A STUDY OF ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING DISABILITIES AMONG REGULAR SCHOOL STUDENTS

INTRODUCTION 

Statement of the Problem    

Significance of the Study

Objectives of the Study

Delimitations of the Study

Procedure of the Study 

Operational Definitions of Variables    

 

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE  

What is Learning?

What is Disability?

What is Difference between Impairment, Disability and

Handicap       

Definitions of Learning Disabilities   

Characteristics of Learning Disabilities   

Types of Learning Disabilities   

   i)            Dyslexia        

   ii)            Dyscalculia   

   iii)            Dysgraphia    

   iv)            Dysphasia     

    v)            ADHD           

Learning Disabilities at Different Levels

Learning Disabilities across the Life Span       

Symptoms, Causes and Treatment           

Sources of Identification (Assessment)

How to Teach Strategies      

Role of Teacher and Parents   

    i)            How to Treat          

    ii)            How to Teach        

Local Studies       

 

METHODOLOGY PROCEDURE OF THE STUDY

Population    

Sample         

Instruments of the Study  

Validation of the Instrument     

Test Administration         

Data Analysis  

 

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA  

 

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND  RECOMMENDATIONS

                   BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

            The purpose to conduct this research was to identify the learning disabilities among secondary school students.

            To achieve the objectives of the study, the sample of 34 students Aizar School System, Roots School System and K.P.S.I, Nishtar Colony, Lahore was selected.

            For the collection of data the first step was to construct the instruments, for this purpose, the instruments were taken from Ph.D studies, which was validated by the experts of educational Psychology and Research Methods.  After that screening checklist, test battery and I.Q. test was given to the identified sample.  After the collection of filled tests the whole data was arranged with the use of codes.  Arranged data was entered in the computer having the software of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS).

            After data collection the data were analyzed.  In this chapter, the analysis of collected data have been presented.  In the analysis, scoring of both test battery and I.Q. test show discrepancies among students.

Table 4.1:      Sequential problems in learning disability test sores in comparison with teacher screening checklist and I.Q. of students 

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Sequential Test

S1

S2

S3

S4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

 

20

17

16

13

19

16

22

15

13

17

8

9

15

11

15

16

16

 

93.27

83.11

93.27

113.60

93.27

98.36

88.19

133.93

113.60

128.85

93.27

98.36

103.4

113.60

103.44

88.19

103.4

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

 Table 4.1 (Continue)

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Sequential Test

S1

S2

S3

S4

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

14

16

14

11

18

7

4

17

10

8

6

18

16

16

19

21

18

 

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

103.44

88.19

108.52

108.52

103.44

108.52

123.77

133.93

83.11

98.36

98.36

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

 

 Above table indicated that students identified by the teachers with the help of screening checklist are having average I.Q. ranging from 83–113 which are student number 1 – 7,9,11-29,32-34. Where as student number 8,10,30,31 have above average I.Q that is 133,128,123,133 respectively.

Student Number 1-34 (except student number 5) are having discrepancy between I.Q. and sequential problem test. Only one student (number 5) does not have sequential problem.

Table 4.2: Non-verbal problem in learning disability test score in comparison with teacher screening checklist and I.Q. of students 

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Non-verbal Test

nv1

nv2

nv3

nv4

nv5

nv6

nv7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

 

20

17

16

13

19

16

22

15

13

17

8

9

15

11

15

16

16

93.27

83.11

93.27

113.60

93.27

98.36

88.19

133.93

113.60

128.85

93.27

98.36

103.4

113.60

103.44

88.19

103.4

 

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

  Table 4.2 (Continue)

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Non-verbal Test

nv1

nv2

nv3

nv4

nv5

nv6

nv7

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

14

16

14

11

18

7

4

17

10

8

6

18

16

16

19

21

18

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

103.44

88.19

108.52

108.52

103.44

108.52

123.77

133.93

83.11

98.36

98.36

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

            Above table indicated that students identified by the teachers with the help of screening checklist are having average I.Q. ranging from 83–113 which are student number 1 – 7,9,11-29,32-34. Where as student number 8,10,30,31 have above average I.Q that is 133,128,123,133 respectively.

Student numbers 3,4,8,15,20 and 27 are having discrepancy between I.Q. and non-verbal problem test and other students are not having learning disability in non-verbal problem test.

Table 4.3:      Direction problem in learning disability test score in comparison with teacher screening checklist and I.Q. of students 

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Test for right left problems or Direction test

r1

r2

r3

r4

r5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

 

20

17

16

13

19

16

22

15

13

17

8

9

15

11

15

16

16

93.27

83.11

93.27

113.60

93.27

98.36

88.19

133.93

113.60

128.85

93.27

98.36

103.4

113.60

103.44

88.19

103.4

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

 

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

 Table 4.3 (Continue)

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Test for right left problems or Direction test

r1

r2

r3

r4

r5

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

 

14

16

14

11

18

7

4

17

10

8

6

18

16

16

19

21

18

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

103.44

88.19

108.52

108.52

103.44

108.52

123.77

133.93

83.11

98.36

98.36

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

 Above table indicated that students identified by the teachers with the help of screening checklist are having average I.Q. ranging from 83–113 which are student number 1 – 7,9,11-29,32-34. Where as student number 8,10,30,31 have above average I.Q that is 133,128,123,133 respectively.

Student numbers 2,3,6,7,10-16,18,24-26,28-30, and 34 are having discrepancy between I.Q. and direction problem test and other students are not having learning disability in direction problem test.

 Table 4.4:      Distance problem in learning disability test score in comparison with teacher screening checklist and I.Q. of students 

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Distance Test

d1

d2

d3

d4

d5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

 

20

17

16

13

19

16

22

15

13

17

8

9

15

11

15

16

16

 

93.27

83.11

93.27

113.60

93.27

98.36

88.19

133.93

113.60

128.85

93.27

98.36

103.4

113.60

103.44

88.19

103.4

 

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

  Table 4.4 (Continue)

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Distance Test

d1

d2

d3

d4

d5

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

 

14

16

14

11

18

7

4

17

10

8

6

18

16

16

19

21

18

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

103.44

88.19

108.52

108.52

103.44

108.52

123.77

133.93

83.11

98.36

98.36

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

 Above table indicated that students identified by the teachers with the help of screening checklist are having average I.Q. ranging from 83–113 which are student number 1 – 7,9,11-29,32-34. Where as student number 8,10,30,31 have above average I.Q that is 133,128,123,133 respectively.

Student numbers 1,2,7,8,13,15,17,28 and 31 are having discrepancy between I.Q. and distance problem test, and other students are not having learning disability in distance problem test.

Table 4.5:      Verbal problem in learning disability test score in comparison with teacher screening checklist and I.Q. of students 

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Verbal Test

v1

v2

v3

v4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

 

20

17

16

13

19

16

22

15

13

17

8

9

15

11

15

16

16

 

93.27

83.11

93.27

113.60

93.27

98.36

88.19

133.93

113.60

128.85

93.27

98.36

103.4

113.60

103.44

88.19

103.4

 

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

            ble 4.5 (Continue)

Student Number

Scores of Checklist

Scores of I.Q. Test

Verbal Test

v1

v2

v3

v4

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

 

14

16

14

11

18

7

4

17

10

8

6

18

16

16

19

21

18

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

83.11

103.44

88.19

108.52

108.52

103.44

108.52

123.77

133.93

83.11

98.36

98.36

 

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

 Above table indicated that students identified by the teachers with the help of screening checklist are having average I.Q. ranging from 83–113 which are student number 1 – 7,9,11-29,32-34. Where as student number 8,10,30,31 have above average I.Q that is 133,128,123,133 respectively.

Student numbers 1-4, 6-26, 28-31, 33 and 34 are having discrepancy between I.Q. and verbal problem test and other students are not having learning disability in verbal problem test.

 Table 4.6: Cumulative results of all the tests of students having L.D

 

Students have discrepancy in the following

Student No.

Sequential

Item No.

Non-Verbal

Item No.

Right-Left

item No.

Distance

item No.

Verbal

Item No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

1

1,2,4

2,3

2,4

-

2,4

2,4

4

2,4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

1

1

2

1

2,3,4

1

4

2

2

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

-

-

1,3

1,3

-

-

-

6

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

1,6,7

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

1,2,4,5

-

-

1,2,3,4

2

-

-

1,2,3,4

1,2,4,5

1,2,3

1,2

1,2

1

1,3

-

1,2,3,4,5

-

-

-

-

-

1,2

1,2,3,5

1,4,5

-

1,2,3,4,5

1

2

-

-

-

3

1,2

3

-

-

-

-

2

3

-

-

-

-

2

-

4,5

-

2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

4

-

-

4,5

-

-

-

4

4

1,4

4

-

4

4

4

4

4

4

34

2,3,4

4

3,4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

-

4

4

4

4

-

4

4

 

<  Previous                                                      

Next >