How Variable Are Interstate Prevalence Rates of Learning Disabilities and Other Special Education Categories? A Longitudinal Comparison

Autor/inn/en	Hallahan, Daniel P.; Keller, Clayton E.; Martinez, Elizabeth A.; Byrd, E. Stephen; Gelman, Jennifer A.; Fan, Xitao
Titel	How Variable Are Interstate Prevalence Rates of Learning Disabilities and Other Special Education Categories? A Longitudinal Comparison
Quelle	In: Exceptional Children, 73 (2007) 2, S.136 (11 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0014-4029
Schlagwörter	Learning Disabilities; Hearing Impairments; Language Impairments; Speech Impairments; Visual Impairments; Mental Retardation; Multiple Disabilities; Physical Disabilities; Emotional Disturbances; Special Education; Incidence; Disability Identification; Comparative Analysis; Longitudinal Studies; Statistical Analysis + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Learning handicap; Lernbehinderung; Hearing impairment; Hörbehinderung; Speech disorder; Speech disorders; Speech disabilities; Speech disability; Speech handicap; Speech handicaps; Speech impairment; Speech impairments; Language handicaps; Sprachbehinderung; Language handicps; Language impairments; Visual handicap; Sehbehinderung; Geistige Behinderung; Multiple disability; Mehrfachbehinderung; Physical handicap; Körperbehinderung; Gefühlsstörung; Special needs education; Sonderpädagogik; Sonderschulwesen; Vorkommen; Longitudinal study; Longitudinal method; Longitudinal methods; Längsschnittuntersuchung; Statistische Analyse
Abstract	This study compared interstate variability of prevalence rates for special education categories from 1984 to 1985 through 2001 to 2002, using the coefficient of variation (CV), which is designed to compare variances when the means of the groups compared are radically different. The category of learning disabilities, presumed by many to be the most variable, was consistently the least variable. Furthermore, as a group, high incidence categories were less variable than low incidence categories. The results strengthen the conclusion of Hallahan, Keller, & Ball (1986) that using state-to-state variability of disability prevalence rates as justification for criticizing learning disabilities identification practices is largely unfounded. Policy implications for methods of learning disabilities identification are discussed. (Contains 3 tables.) (Author).
Anmerkungen	Council for Exceptional Children. 1110 North Glebe Road Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22201. Tel: 888-232-7733; Fax: 703-264-9494; Web site: http://www.cec.sped.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Publications1
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10