Adults and Learning Disabilities:
Moving Beyond the Limits of Learning,
TCALL Occasional Research Paper No. 3

Linda Eastwick Covington
Texas Center for Adult Literacy & Learning

The heterogeneous nature of learning disabilities has led to confusion regarding their definition and their intervention. Although the law protects adults with learning disabilities both in the workplace and classroom, it provides only a broad definition that has been subject to many interpretations. There is a paucity of longitudinal research on learning disabilities, but one study indicates that they are ameliorated by certain protective factors. Cross-sectional research suggests that a wide variety of teaching techniques is necessary for classroom success. The results of this research can be used to empower the adult learner to move beyond the limits of learning.

Learning disabilities has become a topic of some interest in adult education within the last few years. Their heterogeneous nature has led to confusion regarding their definition and their intervention. They are most commonly recognized in the classroom because of an unexpected inability to perform in one of the academic areas of reading, writing, listening, speaking, reasoning, and mathematics. Although the law protects adults with learning disabilities both in the workplace and classroom, it provides only a broad definition that has been subject to many interpretations within the changing social and political contexts of the U.S. educational system over the past thirty years.

Among the protections afforded by the law for those with learning disabilities are instructional accommodations. In order to receive accommodations in the classroom, a student needs a professional diagnosis of a learning disability. Traditionally, a diagnosis has been provided by a psychologist, because the accepted method of establishing the presence of a learning disability involves the administration of IQ and achievement tests. When sufficient discrepancy exists between IQ and achievement, then a learning disability is thought to exist. The law does not specify a particular formula for the determination of a learning disability, however, so the discrepancy model has several variations, and in recent years, its validity has been questioned (e.g., MacMillan & Gresham, 1998).

Because learning disabilities are a lifelong condition, it is logical to review the results of longitudinal studies when studying their effects in adults. Although there is a paucity of such research, one study, begun in the 1950s and continuing to the present, suggests that protective factors, such as temperamental characteristics, special skills and talents, positive self-concepts, and nurturing environments, affect the successful transition to adulthood (Werner, 1999).

A review of cross-sectional research indicates that a combination of direct, strategy, and explicit instruction yields successful outcomes for adults with learning disabilities (Corley & Taymans, 2002). These strategies are characteristic of successful classrooms of all levels (Taylor, et al., 2002), and recent research suggests that many of these strategies are effective for second language learners (Burt, Peyton, & Adams, 2003). In addition, they encompass many of the principles espoused by cognitive scientists (Hirsch, 2002), all of which suggests that these strategies are beneficial to all learners, not just those with learning disabilities.

The key assumption behind learning disabilities is that they are, indeed, a disability. This assumption has been challenged by recent research that suggests with systematic, direct instruction in the basics of reading, the number of students served in the category of learning disabled in the K-12 classroom can be reduced by 70 percent (Lyon, 2001). From this research, as well as studies with adults, a broad set of strategies can be incorporated into the classroom that will help all adult learners.

First, identify the strengths and needs of the adult learner. By doing so, educators have a better idea of a student’s prior knowledge, as well as the methods of learning that have proven successful. This information can then be used to build a curriculum that will ensure success.

Second, use a variety of methods of teaching. The novice educator soon learns that the carefully developed lesson that served as the perfect learning tool for one student can easily fail to produce results in the next. The only way educators can counter this phenomenon is to develop a variety of teaching methods and tools and to be flexible in their implementation and use (Vogel & Reder, 1998).

Third, incorporate emotional authenticity in daily actions. Students respond to those who care about them and who take a genuine interest in them (Knowles, 1984; Hargreaves, 2001). While this truth is fundamental to all classroom situations, it is central to those involving learning disabilities. As Werner’s (1999) longitudinal studies have pointed out, and as many classroom teachers can attest, emotional support is a protective factor that allows students to cope with their disabilities.

And last, provide administrative support for ongoing classroom success. Teaching demands training, thoughtful planning, a positive attitude, and constant analysis. Without support from administration, the teacher is less likely to accomplish these tasks successfully.

The presence or absence of a learning disability is secondary to instructors’ attempts to create a humane and supportive relationship with learners, and to provide multiple opportunities for success using a curriculum based on the needs and interests of each adult. By creating such experiences, adult educators empower those they serve to move beyond the limits of learning.

Burt, M., Peyton, J. K. & Adams, R. (2003). Reading and adult English language learners: A review of the research. Washington, D.C: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Corley, M. A. & Taymans, J. M. (2002). Adults with learning disabilities: A review of the literature. In J. Comings, B. Garner, & C. Smith (Eds.), Annual Review of Adult Learning and Literacy: Volume 3 (pp. 44-83). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hargreaves, A. (2001). Emotional geographies of teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1056-1080.

Hirsch, E. (2002, October-November). Classroom research and cargo cults [Electronic version]. Policy Review, 115. Retrieved November 1, 2002 from http://policyreview.org/OCT02/Hirsch_pring.html

Knowles, M. S. (1984). Introduction: The art and science of helping adults learn. In M. S. Knowles and Associates (Eds.), Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lyon, G. R. (2001, March 8). Measuring success: Using assessments and accountability to raise student achievement. Statement presented at the March 8, 2001 Subcommittee on Education Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U. S. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Retrieved from http://cdl.org/resources/reading_room/measure_success.html

MacMillan, D. & Gresham, F. (1998). Discrepancy between definitions of learning disabilities and school practices: An empirical investigation [Electronic version]. Journal of Learning Disabilities (31), 314-327.

Taylor, B. M., Peterson, D. S., Pearson, P. D., Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). Looking inside classrooms: Reflecting on the “how” as well as the “what” in effective reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 56, 270-279.

Vogel, S. A. & Reder, S. (1998). Learning disabilities, literacy, and adult education. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Werner, E. E. (1999). Risk and protective factors in the lives of children with high-incidence disabilities. In R. Gallimore, L. Berheimer, D. L. MacMillan, D. L. Speece, & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Developmental perspectives on children with high-incidence disabilities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.