Learning Disability Assessment Recommendations

This document has been prepared by professionals in Oregon postsecondary institutions who are involved with disability services for students. These guidelines are based on those established by the Association on Higher Education and Disability (AHEAD) and adapted by OR-AHEAD. The intent of these guidelines is to develop standard criteria for verifying learning disabilities. By defining what constitutes appropriate documentation, appropriate accommodations for students with learning disabilities will become more consistent at a statewide level. This information may also serve as a guideline for diagnosticians who provide LD testing and assessment services to Oregon's college students, for secondary educators who serve as transition coordinators and evaluators for those students transitioning to postsecondary education, and for the students.

I. Model for Assessment

Formal testing instruments should not be used in isolation when assessing the student's performance and abilities. It is highly recommended that other formal and informal methods be incorporated into the assessment process, such as personal interviews and observation. This will provide additional information for a more comprehensive assessment, such as:

  • Understanding why the individual is being assessed
  • Gaining background information/case history
  • Patterns of strength and weakness

Then the diagnostician can:

  • Organize and interrelate the formal and informal data
  • Share the information with the individual in a way that is understandable and useful
  • Devise instructional strategies
  • Form a plan of action with the student and, with the student's consent, other appropriate persons, such as a family member, academic counselor, disability services coordinator, etc

Additional information that may help define the nature and extent of an individual's learning disability:

Observations by the diagnostician such as raised anxiety level, distractibility, excessive time to finish tests, and uncommon errors on written exercises.

Documentation of a learning disability in elementary or secondary school, including the services which were provided.

The following factors, which can be incorporated in the case history:

  • Learning disability among family members
  • Illness, high fever, concussion, seizures, unconsciousness,etc.,
  • Birth trauma or complications
  • Hyperactivity as a child and medications used
  • Delayed or abnormal development of speech, language, motor skills or social skills
  • Physical abuse
  • Substance abuse
  • Medical or physical condition that has been shown to correlate highly with learning disabilities

II. Professional Standards

Test administrators must meet the requirements set forth below:

Appropriate professionals include but are not limited to those in the following occupations:

  • State Licensed Psychologists
  • State Licensed Professional Counselors
  • Staff of postsecondary institutions, disability services offices and departments of special education
  • School Psychologists
  • Vocational Rehabilitation Division diagnosticians

Professionals must hold these degrees:

  • M.Ed.
  • Ed.D.
  • M.A.
  • M.S.
  • Ph.D.
  • M.D.
  • Psy.D.

In these fields:

  • Counseling
  • Psychology
  • Special Education
  • Education
  • Neuro-Psychology

Professionals must have two or more years of direct assessment experience with adults or late adolescents who manifest specific learning disabilities, and be trained in the administration and interpretation of the particular assessment tools used.

III. Acceptable Test Instruments

The evaluation must be on letterhead of the qualified professional and must provide clear and specific evidence of a learning disability as defined in the DSM-IV, a psychiatric diagnostic manual.

The Neuropsychological or Psycho-Educational Evaluation for the diagnosis of a specific learning disability must provide clear and specific evidence of a learning disability.

The report must include:

  1. A specific diagnosis supported by the test data, academic history, anecdotal and clinical observations. These findings must support the fact that individual's functional limitations are due to the stated disabilities.
  2. The assessment report must include the standard scores for all normed measures. Additionally, percentiles may be included. Grade level equivalents are not acceptable presented alone.
  3. The assessment report must show evidence of discrepancies and intra-individual differences.

The nature and severity of functional limitations must be supported by the test data, academic history, anecdotal and clinical observations which may include the student's level of motivation, study skills and other non-cognitive factors.

If given, descriptions of requested accommodations must include rationale and be supported by test results and/or clinical observations.

Tests used must be technically sound (nationally normed) and test scores included.

It is not acceptable to administer one test, nor is it acceptable to base a diagnosis on only one of several subtests. Objective evidence of substantial limitation to learning must be provided.

The test needs to be given by age 16 and/or within a three year period prior to attending a college or university.

  1. Use of one instrument from the following list of Aptitude Assessment Tools:
    • Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised, Standard and Supplemental Batteries
    • Weschler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) and III (preferred)
    • Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale (4th Edition)
  2. Use of at least one instrument from the following list of Achievement Tests:

    A complete achievement battery is required with all subtests and standard scores.

    • Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery - Revised
    • Tests of Achievement, Standard Battery (Knowledge and Supplemental Battery optional)
    • Weschler Individual Achievement Test
    • Stanford Test of Academic Skills
    • Scholastic Abilities Test for Adults
    • Wide Range Achievement Test is NOT accepted as a comprehensive measure of achievement as the sole instrument
  3. The following specific achievement instruments could be used in addition to the required instruments, but may not replace the acceptable test instruments.
    • Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude
    • Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised
    • Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test
    • Stanford Diagnostic Mathematics Test
    • Formal Reading Inventory
    • Test of Adolescent Language
    • Gray Oral Reading Test
    • Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests - Revised
    • Test of Written Language - 2
  4. It is recommended that the assessment include test instruments that evaluate mental processing skills.
    • Bender Gestalt
    • Boder - Test of Spelling Patterns
    • Rey-Osterieth Complex Figure
    • Trail Making A & B
    • Logical Memory I & II from the Weschler Memory Scale - Revised
    • Wisconsin Card Sort
    • Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory - 2
    • Wender Utah Rating Scale
    • Brown Adult Attention Deficit Scale
    • Rating Scale Ratey & Hallowell

IV. Operational Guidelines

For verification of learning disabilities includes:

  • Full scale score as measured by the Weschler Adult Intelligence Scale - Revised, shall fall within the average range or higher (90 - 110)
  • Broad Cognitive Ability score as measured by the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery - Revised, shall fall within the average range or higher.
  • A significant difference (1.5 standard deviations or more based on age norm) is measured between the full scale score on an accepted test of cognitive ability, and the standard score in one or more area of achievement on an accepted test of achievement.
  • The assessment must show evidence of discrepancies (1.5 standard deviations or more, based on age norm) and intra-individual differences.
  • Inability to complete a neuro-psychological test battery due, for example, to sequencing problems, slow speed, non-comprehension of the task or similar problems.
  • Environmental deprivation, educational deprivation as well as hearing and vision deficits will be ruled out as causal factors when achievement is significantly low.

All documentation is confidential and submitted to:

Polly Livingston
Assistant Director, Disability Resource Center
Portland State University
Post Office Box 751 - DRC
Portland, Oregon 97207-0751