2 thoughts on “Why Specific Cognitive Processing Weaknesses Are Typically Only Partial Explanations for Academic Deficits

  1. Brant says:

    I read in Flanagan’s XBA book that the WJ-III NU norm group did not include any students with reading disabilities. That seems like it matters when we are looking at correlations between cognitive processes and academic abilities (especially when we are diagnosing reading disabilities). If the norm group had included those students, the distributions and correlations would have been different, right?

    • If people with LD were included in proportion to their representation in the population, the norms would differ only slightly. Heterogeneous LD samples have somewhat lower means but have approximately same correlations as the standardization sample.

      In general, I am not a fan of studies that define LD with certain patterns of cognitive and academic scores and then use those very same scores to show that people with LD are different. Sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s