A video in which I confess to having had a longstanding misunderstanding about diagnosing learning disorders.
Excel spreadsheet that can apply multiple regression to individuals.
A video in which I confess to having had a longstanding misunderstanding about diagnosing learning disorders.
Excel spreadsheet that can apply multiple regression to individuals.
Assessing Psyche, Engaging Gauss, Seeking Sophia 
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.