| This paper considers the development, based solely on reading research, of the recent legislative amendments of the federal legislation authorizing funding for the remediation of learning disabilities, and the regulatory adoption, in response to those amendments, of a response to intervention model for the identification of learning disabilities. The issue is whether, given recent research into the classification, prediction, and prevention of mathematics learning disabilities, these reading-based amendments of the learning disability identification procedures are equally appropriate for mathematics learning disabilities.; Given the findings of current mathematics disabilities research, the paper suggests that conclusions to be drawn from the research are two-fold.; First, current classification research into the cognitive characteristics underlying mathematics learning disabilities indicates that not all, if any, of such disabilities can be attributable to language-based deficits. Although, given the lack of knowledge regarding learning disabilities at the time the definition was first adopted, the language-based legal definition was no doubt appropriate, current research no longer supports this point of view. The research suggests that the linguistic basis of the disorder, prescribed by the statute as the foundation for any "specific learning disability," from the origin of federal funding for the remediation of learning disabilities in 1970 through the present day (Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2004, sec. 602(30)), is no longer appropriate, at least for mathematics learning disabilities.; Secondly, unlike learning to read, which involves practicing just one skill set, the matching of phonemes to graphemes, mathematics learning is cumulative, requiring multiple skill sets and continuing instruction. However, little is known regarding the cognitive development of the competencies necessary to support post-arithmetical mathematics learning, let alone regarding the occurrence or appearance of disabilities related to such learning. Therefore, given both the dearth of interventions for early-occurring mathematics learning disabilities, and the lack of knowledge regarding later-occurring mathematics disabilities, research suggests that a response-to-intervention identification model may well fail to unearth many cases of such disabilities. Current research suggests that additional research is needed before the response to intervention model can be implemented successfully for the identification and prevention of all mathematics learning disabilities. |
