Learning Disabilities and Special Education

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
For those enmeshed in the day-by-day problems of the field, the trees often obscure the forest. Those familiar with the career of James Gallagher know that he has not only managed to keep the forest in view but has created a vision of how it should grow and evolve. Thus, he was a clear choice for bringing an insider's perspective to the difficult task of critiquing the papers in this series. In offering his views, he begins by noting the consensus among respondents to the future survey with regard to four key problems: (a) the unsatisfactory nature of the status quo, (b) the heterogeneity among those labeled as LD, (c) the need for greater emphasis on differential treatment, and (d) concern over political factors shaping professional decisions. He then explores the classification problem, drawing implications for resolving the conflict between etiology and treatment and for improving research and training. Recognizing that naming problems and identifying possible solutions is not enough, Gallagher concludes his discussion with a five-step plan outlining specific actions that could be taken immediately to influence current public policy related to the differentiation and treatment of the different types of learning problems presently diagnosed as LD. Both his analysis and the call for immediate action underscore the current state of the field's development and directions for future advancement.—Howard S. Adelman and Linda Taylor, Guest Editors

This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit: