National Institute for Literacy (NIFL) - Learning Disabilities Facts

	Learning Disabilities and Literacy
	Learning Disabilities and Educational Attainment
	Learning Disabilities and Employment Status and Earnings
	Parental & Public Awareness in Understanding Learning Disabilities

Return to Facts Overview
References

Definition
For an explanation of learning disabilities, visit Definitions of LD Explained at the Literacy and Learning Disabilities Special Collection. (http://ldlink.coe.utk.edu/definitions.html)

Numbers
In the National Adult Literacy Survey, 1992, 3% of adults age 16 and over reported having a learning disability.
(Kirsch, p43, Table 1.8)

The growth in the number of children with disabilities exceeded the growth in both the resident population and the school enrollment. For the period 1989-90 to 1998-99, growth in the U.S. resident population of children, ages 6-21, was 9.7%, and school enrollment grew 14.1%.
(U.S. Department of Education, pII-19)

In 1998-99, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) served 2,817,148 students (ages 6-21) with specific learning disabilities, compared to 2,062,076 students in 1989-90. This represents a 36.6% increase.
(U.S. Department of Education, pII-20, Table II-2)

In 1998-99, of all the students served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act IDEA, 50.8% had specific learning disabilities, compared to 48.5% in 1989-90.
(U.S. Department of Education, pII-21, Table II-3)

In 1998-99, the racial/ethnic breakdown of students with learning disabilities was:

1.4% American Indian;
1.4% Asian/Pacific Islander;
18.3% Black (non-Hispanic);
15.8% Hispanic; and
63.0% White (non-Hispanic).
(U.S. Department of Education, pII-26, Table II-5)

The National Adult Literacy Survey, 1992, found that the average prose literacy proficiency level of the general population was 272 (Level 2). The average prose literacy level of adults with self-reported learning disabilities was 207 (Level 1).

58% of adults with self-reported learning disabilities were in prose Level 1;
22% in Level 2;
14% in Level 3;
4% in Level 4; and
1% in Level 5.
(Kirsch, p44, Figure 1.10)

In 1997-98, 30.5% of students, age 17 or older, with specific learning disabilities graduated with a standard diploma.
(U.S. Department of Education, pIV-17, Table IV-4)

An analysis of data from the National Adult Literacy Survey, 1992, found the following for adults with self-reported learning disabilities, ages 25-64:

44.9% for women with self-reported learning disabilities, compared to 16.5% of women without self-reported learning disabilities; and
57.6% for men with self-reported learning disabilities, compared to 15.3% of men without self-reported learning disabilities.
(Vogel, p55, Figure 3.6)

27.1% completed 0-8 years of schooling, compared to 4.2% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities;
24.9% completed 9-12 years, compared to 11.6% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities;
17.1% obtained a high school diploma or GED, compared to 34.4% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities;
12.2% completed some college, compared to 22.3% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities; and
8.7% had a college degree, compared to 27.4% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities.
(Vogel, p52, Figure 3.2)

22.6% completed 0-8 years of schooling, compared to 3.9% of women without self-reported learning disabilities;
22.3% completed 9-12 years, compared to 12.5% of women without self-reported learning disabilities;
29.0% obtained a high school diploma or GED, compared to 35.4% of women without self-reported learning disabilities;
13.6% completed some college, compared to 22.9% of women without self-reported learning disabilities; and
12.5% had a college degree, compared to 25.3% of the population without self-reported learning disabilities.

30.7% completed 0-8 years of schooling, compared to 4.6% of men without self-reported learning disabilities;
26.9% completed 9-12 years, compared to 10.7% of men without self-reported learning disabilities;
25.6% obtained a high school diploma or GED, compared to 33.4% of men without self-reported learning disabilities; and
11.1% completed some college, compared to 21.9% of men without self-reported learning disabilities.
(Vogel, p53, Figure 3.3 and 3.4)

A study that examined the postsecondary education status of two cohorts of high school graduates, with and without learning disabilities, found that in 1995:

48.8% of youth with learning disabilities had never attended a postsecondary school, compared to 20.1% of those without learning disabilities.
(Murray, p123, Table 2)

56.0% had not graduated, compared to 32.5% of youth without learning disabilities;
29.8% had graduated from business, vocational, or other training, compared to 11.7% of youth without learning disabilities;
11.9% had graduated from a community college, compared to 10.4% of youth without learning disabilities; and
2.4% had graduated from a four-year college, compared to 45.5% of youth without learning disabilities.
(Murray, p123, Table 3)

36.6% of youth with learning disabilities had never attended a postsecondary school, compared to 9.3% of the youth without learning disabilities.
(Murray, p123, Table 2)

80.5% had not graduated, compared to 56.5% of the population without learning disabilities;
15.9% had graduated from business, vocational, or other training, compared to 7.5% of youth without learning disabilities;
2.4% had graduated from a community college, compared to 11.8% of youth without learning disabilities; and
1.2% had graduated from a four-year college, compared to 24.2% of youth without learning disabilities.
(Murray, p123, Table 3)

An analysis of data from the National Adult Literacy Survey, 1992, found the following for adults with self-reported learning disabilities, age 16 and over:

39% were employed full-time, compared to 51% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities;
13% were employed part-time, compared to 13% of adults with self-reported learning disabilities;
16% were unemployed, compared to 6% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities; and
32% were out of the labor force, compared to 29% without self-reported learning disabilities.
(Reder, p378, Figure 18.1)

Adults with self-reported learning disabilities worked an average of 24.7 weeks during the year preceding the interview, compared to 31.5 weeks for the population without self-reported learning disabilities.
(Reder, p381, Table18.3)

28% were laborers, compared to 18% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities;
45% were in service occupations, compared to 28% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities;
14% were in sales occupations, compared to 28% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities; and
13% were in professional, technical, and managerial occupations, compared to 26% of adults without self-reported learning disabilities.
(Reder, p382, Figure 18.2)

The mean annual salary of adults with self-reported learning disabilities was $14,958, compared to $23,131 for adults without self-reported learning disabilities.
(Reder, p386, Table 18.8)

A study that examined the status of two cohorts of high school graduates, with and without learning disabilities, found that in 1995:

74% of youth with learning disabilities were employed, compared to 88% of the graduates without learning disabilities;
(Edgar, p24)
20% were not in school and not working, compared to 9% of the graduates without learning disabilities.
(Edgar, p34)

11% were employed part-time, compared to 14% of graduates without learning disabilities;
84% were employed full-time, compared to 84% of graduates without learning disabilities.
(Data are missing for 5% of learning disabled and 2% of non learning disabled.)
(Edgar, p30)

70% of youth with learning disabilities were employed, compared to 79% of the graduates without learning disabilities;
(Edgar, p71)
19% were not in school and not working, compared to 4% of the graduates without learning disabilities.
(Edgar, p81)

33% were employed part-time, compared to 58% of graduates without learning disabilities;
65% were employed full-time, compared to 39% of graduates without learning disabilities.
(Data are missing for 2% of learning disabled and 3% of non learning disabled.)
(Edgar, p77)

Public understanding of learning disabilities has improved. A 1999 study found that, compared to results from an earlier study, incorrect associations with learning disabilities had decreased:

66% associated learning disabilities with Attention Deficit Disorder, compared to 81% in 1995;
65% associated learning disabilities with mental retardation, compared to 85% in 1995;
62% associated learning disabilities with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), compared to 79% in 1995;
59% associated learning disabilities with emotional disorders, compared to 77% in 1995;
54% associated learning disabilities with substance abuse on the part of parents, compared to 73% in 1995;
45% associated learning disabilities with deafness, compared to 66% in 1995; and
38% associated learning disabilities with blindness, compared to 60% in 1995.
(Roper Starch Worldwide, Inc., p2)

More people today than in 1995 correctly identified possible indicators of learning disabilities.

85% identified problems in school requiring special assistance/special education classes, compared to 76% in 1995;
84% identified reversing numbers and letters when you try to read them, compared to 77% in 1995;
82% identified trouble learning how to read, compared to 78% in 1995;
81% identified trouble organizing information, compared to 69% in 1995;
79% identified trouble learning how to write, compared to 71% in 1995;
79% identified trouble concentrating on schoolwork, compared to 64% in 1995;
75% identified above average intelligence, but having trouble learning, compared to 57% in 1995; and
72% identified slow learners, compared to 68% in 1995.
(Roper Starch Worldwide, Inc., p4)

In 1999, however, more people (69%) incorrectly associated hyperactivity with learning disabilities, compared to 1995 (58%), and fewer people (68%) correctly associated dyslexia with learning disabilities, compared to 1995 (81%).
(Roper Starch Worldwide, Inc., p8)