ABSTRACT
My response to the Fletcher et al. paper will emphasize points of agreement between their conclusions and other viewpoints on the classification of learning disabilities (LD), will present suggestions that expand their perspective, and will sound a note of caution. Before discussing these points, it is important to be clear on the nature of the evidence reviewed by Fletcher and his colleagues: Most of our knowledge on LD classification is located in the domain of reading defined by word-level skills of primary-aged children. That is, the knowledge base on classification of learning problems in academic domains other than reading (mathematics, spelling, writing) is sparse, we have little research on classifying older children in any domain, and our knowledge of reading disability classification does not include reading comprehension difficulties. On one hand, what we don’t know is sobering and discouraging. On the other hand, the review by Fletcher and his colleagues shows there is progress and promise in efforts to define and classify LD.
