This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Hallahan, D. P. Articles by Ball, D. W. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Comparison of Prevalence Rate Variability from State to State for Each of the Categories of Special Education

Daniel P. Hallahan, who received his PhD from the University of Michigan, is professor in the Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education in the Curry School of Education, University of Virginia.

Clayton E. Keller

Clayton E. Keller is a doctoral student in special education at the Curry School. He received his MA from the College of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Donald W. Ball

Donald W. Ball, associate professor in the Department of Educational Research at the Curry School, University of Virginia, received his EdD from the University of Kansas.

Concerns about the definitions and identification criteria for special education categories, particularly learning disabilities, are a continuing subject of Abate in the profession. Vagueness in definitions and inconsistent criteria for learning disabilities have been said to hamper research and the delively of services, and to be partly responsible fm the tremenhus prevalence ratepwth of some categories. One measure considered by some to be an indication of these definition and identification problems is the variability of prevalence rates among states. Some have stated that prevalence rates are more variable fir the higher pvalence categories, such as learning disabilities, than for the low prevalence categories. This observation, however, h e s not take into account the effects of the size of the means on the variability. When this effect is contmlled for; the higher prevalence categories are no more variable as a pup than the lower ones; in fact the variability within some higher prevalence categories is the lowest of all. The possible reasons for and implications of these findings are discussed.

Remedial and Special Education, Vol. 7, No. 2, 8-14 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/074193258600700204


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. M. Gresham Response to Intervention and Emotional and Behavioral Disorders: Best Practices in Assessment for Intervention Assessment for Effective Intervention, January 1, 2007; 32(4): 214 - 222. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. E. Scruggs and M. A. Mastropieri Response to "Competing Views: A Dialogue on Response to Intervention" Assessment for Effective Intervention, January 1, 2006; 32(1): 62 - 64. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Levine and S. W. Nourse What Follow-Up Studies Say About Postschool Life for Young Men and Women with Learning Disabilities: A Critical Look at the Literature J Learn Disabil, May 1, 1998; 31(3): 212 - 233. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Lester and M. Kelman State Disparities in the Diagnosis and Placement of Pupils with Learning Disabilities J Learn Disabil, November 1, 1997; 30(6): 599 - 607. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. A. Mastropieri and T. E. Scruggs Best Practices in Promoting Reading Comprehension in Students with Learning Disabilities 1976 to 1996 Remedial and Special Education, July 1, 1997; 18(4): 198 - 213. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. G. Shriner, J. E. Ysseldyke, D. Gorney, and M. J. Franklin Examining Prevalence at the Ends of the Spectrum: Giftedness and Disability Remedial and Special Education, September 1, 1993; 14(5): 33 - 39. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Ysseldyke, P. J. O'Sullivan, M. L. Thurlow, and S. L. Christenson Qualitative Differences in Reading and Math Instruction Received by Handicapped Students Remedial and Special Education, January 1, 1989; 10(1): 14 - 20. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. D. Singer, J. S. Palfrey, J. A. Butler, and D. K. Walker Variation in Special Education Classification Across School Districts: How Does Where You Live Affect What You Are Labeled? American Educational Research Journal, January 1, 1989; 26(2): 261 - 281. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Wolman, M. L. Thurlow, and R. H. Bruininks Stability of Categorical Designations for Special Education Students: A Longitudinal Study Journal of Special Education, January 1, 1989; 23(2): 213 - 222. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. E. Scruggs and M. A. Mastropieri Legitimizing the Field of Learning Disabilities: Does Research Orientation Matter? J Learn Disabil, April 1, 1988; 21(4): 219 - 222. [PDF]

				J. M. Kauffman Research in Special Education: A Commentary Remedial and Special Education, November 1, 1987; 8(6): 57 - 62. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Algozzine and J. E. Ysseldyke In Defense of Different Numbers Remedial and Special Education, March 1, 1987; 8(2): 53 - 56. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. E. Keller, D. W. Ball, and D. P. Hallahan Questioning the Defense of Different Numbers: A Reply to Algozzine and Ysseldyke Remedial and Special Education, March 1, 1987; 8(2): 57 - 59. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Ysseldyke, M. L. Thurlow, S. L. Christenson, and J. Weiss Time Allocated to Instruction of Mentally Retarded, Learning Disabled, Emotionally Disturbed, and Nonhandicapped Elementary Students Journal of Special Education, January 1, 1987; 21(3): 43 - 55. [Abstract] [PDF]