- 2,99 €
Description de l’éditeur
Children diagnosed with behavioral disorders (BD) often have academic difficulties (Frick, et al., 1991; Lane, Carter, Pierson, & Glaeser, 2006; Nelson, Benner, Lane, & Smith, 2004; Reid, Gonzalez, Nordness, Trout, & Epstein, 2004). Up to 81% of students with BD achieve below grade level (Ruhl & Berlinghoff, 1992). Although research on the academic performance of students diagnosed with BD is in short supply, studies of the more general population of individuals with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD), who display large academic deficits (Lane et al., 2006; Nelson et al., 2004), make the determination of trends possible. Reid et al., 2004 reported that students with EBD show considerably lower achievement than their typically developing age peers in both reading and writing (effect sizes -0.61 and -0.46). Behavioral disorders comprise patterns described by diagnoses of conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and behavioral disorder not otherwise specified (American Psychiatric Association, 1994; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; DSM-IV). A lack of consensus exists regarding the cause of academic difficulties in this population (Hinshaw, 1992; Lane, 2004). The impulsivity, lack of self-control, and aggressiveness of children with BD may hinder their ability to maintain themselves in the classroom, so that behavior problems may cause academic difficulties. Alternatively, academic difficulties may lead to the externalization of frustration and inappropriate behavior. Another possibility is that no systematic causal relationship exists in either direction between behavior difficulties and academic underachievement. Language skills may play a causal role; by using structural equation modeling, Nelson, Benner, Stern, & Stage (2006) found that language ability but not behavioral functioning was strongly predictive of academic ability in an EBD sample. Despite a lack of agreement about causation, the relationship between BD and academic underachievement is not in dispute (Foley & Epstein, 1992; Hinshaw; Trout, Nordness, Pierce, & Epstein, 2003; Vaughn, Hogan, Lancelotta, Shapiro, & Walker, 1992).