ABSTRACT
The Fuchs et al. meta-analysis of reading differences between low achieving (LA) students and students with learning disabilities (LD) represents quality scholarship of a nature rarely possible in the academy. The issues are well represented and the study has several features that make it an excellent vehicle for discussion of the distinction between low achievement and LD:
The authors objectively identified one of the largest databases to examine the differences between low achievement and LD. The study represents an enormous commitment of time and resources not ordinarily available for, or committed to, research studies in the field of special education.
The authors describe the data, its availability, and its format in ways that should facilitate replication or further inquiry, generation of additional research questions, and development of other recommendations.
The authors clearly describe how they controlled for, eliminated, or at least identified, potential sources of bias.
Their detailed description of procedures and analyses should minimize the type of criticisms that commonly plague research efforts such as these.
The design, procedures, and findings represent a conservative approach; the authors take great care to identify the limitations of their work and do not overstate their findings.
The study presents an unusual clarity of writing that facilitates the readers’ understanding of the study, the findings, and the recommendations. The information contained in this report will be easily understood by researchers and practitioners alike.
