7 page Psychology essay

Atoledo34953

55301039.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >7 page Psychology essay

Journal of Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 20, Number, 2010

Identification of Learning Difficulties among Children Studying in Public Sector Schools

Farhana Kazmi

Psychology Department, Hazara University, NWFP, Pakistan Tahir Pervez

Pakistan Military Academy Campus Abbotabad, National University of Science and Technology, Pakistan

Present aimed to identify learning difficulties among children enrolled in Government / public sector schools in Pakistan. Two indigenously designed questionnaires were used for data collection. Data was collected from 19 schools under the administration of Municipal Corporation (Local Govt) and Punjab Education Department. The strength of the students enrolled in selected classes was 4849. Results indicate that the prevalence of disability stands, 6.06 % in all. Study offers further guidelines to the researchers to explore various unidentified dimensions of LDs with reference to socio economic, ecological and genetic factors.

Key terms: Learning Difficulties, Public Sector Schools

Literarily, learning difficulty is employed to indicate educational problems of the students when their class achievements are substantially below what is expected by their intelligence level or ability to learn (Pastor, & Reuben, 2002). Conceptually, it is an imperfect ability to; listen, speak, read, write and spell or to do simple mathematical calculations (NIMH, 2006; Pastor, & Reuben, 2002). Some of the students with learning difficulties reveal problems in storing information in memory as well as retrieving it from memory (Snowling, 2000) and it causes to lower their academic achievements. Due to the neurological origin, LDs are also named as developmental disorders (Kauchali, & Davidson, 2006). However, all such students require some help and attention to improve their learning process (NIMH, 2006) and they remain successful in their studies even up to the university level (Fullarton, 2008). It has been observed that generally, these students cannot try harder, unable to pay closer

*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Farhana Kazmi, Assistant Professor, Psychology Department, Hazara University, NWFP, Pakistan. Email: [email protected]

Kazmi and Pervaiz

attention, need help to learn but at the same time they are not similar to other children who are enrolled in special education being mentally deficient/ retarded (Pastor, & Reuben, 2002).

LDs are generally divided in to six categories with reference to functional problems, such as: dyslexia (reading problem), dyscalculia (numeric problem), Dysgraphia (writing problem), dyspraxia (problem in running and jumping), auditory processing disorder and visual processing disorder (Wong, 1996; Kemp, Segal, & Cutter, 2009). Experts encompass behavioural and emotional problems in LDs (Lindsay, 1984; Watts, 1985; Rubenzer, 1988; Diakakis, Gardelis, Ventouri, Nikolaou Koltsida, Tsitoura et al., 2008). However, recent studies have shown that such problems may arise as a result of their poor performance in studies, methodological pitfalls and developmental issues (Huntington, 1993; Saddler, & Buckland, 1995) and due to stress (Tomblin, Zhang, Buckwalter, & Catts, 2000; Hill & Wigfield, 1984; Svetaz, Ireland, & Blum, 2001). Behavioural problems are further subdivided into temperamental /emotional (Mather & Goldstein, 2001) and antisocial behaviour such as destructiveness, aggression, disobedience, bullying other children and angry reaction toward school staff (Kemp, Segal & Cutter, 2009). Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has also been grouped with learning disabilities (Lyness, 2007).

The factor of IQ is significant in the process of identification of LDs. Studies have shown that LDs are independent of individual’s IQ (Siegel, 1989; Vaughn, Levey, Coleman, & Bos, 2002; Vellutino, Fletcher, Snowling, & Scanlon, 2004; Woolley, 2005; Lyness, 2007; Zachou, & Zachos, 2008; Glassberg, Hooper, & Mattison, 1999). This basic feature differentiates LDs from mental retardation (Woolley, 2005). Siegel (1989) has concluded that poor readers at a variety of IQ levels showed similar reading, spelling, language and memory deficits. Another study also has supported that such individuals remain successful in their studies even up to the higher level (Fullarton, 2008).

It has been reported that the symptoms of LDs significantly overlap with each other (Dykman, & Ackerman, 1991; Kaplan, Dewey, Crawford, & Wilson, 2001; Lyness, 2007; Young et al., 2002). Children with neurological problem manifest more than one impairment (Meehan, Njuguna, Mturi, Alcock, & Newton, 2006). For example LD and ADH are on a continuum, interrelated and usually coexist (Mayes, Calhoun, & Crowell, 2000; Pastor, & Reuben 2002;

Learning Difficulties among Children

Vellutino, Fletcher, Snowling, Scanlon, 2004). Study has concluded that students with ADHD were found less proficient in writing stories than other children of their age (Newcomer, & Barenboim, 1991). Problems in spatial thinking coexist with numeration and computation to construct meaningful measurement concepts and processes (Booker, Bond, Sparrow, & Swan, 2003). Similarly, phonological awareness of the sound structure of words and the ability to manipulate sounds in words have been found key factors in the development of reading ability (Wagner, 1986; Tunmer, Chapman, Greaney, & Prochnow, 2002).

The students with LDs manifest different types of behavioural problems i.e., social inter personal and adjustment problems (Snowling, 2000; Bishop, & Leonard, 2000; Maqbool, 2002) such as loss of appetite or excessive eating, nail biting, refusing to realize responsibilities, antisocial or disruptive behaviour (Rubenzer,1988) and emotional problems and in some cases symptoms of depression as well (MartÃnez, & Semrud-Clikeman, 2004). As emotional development of these students significantly differs from normal students and these students appear to be at increased risk for severe depression and suicide, contributing factor may be methodological pitfalls and developmental issues (Huntington, 1993; Saddler & Buckland, 1995). According to a report by Snowling (2000) motivation of such student decreases which lower their self-concept, self-esteem, determination to face difficulties and they attribute their academic success or failure to their luck. Studies indicate that academic stress among the students generally gets worse as children progress through school (Hill, & Wigfield, 1984) and it may be one of the causes that the students with learning difficulty face emotional distress (Svetaz, Ireland, & Blum, 2000).

For identification of LDs, generally, indigenously designed questionnaire have been used in many studies such as; ten questions questionnaire (TQQ) (Belmont, 1984) or ten questions screen (TQS) (Mirza, Mehmood, Tareen, Davidson, & Rahman, 2008). TQQ and TQS have been used especially in under developed countries, where testing resource are limited such as; in Bangladesh (Zaman, Khan, Islam, & Durkin, 1992) in Jamaica (Thorburn et al.,1992), in Pakistan (Durkin, Hasan, & Hasan, 1995 ) and in Kenya (Mung’ala-Odera, Meehan, Njuguna Mturi, Alcock, Carter, et al. 2004).

Kazmi and Pervaiz

The "real" identification and prevalence of LD is difficult due to much dispute in definition with objective identification criteria (Lyon, 1996) and the most likely it is a result of inconsistencies in the criteria used to define LD in different studies (Semrud-Clikeman, Biederman, Sprich-Buckminster, Lehman, Faraone, & Norman, 1992). Studies reveal tremendous variations in prevalence of overall child and adolescent disorders in the general population rating from 1 to 50%, with a mean prevalence rate of 15.8%. Approximate rates of 8% for pre-schoolers and 12% among school students were recorded. Prevalence however, depends on age, gender and other factors (Roberts, Attikisson & Rosenblatt, 1998).

Different studies have reported different statistics. For instance, prevalence is quite different with reference to region and country. In USA, prevalence of LDs among common masses is 1.69% (US Census Bureau, 2004). The prevalence in Western countries has been calculated 3% (Hamilton-Kirkwood, 2001). However, in general, 5% of all public school students have been identified with LDs (Shaffer et al., 1996; Lyon, 1996). Johnson (2007) reported that mean prevalence of LDs is 2%. Louden (2000) concluded 10% to 20% and Tellioglu (2009) stated 2 to10 %. Whereas, Glassberg, Hooper and Mattison (1999) have reported 15.9 %. It has been found that 4-9 year of age is a very sensitive period for the development of the disabilities (Lindsay, 1984; Leach, Scarborough, & Rescorla, 2003; Woolley, 2005). Diakakis and colleagues (2008) identified 15.5% students as having LDs as well as behavioural problems in elementary schools with the age range of 7 to 10 years. Prevalence of dyslexic among students have been reported significantly greater from Grades 3 through grade 6 (Murphy, 2006) and a good number of students who reach in upper-primary and middle school grades have deficits in reading ability (Manset-Williamson & Nelson, 2005). A recent study in rural area of Rawalpindi (Pakistan) has reported that prevalence of learning difficulties among the children (including, visual problems, hearing problems, motor problems) is 13.5 % whereas, difficulty in reading and writing is 3.7%, visual problems is 2%, hearing problems is 2.5%, motor problems is 5.3% and fits is 2.1% (Mirza, Mehmood, Tareen, Davidson, & Rahman, 2008).

The learning difficulties persist in the course of time implies the need for a more accurate diagnosis at early stage as well as for an effective intervention (Lindsay, 1984; Zachou & Zachos, 2008). Various management strategies have been assumed for the students

Learning Difficulties among Children

with learning disability. Triadic model of intervention i.e., doctors, therapists and the role of teachers/parents have been considered the best for identification, treatment, training and remedial work (Watts, 1985, Kemp, Segal, & Cutter, 2009). ‘Community-based rehabilitation (CBR) model’ was presented for developing countries to improve the quality of life along with intervention and treatment (Pim, & Sally, 2006).

With reference to intervention, the most important is to reduce the stress of the students (Omizo & Michael, 1982; Rubenzer, 1988 & 1987; Barker, 1987). Peer-assisted learning intervention strategies (PALS) (Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, & Simmons, 1997; Rohrbeck, et al, 2003; Spörer, & Brunstein, 2009) and community based rehabilitation program (Salamati, et. al. 2009) have also been found successfully employed to progress learning potential of these students. ‘Explicit self-regulatory strategy intervention’ (Nelson, & Manset-Williamson, 2005) Attention selection organization integration monitoring model (ASOIM), (Sung, Chang, Huang, & Sheng 2008) and ‘Paraphrasing strategy (RAP) (Hagaman, 2008) have been found effective for intervention of LDs.

There is a lack of comprehensive data on learning difficulties in Pakistan. A few studies have been conducted only with reference to physical, mentally handicapped children and on general mental health (Miles, & Miles, 2004; Durkin, Hasan, & Hasan, 1998; Shami, Schmitt, & Bittles, 1989; Bhatti, & Ashfaq, 2008; Hussain, 2009; Sarwat, Ali, & Ejaz, 2009) but field of learning difficulties has remained extremely ignored. Yet, some recent studies on learning difficulties provide fairly reliable statistics on LDs in Pakistan (Durkin, Hasan, & Hasan 1995; Maqbool, 2002; Rahman, Maqbool, & Zuberi, 2002). The present study was an exploratory study and it aimed at identifying LDs and their types among children studying in Government/public sector schools.

Method Sample

The study was conducted in the city area of district Jhang, agriculture based underdeveloped city, with 77 % rural population (Statistical Division, 2000). It is located in the centre of the province Punjab (Pakistan). At present Jhang is divided in to three parts i.e., Jhang Maghiāna, Seattleite Town and Jhang city (Tikkanen, 2007). Population of the present study consisted of the children studying in the government or public sectors schools. Lists of all government schools

Kazmi and Pervaiz

were obtained from district education office. A sample of 19 schools both primary (grade 1st to 5th ) and middle (grade 6st to 8th ) were selected through simple random sampling from three parts of the Jhang city, under the administration of Municipal Corporation (Local Govt) and Punjab Education Department. From these 19 schools 40 classes at primary level and 64 classes at middle level were selected. The strength of the students enrolled in these classes was 1647 and 3202 children respectively. Though the educational setup in Jhang comprised of public and private schools however, to control the variable of Socio economic status (SES), solitary Govt. schools were included in the study as being extremely low fee structure enrolled students in these schools belong to lower socio economic class. Table 1 Basic Data with Reference to the Study

Data f 1 Total schools surveyed 19

2 Total classes surveyed 114 3 Total class teachers interviewed 114 4 Total students enrolled in selected classes 4849

5 Total students identified as learning disabled 292

6 Students identified in primary classes 91

7 Students identified in primary classes 201

Assessment Measures

In the present study the holistic view of LDs was employed i.e., all those children were defined as having learning difficulty who are facing problems in; running, jumping, numeric skills, hearing and visual senses, writing, reading and speaking. The victim of seizures and those revealing any type of behavioural adjustment in class (e.g., aggression, disobedience, bullying etc) were also included. Two indigenously designed questionnaires were used for data collection. Keeping in view the operational definition and existing literature on LDs, a basic questionnaire was developed following TQQ and TQS

Learning Difficulties among Children

(Belmont, 1984; Mirza, Mehmood, Tareen, Davidson, & Rahman, 2008).

The questionnaire consisted of 10 questions with reference to various types of LDs. Four questions were structured addressing the students’ problems of; gross motor skills, auditory, visual, and seizure; three questions were designed to identify problems related to numeracy skills, writing, reading and three questions were included to screen behavioural problems; i.e., aggression, disobedience and bullying others. Each question was further elaborated with example of each learning disability. It was assured by the teacher, through the questions, that all identified students were otherwise intellectually normal. At the end of each question, detailed nature of difficulty was also inquired from the teacher. Additional information tapped by this questionnaire was; age, grade and strength of students in the class. At the end class teachers were also asked to write some suggestive measures to improve the students’ level of achievement. Students overall progress in the class was also assessed by the teachers on three point scale (e.g. above average/average/unsatisfactory). The second questionnaire i.e. student’s conformity questionnaire, was based on all types of learning problems, the students were identified by the class teachers to further evaluate their problem to adjust in school. Validity of the questionnaires was determined through content validity. Careful identification of the LDs through basic questionnaire with the help of teachers and later interviews with the screened students on the ‘student’s conformity questionnaire’ was the sole source of validity of the instrument and the results. Procedure

The data was collected though face to face interviews. At the first stage, each class teacher from the selected classes was interviewed on basic questionnaire to identify children with learning difficulties in their classes. All these teachers were experienced and had completed teacher training courses such as B. Ed and M.Ed., before joining their services. Though all these teachers had fair understanding about the LDs by virtue of their experience and their post service training, however, in case of confusion they were explained about the signs and symptoms of LDs during the identification process to maintain the validity of the results. At the second stage the screened students were interviewed on ‘student’s conformity questionnaire for further

Kazmi and Pervaiz

validation of the findings. Because of the non availability of resources and experts in LDs in Jhang area, the degree of the students’ problems and the number of students with overlapping symptoms could not be identified

Results

Results indicate that total 91 students at primary level and 201 students at higher level were identified as having Learning Difficulties. Table 2 Prevalence of Learning Difficulties among Children in Primary Classes (N=1647)

Type of LDs f

% (n= 1647)

% (n= 91)

Dyspraxia (running & jumping)

52 1.07 18

Speech 43 0.9 15 Hearing 19 0.4 6.5 Sight 5 0.1 1.7 Complaints of Fits 14 0.3 5 Numeric Skills 62 1.3 21.2 Reading Problem 45 0.92 15 Writing Problem 33 0.68 11 Behavioural Problem 19 0.39 6.5 Total 292 6.06 100 Above table indicates prevalence and ratio of different types of

disability among the students of primary classes. Total 91 students (i.e. 5.59 %) were identified with learning difficulties.

Learning Difficulties among Children

Table 3 Prevalence of Learning Difficulties among Higher Classes

Type of LDs f %

n=3202

n=201

Dyspraxia (running & jumping) 39 1.2 19.4

Speech 35 1.09 17.4 Hearing 13 0.4 6.5 Sight 4 0.12 2 Complains of Fits 8 0.3 4 Mathematical Difficulty 42 1.3 21 Reading Difficulty 30 0.94 15% Writing Difficulty 19 0.59 9%

Behavioural Problems 11 0.34 5.5 Total 201 6.3% 100%

Above table reveals prevalence and ratio of different types of

learning difficulties among children studying in higher classes. Total 201 students of 3202 (6.3 %) were identified with learning difficulties.

Kazmi and Pervaiz

Table 4 Comparison of Prevalence Rate among Children Studying in Primary Classes and Those in Higher Classes

Types of LDs

Primary classes

(1st to 5th )

Higher classes

(6th to 8th )

Total

n = 1647 n = 3202 N=4849 f f f χ2 Dyspraxia(problem in running & jumping)

13 39 52 0.92

Speech 8 35 43 3.16 Hearing 6 13 19 0.00 Sight 1 4 5 0.29 Complains of Fits 6 8 14 0.89 Mathematical Difficulty 20 42 62 0.03

Reading Difficulty 15 30 45 0.09 Writing Difficulty 14 19 33 1.95 Behavioural Problems 8 11 19 1.06 Total 91 201 292 8.42

χ2

, df 8 = 8.42 (p<0.05)

Above table reveals comparison between prevalence of different types of difficulties in primary and higher classes. The results revealed that prevalence of various type of disability is independent of age and grades of the students. However, in higher classes there were more significant hearing impairments and mathematical difficulties compared to those at primary level.

Learning Difficulties among Children

Table 5 Academic Performance Children Identified Having LDs Academic performance f % Satisfactory (average) 259 89% dissatisfactory 33 11% Total 292 100

Table 6 Proposed Management Strategies-Class Teachers’ View

Discussion

Objective of the present study was to identify the prevalence and types of learning difficulties among children enrolled in Government /public sector schools. Data was collected specifically from Government schools to control the SES of the students. Validity of the findings was assured through content validity of questionnaires and the careful identification of the students. Prevalence of LD stands, 6.06 % at both level of grades. About 3% of the identified students were facing problem in; numeric skill, reading and writing. This ratio is quite associated with the study conducted in Rawalpindi region (Mirza, Mehmood, Tareen, Davidson, & Rahman, 2008). The overall figures are less than those reported by earlier researches (Roberts, Attikisson, & Rosenblatt, 1998; Louden, 2000; Glassberg, Hooper, & Mattison, 1999). Prevalence of LDs identified in the present study is higher than that reported by, Hamilton-Kirkwood, (2001), Johnson (2007) and

Strategy f % Hard work 85 29% By enhancing self-esteem 38 13% Individual attention 76 26% Sympathetic & supportive attitude towards the child

93 32%

Total 292 100

Kazmi and Pervaiz

much higher than Shaffer et al. (1996) Lyon (1996) and Diakakis, Gardelis, Ventouri, Nikolaou Koltsida, Tsitoura et al. (2008). However, the findings are concurred with Tellioglue (2009). Prevalence of hearing problem (i.e. 0.4%), visual problems (i.e. 0.1 %) motor difficulty (i.e.1.07%) and complaints of fits (i.e. 0.3%) are also very low compared to those reported by Mirza, Mehmood, Tareen, Davidson, and Rahman, (2008) in their study in Rawalpindi region. One could argue that both studies are not comparable as their study was based on common population. It was observed that because of the poor reading writing and numeric skill majority of these students were labelled by their teachers as; mentally slow, lacking will to learn, casual or sometimes as “dull” In the present study the students with mixed symptoms of LDs could not be assessed due to the limitations of resources i.e. time and testing material. This study may provide guide line to initiate further similar research with reference to various demographical variables in urban and rural areas of Pakistan. Such as variables of age, economic factor, cousin marriage or marriage in same cast/ tribes, environmental factors, birth at home and industrial areas versus agricultural areas. There is a significant need to initiate a mass level study to identify etiological factors such as; neurobiological, genetic, cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional and environmental that alone or in combination, influences the development of LDs. Conclusion

In Pakistan the problem of learning difficulties has been extremely ignored at all level and no serious efforts have been made to help out the students with LDs. The identification and then intervention of LD students is a complex issue. Though the origin of the LD cannot be eradicated, however one can boast up their morale through early detection and employing suitable models of intervention. It can improve their academic achievements and their self-esteem which will surely enable them to exploit their God gifted intellectual potentials. They need at least similar efforts and strategy as it was employed for the mentally retarded and physically disabled children in the past. Contrary to mentally handicapped LD children can be saved from frustration, emotional distress and consequently from the early termination of their education.

References

Learning Difficulties among Children

Barker, B. (1987). Helping Students Cope with Stress. Learning, 15(5), 44-46.

Belmont, L. (1984). Final report of the international pilot study of severe childhood disability. New York: Gertrude Sergievsky Center, Columbia University.

Bhatti, A., & Ashfaq, G. (2008). Frequency of chromosomal anomalies in mentally handicapped children. Pakistan Journal of Medical Research, 47(1), 47-59.

Bishop, D. (2006). Developmental cognitive genetics: How psychology can inform genetics and vice versa. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(7), 1153–1168.

Bishop, D. V. M., & Leonard, L. B. (Eds.). (2000). Speech and language impairments in children: Causes, characteristics, intervention and outcome. New York: Psychology Press.

Booker, G., Bond, D., Sparrow, L., & Swan, P. (2003). Teaching primary mathematics (3rd ed). Sydney, Australia: Pearson Education.

Cobb, D. E., & Evans, J. R. (1981). The use of biofeedback techniques with school-aged children exhibiting behavioural and/or learning problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 9 (2), 251-281.

Diakakis, P., Gardelis, J., Ventouri, K., Nikolaou, K., Koltsida, G., Tsitoura S., et al. (2008). Behavioural problems in children with learning difficulties according to their parents and teachers. Paediatrics, 121 (2), S100-S101.

Durkin, M. S., Hasan, Z. M., & Hasan, K. Z. (1998). Prevalence and correlates of mental retardation among children in Karachi, Pakistan. American Journal of Epidemiology, 147(3).

Durkin, M. S., Hasan, M. Z., & Hasan, Z. (1995). The ten questions screen for childhood disabilities: Its uses and limitations in Pakistan. Journal of Epidemiological Community Health, 49, 431–36.

Dykman, R. A., & Ackerman, P. T. (1992). Diagnosing dyslexia: IQ regression plus cut point. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(9), 574-576.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G., & Simmons, D. C. (1997). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 174-206.

Kazmi and Pervaiz

Fullarton, S. (2008). Successful young adults with learning disabilities. Bangalore, India: Vdm Verlag. Retrieved January 2, 2010 from http://www.flipkart.com/

Glassberg, L. A., Hooper, S.R., & Mattison, R. E. (1999). Prevalence of learning disabilities at enrolment in special education students with behavioural disorders. Behavioural Disorders, 25(1), 9-21.

Hagaman, J. L. (2008). The effects of the paraphrasing strategy on the reading comprehension of middle school students at risk for failure in Reading. Remedial and Special Education, 29(4), 222-234.

Hamilton-Kirkwood, L. (2 001). Learning disabilities. Health evidence bulletins Wales. Retrieved January 2, 2010 from http://hebw.uwcm.ac.uk.

Hill, K. T., & Wigfield, A. (1984). Test anxiety: A major educational problem and what can be done about it. The Elementary School Journal, 85(1), 105-126.

Hughes, H., Jackson, K., Du Bois, K. E. & Erwin, R. (1979). Treatment of handwriting problems utilizing EMG biofeedback training. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 48(2), 603-666.

Huntington, D. D., & Bender, W. N. (1993). Adolescents with learning disabilities at risk?. Emotional well-being, depression, suicide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, (3), 159-166.

Hussain, S.A. (2009). A review of global issues and prevalence of child mental health problems. Journal of Pakistan Psychiatric Association, 6(1), 5-14.

Johnson, C. J. (2007). Prevalence of speech and language disorders in children. The encyclopaedia of early language and literacy development. 18:31:47

Kaplan, B. J., Dewey, D. M., Crawford, S. G., & Wilson, B. N. (2001). The term comorbidity is of questionable value in reference to developmental disorders: data and theory. Journal of Learning Disability, 34(6), 555-565.

Kauchali, S., & Davidson, L. L. (2006). The epidemiology of neuro developmental disorders in Sub-Saharan Africa moving forward to understand the health and psychosocial needs of children, families, and communities. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35, 689–690.

Kemp, G., Segal, J., & Cutter, D. (2009). Learning disabilities in children: learning disability symptoms, types & testing. Retrieved January 4, 2010 from http://helpguide.org/ mental/ parenting/

Learning Difficulties among Children

Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S., & Rescorla, L. (2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 211- 224.

Lindsay, G. (1984). Screening for children with Special Needs. London: Academic Press.

Louden, W. et al. (2000). Mapping the territory, primary students with learning difficulties: Literacy and numeracy, 1 (2 & 3), 175-185.

Lyness, D'Arcy. (2007). Learning disability. Retrieved January 5, 2010 from http://kidshealth.org/

Lyon, G. R. (1996). Learning Disabilities. The Future of Children, 6 (1), 54-76.

Manset-Williamson, G., & Nelson, J. M. (2005). Balanced strategic reading instruction for upper-elementary and middle school students with reading disabilities: A comparative study of two approaches. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(1), 58-74.

Maqbool, E. (2002). Relationship between self-concept and achievement among reading and non-reading disabled school children. PhD thesis, University of Karachi, Pakistan.

MartÃnez, R. S., & Semrud-Clikeman, M. (2004). Emotional adjustment and school functioning of young adolescents with multiple versus single learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disability, 37(5), 411-20.

Mather, N., & Goldstein, S. (2001). Behavior modification in the classroom. Retrieved January 4, 2010 from http://www.ldonline.org/article/6030

Mayes, S. D., Calhoun, S. L., & Crowell, E. W. (2000). Learning disabilities and ADHD: Overlapping spectrum disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(5), 417-424.

Meehan, R., Njuguna, P., Mturi N., Alcock, K.J., & Newton, C.R. (2006). Prevalence and risk factors of neurological disability and impairment in children living in rural Kenya. Journal of Epidemiology, 35, 683–688.

Miles, M., (2004). Disability & social responses in Afghanistan & Pakistan. Retrieved January 24, 2010 from http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/ /afghanpakistan/introduction.

Mirza, I., Mehmood, T., Tareen, A., Davidson, L., & Rahman, A. (2008). Feasibility study on the use of the ten questions screen by lady health workers to detect developmental disabilities in Pakistan. Journal of Pakistan Psychiatric Society, 5(2), 97.

Kazmi and Pervaiz

Mung’ala-Odera, V., Meehan, R., Njuguna, P., Mturi, N. Alcock, K., Carter, J. A., et al. (2004). Validity and reliability of the ten questions questionnaire for detecting moderate to severe neurological impairment in children aged 6–9 years in rural Kenya. Neuroepide miology, 23, (1-2), 67–72.

Murphy, C. (2006). Written language of children with a diagnosis of reading disabilities from Grades 3 through 6. Journal of Undergraduate Research, 8(2).

NIMH (2006). Learning disabilities: decade of the brain. NIMH, 95- 3611.

Nelson, J. M., & Manset-Williamson, G. (2005). The impact of explicit, self-regulatory reading comprehension strategy instruction on the reading-specific self-efficacy, attributions and affect of students with reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29(3), 213-230.

Newcomer, P. L., & Barenbaum, E. M. (1991). The written composing ability of children with learning disabilities: A review of the literature from 1980-1990. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24(10), 578-593.

Omizo, n. M., & W. B. Michael (1982). Biofeedback-induced relaxation training and impulsivity, attention to task, and locus of control among hyperactive boys. In Rubenzer, R. L. (1988). Stress management for the learning disabled. ERIC Digest.

Pastor, P., & Reuben, C. (2002). Attention deficit disorder and learning disability: National Centre for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat, 10(206). Retrieved January 4, 2010 from http: // www. cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_206. pdf.

Pim, K., & Sally, H. (2006). A process for the systematic review of community-based rehabilitation evaluation reports: formulating evidence for policy and practice. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 29(1), 27-30.

Rahman, A., Maqbool, E., & Zuberi, S. H. (2002). Lead–associated deficits in stature, mental ability and behavior in children in Karachi. Annals of Tropical Pediatrics, 22, 301-311.

Roberts, E. R., Attikisson, C. C., & Rosenblatt, A. (1998). A. Prevalence of psychopathology among children and adolescent. In Hussain, S.A. (2009). A review of global issues and prevalence of child mental health problems. Journal of Pakistan Psychiatric Association, 6(1), 5-14.

Learning Difficulties among Children

Rohrbeck, C. A., et al. (2003). Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students, a meta-analytic review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 95(2), 240-257.

Rubenzer, R. L. (1988). Stress management for the learning disabled: ERIC Digest.

Saddler, C. D., & Buckland, R. L., Jr. (1995). The multidimensional perfectionism scale: correlations with depression in college students with learning disabilities. Psychological Report, 77(2), 483-90.

Salamati, P., Abolhassani, F., Shariati, B., Kamali, M., & Alehossein, S. M. (2009). Home based training: main strategy of community based rehabilitation in Iran. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 25(3), 462-467.

Sarwat, A., Ali, S. M. I., & Ejaz, M. S. (2009). Mental health morbidity in children: A hospital based study in child psychiatry clinic. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 25 (6), 982-985.

Semrud-Clikeman, M., Biederman, J., Sprich-Buckminster, S., Lehman, B. K., Faraone, S. V., & Norman, D. (1992). Comorbidity between ADDH and learning disability: A review and report in a clinically referred. Journal of American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 31(3), 439-48.

Shaffer, D., et al (1996). Methods for the epidemiology of child and adolescent mental disorders study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 865-877.

Shami, S. A., Schmitt, L. H., & Bittles, A. H. (1989). Consanguinity related prenatal and postnatal mortality of the populations of seven Pakistani Punjab cities. Journal of Medical Genetics, 26(4), 267-71.

Siegel, L. S. (1989). IQ Is Irrelevant to the definition of learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(8), 469-478.

Snowling, M. J. (2000). Dyslexia (2nd ed). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Spörer, N., & Brunstein, J. C. (2009). Fostering the reading

comprehension of secondary school students through peer-assisted learning: Effects on strategy knowledge, strategy use, and task performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(4), 289- 297.

Statistics Division (2000). Census Report of District Jhang. Population Census Organization. Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.

Sung, Y., Chang, K., & Huang, J. (2008). Improving children’s reading comprehension and use of strategies through computer-based strategy training. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1552-1571.

Kazmi and Pervaiz

Svetaz, M. V., & Ireland, M., & Blum, R. (2000). Adolescents with learning disabilities: risk and protective factors associated with emotional well-being: findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27(5), 340-8.

Tellioglu, T. (2006). Learning Disorders. Retrieved February 15, 2010 from http://yourtotalhealth.ivillage.com/learning- disorders.htmlpage5

Thorburn M, et al., (1992). Identification of childhood disability in Jamaica: the ‘ten questions’ screen. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 15, 115–27.

Tikkanen, A. (2007) (Ed). Jhang Maghiāna. In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved November 24, 2009, from Encyclopaedia Britannica Online:http://www. britannica. com/Jhang-Maghiana

Tomblin, J. B., Zhang, X. Y., Buckwalter, P., & Catts, H. (2000). The association of reading disability, behavioral disorders, and language impairment among second-grade children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 473-482.

Tunmer, W. E., Chapman, J. W., Greaney, K. T., & Prochnow, J. E. (2002). The contribution of educational psychology to intervention research andpractice. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 49(1), 11-29.

US Census Bureau, (2004) Population Estimates Statistics by country for learning disabilities. Retrieved June 4, 2010 from http://www.cureresearch.com/l/learning_disabilities /stats- country.htm

Vaughn, S., Levey, S., Coleman, M., & Bos, C. (2002). Reading instructions for students with LD and EBD: A synthesis of observation studies. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 2-13.

Vellutino, F. R., Fletcher, J. M., Snowling, M. J., & Scanlon, D. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychiatry, 45(1), 2-40.

Wagner, R. K. (1986) Phonological processing abilities and reading: Implications for disabled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19 (10), 623-630.

Watts, L. (1974). Methods for Learning Disorders. New York: John Willey and Sons, Inc

Watts, N. F. (1985). New Development in Clinical Psychology. New York: John Willey & Sons.

Learning Difficulties among Children

Wong, B., & Fraser, S. (1996). The ABCS of learning disabilities. London: Academic Press.

Woolley, Gary. (2005). Research on reading comprehension difficulties after year four. Retrieved January 5, 2010 from http://www.canberra.edu.au/data/assets/woolley.

Zachou, A., & Zachos, I. (2008). Phonological spelling errors in the writing of Greek dyslexic children: In support of the phonological deficit theory. Retrieved January 6, 2010 from http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/

Zaman, S. S., Khan, N., Islam, S., & Durkin, M. (1992). Childhood disabilities in Bangladesh: Report on rapid epidemiological assessment of childhood disabilities in Bangladesh. Bangladesh: Bangladesh Protibondhi Foundation.

Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J. B. (2000). The association of intervention receipt with speech- language profiles and social-demographic variables. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 345- 357.

Applied Psychology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv

without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email

articles for individual use.