools and homes with children with LD 9. To know and understand how Grade 2 students with learning disability can improve and acquire learning along with other students who are not disabled 10. To study the different intervention and learning techniques for children with LD introduced in education programs Piaget’s theory on intellectual development Jean Piaget’s studies and experiments on developmental psychology influenced present-day perceptions on child psychology, particularly on children with special education needs. More than any other theorist or scientist, Piaget influenced “our conception and understanding of the cognitive resources of children” (Beilin, 1992 as cited in Jurczak, 1997, p. 311). In the foreword to The Origins of Intelligence, Piaget posited that “sensorimotor schemata are not concepts, but that there is a ‘functional relationship’ between the early sensorimotor schemata and the later formation of concepts” (Jurczak, p. 314). Piaget implied that this relationship is referred to as “parenté” in French, which means kinship. He divides human development into a set of qualitatively distinct periods or “stages” and uses words that relate a continuous relationship among the different phases, wherein the activities “constitute an historical development so that each episode depends on preceding episodes” (as cited in Jurczak, p. 314). The developmental theory of Jean Piaget emphasizes on man’s intellectual development. Abstract thinking evolves from the sensorimotor behavior in infancy through the intermediate stage (Woodward, 1963 as cited in Klein & Safford, 2001). Piaget’s studies focused on the kinds of psychological operations that composed intellectual development. His primary aim was not to provide an inventory of behavior; rather, he focused on interpreting behavior in terms of its origins and to foretell what would grow from it in the different stages. He found that the central nervous system during the early years of social interaction, “constantly forms levels of integration which are both quantitatively and qualitatively different from the synthesis out of which they evolved” (Robinson & Robinson, 1965 as cited in Klein & Safford, p. 201). Piaget’s views on child development were distinct from those proposed by other theorists. Mental retardation, in the context of the universality of mental development, provides researchers with many questions that are important to the study. But Piaget’s theory provides us understanding of this mental development. His developmental theory of conceptual understanding states that people can succeed on certain tasks with thoughtful understanding the “how” and “why” of their successful activities (Piaget, 1976, 1978 as cited in Wolfsont, 2002, p. 188). Piaget proved that there was a gap between success and understanding because “the reflective understanding occurs performance requires a higher stage of mental operations than is required for the successful behavior on the task” (Wolfsont, 2002, p. 188). The studies of Gesell (1954) and Isaacs (1933) on child development are consistent with the theories of Piaget. The methods of their studies encouraged educators to allow children’s cognitive abilities to develop naturally and “to concentrate on social-emotional growth” (Klein & Safford, 2001, p. 202). The difference of Piaget’s theory is that Piaget views the child’s total development as a result of social interactions. His ideas centered on the importance of the environment and the importance of the child as a learner. The child must be active in social interaction or with his/her surrounding. Piaget posited that “cognitive processes do not emerge through direct learning but through a reorganization of psychological structures resulting from interaction with the environment” (Elkind, 1967; Flavel, 1963; Piaget, 1964 as cited in Klein & Safford, 2001, 202). On the other hand, the theory of John Dewey emphasized as experimental, giving the explanation that “intelligence is a way in which one responds to one’s environment …(and that) one can understand the response in terms of its genesis” (Seltzer, 1977, p. 323). Both Piaget and Dewey were one in saying that knowing and doing had a relevant connection. They agreed that intelligent activity starts with biological activity. According to Piaget, hereditary intelligence is inborn, but this is modified or influenced by the environment or the surrounding, and he concludes that he cannot find an absolute beginning to cognitive development. Dewey explains that knowledge is a biological process, as in any other biological processes, and involves interaction. All knowledge involves an interaction similar to that of a plant which must interact with its environment to have growth in the process (Seltzer, 1977, p. 324). The principle of self-regulation is basic to the descriptions of intelligent activity. Autoregulation explains how natural organisms survive and grow, and intelligence as one form of adaptation, has a self-regulating feature analogous to the biological adaptation (Seltzer, 1977, p. 324). Piaget espoused the stage-development theory of cognitive development which states that “for a child to arrive at stage B in his development, he must first have reached and passed through stage A … (and) stage B cannot be arrived at until stage A has been mastered” (Siegel, 1975 as cited in Klein & Safford, 2002, p. 202). It is the cognitive development that is questionable not the age of the child. Transition from the different stages needs integration and new levels of performance. The roots of stage B come from the previous stage but the roots reach mature in the succeeding stage. Cognitive development is reared through an interaction with the environment. Piaget’s theory that progression through different stages happens in unchanging sequence, along with his other theory that transitions in the different levels involve qualitative rather than quantitative change, provided for new areas of studies on child development. A test to Piaget’s theory is the question of whether development is really of continuous manner (Klein & Safford, p. 202). The Piagetian theories produced conflicting research results. For example, Sigel and Hooper (1968 as cited in Klein & Safford, 2002) posited that direct teaching of conservation through verbal teaching did not provide fixed conservation concepts. Formal education did not have any effect on conservation. In a study on children who were attending school and who were not in school, Goodnow and Bethon (1966 as cited in Klein and Safford, 2002) found that there were no significant differences noted. This proved that specific training cannot substitute for “age-linked general experience,” a Piagetian concept. Children with Special Education Needs (SEN) Special education needs (SEN) applies to various situations and the amount and kind of help that should be given depends on the individual child’s situation. There are children who have difficulty in reading acquisition and therefore they have to be aided with supplemental, rigorous instruction, although teachers have to provide suggestions on what children needs with respect to their disability (Anders et al., 2011, p. 423). There are also children with LD who have difficulties in one or many aspects of educational performance. Children with epilepsy provide a specific example of children with SEN. They have the risk of learning and behavioural difficulties which is higher than those without epilepsy, and their sickness or disability is not just about seizures. Factors that have to be dealt with include the “effects of seizures or seizure medications, global cognitive deficits, specific cognitive deficits, social-emotional and behavioural difficulties and academic delays” (Reilly & Ballantine, 2011, p. 143). In some European countries, children with SEN are provided inclusive education while other countries have their children with intellectual disabilities attend special schools. It is becoming a common practice in some parts in Europe, particularly Switzerland, that children with intellectual disabilities are provided inclusive education. Children with disabilities were part of a study on inclusion on the academic achievement of children with mild disabilities. The study aimed to compare the progress of children learning disabilities in inclusive versus special school settings. With respect to their progress in mathematics and global adaptive behavior, the two groups did not differ. But there was a slight difference between the progress of the two groups in the subject of literacy. The conclusion was that the children with learning disability made important progress in their literacy skills, mathematic skills and adaptive behavior displayed at school and at home, independent of their type of placement (Dessemontet, Bless, & Morin, 2012, p. 585). Children with special education needs may be integrated if they fit in the “mainstream”. Mainstream refers to regular schools attended by typically developing children (Nind et al., 2011). Society should provide a mechanism to help children with SEN since in this current age of intense globalization more barriers are created instead of helping them. Accommodations have to be provided to give them ease in their education and learning. An example is the Braille lessons for children with visual impairment that are being applied in SEN facilities. Moreover, children with learning disabilities must be provided with an understanding heart as common misunderstandings can create barriers to appropriate services. There may be misconceptions that are subtle but are equally insidious harmful. SEN facilities should provide a wholesome atmosphere, friendly environment, classes, and other learning practices. Students with SEN who express difficulties and challenges must be provided necessary attention to avoid any injustice. Most of the visually impaired have faced the difficulties of transport, lack of social relationship, and few books printed in Braille (Bano, Akhter, & Anjum, 2013, p. 81). The Grade 2 students with LD There have been little empirical studies on experiences of students with learning disabilities, particularly on Grade 2 students, but learning programs have been applied without taking into consideration the theory and its applications. Yasutake and Bryan (1995 as cited in Sideridis et al., 2006) indicated that children with learning disabilities (LD) are at risk of having negative experiences than non-disabled children. Sideridis and colleagues (2006) have said that affective reactions come first before “cognitive processing,” believed to be automatic and not based on controlled processes and impact on succeeding “cognitive processing and behavior” (De Houwer & Hermans, 2001 as cited in Sideridis, et al., 2006). Piaget’s development theory focuses on early development of intellectual ability and the evolution of abstract thinking which starts in the sensorimotor behavior of infancy until early childhood (Woodward, 1963 as cited in Klein & Safford, 2001). Piaget’s theory emphasized the psychological aspects of intellectual development. Piaget theorized that the early psychological structures in a child can be reorganized from social interaction and that “self concept, social development, play, and art all have cognitive structural components” (Piaget, 1964 as cited in Klein & Safford, 2001, p. 202). Piaget also supports the theory that practice is a part of the learning process and that there should be a transition from one stage of development to another which needs integration and new levels of performance. A child’s social interaction provides nurturing and enhancement of cognitive development. Piaget is concerned with development at an early age and all hindrances have to be kept at the minimum and dealt with so that the development is nurtured and goes on without a hitch; else, the development becomes blocked and there might be no other chance in the future. It must start from the early years of learning, in different stages, and all the learning outcomes have to be integrated. The integration is part of the learning process and must also be a part of the learning program. Studies made by Sigel, Roeper, and Hooper (1966 as cited in Klein & Safford, 2001) indicated that there was success in bringing conservation in talented 5-year-old children. The study was conducted by building through prerequisite steps of several classification, “multiple relationality, and reversibility”. The researchers developed a training program using 5-year-old gifted children and taking them through the important prerequisite steps leading to conservation. They found that the children in the raining group could solve a conservation task in the posttest scenario than those in the control group wherein two were not able to solve any tasks. Multiple classification could be taught to 7- and 8-year-old children in a successful training program (Klein & Safford, 2001). Resources for students with additional learning needs should be prioritized. But before this can be done, prevalence estimates should be considered (Law et al., 2000 as cited in McLeod & McKinnon, 2010). Chambers and colleagues (2004 as cited in McCleod & McKinnon) found in their study that the cost in providing additional learning needs for students with disability could be determined by determining the expenditure for individual children. Additionally, the level of support and other activities connected with the prioritization should be determined. In determining the level of support that should be given to children with disability, teachers should look at: “the additional difficulties experienced by the children, their own knowledge gaps, and the barriers to meeting the children’s needs” (McLeod & McKinnon, 2010, p. 124). Learning realities There is in the phenomenon of children’s learning disability the Matthew effect wherein the low achiever tends to be more left behind in learning while those who are high achiever get more enhanced learning, which then results in the widening gap between low- and high-achievers. As the child is left behind, opportunities and access to new vocabulary and reading material also become limited (Stanovich, 1986 as cited in Scarborough & Parker, 2003, p. 48). Teachers hold a key role in the child’s learning, or they might have low expectations for this particular kind of child and deliver low quality instruction and learning. Classmates of the child may look down upon a child with LD, or stigmatize their classmate (Bryan, 1974; Garrett & Crump, 1980 as cited in Scarborough & Parker, 2003, p. 48). The Matthew effect states that children who initially have low achievement will have slower progress than children who learn fast. Over time, the gap between these two groups widens and the variability increases (Scarborough & Parker, 2003, p. 48). But it is not only in the context of achievement will the gap widens but also on “LD-related cognitive” skills, such as IQ and reading skills, and also in learning outcomes. However, in longitudinal studies conducted by several researchers, no concrete proof was seen for negative Matthew effects on Grades 1 to six. But the researchers found the growing gap between poorer readers and nondisabled readers. Achievement between the two groups also widened in the second up to fourth grades, particularly in word recognition and reading skills. This gap was not seen in children aged 9 to 15 years, in the subject of “word recognition and reading comprehension” (Scarborough & Parker, 2003, p. 49). In some studies, children with LD were seen to have lower IQ than non-disabled children. They also had weaker word comprehension and language understanding. Affective processing is important in the definition of LD. Negative affect is higher in LD students than their peers with no LD (Sideridis et al., 2006). The study of Scarborough and Parker (2003) focused on Matthew effects in IQ, reading comprehension, and other attitudinal problems in children with LD and non-disabled children in Grades 2 through 8. The study wanted to investigate if Matthew effects occurred on children with LD and if the investigation found that it was so, could it spread to IQ and other social and behavioral problems. The study found that Matthew effects did not exist on children who were slow in reading skills but a gap was seen in the two groups for Grades 2 through 8 students. Their IQ scores in math had widened. Those who were slower in math had low IQ and were found to have behavioral and social problems (Scarborough & Parker, 2003). Children with LD in Grade 2 were behind in reading achievement but in Grade 8, they were not really far behind than normally achieving children. Psychopathology in students with LD In another study on children with LD, the researchers found that the children had high scores on psychopathology indices, meaning they had psychotic features (Sideridis, Mouzaki, Simos, & Protopapas, 2006, p. 160), or were found to have psychopathological disturbances in several studies. Psychopathology, emotion, and/or motivation factors were found to be predictors of learning disabilities, rather than cognitive and metacognitive factors, although the latter are also important variables (Botsas & Padeliadu, 2003 as cited in Sideridis et al., 2006). Identification and classification of learning disabilities are based on conceptual or methodological grounds. One reason for this is that researchers find it hard to define learning disabilities and also difficult to measure IQ (MacMillan & Forness, 1998; Stuebing et al., 2002 as cited in Sideridis et al., 2006). Some said that there is a difference between ability and achievement and that it was also difficult to find models for criteria. Still others were concerned on “overidentification,” particularly on the problem of “specificity of the criteria” used by different states (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 2002 as cited in Sideridis, 2006, p. 160). Psychopathology can provide basis for LD classification scheme. For example, a meta-analysis has shown the prevalence of depression among students with LD, believed to be about 88% of the reviewed researches. Anxiety disorders have also been found to be prevalent and “above normative” among LD students. With these facts, Sideridis and colleagues (2006) suggested classification studies to be conducted for the following reasons: (a) the identification criteria has often been argued by researchers (Francis et al., 2005; Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003 as cited in Sideridis et al., 2006); (b) cognitive variables have been found to be poor predictors of LD; and (c) there were comorbid features found in empirical classification studies (Kline et al., as cited in Sideridis et al., 2006). The study focused on: whether motivation, emotions, and psychopathology were significant predictors of reading comprehension difficulties; and, whether motivational, emotional, and psychopathology indices interact with cognitive variables to form clusters of student profiles; and, how were students with LD in reading comprehension grouped and identified into those profiles? The study selected children from grades 2 through 4 from Greek elementary schools in Crete, Attica, who had low reading comprehension performance. Reading comprehension is an important assessment of reading skill as it addresses the purpose of the reading task, i.e. the removing and developing of meaning from the reading material (Sideridis, 2006, p. 161). Reading comprehension performance shows a different cluster of cognitive skills than word-level reading skills, even if this is used in children with specific reading disability or dyslexia. The children were tested individually in two 40-minute sessions over three weeks on tests like “word and pseudoword reading accuracy, pseudoword and sight word efficiency, text comprehension, receptive vocabulary and spelling” (Sideridis, 2006, p. 162). The children were also given tests in spelling or orthographic ability, slight word reading efficiency or “Test of Word Reading Efficiency” (TOWRE; Torgesen, Wagner, & Rashotte, 1999 as cited in Sideridis, 2006). Other tests given were on receptive vocabulary, expressive vocabulary, reading motivation, and assessments on anxiety and depression using the “Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale” (RCMAS) and the “Children’s Depression Iventory” (CDI). The study concluded that psychopathology inclinations became more prevalent in later grades, e.g. Grade 4. Psychopathology in predicting reading comprehension difficulties becomes more prevalent for older students. Reading difficulties are one of the reasons why students have to be provided with special education in line with the concept of specific learning disability (SLD) model. In the United States, students taking up SLD are categorized under the SLD through the implementation of the “Individuals With Disabilities Education Act” (IDEA). Students who are considered having emotional disturbance (ED) have also increased (U.S. Department of Education, 2011 as cited in Wanzek, Al Otaiba, & Petscher, 2014, p. 188). In the case of children with mathematics learning disability (MLD), there is also no clear definition for this type of learning disability, just like dyslexia. There is no particular assessment standard for this (Murphy, Mazzocco, Hanich, & Early, 2007) as in other learning disability measurement. Other measures of children’s math intelligence include the “Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised,” and the “Woodcock Johnson-Revised (WJ-R) Calculation or Applied Problems Subtests” (Murphy et al., 2007). MLD is common in children just like other learning disabilities. Assessment Techniques Teachers use several techniques in assessing reading comprehension for Grade 2 students, e.g. they use the analogy-based phonics which is a method of allowing students to use known words in decoding unknown words. One example is that in decoding an unknown word snap, the student can use the word map (White, 2005, p. 234). In this method, there should be a planned set of phonic elements to be taught sequentially (Ehri et al., 2001 as cited in White, p. 234). Phonic elements use common spelling to include consonants, digraphs, and blends. Cunningham (1975 as cited in White, 2005) was the pioneer in using the method of analogy-based phonics. It was applied in the original Benchmark Word Identification Program and now a model in teaching reading comprehension for disabled students. However, analogy-based phonics program is not popular with regular classroom teachers (White, 2005). Rime-based instructions are based on some evidence. Most children are skilled in dividing spoken syllables before they can divide “consonant cluster or rimes into their component phonemes” (White, 2005, p. 237). Secondly, beginning readers know how to make similarities between the spelling patterns in words when they are given hint words. Thirdly, reading new words by similarity is easier than letter-by-letter decoding for beginning readers, and gets rid of blending the phonemes of the rime (Ehri & Robbins, 1991; McClure, Ferreira, & Bisanz, 1996 as cited in White 2005). Fourth, vowel pronunciations are more reliable and firm within specific spelling models. In Hawaii, they used a comprehensive-based reading program known as the Kamehameha Elementary Education Program (KEEP) which was used for Hawaiian students who were at risk of failing in their classes. Teachers were first trained to implement the KEEP reading program, and were supported by the sponsor, the Kamehameha Schools and Bishop Estate. An important feature of the KEEP was its focus “on the active instruction of comprehension in small groups” (Tharp, 1982 as cited in White, 2005, p. 240). In this program, a group was devoted to comprehension and another group focused on word recognition. This is in line with Piaget’s concept of practice as part of the learning process (Klein & Safford, 2001). Comprehension instruction was next introduced after an Experience-Test-Relationship (ETR) model, wherein the teacher gave a story drawn from experiences that were known to the students. The teachers also motivated the children to love reading and allowed them to relate the texts with their acquired knowledge. KEEP teachers asked many higher order questions. From this background, the KEEP school teachers decided to infuse the analogy-based phonics program. The analogy-based phonics appealed to teachers because it enhanced the students’ knowledge in decoding and comprehending. This becomes successful learning as it focuses on cognitive development, and not the age of the child. Conclusion/Recommendation In providing education for children with special needs, the manner in which this problem is addressed should be given utmost attention by teachers and policymakers. The first and most important should be how to understand the children and their needs. Some of them may not be able to process verbal language easily, and others may not be able to speak. We should talk to them at their chronological age, and not baby-talk to them. We must give them respect by addressing the student directly, even if he or she is not able to respond verbally. We should also bear in mind that children with special needs tend to be stronger visual learners but may have great difficulty in processing verbal language. In communicating with a child with special needs, we can use a physical gesture or picture. There are other ways in communicating with children with special needs. But the most important is we have first to understand and give them the necessary care. References McLeod, S. & McKinnon, D. (2010). Support required for primary and secondary students with communication disorders and/or other learning needs. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 26(2), 123-143. doi: 10.1177/0265659010368754 Murphy, M., Mazzocco, M., Hanich, L., & Martha, E. (2007). Cognitive characteristics of children with mathematics learning disability (MLD) vary as a function of the cutoff criterion used to define MLD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(5), 458-478. Scarborough, H. & Parker, J. (2003). Matthew effects in children with learning disabilities: Development of reading, IQ, and psychosocial problems from grade 2 to Grade 8. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 47-71. Sideridis, G., Mouzaki, A., Simos, P., & Protopapas, A. (2006). Classification of students with reading comprehension difficulties: The roles of motivation, affect, and psychopathology. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29(3), 159-180. Wanzek, J., Al Otaiba, S., & Petscher, Y. (2014). Oral reading fluency development for children with emotional disturbance or learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 80(2). 187-204. White, T. (2005). Effects of systematic and strategic analogy-based phonics on grade 2 students’ word reading and reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(2), 234-255. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.40.2.5 Read More