Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Learning disabilities

Ten years later

Bibliographic Data

ID11259179
AuthorsJ Michael Coleman, Jason Coleman (0000-0003-4167-2762, corresponding author), Earl E Davis (0000-0003-4516-217X)
Year1976
Volume53
Issue3
Pages180-186
Publication date1976-04-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePeabody Journal of Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0161-956X • E-ISSN: 1532-7930
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/01619567609538075
OpenAlexW1972623024
LanguageEN
References cited11

In 1964, a group of parents, educators, psychologists, and other professionals banded together to create the Association for Children with Learning Disabilities. The focal point of this collective emphasized the diagnosis and education of brain-injured children. Since that time other organizations such as the Council for Exceptional Children have created divisions within their own structure that focus on learning disabilities. The fiscal impact of these organizations on federal funding in this area has been dramatic. Federal funding totalled approximately $20,000,000 in 1971, with nearly $31,000,000 spent on teacher training and model centers in 1973. These sums do not include state appropriations. With the onset of mandatory education in many states this financial input is considerable. The State of Tennessee, for example, estimates that its 1975 expenditure in learning disabilities services will exceed $10,000,000. As Bryan states, field is quite bullish in what must be considered a very bearish time.' The area of learning disabilities has come of age. It receives funds and provides services at a rapidly expanding rate. Black demonstrated that the decade from 1962 to 1972 witnessed a veritable explosion of publications on the topic of learning disabilities.2 A review of Exceptional Child Education Abstracts indicated over 350 articles relating to learning disabilities published during 1974. This mass of money, research, literature, and program services would suggest unification in the field at least to the extent of common agreement as to the population that should be served. Yet, at this point there remains no consensus of attributes that consistently characterize the learning disabled child. Wepman, et al., suggest that, There is little

Developmental psychology · Economics · Education Act · Federal funds · Learning disability · Mathematics education · Medical education · Point (geometry · Political science · Population · Public relations · Sociology · Special education · State (computer science · Demography · Diverse Education Studies and Reforms · Education Discipline and Inequality · Family and Disability Support Research · Medicine · Psychology

  • Compensatory education and social justice

    Bernard Farber, Michael Lewis•Peabody Journal of Education•1972

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae