Learning Disabilities vs. Intellectual Disabilities: Best Practices

Defining Learning Disabilities and Intellectual Disabilities

Learning disabilities, or specific learning disabilities, is a fairly well-defined category that refers to impairments in functioning typically related to language, perception, memory, or mathematical processing. The classification includes a number of conditions such as dyslexia, developmental aphasia, and brain dysfunctions, but does not include intellectual disabilities or emotional disturbances (Kavale, Spaulding & Beam, 2009). Moreover, learning disabilities manifest regardless of access to opportunity and other socioeconomic or environmental factors (Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2018). Learning disabilities also need to be distinguished from intellectual disabilities. Formerly known as mental retardation, intellectual disabilities refer to low general functioning including low IQ scores and problems with adaptive behavior (Kavale, Spaulding & Beam, 2009). Therefore, intellectual disabilities are typically concurrent with impaired social functioning and other global factors.

Specific learning disabilities, on the other hand, usually manifest in specific ways, and each person will present with different types. For example, a person who is dyslexic might have no trouble with spoken language or mathematics. Some people with specific learning disabilities experience dysfunction in fine or gross motor skills or with working memory (Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2018). The prevalence of specific learning disabilities in the American population is around 8–10% (Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2018), which is far greater than the prevalence of intellectual disability (Tasse, 2016). Intellectual disability is generally better classified as a developmental disorder than as a cognitive disability that impacts a particular realm or type of formal processing (Tasse, 2016). Thus, intellectual disabilities are more generalized overall than learning disabilities, with clear implications for instructional practice and design.

There are no global characteristics associated with specific learning disabilities, given their tremendous diversity and scope. As such, specific learning disabilities can be more difficult to initially recognize in some children, or to address with evidence-based practice options, especially in comparison with intellectual disabilities. For example, the "heterogeneous clusters of disorders" defining specific learning disabilities can occasionally blur the line between these and intellectual disability, challenging special education leaders to provide individualized attention and intervention plans (Kavale, Spaulding & Beam, 2009, p. 45). Special education can respond to both intellectual and learning disabilities through an assessment of empirical evidence informing best practices.

Legal Frameworks and Inclusive Education Principles

The legal and medical definitions of intellectual disabilities and learning disabilities have been converging more in recent years, permitting more consistent special education practices. For example, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the American Psychological Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) both offer definitions that encourage adaptations or modifications to the school environment, pedagogy, and curricula to help maximize the potential of all students with special needs. Common Core state standards also help guide teachers and special education leaders toward more cogent instructional design.

Given the preference for integrated classrooms and collaborative teaching models as part of a least restrictive learning environment ideal, special education aims to modify and accommodate rather than segregate students with intellectual or learning disabilities when possible. Of course, each student does need to be evaluated, assessed, and diagnosed individually, with some requiring specialized instruction that cannot be provided in a general education setting. Effective teacher use of evidence-based instructional strategies, or collaborative teaching with special education instructors, can simplify pedagogical practices in an integrated classroom. Specific instructional techniques — including "cognitive strategy instruction, differentiated instruction, and opportunities for independent application" — have proven helpful but "were reported infrequently across the published observational research" (McKenna, Shin & Ciullo, 2015, p. 205). Possibly due to the heterogeneous nature of specific learning disabilities, the infrequent or inconsistent use of specific strategies makes it harder to ascertain which methods of instruction or content modifications work best with which populations. More research on specific populations within the learning disabilities construct would help highlight future best practices.

Evidence-Based Instructional Strategies

For students who have been diagnosed with intellectual or specific learning disabilities, emphasis on meaningful metrics and evaluation strategies allows for ongoing assessments that help students and their parents become more involved in an Individualized Education Plan (IEP), if one is warranted under the IDEA provisions. An IEP can cover instruction strategies and adaptations to lesson plans for students with intellectual disabilities as well as for specific learning disabilities. With no universal means of helping all students — due to the diversity of intellectual disability manifestation — teachers have at their disposal a number of evidence-based options for classroom design, support, and lesson modification.

As with specific learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities require ongoing observation, monitoring, and assessment to ensure student responsiveness to the selected strategy. Students may demonstrate behavioral or social skills issues that warrant additional attention. As Wakeman, Karvonen & Ahumada (2013) point out, "most educators can change and adapt learning for students with moderate and severe intellectual disabilities based upon data as soon as there is recognition for the need to change instruction" (p. 12). With either learning or intellectual disabilities, best practices begin with identification and monitoring during a pre-referral stage. If the student does not respond to initial modifications to instructional practice and content, then further interventions may be warranted, particularly if the student has been formally referred, diagnosed, and given an IEP.

All educators are advised to modify content, the level of abstraction or cognitive complexity of an assignment, and the methods used to deliver material (Wakeman, Karvonen & Ahumada, 2013). With specific learning disabilities, the goal is to identify the student's needs related to subject-specific processing issues such as linguistic or mathematical learning disabilities. Students may, for example, struggle more with input and perception than with the production of outputs such as assignments or examinations. Whatever the situation, the special education leader works with the parents, student, and general education teacher to provide subject-specific, student-focused, and developmentally appropriate modifications within the least restrictive environment. As lifelong impairments, learning disabilities and intellectual disabilities warrant instructional strategies and classroom designs that promote inclusion and diversity awareness.