A Meta-Research Commentary on Macmillan and Siperstein's “Learning Disabilities as Operationally Defined by Schools”

The paper by MacMillan and Siperstein (this volume) is an excellent, culminating contribution to a line of scholarship initiated by the senior author and his colleagues more than two decades ago. In 1980, MacMillan, Meyers, and Morrison wrote what now must be considered a modern classic in the history of special education scholarship. In highly simplified reduction, that paper argued cogently and forcefully why school-identified samples of students with mild disabilities should be distrusted for purposes of research. ¹ Viewed from the standpoint of the research community, awakening to the new, policy-dominated era of special education, MacMillan et al.’s paper was a serious warning of the bumpy road ahead. I direct my comments first to MacMillan and Siperstein’s main points. Then I address some meta-research considerations to which MacMillan and Siperstein have only alluded. Finally, I discuss some theoretical ideas about the nature of learning disabilities (LDs) and its identification in schools that have been passed over in this and most other discussions of the issue.