Abstract
 

This paper offers a voice for thousands of students and adults across the United States who grapple with learning disabilities. To achieve this aim, background context is offered regarding definitions of such disabilities as well as an overview of the positive and negative outcomes of The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This paper then proceeds to evaluate the process of diagnosing learning disabilities and presents common barriers that are faced. The disturbing consequences of improper diagnoses and untreated learning disabilities are also explored with respect to children, teenagers, adults, gender, and underrepresented racial minority populations. Thereafter, this paper analyzes post-diagnosis barriers to support in terms of funding, staffing, and pervasive societal stigmas. Furthermore, there are numerous post-diagnosis opportunities for support that are considered, including early diagnosis, widespread education, personalized interventions, and hidden gifts. This paper concludes by recommending proactive, early diagnosis and data-driven support services to empower people with learning disabilities nationwide.

Background Context
 

Overview

For the purposes of this paper, the term “learning disabilities” encompasses dyslexia, dysgraphia, and dyscalculia. There are a number of symptoms that are unique to each type of disability. For example, dyslexia is characterized by “...difficulty spelling, recognizing words and making connections between letters and sounds…” (Downs). Common symptoms of dyslexia may include difficulty speaking, sequencing numbers, and learning songs. Furthermore, dysgraphia consists of writing-related problems. People with dysgraphia “...may have distorted handwriting, omit words and struggle to put thoughts to paper” (Downs). Another common learning disability is dyscalculia. This disorder typically manifests through “...experiencing difficulties when dealing with numbers, including counting and doing arithmetic” (Cicerchia). Other dyscalculia indicators include an excessive reliance on finger counting and problems with number estimation.

Unfortunately, learning disabilities are generally misunderstood on a nationwide scale. They are often “...confused with learning problems which are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor handicaps; of intellectual disability; of emotional disturbance; or of environmental, cultural or economic disadvantages” (“What Are Learning Disabilities?”). Indeed, people with learning disabilities tend to possess a normal or above-average intelligence. To reap the benefits of such heightened intelligence, however, it is critical that people with learning disabilities are diagnosed early in life and are provided with an education that properly accommodates their needs. Otherwise, there is a grave risk that their personal, academic, and professional potential may be unfulfilled.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

In 1970, U.S. schools tended to exclude children with disabilities in their curricula. They “...educated only one in five children with disabilities, and many states had laws excluding certain students, including children who were deaf, blind, emotionally disturbed, or had an intellectual disability” (U.S. Department of Education). In the wake of this glaring oversight, U.S. Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) in 1975. The purpose of EHA was “...to support states and localities in protecting the rights of, meeting the individual needs of, and improving the results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities and their families. This landmark law’s name changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, in a 1990 reauthorization. The law was last reauthorized in 2004” (U.S. Department of Education). It is important to underscore that IDEA was sorely needed. Prior to its implementation, there were limited resources available across the country for underserved students with disabilities. By enacting IDEA, the “...U.S. has progressed from excluding nearly 1.8 million children with disabilities from public schools prior to EHA implementation to providing more than 7.5 million children with disabilities with special education and related services designed to meet their individual needs in the 2018-19 school year” (U.S. Department of Education).

The implementation of IDEA had profound effects on students with disabilities by providing them with the resources and education they needed to succeed both within the classroom and beyond it. “IDEA’s impact has opened the door to opportunities once out of reach for many disabled people. Special needs students who went through school since the implementation of IDEA are twice as likely to have jobs than older adults with similar disabilities who didn’t benefit from the law” (Peterson). Since IDEA’s enactment, significant improvements have been undertaken by schools across the country, allowing for millions of students with disabilities to be provided with an education conducive to their needs. “In 2020–21, the number of students ages 3–21 who received special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was 7.2 million, or 15 percent of all public school students. Among students receiving special education services, the most common category of disability was specific learning disabilities (33 percent)” (National Center for Education Statistics).

Despite IDEA’s significant progress, there are still barriers that impact special education students nationwide in negative ways. There seems to be a glaring discrepancy between students who are estimated to have attention and/or learning disabilities and those who receive Individualized Education Program documentation (IEPs) and other resources critical to their academic success. “There are approximately 56.6 million students in elementary and secondary schools in the United States…20%, or 1 in 5, would represent 11.2 million students with learning and attention issues” (Barto). This is a significant number of U.S. students who are affected by learning and attention deficiencies.

It is important to consider how often IEPs and other disability-specific education plans are being employed for the ‘one in five’ students mentioned above. “Approximately 8.25% are identified in school and receive some specialized instruction or accommodations through an IEP or a 504. [This represents] [l]ess than half of the total number of students estimated to have learning and attention issues” (Barto). As more students with disabilities enroll in school, the need for high quality special education classes as well as accessible IEP and related resources becomes increasingly critical. Despite significant demand for implementing individualized education plans and providing available resources to large populations of students with learning disabilities, not every student receives such academic assistance. The discrepancy between students who need special education resources and those who actually receive them is disproportionate. As will be detailed later in this paper, this disparity can have devastating impacts on those who remain undiagnosed.

The Process of Diagnosing Learning Disabilities
 

Overview

Proper diagnosis is key to ensuring that people with learning disabilities are understood, educated, and offered opportunities to improve their lives. “Learning disabilities are traditionally diagnosed by conducting two tests and noticing a significant discrepancy between their scores. These tests are an in­telligence (or IQ) test and a standardized achievement (reading, writing, arith­metic) test” (American Academy of Pediatrics). This method has been commonly  implemented by learning disability evaluation specialists in the past. Furthermore, this process usually occurs after a deficiency or challenge in a certain academic subject has been recognized by teachers or parents. To illustrate this evaluation process, someone “...might score 112 on the full-scale IQ test, but her math score might be 90; this discrepancy of 22 points between her potential ability (IQ) and actual achievement (in math) might qualify her for special services at her school. Some states, for example, define a learning disability as a difference of 15 points, but the criteria for services vary from one part of the country to another” (American Academy of Pediatrics). Although misconceptions still prevail that low IQ scores are a hallmark of learning disabilities, the contrast of scores between the two aforementioned tests can determine diagnosis.

Discrepancies between IQ scores and actual achievement constitute only one aspect of the diagnostic process. The Response to Intervention (RTI) initiative is another important dimension that can assist students with learning disabilities. “The purpose of RTI is that of a prevention model to limit or prevent academic failure for students who are having difficulty learning by providing ‘scientific research-based interventions’ to bring students up to grade level achievement. Although there is no single RTI model, the many variations that are emerging use a two-to-five tiered model” (“Response to Intervention (RTI)”). Each RTI tier offers individualized training and ongoing assessments to determine progress. Moreover, RTI provides criteria for altering interventions as needed through a collaborative decision-making process. Given its nationwide prominence, “...local Education Agencies must use [RTI] eligibility criteria developed by their State. States must permit, and may require, using RTI as a part of eligibility criteria” (“Response to Intervention (RTI)”). In sum, RTI is widely implemented across the nation, and can be a beneficial part of the diagnostic and intervention process for students with learning disabilities.

The Path To Diagnosis

The path to receiving a learning disability diagnosis can be arduous when other factors – such as cost and parental involvement – come into play. The onus is largely on parents to approach school administrators when they have concerns about the learning needs of their children. Moreover, the process is often lengthy, requires a significant amount of paperwork, and requires parents to transport their children for multiple tests and/or school conferences. This “...adds a mental and emotional cost, especially for parents faced with barriers such as job and family demands, limited English-speaking skills, or other socio-economic roadblocks to taking a more active role in their child’s education” (Glassman).

In addition, financial concerns can be a barrier to obtaining a learning disability diagnosis. Learning disability advocate Amanda Morin has described this issue in detail. She said, “The school can evaluate your child for free. Or you can hire a private evaluator, which costs $1,000 to $5,000, depending on where you live and the specialist doing the test. A neuropsychologist costs more than a child psychologist, and you may have to travel or take off work, which will add to the expense” (Glassman). On the surface, having the option of a free, public evaluation over a private one can be considered a benefit for financially underserved families. Although it is possible that these two evaluations may significantly differ in terms of quality, both may serve as viable options for diagnosis. The criteria for choosing between these different types of evaluations can depend on many different factors, and may vary from family to family.

In some cases, evaluations implemented by public schools can be just as valuable – if not more valuable – as their private counterparts. This is because public school teachers and evaluators are expected to follow a series of pertinent federal education laws. In turn, this can offer structure and transparency to the evaluation process. There are other potential advantages of evaluations conducted within a public school setting. “If your child is evaluated at school, they’ll most likely be seen in a familiar environment and may recognize some of the school staff testing them. Because your child is at school every day, the evaluation can be flexible — over a period of time, involving shorter sessions, and, ideally, when your child is at their best” (GreatSchools Staff).

The Consequences of Improper Diagnosis and Untreated Learning Disabilities
 

Overview

Unfortunately, many individuals with learning disabilities nationwide may never receive a formal diagnosis at all. “60% of adults with severe literacy problems have undetected or untreated learning disabilities” (“What Are Learning Disabilities?”). Unsurprisingly, this staggering statistic often results in a multitude of negative consequences and can have extremely negative repercussions. Morin stated that, “Kids whose learning disabilities go undetected are three times more likely to drop out of school and have a higher chance of ending up in the criminal justice system…” (Glassman). A learning disability can result in a variety of additional issues if it is not identified early, properly diagnosed, and effectively treated. In response to these added challenges, children may exhibit numerous socioemotional issues such as chronic sadness, frustration, or disappointment. Indeed, an undiagnosed and/or mistreated learning disability can also lead to an exceedingly difficult social and family life. This can result in problems which reach far beyond the school environment and ultimately seep into adulthood.

Children and Teenagers

Left untreated, learning disabilities can have an array of other extremely adverse effects on children – often in life-altering ways. Without a diagnosis to explain why children consistently struggle academically, insecurity and low self-esteem regarding their intelligence often develop – despite research showing that individuals with learning disabilities commonly have IQs that are average or above average. It is essential to the wellbeing of individuals with learning disabilities to understand the root cause of academic challenges and have accurate information about how to compensate for such issues and learn differently. Without such indispensable knowledge, unhealthy coping mechanisms and behavioral issues can result from deep-rooted emotional conflict that often festers over time. “Behavior problems like acting out might occur. Or the learning problems may show up within the family, causing, for example, mis­understandings, increased stress, or blaming others” (American Academy of Pediatrics).

Educational achievement can be understood as integral to a successful life. Yet when children with learning disabilities struggle to excel academically without adequate resources or support, they often leave school upon entering their teenage years. “The dropout rate for students with LD (18.1 percent) is nearly three times the rate of all students (6.5 percent)” (U.S. Department of Education). This only further limits their future potential, triggering a negative butterfly effect in many cases. In turn, learning disabilities can also lead to drug use, teenage pregnancy, crime, and lifelong poverty (Promise Project).

Adults

The fallout of improper diagnosis and mistreatment is not limited to children and teenagers. In fact, it can have life-long consequences as these populations enter adulthood. “For adults, having an undiagnosed learning disability can affect career choice, limit job advancement and lead to a number of psychological and emotional issues, including depression and feelings of low self-worth. This is particularly true when the person interprets his or her past educational failures as personal faults and experiences feelings of embarrassment and shame because of a perceived intellectual deficiency” (Cicerchia). Students who were not offered the opportunity to understand how their brains learn and unique ways that they process information may not be able to sufficiently compensate and cope with their disabilities.

As a result of this dearth of information and coping skills, people with learning disabilities can eventually grow into adults who fear their differing perspectives and needs – rather than fully embrace them and thereby unlock their potential. “An adult with a learning disability can absolutely thrive in their career of choice. However, without the proper support, they may limit themselves. Fearing the perception that they aren’t smart enough, an adult with a learning difference may not strive for management positions or could quit a job that requires reading a lot of reports” (Brain Balance). In light of this, it seems that chronically low self-esteem can loom over adults with learning disabilities and negatively impact their careers.

An important, but often overlooked, effect of mistreated learning disabilities is the serious impact that they can have on life expectancy. For people who have intellectual and developmental disabilities, mortality rates are greater than those of the general U.S. population. The most recent available statistics about this issue are from 2015. They demonstrate that the “...average age at death for people in state intellectual and developmental disabilities systems was 50.4-58.7 years and 61.2-63.0 years in Medicaid data” (Lauer and McCallion). This contrasts significantly with the life expectancy of the U.S. population at large in 2015, which averaged 78.8 years (Xu et al.). This difference – in excess of fifteen years – is extremely disturbing and demands investigation. One plausible explanation for this finding is in the domain of mental health. “The Health Equality thinktank cites statistics that show children with learning disabilities are at increased risk of mental health conditions, including depression…” (Siddique). In turn, depression and related mental health issues have been shown to negatively impact mortality (Gilman et al.). 

Gender

                  Learning disability diagnosis rates can have a disproportionately detrimental impact on girls. “According to the National Center for Education Statistics, during the 2018 to 2019 school year, 18% of male students ages 6 to 21 received special services under IDEA, compared to 10% of female students benefiting from these services” (Haddad). Since females are diagnosed at significantly lower rates than males on a nationwide scale, they are more vulnerable to developing low self-esteem and related issues. This is largely due to the fact that they are not provided with an explanation for their academic challenges nor resources to help cope with them. Further research is currently being conducted as to whether this striking gender disparity in diagnosis is the result of sexism, contrasting biological mechanisms between genders that may be more likely to result in learning disabilities, or some combination of both factors. Moreover, additional studies are being conducted to determine learning disability diagnosis rates and disproportionalities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and many other terms (LGBTQIA+) community members throughout the country.

Underrepresented Racial Minority Populations

Underrepresented racial minority populations in the U.S. include Blacks, African Americans, Latinxs, Hispanics, Indigenous peoples (for example, American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians), and two or more races, when one or more are from the preceding racial and ethnic categories in this list (University of California San Francisco). Both overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of learning disabilities among underrepresented racial minority populations have been detected through extensive research. “In many situations, students of color are less likely than their white peers to be identified and to receive special education services, despite demonstrating similar levels of academic performance and behavior, even when attending the same schools” (“What Are Learning Disabilities?”). Other studies, however, have revealed that the opposite may be true. These research papers are “...uncovering more nuanced findings, suggesting that minority students are overidentified in some contexts, and underidentified in others” (Riser-Kositsky). This paper thereby recommends further research regarding the relationship between race and learning disability diagnosis rates.

Both underdiagnosis and overdiagnosis of learning disabilities among racial minority populations can have profound shortcomings. For example, underdiagnosis can result in such individuals not receiving the support and information that they need to thrive. Overdiagnosis, however, can lead to racial minority populations being “...placed in more restrictive educational settings, and disciplined at markedly higher rates than their peers” (Glassman).  As discussed earlier, many students with learning disabilities often become entangled in the justice system, and part of the reason for this is because of the disproportionate amount of disciplinary action that they experience at a young age. “For students with LDs, there is an increasing number of studies investigating the disproportionalities in LD overidentification. One such group of students are students with racial-ethnic minorities…For example, African-American students with LDs reported negative consequences of their special education placement…and barriers preventing them from returning to general education placements” (Leung).

Subjecting racial minority students to more ‘restrictive’ and ‘negative’ atmospheres during the school day can contribute to a path of juvenile delinquency among such marginalized populations. This is especially true when such students are from low-income areas in which local schools lack the resources to support their ability to manage learning disabilities effectively. “Unaddressed learning and attention issues contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline. A large study found that half of young students with learning disabilities or related issues had been involved at some point with the justice system” (Barto). The effects of learning disabilities extend far beyond the school yard and – as an increasing number of studies have shown – quite possibly to the prison yard. Involvement in the criminal justice system can alter the entire trajectory of a person’s life. In addition to the negative socioemotional impacts of this system on a human being, it can adversely affect career opportunities and college admissions outcomes.

Post-Diagnosis: Barriers To Support
 

Funding

Students with learning disabilities often face numerous challenges when attempting to seek the support that they require. “In fiscal year 2018, the federal government earmarked $12.3 billion for the education of children ages 3-12 with disabilities. That’s only about 15 percent of the excess cost of educating students with disabilities, compared with the cost of educating a general education student. The federal government under the 1975 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act set a goal to pay states up to 40 percent of the excess cost. It never reached that goal” (Riser-Kositsky). In light of this assessment, economically disenfranchised households that rely exclusively on public resources for their special education programming would not have their needs adequately filled. Unfortunately, private special education initiatives may not be a viable option for many of these families due to their high levels of cost.

Staffing

Funding is just one of several issues that special education students face when seeking support. “In 2016, there were 17.1 special education students for each special education teacher in the United States. That’s higher than the overall student-teacher ratio of 16.2 students per teacher. From 2006 to 2016, the number of special education teachers has decreased by 17 percent, while the number of special education students only dropped by 1 percent” (Riser-Kositsky). Even the most effective special education teachers may be overwhelmed by an untenable amount of students. The difference in student-teacher ratios and the decrease of employed special education teachers contribute to a lower educational quality for students with learning disabilities. Given the critical role that trust and alignment between student, parent, and teacher plays in academic success, the need for qualified and passionate special education teachers is increasingly important.

Stigmas

In addition to a lack of funding and qualified educators, students with learning disabilities are further disadvantaged with respect to the support services that they can access due to societal stigmas. According to the International Dyslexia Association, seven out of ten parents, educators, and school administrators incorrectly linked learning disabilities with intellectual disabilities. These results clearly show a disconnect from what learning disabilities truly are, and what they are construed to be. Another misconception is related to the fact that a “...majority (51%) think that what people call learning disabilities is the result of laziness…More than two-thirds of parents think specific signs of learning disabilities are something a 2-4 year old will grow out of and are therefore more likely to delay seeking professional help…” (International Dyslexia Association). Even when children are diagnosed, many of them may feel marginalized by their own parents. “43 percent of parents say they wouldn’t want others to know if their child had LD” (Understood Team).

Unfortunately, the aforementioned opinions are not harmless. They may illustrate a sense of shame that accompanies a learning disability diagnosis, which further disadvantages affected students. If students and their parents perceive a learning disability as something to be ashamed of, rather than something that can and should be accommodated for, they may be less likely to successfully cope with it. This can not only hinder self-confidence, but also lead to a lack of proper diagnosis and treatment. “Low self-esteem and stigma help explain why only 1 in 4 students with LD tell their college they have a disability and why only 1 in 20 young adults with LD receive accommodations in the workplace” (Mangal).

Post-Diagnosis: Opportunities For Support
 

Early Diagnosis

Despite the fact that there are many obstacles for people with learning disabilities to access support, a number of viable approaches are available to help them unlock their personal and academic potential. “With the right support and interventions…children and adults with learning disabilities can succeed in school and life. Recognizing, accepting and understanding [one’s] learning disability are the first steps to success” (“What Are Learning Disabilities?”). As previously mentioned, the most critical actions that should first be taken on behalf of people with learning disabilities include a formal evaluation and diagnosis of their underlying issues. “The identification process includes (1) screening, (2) examination for the presence of risk indicators and protective factors, (3) systematic observations, and, if indicated, (4) a comprehensive evaluation. An effective early identification program must take into account the numerous biological, environmental, and cultural factors that may influence the course of a child’s development” (National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities).

Although proper evaluation procedures for learning disabilities require a significant investment in time and resources, they can be worth the proactive effort. “Learning disabilities have no cure, but early intervention can lessen their effects. People with learning disabilities can develop ways to cope with their disabilities. Getting help earlier increases the chance of success in school and later in life” (National Institutes of Health: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development). Unfortunately, due to commonly held misconceptions by a widely uneducated U.S. public, many parents choose to wait for their children to outgrow learning challenges. “It is not in the child’s best interest to ‘wait and see’ or hope that the child will ‘grow out of’ his or her problems” (National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities). These delays can be extremely detrimental for screening and early intervention implementation.

Widespread Education

The process of early detection should then be followed by educating people and their families about their diagnosis-specific educational options and other related available resources as early in life as possible. To this end, one option is for schools to provide “...all students with information about disabilities – including relatively mild ones – and to do so frequently, ensuring that those who are not enrolled in special education receive certain key messages. This includes basic information about the range of disability types that qualify for support in college and how to access these resources” (Schechter). In light of this, it is essential to dispel stigmas with knowledge and make robust resources more accessible to those who most need them. Furthermore, educating the entire student population can significantly benefit people with disabilities and expand the knowledge base of their general education peers.

When possible, including students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms can be another beneficial approach to adopt nationwide. “Seven out of 10 students with LD spend at least 80 percent of their time in general education classrooms. Inclusion is beneficial, but in a nationwide survey many general education teachers said they don’t have the training or the resources to meet the needs of diverse learners” (Mangal). Including students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms with their peers can be helpful for self-esteem and socialization. Yet just because students with learning disabilities are placed in general education environments may not necessarily mean that they are receiving proper support from their teachers in those classes. “Only 30 percent of general educators feel strongly that they can successfully teach kids with LD. More training and resources are needed to help diverse learners thrive in general education classrooms” (Understood Team).

Increased training for general education teachers regarding how to accommodate students with learning disabilities can be greatly beneficial – especially since a low percentage of such teachers may be improperly equipped in this regard. “Since almost five percent of all students in our nation’s public schools are classified as having specific learning disabilities (SLD), every teacher can expect to find students with learning disabilities in the classroom…Despite obstacles, recent research tells us that we can teach these students how to learn” (Barto). As a result, The Learning Disabilities Association has curated multiple learning modules and other related resources to empower educators in this regard. When implemented appropriately, such teacher training can ultimately boost the confidence and self-esteem of students with learning disabilities, as well as provide accessible resources and information to support them.

In addition to teacher training, educational resources targeted to parents can have numerous benefits. “Parents are often baffled by the problems presented by a child with learning disabilities. Often this ‘invisible disability’ does not become obvious until a child reaches school age. Even then, difficulties may be subtle and hard to recognize” (Barto). In response to such bafflement, educated and active parents have the potential to change the lives of their children for the better. Equipped with such information, parents are then better positioned to effectively advocate for the needs of their children from school administrators and educators. In addition, such parental advocacy potentially expedites the chances that students with learning disabilities will be granted an IEP and thereby receive requisite school-sponsored support.

Personalized Interventions and Hidden Gifts

Another post-diagnosis opportunity to support individuals with learning disabilities entails using personalized interventions to uncover the extraordinary potential of this population. Despite the negative misconceptions surrounding learning disabilities and challenges that often result from a diagnosis, research is beginning to reveal the ‘hidden gifts’ of such people. “Unique developments in brain structure cause learning disabilities. They lend themselves to significant cognitive advantages” (Bechtel). Personalized interventions can empower people to harness their strengths to their advantage. Within the confines of a given school day, for example, people with learning disabilities should have access to activities of their choosing and interests. In so doing, they can be encouraged to develop their remarkable cognitive skills and talents as they learn individualized strategies for how to best manage their disabilities. While addressing such disabilities, the top priority of all teachers involved throughout this process is to make sure that giftedness is recognized and embraced.

To help students with learning disabilities discover pedagogical strategies that work best for them, educators can leverage a number of personalized techniques. For example, teachers can try prioritizing concepts over details for students with macro-level cognitive emphases. Particularly in small-group situations, teachers should be encouraged to present big-picture, open-ended issues that call for varied thinking. Teachers might also provide opportunities for students to research real-world issues for actual audiences based on student interests. This strategy can increase engagement because students are more likely to recognize how their academic interests have an actual impact on society. Additionally, teachers can provide all students with learning disabilities, their families, and their paraprofessionals with thorough rubrics, checklists, and performance lists to significantly decrease stress and expel uncertainty (Baum and Owen).

To activate many senses for effective learning, teachers may also experiment with visual, tactile-kinesthetic, and movement exercises. This tactic can allow students to gain access to information through a variety of channels and help such knowledge become physiologically ingrained. Moreover, it has been discovered that providing students who have learning disabilities with printed copies of lecture notes and peer note-taking assistance can be extraordinarily beneficial (Winebrenner). Along these lines, it is critical that class plans and homework be made available in advance. The option of having exams and reports in big print or dictated may also be considered by school administrators. Furthermore, offering students with learning disabilities more time to complete tasks and tests can be extremely helpful to them.

Teachers can also provide assistance to students with learning disabilities by reducing the number of assigned tasks and emphasizing quality over quantity. Re-teaching should also not be seen as a consequence but rather as a standard component of instruction. Paired tasks, such as coupling a student who excels at writing with a student who excels at reading, can also be advantageous to numerous students at once (Baum and Owen). Furthermore, teachers are encouraged to leverage assistive technological tools that include electronic boards, talking computers, hearing aids, talking maps, and software that can correct spelling, grammar, and vocabulary errors. These resources have proven essential for those with certain learning disabilities to succeed in specific circumstances. In STEM-related fields, interactive math tables and related manipulatives have also been beneficial in numerous research studies (Winebrenner). For classrooms and schools that may lack such technological resources, graph paper can be used to align numbers in math classes and help students with learning disabilities.

In some circumstances, grade acceleration in one academic area while obtaining remediation in another may be helpful for gifted students with learning disabilities. For instance, students may require specialized treatment for dyslexia while possessing exceptional mathematical skills due to their quick conceptual understanding, ability to think abstractly, and capacity for complexity. Even if the person may struggle with reading tasks, he or she may be able to operate at a grade level or even above in another subject like mathematics (Brody and Mills). In light of this, gifted students with learning disabilities should be given the opportunity to work at an appropriate level in each subject area, even if this causes grade level inconsistencies in students’ educational programs. It is critical to understand, however, that not every tactic will be effective with every one of these students. It is best for teachers to assess the given context and modify their educational plans to include appropriate instruction and accommodations. Overall, teachers should be adaptable and willing to attempt a variety of approaches on a case-by-case basis.

One additional strategy that has been very effective for personalized instruction on behalf of  students with learning disabilities entails the proactive ability of schools to provide relevant role models for them. This is especially true when adults or older students who have experienced learning disabilities in their own lives engage with current students (Winebrenner). This engagement can include, but is not limited to, mentorship, lectures, and parent conferences. To ensure success and reduce frustration, it would be ideal if these role models could offer students, teachers, and families regular, frequent, and personalized guidance. These role models may also inspire teachers to pace lessons and alter their methods of instruction in accordance with students’ unique learning capacities. To achieve this, it has been demonstrated that employing several modalities and chunking instructions into smaller, more manageable pieces is particularly successful (Baum and Owen). These role models can truly uplift everyone involved in the learning process and inspire them to never underestimate the potential of people with learning disabilities.

When implemented skillfully, personalized interventions can help excavate the ‘hidden gifts’ of people with learning disabilities. These gifts often manifest in a number of positive ways across various sectors of society. “Psychologists who analyzed the mental makeup of business winners found that learning difficulties are one of the most important precursors of financial success. About 40 percent of the 300 studied had been diagnosed with dyslexia — four times the rate in the general population” (Csillag). These findings are heartening and should be widely publicized to help reduce the stigmas surrounding learning disabilities. Furthermore, “25% of Fortune500 CEOs are dyslexic, 50% of NASA engineers have a learning disability, and a majority of the most famous innovators throughout history had learning disorders” (Bechtel). Across varying historical periods and fields, individuals with learning disabilities have consistently proven to be successful when they are offered the freedom to leverage their remarkable strengths in positive ways.

An extensively researched example of this phenomenon is evident among people with dyslexia. “Dyslexia should be considered a difference, not a disorder, researchers at the University of Cambridge say. This is evidenced by studies in cognition, behaviour and the brain that show that people with dyslexia are specialised to explore the unknown and think in terms of the bigger picture” (Barrett). Indeed, people with dyslexia tend to be inventive and discover refreshingly new ways of approaching problems. Given the generally high IQs and brilliant minds of students and adults with dyslexia, this is not surprising. Decades of research into the hidden gifts of people with dyslexia have consistently and “...boldly associated dyslexia with genius…noting surprising talents that are all too often obscured by reading and writing disabilities at school. Now that light has been shed on the subject, we can no longer adopt a reductive vision of dyslexia; indeed, recent research invites us to tap into these talents, regardless of the nature of our role in the education community” (Rousseau).

Educators and supervisors of people with dyslexia in both academic and non-academic settings should be aware of this significant asset. In turn, they can encourage those with dyslexia to tackle issues and academic content from a broader perspective. Then, they can offer them personalized assistance when dealing with the smaller details of certain tasks. Educators and supervisors can also consider pairing people with dyslexia with those who do not have this diagnosis. “Bringing explorative, global-thinking brains together with exploitative, local-thinking brains leads to solutions that couldn’t be imagined by one individual, or even a group of similar people” (Barrett).

Another hidden gift associated with learning disabilities includes empathy cultivation. People with learning disabilities “...tend to be more empathetic, due to the hardships they face. Most teachers with learning disabilities view their disabilities as having a positive effect on their teaching, likely due to the ability to empathize with students and their potential learning struggles” (Csillag). These individuals deeply understand the frustration of struggling with concepts and battling external stigmas, so they are often able to relate more easily to difficulties that others face. This developed sense of understanding for the plights of others is also beneficial in numerous social contexts. For example, due to the empathetic nature of certain people with learning disabilities, they are more likely to forge healthy friendships and relationships (Csillag). They may also be exceptionally skilled at networking within social contexts such as conferences.

Concluding Thoughts
 

This paper has explored many of the consequences of not diagnosing learning disabilities in a timely fashion. It also detailed the repercussions of systemic failures to provide adequate resources to this population on a national scale. People with learning disabilities deserve the same opportunities and resources as the general population. Ideally, a learning disability diagnosis should not be feared, but rather sought as quickly as possible to lay a foundation for successful coping mechanisms. At the earliest sign of a learning disability, this paper recommends proactive screening. To this end, the federal government can stipulate early diagnosis protocols as a fundamental requirement for receiving IDEA funding.

Despite this paper and numerous research studies demonstrating that people with learning disabilities have the potential to succeed, there are still entrenched nationwide stigmas against this population. As discussed, these stigmas affect self-esteem, access to resources, academic success, and career advancement. It is thereby vital that this narrative be changed through widespread education about the reality of such disabilities, and that their accompanying misconceptions are corrected. Through this de-stigmatization process, learning disabilities can ultimately be understood as differences in individuals’ information processing capabilities that can be accomodated, rather than as insurmountable obstacles.

Throughout this process, people with learning disabilities can excavate their ‘hidden gifts’ such as enhanced IQs, business acumen, and empathetic personalities. As evidenced from the “Personalized Interventions and Hidden Gifts” section of this paper, there is a wealth of information about the tremendous advantages associated with people who are diagnosed with dyslexia. Unfortunately, there is less information available about other learning disabilities in this regard. In light of this oversight, this paper recommends additional research into the ‘hidden gifts’ that can be derived from other learning disabilities as well, such as dysgraphia and dyscalculia.

Equitable access to early learning disability diagnoses and support should be provided to all U.S. citizens – including children, teenagers, adults, and underrepresented racial minority populations of all genders. Although retrieving a diagnosis and effective assistance can be time-consuming and complex, research has shown that such early interventions are critical to helping students – and ultimately adults – achieve their fullest potential. Through timely diagnosis, access to excellent support services, and widespread education, people with learning disabilities are no longer condemned to suffer in silence.

Works Cited
American Academy of Pediatrics. “Diagnosing a Learning Disability.” HealthyChildren.org, www.healthychildren.org/English/health-issues/conditions/learning-disabilities/Pages/Diagnosing-a-Learning-Disability.aspx.

Barrett, Amy. “Dyslexia Isn’t a Disorder, It’s Essential to How Our Species Adapt, Say Researchers.” BBC Science Focus Magazine, 27 June 2022, www.sciencefocus.com/news/dyslexia-isnt-a-disorder-its-part-of-our-species-cultural-evolution-say-researchers.

Barto, Amy. “The State of Learning Disabilities Today – Learning Disabilities Association of America.” ldaamerica.org/lda_today/the-state-of-learning-disabilities-today.

Baum, Susan, and Steven Owen. To Be Gifted and Learning Disabled: Strategies for Helping Bright Students With LD, ADHD and More. 2nd ed., Prufrock Press, 2004.

Bechtel, Alexandra. “Hidden Advantages: The Positive Side of Learning Disorders.” Medium, 15 Dec. 2021, medium.com/@misssdintl2020/hidden-advantages-the-positive-side-of-learning -disorders-ad4507b289ae.

Brain Balance. “What Happens Later? The Lifelong Impact of Learning Disorders.” www.brainbalancecenters.com/blog/what-happens-later-the-lifelong-impact-of-learning-disorders.

Brody, Linda E., and Carol J. Mills. “Gifted Children With Learning Disabilities: A Review of the Issues.” Journal of Learning Disabilities, vol. 30, no. 3, SAGE Publications, May 1997, pp. 282–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949703000304.

Cicerchia, Meredith. “Recognizing Dyscalculia in Adults.” Touch-type Read and Spell (TTRS), www.readandspell.com/us/dyscalculia-in-adults.

Csillag, Jules. “Strengths of People With Learning Disabilities.” Noodle, www.noodle.com/articles/strengths-of-people-with-learning-disabilities.

Downs, Jere. “Understanding Different Types of Learning Disabilities.” U.S. News And World Report, Oct. 2021, www.usnews.com/education/k12/articles/understanding-different-types- of-learning-disabilities.

Gilman, Stephen E., et al. “Depression and Mortality in a Longitudinal Study: 1952–2011.” Canadian Medical Association Journal, vol. 189, no. 42, CMA Joule Inc., Oct. 2017, pp. E1304–10. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.170125.

Glassman, Suzie. “The Cost of Diagnosing Your Child’s Learning Difficulties: What Parents Need to Know.” Parents, 12 Aug. 2021, www.parents.com/kids/development/learning-disabilities/ cost-of-diagnosing-child-learning-difficulty.

Gonen, Yoav, and Alex Zimmerman. “A Two-tiered System: Families Who Can’t Afford Private Evaluations Struggle to Secure Special Ed Services.” Chalkbeat New York, 4 Feb. 2020, ny.chalkbeat.org/2019/10/31/21121871/a-two-tiered-system-families-who-can-t-afford-private-evaluations-struggle-to-secure-special-ed-serv.

GreatSchools Staff. “Evaluation for a Learning Disability: Public or Private?” Greatschools.org, 30 April 2021, https://www.greatschools.org/gk/articles/public-private-evaluation-of-learning- disability.

Haddad, Douglas. “Do More Boys Than Girls Have Learning Disabilities?” Verywell Family, 10 June 2020, www.verywellfamily.com/gender-differences-in-learning-disabilities-2162942.

International Dyslexia Association. “New Poll Reveals Dangerous Confusion About Children With Learning Disabilities.” International Dyslexia Association Website, 2010, dyslexiaida.org/tremaine-foundation-study.

Lauer, Emily, and Philip McCallion. “Mortality of People With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities From Select US State Disability Service Systems and Medical Claims Data.” Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, vol. 28, no. 5, Wiley, May 2015, pp. 394–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12191.

Learning Disabilities Association of America. “Response to Intervention (RTI).” https://ldaamerica.org/advocacy/lda-position-papers/response-to-intervention-rti/.

---. “What Are Learning Disabilities?” ldaamerica.org/advocacy/lda-position-papers/what-are- learning-disabilities.

Leung, Enoch. “Examining Learning Disabilities in Schools Through an Intersectional and Equitable Lens.” Learning Disabilities - Neurobiology, Assessment, Clinical Features and Treatments, IntechOpen, Mar. 2022, https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99572.

Mangal, Cierra. “The State of LD: Understanding the 1 in 5.” NCLD, 23 Oct. 2019, www.ncld.org/news/newsroom/the-state-of-ld-understanding-the-1-in-5.

National Center For Education Statistics. “Students With Disabilities.” nces.ed.gov, May 2022, nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgg/students-with-disabilities.

National Institutes of Health: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. “What Are the Treatments for Learning Disabilities?” NIH, 2018, www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/learning/conditioninfo/treatment.

National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. “Learning Disabilities and Young Children: Identification and Intervention.” Reading Rockets, www.readingrockets.org/article/learning- disabilities-and-young-children-identification-and-intervention.

Peterson, Margie. “IDEA’s Impact - Theory to Practice: Lehigh University College of Education.” ed.lehigh.edu/theory-to-practice/2016/IDEAs-impact.

Promise Project. “LD Basics.” Promise Project, www.promise-project.org/promise2/learning/ldBasics.

Riser-Kositsky, Maya. “Special Education: Definition, Statistics, and Trends.” Education Week, 22 July 2022, www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/special-education-definition-statistics-and -trends/2019/12

Rousseau, Nadia. “Dyslexia: When Hidden Talents Are Awakened.” LD@School, 21 June 2018, www.ldatschool.ca/dyslexia-when-hidden-talents-are-awakened.

Schechter, Julia Silverman. “Supporting the Needs of Students With Undiagnosed Disabilities .” kappanonline.org, 23 Oct. 2018, kappanonline.org/schechter-supporting-needs-students- undiagnosed-disabilities.

Siddique, Haroon. “Two in Five People With Learning Disabilities Not Diagnosed in Childhood.” The Guardian, 5 Nov. 2018, www.theguardian.com/society/2018/nov/05/two-in-five-people-with -learning-disabilities-not -diagnosed-in-childhood.

Understood Team. “Learning Disabilities by the Numbers.” 3 Aug. 2022, www.understood.org/en/articles/learning-disabilities-by-the-numbers.

University of California San Francisco. “Underrepresented Minority Definition: Office of Diversity and Outreach.” diversity.ucsf.edu/programs-resources/urm-definition.

U.S. Department of Education. “A History of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act.” Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 18 Mar. 2022, sites.ed.gov/idea/IDEA-History.

Winebrenner, Susan. “Teaching Strategies for Twice-Exceptional Students.” Intervention in School and Clinic, vol. 38, no. 3, SAGE Publications, Jan. 2003, pp. 131–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512030380030101.

Xu, Jiaquan, et al. “Products - Data Briefs - Number 267 - December 2016.” www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db267.htm.