D. Kim Reid

The Discursive Practice of Learning Disability Implications for Instruction and Parent—School Relations

This article serves as an invitation to rethink and to broaden the scope of learning disabilities (LD) research and practice. We begin with 3 assumptions: Education in a representative democracy is inevitably a political enterprise; social justice is everyones responsibility, but educators have a special role to play; and segregated schooling is neither equal nor equitable. After an analysis of the primary extant discourses, we argue for a more comprehensive and more openly political vision of the LD field, which we think is supported by Disability Studies in Education. Finally, we draw 3 conclusions relevant to our collective work as researchers and educators. First, learning disabilities are not objective fact; they are historically and culturally determined. Second, disability is both a personal and a societal attribute. Finally, learning disabilities are not and have never been immutable. We contend that we are ethically bound to transform educational practices to both welcome and accommodate everybodys children.

Anna's Story Narratives of Personal Experience About Being Labeled Learning Disabled

The narratives of personal experience of an adolescent named Anna provided insights into two issues: first, how well her discourse conformed to linguistic expectations for the types of narrative traditionally deemed acceptable in school, and second, the themes associated with the presentation of self that Anna and her peers addressed when talking about their personal experiences as students labeled learning disabled. By narrative, we mean the root metaphor for human sense-making that is described in the following epigraph by Bruner. We found that Annas narrative differed from typical school-based expectations in that its structure was reminiscent of the oral tradition. From the group of students, we heard themes of isolation, undervaluing, and oppression. We recommend a more thoughtful and respectful approach to educational decision making that gives voice to students.

Scaffolding A Broader View

To situate the concept of scaffolding within a broader context than that addressed by Stone, I discuss it with respect to (a) the historical context of learning disabilities, (b) the emerging focus on learners activity, (c) the reification of learning disabilities, and (d) the unintended effects that frequently occur as a by-product of injudicious (and often unintentional) scaffolding. I conclude that the effective practice of special education has been inhibited by our isolation of interventions from the theories that give rise to them, and by the way we structure teacher education. Although scaffolding is not the answer to correcting these problems, it may serve to refocus our attention and efforts in useful ways.

A Reply from the Board of Trustees for DCLD

J. Lee Wiederholt, Robert Algozzine, Grace Bingham, Carol Bradley, Linda Brown, Virginia Brown, Tanis Bryan, Susan Gruber, Daniel Hallahan, Donald D. Hammill, Floyd Hudson, Tom Jeschke, Patricia Lane, Stephen C. Larsen, James Leigh, Isabelle Liberman, Reed Martin, Jay McLoughlin, Gaye McNutt, Carolyn Spearman Nelson, Anne Netick, Mary Poplin, D. Kim Reid, Robert T. Smith, Richard Tucker, Gerald Wallace, Judy Wilson