Neuropsychology Review

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 97–103 | Cite as

Ecological Neuropsychology: An Alternative to the Deficit Model for Conceptualizing and Serving Students with Learning Disabilities

  • Rik Carl D'Amato
  • Franci Crepeau-Hobson
  • Leesa V. Huang
  • Molly Geil
Article

Abstract

The present paper contends that children with learning disabilities are better served when assessment and intervention are conceptualized within an ecological neuropsychology perspective than within the traditional deficit model perspective, which is the predominant approach to intervention in medical and educational settings. The deficit method conceptualizes problems as within the child, and the major consequence of this approach is that little time is spent analyzing the learning environment or other systems that might impact the child's ability to be successful in an academic setting. Therefore, rehabilitation efforts have had limited success. In contrast, ecological neuropsychology is a strength-based approach that considers the child, as well as the systems within which he/she interacts, when assessing, diagnosing, and intervening with students who are experiencing learning difficulties.

Keywords

ecological neuropsychology medical model learning disabilities special education strength-based models rehabilitation 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Psychological Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edn.—text revision, Author, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. Banks, J. A., and Banks, C. A. (eds.). (2001). Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives, Allyn & Bacon, Boston.Google Scholar
  3. Bricklin, P. M., and Gallico, R. (1984). Learning disabilities and emotional disturbance: Critical issues in definition, assessment, and service delivery. J. Learn. Disabil. 3: 141–156.Google Scholar
  4. Condeluci, A. (1994). Transition to employment. In: Savage, R. C., and Wolcott, G. F. (eds.), Educational Dimensions of Acquired Brain Injury, Pro-Ed, Austin, TX, pp. 519–542.Google Scholar
  5. Conoley, J. C., and Gutkin, T. B. (1995). Why didn't–why doesn't school psychology realize its promise? J. Sch. Psychol. 33: 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cortiella, C. (2003). The discrepancy dilemma: Congress ponders a better way to identify learning disabilities. Retrieved June 4, 2004, from http://schwablearning.org/articles.asp?r = 703.
  7. D'Amato, R. C. (1990). A neuropsychological approach to school psychology. Sch. Psychol. Q. 5: 141–160.Google Scholar
  8. D'Amato, R. C., and Dean, R. S. (1987). Psychological assessment reports, individual education plans, and daily lesson plans: Are they related? Prof. Sch. Psychol. 2: 93–101.Google Scholar
  9. D'Amato, R. C., and Dean, R. S. (1989). The School Psychologist in Nontraditional Settings: Integrating Clients, Services, and Settings, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  10. D'Amato, R. C., Dean, R. S., Rattan, G., and Nickell, K. (1988). A study of psychological referrals for learning disabled children. J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 6: 118–124.Google Scholar
  11. D'Amato, R. C., Dean, R. S., and Rhodes, R. L. (1998). Subtyping children's learning disabilities with neuropsychological, intellectual, and achievement measures. Int. J. Neurosci. 96: 107–125.Google Scholar
  12. D'Amato, R. C., Fletcher-Janzen, E., and Reynolds, C. (eds.). (2005). The Handbook of School Neuropsychology, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  13. D'Amato, R. C., and Rothlisberg, B. A. (1996). How education should respond to students with traumatic brain injury. J. Learn. Disabil. 6: 670–683.Google Scholar
  14. D'Amato, R. C., Rothlisberg, B. A., and Leu Work, P. H. (1999). Neuropsychological assessment for intervention. In: Reynolds, C. R., and Gutkin, T. B. (eds.), The Handbook of School Psychology, 3rd edn., Wiley, New York, pp. 452–475.Google Scholar
  15. D'Amato, R. C., Rothlisberg, B. A., and Rhodes, R. L. (1997). Utilizing a neuropsychological paradigm for understanding common educational and psychological tests. In: Reynolds, C. R., and Fletcher-Janzen, E. (eds.), Handbook of Clinical Child Neuropsychology, 2nd edn., Plenum Press, New York, pp. 270–295.Google Scholar
  16. Donovan, M. S., and Cross, C. T. (2002). Minorities in Special and Gifted Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  17. Dwyer, K. P. (1987). School psychology assessment. In: Kavale, K. A., Forness, S. R., and Bender, M. (eds.), Handbook of Learning Disabilities: Dimensions and Diagnosis, Vol. 1, Little, Brown Company, Boston, MA, pp. 325–348.Google Scholar
  18. Epps, S., and Tindal, G. (1987). The effectiveness of differential programming in serving students with mild handicaps: Placement options and instructional programming. In: Wang, M. C., Reynolds, M., and Walberg, H. J. (eds.), Handbook of Special Education: Research & Practice, vol. 1, Pergamon, New York, pp. 213–248.Google Scholar
  19. Federal Register (December 2004). Reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA—PL 108–446).Google Scholar
  20. Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P., and Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 18(3): 157–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gaddes, W. H., and Edgell, D. (1994). Learning Disabilities and Brain Function: A Neuropsychological Approach, Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Gilger, J. W., and Kaplan, B. J. (2001). Atypical brain development: A conceptual framework for understanding developmental learning disabilities. Dev. Neuropsychol. 20(2): 465–481.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Gutkin, T. B., and Reynolds, C. R. (1999). The Handbook of School Psychology, 3rd edn., John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  24. Hallahan, D. P., and Kauffman, J. M. (1991). Exceptional Children, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  25. Hartlage, L. C., and Telzrow, C. F. (1983). The neuropsychological basis of educational intervention. J. Learn. Disabil. 1(5): 521–528.Google Scholar
  26. Huebner, E. S., and Gilman, R. (2003). Toward a focus on positive psychology in school psychology. Sch. Psychol. Q. 18(2): 99–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hess, R. S., and D'Amato, R. C. (1998). Assessment of memory, learning, and special aptitudes. In Reynolds, C. R. (Ed.), Volume 3: Assessment. In: Bellack, A. S. and Hersen, M. (edu.), Comprehensive Clinical Psychology Encyclopedia (pp. 239–265). Pergamon-Elsevier Science, Oxford, England.Google Scholar
  28. Hynd, G. W., and Willis, W. G. (1988). Pediatric Neuropsychology, Grune & Stratton, Florida.Google Scholar
  29. Kavale, K. (1990). Effectiveness of special education. In: Gutkin, R. B., and Reynolds, C. R. (eds.), The Handbook of School Psychology, Wiley, New York, pp. 868–898.Google Scholar
  30. Kavale, K. A., Forness, S. R., and Bender, M. (1987). Handbook of Learning Disabilities, College-Hill Press, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  31. Leu, P. W., and D'Amato, R. C. (1994). Right Child, Wrong Teacher: Using an Ecological Assessment for Intervention. Paper presented at the 26th annual meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  32. Long, C. J., and Ross, L. K. (1992). Handbook of Head Trauma: Acute Care to Recovery, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Luria, A. R. (1973). The Working Brain, Penguin Books, Harmonds-Worth.Google Scholar
  34. MacMann, G. M., and Barnett, D. W. (1999). Diagnostic decision making in school psychology: Understanding and coping with uncertainty. In: Reynolds, C. R., and Gutkin, T. B. (eds.), The Handbook of School Psychology, 3rd edn., Wiley, New York, pp. 519–548.Google Scholar
  35. Martens, B. K. (1992). The difference between a good theory and a good treatment is a matter of degree. Sch. Psychol. Q. 1: 104–107.Google Scholar
  36. Meyers, J. (2002). Reflections on the futures conference from the perspective of a school psychology educator. Retrieved June 5, 2004, from http://www.indiana.edu/futures~/reflection_meyer.ppt.
  37. Nell, V., and Boer, C. (1988). Co-constructing a workable reality: The use of clinical neuropsychology. Fam. Syst. Med. 6(1): 40–50.Google Scholar
  38. Parks, R. W., Levine, D. S., Long, D. L. (1998). Fundamentals of Neural Network Modeling: Neuropsychology and Cognitive Neuroscience, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  39. Phares, E. J. (1992). Clinical Psychology: Concepts, Methods, and Profession, 4th edn., Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA.Google Scholar
  40. Phelps, L., Brown, R. T., and Power, T. J. (2002). Pediatric Psychopharmacology: Combining Medical and Psychosocial Interventions, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  41. Puente, A. E., and McCaffrey, R. J., III (eds.). (1992). Handbook of Neuropsychological Assessment: A Biopsychosocial Perspective, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  42. Reynolds, C. R., and Fletcher-Janzen, E. (1997). The Handbook of Clinical Child Neuropsychology, 2nd edn., Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  43. Reynolds, C. R., Gutkin, T. B., Elliot, S. N., and Witt, J. C. (1984). School Psychology: Essentials of Theory and Practice, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  44. Riccio, C. A., Hynd, G. W., and Cohen, M. J. (1993). Neuropsychology in the schools: Does it belong? Sch. Psychol. Int. 14: 291–315.Google Scholar
  45. Rothlisberg, B. A., D'Amato, R. C., and Palencia, B. N. (2003). Assessment of children for intervention planning following traumatic brain injury. In: Reynolds, C. R., and Kamphaus, R. W. (eds.), Handbook of Psychological and Educational Assessment of Children: Personality, Behavior and Content, 2nd edn., Guilford, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Rourke, B. P. (eds.). (1985). Neuropsychology of Learning Disorders: Essential of Subtype Analysis, Guilford, New York.Google Scholar
  47. Safran, S. P., Safran, J. S., and Rich, C. E. (1991). Special education classification and program success: Is there a relationship? Psychol. Sch. 24: 340–345.Google Scholar
  48. Sattler, J. M. (2002). Assessment of Children: Behavioral and Clinical Applications, 4th edn., J. M. Sattler, Publisher, Inc., San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  49. Sattler, J. M., and D'Amato, R. C. (2002). Brain injuries: Theory and rehabilitation programs. In: Sattler, J. M. (eds.), Assessment of Children, 4th edn., J. M. Sattler, Publisher, Inc., San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  50. Shaywitz, W. S. (2003). Overcoming Dyslexia: A New and Complete Science-Based Program for Reading Problems at any Level, Knopf; Random House, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  51. Sheridan, S. M., and D'Amato, R. C. (2003). Partnering to chart our futures: School Psychology Review and School Psychology Quarterly combined issue on the multisite conference on the future of school psychology. Sch. Psychol. Q. 18(4): 352–357.Google Scholar
  52. Sheridan, S. M., and Gutkin, T. B. (2000). The ecology of school psychology: Examining and changing our paradigm for the 21st Century. Sch. Psychol. Rev. 29(4): 485–501.Google Scholar
  53. Stoner, G., and Green, S. K. (1992). Reconsidering the scientist–practitioner model for school psychology practice. Sch. Psychol. Rev. 2(l): 155–166.Google Scholar
  54. Traughber, M. C., and D'Amato, R. C. (2005). Integrating evidence-based neuropsychological services into school settings: Issues and challenges for the future. In: D'Amato, R. C., Fletcher-Janzen, E., and Reynolds, C. R. (eds.), The Handbook of School Neuropsychology (pp. 827–857). New York, Wiley.Google Scholar
  55. U.S. Department of Education. (2000). 22nd Annual report to Congress on the implementation of the individuals with disabilities education act. Retrieved December 21, 2001, from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/Products/OSEP2000AnlRpt/.
  56. Vaughn, S., and Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 18(3): 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Work, L. P., and Hee-Sook, C. (2005). Developing classroom and group intervention programs based on neuropsychological principles. In: D'Amato, R. C., Fletcher-Janzen, E., and Reynolds, C. R. (eds.), The Handbook of School Neuropsychology, Wiley, New York, pp. 663–683.Google Scholar
  58. Ysseldyke, J. E. (1987). Classification of handicapped students. In: Wang, M. C., Reynolds, M., and Walberg, H. J. (eds.), Handbook of Special Education: Research & Practice, vol. 1, Pergamon, New York, pp. 253–271.Google Scholar
  59. Ysseldyke, J. E., Christenson, S. L., Thurlow, M. L., and Bakewell, D. (1989). Are different kinds of instructional tasks used by different categories of students in different settings? Sch. Psychol. Rev. 18: 98–111.Google Scholar
  60. Ysseldyke, J. E., Reynolds, M. C., and Weinberg, R. A. (1984). School Psychology: A Blueprint for Training and Practice. National School Psychology In-Service Training Network, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rik Carl D'Amato
    • 1
    • 3
  • Franci Crepeau-Hobson
    • 1
  • Leesa V. Huang
    • 2
  • Molly Geil
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Northern ColoradoGreeley
  2. 2.California State UniversityChico
  3. 3.Center for Collaborative for Research in Education, Neuropsychology Laboratory, College of Education and Behavioural Science, Office of the DeanUniversity of Northern ColoradoGreeley

Personalised recommendations