الفهرس يوجد فقط 14 صفحة متاحة للعرض العام
 |  | from | 226 |  |  |
| | | from | 226 | | |
المستخلص
LDs are the fastest-growing category for all high incidence disabilities. More children are currently being served in LDs programs than in any other area of special education. Overall, about 5% of school-aged children struggle with reading, writing, or mathematics, given the economic and social costs associated with LD, assessment and diagnosis of children with LDs are of critical importance.
Aim of work:
To review the different tools and measurements used in assessment and diagnosis of LDs worldwide, in Arab countries and in Egypt.
Methodology :
Reviewing all available studies on LDs, computerized literature, Contact other specialties concerned with LDs to search for available diagnostic tools and to make recommendations for further studies that may aid in management for those children.
Definitions of LDs:
The two definitions of LDs enjoying the greatest support are the legislative definition found in IDEA: The term ‘‘SLD” means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which manifest itself in imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations, The term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. Such term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.
And the definition proposed by The NJCLD; that uses the term LD to indicate a discrepancy between a child’s apparent capacity to learn and his or her level of achievement.
Diagnostic Models of LDs:
I. The Aptitude-Achievement Discrepancy Model:
where discrepancy between student IQ and achievement is used as the main criteria for determining SLD.In DSM-IV guidelines, a significant discrepancy is described as achievement substantially below expectations “more than 2 standard deviations between achievement and IQ” for age, schooling, and level of intelligence. While The ICD-10 recommends a cutoff for an ability-achievement discrepancy “. . . that is at least 2 standard errors of prediction below the level expected on the basis of the child’s chronological age and general intelligence.
II. Low Achievement Models:
Based on the use of (achievement markers) achievement scores below the 25th percentile and (exclusionary criteria) the individual doesn’t meet criteria for MR.
III. Intraindividual Differences Models:
Proposes the presence of intraindividual differences; strengths weaknesses on measures of cognitive function in a multitest discrepancy model as a marker for “unexpected underachievement”.
IV. Models Incorporating RTI:
Involves identification based in part on repeated curriculum-based assessments of the same core area, such as reading or math. The student is provided with instruction of sufficient quality and intensity that improved outcomes would be expected. Unexpected underachievement is identified on the basis of a poorer response to instruction than would be expected from most other students.
Comorbidities with LDs:
• ADHD occurs as a comorbidity in about 20% of children with SLD. SLD frequently observed in patients with ADHD, are dyslexia and dyscalculia.
• All children with epilepsy should be considered vulnerable to LD.
• a comorbidity of DCD exists with ADHD and LDs.
• Persons with LDs are more likely to have current and future psychopathology; emotional problems, anxiety ranging from mild restlessness to panic attacks, somatic symptoms, sleep disturbances, eating disorders, generalized anxiety disorder as the child matures or depression and even suicide.
Epidemiology of LDs:
LD continues to grow at a rapid rate; it remains the fastest-growing category for all high-incidence disabilities. However, there is a continuing problem in the field of LDs; is the considerably variable prevalence rates, due to the differing criteria used by various states to determine eligibility for LDs services and the broad definition of a LD.
• In 2009, in USA, 5 million children aged 3-17 had a LD (8%); 11% of boys had a LD compared with 6% of girls
• An estimated 4 % of school-age children having reading disorder; 3-4 times as many boys as girls are reported to have SRD in clinically referred samples.
• Mathematics disorder alone is estimated to occur in about 1% of school-age children, Mathematics disorder may occur with greater frequency in girls.
• The prevalence of disorder of written expression with reading disorder is approximately 4% of school-age children, occurring in about 3 times as many boys as girls.
• In (2008), In Belgium, Learning problems occur in about 5% of school-aged children.
• Estimates of the prevalence rates of LDs in Arab Countries vary widely, because of the unclear definition on one side and deficiency of standardized tools for diagnosis on the other side. However the documented ratio is 2-3 %.
• In (2008), the percentage of students with dyslexia in primary stage in Egypt is 28.63%.
Models for Assessment of LDs:
I. Traditional Assessment: by giving standardized as well as using other informal measures.
II. CBM: Provides an alternative or complement measure to traditional norm-referenced measures, CBM is based on the curriculum in the local school, links testing to instruction and requires graphing of performance using direct and repeated measures over successive time periods.
III. The RTI: Is a student-centered assessment models that use problem-solving and research based method ,its core components include high-quality classroom instruction, universal screening, continuous progress monitoring, research- based interventions, and fidelity of instructional interventions.
IV. The IEP: is a management tool for the entire assessment-teaching process it involves all the assessment evaluation and teaching procedures through a written plan for a particular student developed by the IEP team prescribing specific educational objectives and placement for an individual student. It consists of three broad stages; referral, assessment, and instruction.
• Assessment stages of IEP:
A. Determining present levels of performance.
B. Gathering additional information
C. Measuring discrepancy: a discrepancy between what a student is actually learning (achievement) using achievement tests and what the student ought to be learning (potential) using an intelligence, or IQ test.
• Goals of Assessment stages:
A. Determining present levels of performance.
B. Gathering additional information:
C. Measuring discrepancy
• Methods used for obtaining assessment information:
A. Case History.
B. Observation.
C. Informal Measures: Portfolio assessment, informal tests, criterion-referenced tests and diagnostic teaching.
D. Formal Standardized Tests:
1) Tests of mental abilities (cognitive testing)
2) Motor tests
3) Language assessment tests:
a. Receptive Language: e.g., The Token Test for Children and the PPVT-III.
b. Expressive language functioning: e.g., The CTOPP test and the EOWPVT-R test.
c. Speech-screening tests of articulation: e.g., the Templin-Darley Tests of Articulation.
d. Tests of written language: e.g., the TOWL-2.
4) Memory Testing: e.g., the Children’s Memory Scale.
5) Screening Tests for Visual and Auditory Acuity.
6) Attention, Concentration, and Impulse Control:
e.g., the Connors’ Parent and Teacher rating scale or Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist
7) Emotional and Personality Functioning
8) Achievement Testing: