• Teachers
• School Psychologists
• School & District Administrators
• State Departments of Education
• Researchers
• Parents

• NRCLD Home
• SLD and RTI Tools
• SLD Determination
• What is RTI?
• "How to" topics
• Changing roles of educators
• About NRCLD
• NRCLD research
• NRCLD publications
• NRCLD presentations
• NRCLD Contacts
• SLD and RTI resources

And Miles to Go...:
State SLD Requirements
and Authoritative Recommendations

Previous Page | Next Page
(Recommendations) | (Methodology)

Report Text

• Introduction
• SLD Definitions and Classification Criteria
• Historical Overview
• Questioning the Ability-Achievement Discrepancy
• Recommendations for Change in SLD Definition and Classification Criteria
• State Education Agency SLD Definitions and Criteria
• Methodology
• Results
• Analysis of Discrepancy Determination Methods
• Summary of Trends
• SLD Beliefs
• Further Analyses
• Discussion
• References

Figures and Tables

• Figure 1: Distribution of State SLD Prevalence
• Table 1: Consensus Conclusions: LD Summit Follow-Up (Bradley et al., 2002)
• Table 2: Components of State Definitions and Criteria
• Table 3: Methods used to determine the discrepancy
• Table 4: LD Beliefs

State Education Agency SLD Definitions and Criteria

SLD is diagnosed by multidisciplinary teams in local education agencies (LEA) who generally apply definitions and classification criteria adopted by state education agencies (SEA). The Federal regulations regarding the SLD definition and classification criteria influence state definitions and criteria, but states exercise significant discretion in the names used for disabilities, the definitions, and classification criteria. The wide state discretion allowed in the OSEP monitoring of IDEA implementation can perhaps be tied to the strong traditions in this nation of education being a state and local matter and the absence of a national curriculum. Moreover, in the commentaries regarding the proposed SLD rules, one of the issues was the violation of states rights (Federal Register, December 29, 1977). For this and other reasons consistent SLD definitions and classification criteria have never been implemented in the states.

The potential importance of state variations in SLD definitions and classification criteria was recognized early in the implementation of the EHA. The first published survey of state SLD requirements appeared in 1976 reporting the results of a 1974 survey of SEAs (Mercer, Forgnone, & Wolking, 1976). Subsequent surveys were conducted by this group in 1983, 1988, and 1994 (Mercer, Hughes, & Mercer, 1985; Mercer, King-Sears, & Mercer, 1990; Mercer, Jordan, Allsopp, & Mercer, 1996) and by Frankenberger & Harper (1987). Readers are referred to those articles for further details about methodology and results.

Several conclusions can be derived from studying prior SEA surveys of SLD requirements. First, the states have gradually moved toward adoption of the Federal definition of SLD. Second, states have generally adopted the terms SLD or LD, with fewer states over the years using idiosyncratic nomenclature. Some exceptions exist to this latter trend. For example Colorado uses the term Perceptual and Communicative Disorder with what looks very much like an SLD definition. Furthermore, states have moved increasingly toward the requirement of the ability-achievement discrepancy as part of SLD eligibility determination; however, no consensus exists on the method to operationalize the discrepancy or the criteria for determining that the discrepancy is severe.

A survey of SEA requirements for SLD was necessary to update our knowledge base regarding current SLD requirements and trends in definition and classification criteria. Mercer (personal communication, December, 2001) indicated that he and his group did not anticipate conducting another survey of SEAs. This meant that SEA requirements for SLD had not been examined carefully since the 1994 survey (Mercer et al., 1996).

Previous Page | Next Page
(Recommendations) | (Methodology)