Implementation and Results of Intraoperative Methadone in Pediatric Cardiac Surgery: Early Experiences and Outcomes.

Is it appropriate and acceptable for a given child, with a given profile of skills and achievement, to be considered to have a specific learning difficulty (SpLD) if they attend School A rather than School B? While it has long been known that schools as social institutions exert differential effects upon children’s learning (; ), the question posed here is unconcerned with the possible reasons for actual differences between a child’s educational development should they have attended School A rather than School B; neither does it address where one stands in relation to debates over the appropriateness of medical versus social models of disability (; ). Rather, it simply asks whether an individual presenting with a particular level of academic achievement would, in one school, be deemed to have an SpLD but be considered not to have such a need in another. While there is likely to be variation of judgment and procedures between individual schools (; ), any systemic patterns in determining that a given child has, or does not have, a SpLD, reflecting school composition differences of race, gender, religion or social class, would surely be inappropriate. Not only does the SpLD label often provide additional accommodations and resources and, perhaps, more teacher understanding and encouragement (), it also often carries a higher status than alternative labels that highlight intellectual or behavioral difficulties (, ). The purpose of this study, therefore, is to investigate whether and how school membership, student-level academic achievement, demographic characteristics, and school-level composition collectively influence variations in the identification of SpLD among upper elementary students in England. Following the seminal work of Kirk in the United States (1963), in relation to the category of Learning Disability (LD), the notion of a SpLD being demonstrated by unexpected underachievement was codified in U.S. federal law (U.S. Public Law 115-391) in 2018. In recent years, more countries have adopted this conception (; ). While the definition remains highly contested (), it delineates the core characteristics of LD/SpLD, which concern unexpected and persistent difficulties in reading, writing, spelling, or mathematical calculation, not principally attributable to sensory, motor, cognitive, emotional, cultural, or economic factors.