Agreement Among Traditional and RTI-based Definitions of Reading-Related Learning Disability with Preschool Children

Area of Science:

• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Neuroscience

Background:

• Early identification of children at risk for reading-related learning disabilities (LD) is crucial for timely intervention.
• Existing methods for identifying LD risk in preschoolers vary, necessitating an evaluation of their comparative effectiveness.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the agreement among four contemporary methods for identifying young children at risk for later reading-related learning disabilities.
• To assess how different severity levels and classification approaches (single- vs. two-measure) affect agreement between methods.

Main Methods:

• A sample of 1,011 preschoolers was assessed using four methods: IQ-achievement discrepancy, low achievement, low growth, and dual-discrepancy.
• Risk status was determined across three early-literacy skills (language, phonological awareness, print knowledge) at three severity levels (5th, 10th, 25th percentiles).
• Chance-corrected affected-status agreement (CCASA) was used to quantify agreement among methods.

Main Results:

• Poor agreement was found among the four methods for identifying children at risk for LD.
• Agreement rates generally decreased as the severity level increased.
• Two-measure classification showed lower agreement rates compared to single-measure classification.

Conclusions:

• Conventional methods for identifying preschool children at risk for LD exhibit low agreement.
• This lack of consensus among identification methods poses a significant barrier to effective early identification and intervention for at-risk children.