Promoting Science in Specific Learning Disabilities: Three Kinds of Challenges

Abstract

The field of specific learning disabilities (SLDs) has faced three kinds of challenges. Constitutional challenges arise from classification and definitional complexities, identification issues, comorbidity, and ontological debates. Internal challenges include the inherent difficulties of scientific thinking that compete with intuitionism and confirmation bias, the lack of randomized controlled trials to evaluate interventions, the low rate of replication studies, publication bias, and the gap between research on evidence-based practices and implementation. External challenges include philosophical movements in academia, primarily social constructionism and cognitive relativism. They also encompass broader social trends such as neurological reductionism, educational fads, and political conformism. This article specifically focuses on the influence of cognitive relativism in the field of SLDs. Despite these challenges, the field has made incremental progress by committing itself to scientific inquiry. The fundamental purpose of research is truth-seeking, aiming to expand the knowledge base on how best to support students with SLDs. The development of cognitive theories of dyslexia illustrates the refining nature of scientific inquiry as it moves closer to the truth. Upholding rigorous scientific standards is crucial for the future development of the field, providing effective support and consistently enhancing educational outcomes for students with SLDs..