Comparing the Self-Concept of

Students With and Without

Learning Disabilities
Amy M. Gans, Maureen C. Kenny, and Dave L. Ghany

This

study compared self-concept in 50 middle school children with learning disabilities (LD) and 70 of their peers without LD. The stu-

dents, primarily Hispanic, completed the Piers-Harris Childrens Self-Concept Scale, and each obtained

a score in six subdomains. Differfound between the groups on the Intellectual and School Status and Behavior subscales, with students without LD scoring
higher on both scales. There was no difference between groups on global self-concept. The limitations of this study are identified, and
directions for future research are provided.
ences were

,stimates claim that between 2%

and 10% of the population are
affected by learning disabilities
American
(LD;
Psychiatric Association, 1994; Silver, 1991). In addition to
concerns over the academic struggles
of these children, research has also investigated their emotional difficulties.
Learning disabilities have been found
to affect mental health, self-esteem, and
the social activities of children (Johnson, 1995). Children with LD are often
described as depressed or withdrawn

(Wright-Strawderman & Watson, 1992)

and lacking social skills (Vaughn,
Zaragoza, Hogan, & Walker, 1993).
Children who have experienced humiliation, rejection, and failure, as
many children with LD have, generally
have feelings of low self-worth and
vulnerability (Hughes & Baker, 1990).
Researchers interest in the self-concept
of children with LD has increased
given the concern that their academic
failure may affect their global selfconcept (Cooley & Ayres, 1988). However, the research literature on selfconcept in children with LD shows
mixed findings and is often contradic-

& MacMillan, 1997).

A large body of research has described the academic self-perceptions
of children with LD. Many studies
have maintained that despite the LD
label, these children retain a positive
self-concept about their academic skills.
Meltzer, Roditi, Houser, and Perlman
(1998) used the Student Self-Report System in a study with fourth- through
ninth-grade students and found that
students with LD considered them-

tory (Gresham

selves

as

in the

areas

using appropriate strategies

of reading, writing, spelling, math, and organization and as
being competent in those domains.
They also rated their academic performance and organization as average to
above average. Bear and Minke (1996),
using the Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPP-C) with third-grade students,
found that children with LD did not
perceive themselves to be any less
competent in their schoolwork or less
intelligent than their peers.
However, other research has found
that children with LD have lower selfconcept, particularly in regard to their
academic achievement. Harter, White-

sell, and Junkin (1998), using the SelfPerception Profile for Adolescents, found
that 9th- through 12th-grade students
with LD felt worse about their general
intellectual ability than did typically
achieving students. In related research,
Boetsch, Green, and Pennington (1996)
conducted a series of four studies that
used a number of measures (including
an adaptive version of the Adult SelfPerception Profile and the Self-Perception
Profile for Learning Disabled Students).
They reported that children ages 7 to
18 with developmental dyslexia had
lower global self-worth and lower perceived competence in scholastic domains than typically achieving students. Renick and Harter (1989) found
that students with LD who compared
their academic competence with that
of typically achieving students tended
to have lower perceived competence
than if they compared themselves to
other students with LD. Bear, Clever,
and Proctor (1991), using the Harter
Self Perception Profile for Children with
third graders, found that they perceived
their scholastic competence as lower
than that of their typically achieving

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

287

288

peers. These feelings of lowered selfconcept may also affect childrens socialization, as evidenced by Valas (1999)
results. Using a modified version of
the Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction
Questionnaire, a modified version of the
Self-Description Questionnaire II, and a
sociometric question referring to a
hypothetical situation with fourth-,
seventh-, and ninth-grade students,
Valas (1999) found that compared to
students without LD, students with LD
were less accepted by their peers, had
lower self-esteem, and felt more lonely.
Many studies have maintained that
despite the lower self-concept in children with LD in the intellectual domain, the children maintain positive
feelings of global self-worth. Bear and
Minke (1996) and Bear et al. (1991)
found no differences in global selfworth between children with LD and
their peers without LD. Rothman and
Cosden (1995) used the Heymans SelfPerception of a Learning Disability Scale
with third- through sixth-grade children with LD and found that children
with less negative perceptions of their

self-concept (Hagborg,

LD

Buswell

havioral competence, and more social

acceptance than students with LD who
had more negative perceptions of their
LD. However, adequate global selfconcept among children with LD has
not been a consistent finding by researchers (Chapman, 1988). Harter et al.
(1998) found that typically achieving
students reported more positive global self-worth and positive evaluations
of their self-worth than did students
with LD.
Researchers have offered some explanations for why many children
with LD do maintain positive selfperceptions and feelings of self-worth
in spite of their academic difficulties.
Factors such as perceived social support and favorable feedback from oth-

analysis involving thousands of participants and concluded that boys scored

higher on standard measures of global
self-esteem than girls, but the difference was small. Harter et al. (1998) reported that girls displayed much lower
perceptions of their physical appearance than did boys. Contrary to these
findings, Knox, Funk, Elliot, and Bush
(1998) found no significant difference
between male and female high school
general education students using the
Harter Self-Perception Scale for Adolescents Global Self-Worth scale. Despite
these findings, the literature lacks
studies examining the relationship between gender and self-concept in children with LD. One reason for the
dearth of literature in this area may be
the overrepresentation of boys in samples of children with LD (Meltzer et al.,

perceived a more positive global

self-concept, more intellectual and be-

ers, especially teachers, parents, friends,

and peers (Bear et al., 1991; Forman,

1988; Kloomok & Cosden, 1994; Rothman &

Cosden, 1995), and perceived
competence in domains other than academics

seem

to aid in

elevating

their

1996; Harter,
research
has shown a
Moreover,
1987).

discrepancy

between childrens self-

assessments and teachers

judgments

(Meltzer et al.,1998). Students with LD

frequently perceive themselves as capable and effective and often rate themselves as academically stronger than
their teachers judge them to be (Meltzer et al., 1998). The comparison group
used by students with LD for selfevaluation may also affect their individual self-concept. Renick and Harter
(1989) found that children with LD who
compared themselves to others with
LD felt better about their performance
than children with LD who compared
themselves to their peers without LD.
Beltempo and Achille (1990) found that
when children with LD were placed in
a combination of partial special education settings and general education
classrooms, they reported higher selfesteem than children with LD in other

settings.
Research on gender differences in
self-concept has also yielded conflicting data. Kling, Hyde, Showers, and

(1999) conducted

meta-

1998).
Another area in which literature is
lacking is the use of ethnically diverse
samples of children with LD. Despite
trends in the U.S. census of the dispro-

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

portionate growth
most studies make

of ethnic groups,
mention of eth-

no

nic differences or employ only European American samples. Specifically,

the European American population in

the United States has grown at the relatively small rate of 5.9%, whereas the
Hispanic population has grown 57.9%
and the Asian American population
has grown 48.3% (U.S. Census Bureau,
2000). Furthermore, Hispanic children
represent a large number of referrals
for special education (Tansy & Miller,
1997). The Office of Special Education
reported that 8% of the students in
special education programs are Hispanic, and these numbers can be
higher in areas where there is a large
Hispanic population, such as Florida
(15%; Florida Department of Education, 2002; Office of Special Education

Programs, 2000). However, recent

studies have suggested that Hispanic
students are not overrepresented in exceptional education categories at the
national level and may in fact be underrepresented relative to their presence in the population (MacMillan &
Reschly, 1998; U.S. Department of Ed-

ucation, 1997).
The existing studies that contained
diverse participants have not made
comparisons across such groups (e.g.,
Bear & Minke, 1996; Harter et al., 1998;
Knox et al., 1998). In the available literature, findings are scarce. For example,
Martinez and Dukes (1997), using items
from the Multigroup Ethnic Identity
measure, the Self-Concept of Academic
Ability scale, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem
scale, and the Purpose in Life scale with
high school students, found lower
scores on self-esteem in Hispanics,
Asian Americans, and Native Americans

compared to European Americans,

African Americans, and individuals of

mixed ethnicity. Rothman and Cosden
(1995) examined differences between
ethnic groups (European Americans
and Hispanics) and found no differences on their self-perception of LD.
Clearly, the relationship between the
ethnicity of students with LD and their
self-concept needs to be evaluated further (e.g., Boetsch et al., 1996; Meltzer

289

et al.,1998; Renick &

Harter, 1989; Valas,

1999).

ganizing function, and plays a key role

States). The school

in motivation (Piers, 1994). The instrument also contains both global and

on

This study sought to examine the

self-concept of children with LD from specific components of self-concept.
Piers (1994) aforementioned definiprimarily Hispanic backgrounds. The
Piers-Harris Childrens Self-Concept Scale tion of global self-concept reflects how
(PHCSCS) was chosen for this study an individual feels about him- or herbecause of its theoretical understanding of self-concept as well as its ease of
administration and target population.
Furthermore, the PHCSCS adequacy
and usefulness as a research instrument has been widely documented
(Impara & Murphy, 1994). We believe
the yes and no format of the questions
on the PHCSCS would be easier for
children to

those with

respond to (especially for

LD) as compared to other

self as
count

total person and takes into accharacteristic interactions with

a

others, general and specific abilities,

and

selfrefers
to
&dquo;an
individuals
selfconcept
in
functionareas
of
appraisal specific
ing&dquo; (Piers, 1994, p. 43). The PHCSCS
includes six cluster scales: Behavior,
Intellectual and School Status, Physical

physical self-image. Specific

Appearance

and

Attributes, Anxiety,

Popularity, and Happiness and Satisfaction. These were developed from a

factor analysis based on the notion that
self-concept is not a unitary dimension. Children are not characterized

(e.g., the Harter Self-Perception

Profile). Self-concept as assessed by this
instrument was defined by Piers (1994)
as &dquo;a relatively stable set of selfattitudes, reflecting both a description solely by global self-concept; rather,
and an evaluation of ones own be- they view themselves quite differently
havior and attributes&dquo; (p. 1). This in- across different areas. Piers (1994)
strument uses childrens conscious
stated, &dquo;From a global perspective,
self-perceptions gained through self- self-concept refers to a persons selfmeasures

report, rather than attempting to conjecture how they feel about themselves

perceptions in relation to important aspects of life&dquo; (p. 43).

from their observable actions or the attributions of others.

Piers (1994) contended that the terms
self-esteem and self-regard are interchangeable with the self-concept measured by this scale. This scale was
constructed based on the belief that
individuals develop a view of themselves that remains consistent throughout development. It is also based on
the assumption that children will reveal aspects of their underlying selfimage by responding to the declarative
statements contained in the instrument
(Piers, 1994). This instrument uses selfreport because it is believed to be the
best way for individuals to express their
experiences of self, which are viewed
as phenomenological. This measure
also relies on other theoretical understandings of childrens self-concept,
namely that self-concept has a selfevaluation and self-descriptive component, is experienced and expressed by
the self differently at various stages of

This study compares children with

LD and their peers without LD on selfconcept and contributes to the litera-

development,

serves an

important

or-

by using a primarily Hispanic

sample and by examining gender differences. We hypothesized that chilture

dren with LD would score lower on the

Intellectual and School Status scale
than their peers without LD as measured by the Piers-Harris Childrens SelfConcept Scale. We also hypothesized
that children with LD would not differ
in their global self-concept from children in general education classes. Furthermore, we predicted that girls with
LD would have lower self-concept
than boys with LD.

Method

Participants
One hundred twenty-four participants
were selected from a large middle
school in a public school district in the
Southeast (fourth largest in the United

was selected based

the large number of students who
were enrolled in exceptional student
education (ESE). In this school, special
education teachers identified children
in Grades 6, 7, and 8 who were classified as having LD. All students who
were so labeled had been evaluated
prior to placement. The evaluation process in this school district consisted of
a referral for assessment
including a viand
sion, hearing,
speech screening
and a review of social, psychological,
medical, and achievement data in the
students cumulative record. The assessment was conducted by a profes-

sional

(e.g.,

school

psychologist)

who

administered intellectual and achievement tests individually to each student. For all the students with LD in
this study, there was evidence that they
exhibited a discrepancy of 1.5 SD or
more between their intellectual standard score and their achievement standard score in math, reading, or written
expression. A multidisciplinary evaluation team met and made recommendations for class placement using an
Individualized Education Program (IEP)
that specified long- and short-term
goals for each student. Students were
then enrolled in various exceptionality
classes, where they received instruction from a certified special education
teacher. In class, students were provided with small-group and individualized instruction that was geared toward meeting their needs as specified
on their IEP. The students with LD were
in special education classes throughout the day. They were primarily in
self-contained classrooms, with the exception of such classes as physical education and art, when they were
placed in general education courses.
The mean reading level of these students, as assessed by the GatesMacGinities Reading Tests (MacGinitie,
MacGinitie, Maria, & Dryer, 2000) was
4.0 (fourth-grade level), whereas their
mean math level, as assessed by the
Shaw-Hiehle Individualized Computational Skills Program (Shaw & Hiehle,
1972) was 3.5 (third year, fifth month).
Reading and math level scores for the

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

290

students without LD

tained,

were

not ob-

seventh-, and eighth-grade classes

to be at

the middle school. The Spanish version

of the consent form was created by a
process of translation and independent
back-translation of the English version.
Consent forms were available in both
languages because many parents were
Spanish speaking. However, all students were fluent in English; thus, the
test was administered only in this language. On the day of the test administration, the children who returned
signed consent forms were brought to
a separate classroom. The children
were given verbal instructions on how
to complete the Piers-Harris Childrens
Self-Concept Scale (Piers,1994). The measure was group-administered in a classroom by a member of the research
team, who read the items aloud and
circulated in the classroom observing
the childrens understanding of the
instrument and providing assistance
when necessary. Demographic variables such as age, gender, and ethnicity were obtained as well. When the
children had completed the measure

as they were expected

grade level and thus were not assessed.

There was a total of 50 children with

LD (29 boys, 21 girls ) and 74 children
without LD (33 boys, 41 girls). Fortyone percent of the children were in
sixth grade, 40% in seventh grade, and
the remaining 20% of the children were
in eighth grade. The children in Grades
7 and 8 were pooled for statistical purposes, given the low number of children with LD in the eighth grade. The
children ranged in age from 11 to 14
(M = 12.52, SD = .82). The participants
were self-identified as Hispanic (84%)
or non-Hispanic (16%). The nonHispanic participants included European Americans and African Americans ; they were grouped together for
statistical purposes. Fifty-two percent
of the children came from intact
homes, whereas 40% had parents who
were divorced. The remaining children
were either living with relatives or in a
single-parent (nondivorced) home. Table 1 provides the demographic characteristics for each group.

(approximately

20 minutes

at

later), they

for children in the fourth- to

grade with at least a thirdgrade reading level. Children complete
this 80-item scale by responding yes or
no to the test statements. The instrument can be individually or groupadministered and is an excellent
screening tool that can be used with an
entire classroom (Piers, 1994). It has six
subdomains:

priate

twelfth

1.

Physical Appearance and Attributes (e.g., &dquo;My looks bother me,&dquo;

&dquo;I have a pleasant face&dquo;);

2.

Anxiety (e.g., &dquo;I feel left out of

things,&dquo; &dquo;I am often afraid&dquo;);
Intellectual and School Status (e.g.,
&dquo;I am smart,&dquo; &dquo;I am an important

3.

member of my

class&dquo;);

4. Behavior (e.g., &dquo;I am well behaved

in school,&dquo; &dquo;I am obedient at

home&dquo;);
5.

6.

Happiness and Satisfaction (e.g.,

&dquo;I am cheerful,&dquo; &dquo;I am a good person&dquo;) ; and
Popularity (e.g., &dquo;I have many
friends,&dquo; &dquo;It is hard for me to make
friends&dquo;).

returned to their classroom.

Procedure
Informed consent forms along with a
letter (available both in Spanish and
in English) describing the study were
given to children in several sixth-,

Measure
The Piers-Harris Childrens Self-Concept
Scale was developed as a measure of
childrens self-concept and is appro-

TABLE 1

Demographic Characteristics of the Sample by Group

The internal consistency estimates for

the cluster scales and total scale range
from .74 to .90 (Piers, 1994). For the
present study, the internal consistency
(obtained using Cronbachs alpha) for
the cluster scales ranged from .66 to .79
and .84 for the total score, which exceeded the minimally acceptable standard of reliability (.50; Nunally, 1967).
The PHCSCS has been compared to
other measures of self-concept with
correlations ranging from .32 to .85,
with lower correlations among tests
using younger age groups, thus estab-

lishing

concurrent

validity. Overall,

the PHCSCS has received heavy clinical use and has been recommended
over other measures of self-concept

(Piers, 1994).
Results
Quantitative data were analyzed using
Note. LD =
= 50. bn

an

learning disabilities.
74. included European Americans and African Americans.

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

SPSS Version 10.0. The LD and non-LD

groups did not differ on age, F(l,

291

122) 0.3, p = .86, partial B2

der, X2(l, N = 124) 2.15, p
=

.13;

ethnicity, x2(1, N

or

p = .64,

.00; gen.14, 0
124) = .22,
=

TABLE 2
Means and Standard Errors of PHCSCS Subscales for Children
With and Without Learning Disabilities

(D = .04. The groups did differ

on grade, x2(1, N
124) = 5.73, p .02,
(D = .22. There were significantly more
children with LD in sixth grade, but
there were more students without LD
in seventh and eighth grade. A 2 x 2
x 2 MANOVA of ESE
by gender by
grade was performed on the PHCSCS
subscales and revealed a marginally
significant difference for ESE, F(6,
=

111)

1.94, p

.081, partial 112

.095,

and a

significant main effect of gender,

F(6, 111) 3.01, p = .009, partial B2 = .14.
A 2 x 2 x 2 ANOVA of ESE by gender
=

by grade on PHCSCS total score was

marginally significant for children

TABLE 3
Correlations of PHCSCS Subscales for Students with
Learning Disabilities (n = 50)

with LD and children without LD, F(l,

116) = 3.56, p .062, partial r~z .03.
A significant main effect of ESE on
the Intellectual and School Status subscale was found, F(1, 116)
6.13, p
.015, partial B2 = .05, with students
with LD (M = 11.36, SE .45) scoring
lower than students without LD (M =
12.85, SE .40). A significant main effect of ESE on the Behavior subscore,
=

.009, partial r~2

.057, revealed that students with LD
(M = 11.36, SE .44) scored lower than
students without LD (M 12.90, SE

F(1, 116) = 7.03, p

.38). None of the other subscales

yielded significant differences between
students with LD and their peers (see
Table 2). A main effect of Gender on Behavior, F(1,116) = 6.42, p = .013, partial
B2 = .052, was also found, with girls
(M = 12.86, SE .42) scoring significantly higher than boys (M 11.39,
SE
.41). To examine possible differ=

Note. PHCSCS = Piers-Harris Childrens

*p < .05, two-tailed. **p < .01, two-tailed.

Self-Concept Scale (Piers, 1994).

significantly higher for the students

with LD than for the students without
LD, z 3.08, p < .001. No other subscale
correlations were significantly different (see Table 5).
=

ethnicity, two additional

performed. A 2 x 2 x 2
MANOVA of ESE by ethnicity by grade
was performed on the six PHCSCS
ences

due to

analyses

subscales, and a 2 x 2

x 2 ANOVA was
the total score. No main effects
or interactions were found for ethnicity. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients of the subscales of the
PHCSCS are presented for the students
with LD (see Table 3) and the students
without LD (see Table 4). The correlation of Happiness with Behavior was

run on

Discussion

were

We evaluated sixth-, seventh- and

eighth-grade students, primarily Hispanic, in a large public school to determine if students who were labeled
with LD differed in their self-concept,
both global and specific, from their
typically achieving peers. Our primary

hypothesis

was

supported; namely,

children with LD scored significantly

lower on the PHCSCS subscale of Intellectual and School Status. This find-

I
.

ing

is consistent with
(e.g., Bear et al.,

search

previous

re-

1991; Harter
et al., 1998). Given that children with
LD are by definition somewhat cognitively challenged and experience academic difficulties, it is understandable
that they would unfavorably evaluate
their own intellectual ability (Chapman, 1988). Most students with LD
know that they have been labeled with
a disability and, thus, somehow differ
from their peers. Specifically, the children in this sample were in separate
classes with other ESE students, including students with mental retardation or emotional disturbances. Our
findings support the notion that children with LD have a negative selfconcept of their abilities and academic

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

292

TABLE 4
Correlations of PHCSCS Subscales for Students Without

Learning Disabilities (n

74)

TABLE 5

Differences in Correlations of PHCSCS Subscales Between

Note. LD

***p < .001,

learning disabilities;

PHCSCS

Piers-Harris Childrens

Groups

Self-Concept Scale (Piers, 1994).

two-tailed.

skills and one that is lower than that of

their peers. Our second hypothesisthat students with LD would not have
a lower global self-concept than their
peers-was also confirmed. Thus, the
students in the LD group did not
generalize their feelings of academic
weakness to more generalized selfconcept perceptions. This may be attributed to their perceived self-concept
in areas other than academic skills

(e.g., physical appearance, popularity).

A nonpredicted finding was that the

children with LD scored lower than
their peers without LD on the selfconcept subscale of Behavior. Thus,
children with LD either were more
willing to acknowled ge their behavioral difficulties or had more behavioral difficulties than the children
without LD. This confirms the findings
of previous research (e.g., Bear et al.,
1991; Vaughn et al., 1993) and might be
explained by the findings of many

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

studies that have found students with

LD to be frequently off task and distracted, which in turn may cause behavior problems. In a meta-analysis,
Bender and Smith (1990) found that
teachers ratings and classrooms observations revealed excessive off-task behavior, conduct disorders, and other
behavioral problems for children with
LD. They concluded that students with
LD may not understand how to do
their schoolwork and become frustrated and act out as a result (Bender &
Smith, 1990). The connection between
LD and behavioral disorders has been
evaluated, but a clear relationship has
not been established, although these
findings support the childrens perception that they have more behavioral
difficulties.
Contrary to our hypothesis, there was
no difference between boys with LD
and girls with LD on self-concept. This
preliminary finding suggests that gender may not play a role in the development of self-concept in children with
LD. There was no interaction effect between gender and ESE. One difference
that emerged was the girls higher
scores on the Behavior subscale. This
may be the result of the expectation
that girls should be better behaved
than boys. However, these findings
need to be replicated and explored
with a larger sample.
The present sample demonstrates a
facet of exceptional education-namely,
the presence of Hispanic children. The
school in which this study was conducted is not unlike other schools in
large urban districts. The ethnic composition is primarily Hispanic (72%),
followed by European American (12%)
and African American (3%). Although
no differences were found for selfesteem based on ethnicity, it is important to examine diverse exceptional education populations. Contrary to the
findings of Martinez and Dukes (1997),
the Hispanic students in this sample
did not report lower self-concept than
their non-Hispanic peers. This may be
due to their majority presence in this
school. As some schools acquire in-

creasingly larger Hispanic popula-

293

tions, there will be a need to study these

unique environments. Valles (1998) cautioned that as the number of children

from diverse backgrounds increases in
public schools, exceptional education
should be prepared to serve them.
The finding that students with LD
have a lower self-concept with regard
to their intellectual ability than their
peers without LD can provide direction for educators and parents. Some
researchers have suggested that educators be aware of the potential stigmatizing effects of the selection process
for special education on children with
LD (Stone, 1997; Valas, 1999). Individuals who work with children with LD
need to know how to prevent low selfconcept in children with LD and be
aware of the interventions available to
help them (Gurney, 1998). These findings can help educators develop programs and strategies to assist students
in special education to gain a sense
of success in their lives. Teachers and
parents can have a significant impact
on helping children build their selfconcept by providing positive feedback (Bear, Minke, Griffin, & Deemer,
1998). Untreated, low self-esteem can
lead to involvement with drugs and
school dropout and affect the general
well-being of children (Martinez &
Dukes, 1997; Vaughn, LaGreca, & Kuttler,1999). Johnson (1995) cautioned educators to examine a variety of areas in
children with LD, as problems in one
area (self-concept) can influence others
(e.g., social activities, leisure pursuits,
mental health). Intervention needs to
be early and efficient because interventions applied later in the childs school
years may not be effective due to the
students declining motivation and al-

ready impaired self-concept (Lyon,

1996).
Limitations and Directions for
Future Research
A variety of methodological issues
arise when conducting research on
self-concept in children with LD. Many
variables that may influence the results
are

difficult to control. Such variables

include the physical attractiveness of

the student (Gresham & McMillan,
1997), which may influence his or her
popularity and self-concept. Moreover,
socioeconomic status, family variables
(such as home environment), and the
childs relationship with teachers may
also contribute to the childs self-

concept (Hagborg, 1996; Wiest, Wong,

& Kreil, 1998). This sample contained a
of children with LD, without
subgrouping by types of learning disabilities (e.g., reading, writing, mathematics), which may affect self-concept

variety

(San Miguel, Forness,

Although

this

&

Kavale, 1996).

study sought to use a

diverse sample than previous research, it contained primarily Hispanic

children from only one school in an
more

urban area. Thus, the results are generalizable only to other schools with similar populations. There were no differences

in

self-concept by ethnicity,

so

Hispanic children were similar to their

European American and African American peers in this sample on the
PHCSCS. However, future research
should employ larger samples of African Americans and other ethnic groups.
The present study used childrens
self-report, believing this to provide an
accurate assessment of self-concept.
However, past research has revealed
a
discrepancy between the selfassessments of students with LD and
their teachers judgments, with students perceiving themselves to be
more capable than their teachers judge
them (Meltzer et al., 1998). Other research has confirmed a discrepancy between childrens self-perceptions and
those of their parents and teachers
(Stone, 1997). Future research may include both a teacher and a child rating
for comparison purposes and to further examine the relationship between
child self-report and teacher perceptions (Bear et al., 1998). Kling et al.
(1999) recommended the use of alternative types of self-concept measures,
such as those completed by observers.
Continued research in this area
could include studies illuminating the
conflicting data on self-concept and
classroom setting (e.g., Bear et al.,1991;

Gresham & MacMillan, 1997). It would

be helpful to compare students with
LD in self-contained settings to those
who are mainstreamed. Students rating of their self-concept may vary depending on whom they use as their reference group (i.e., LD or peers without
LD). Also, longitudinal research would
provide more information on the developmental changes that affect individuals and their self-concept, with
special attention to gender issues (Bear

al., 1998; DesRosiers, Vrsalovic,

Knauf, Vargas, & Busch-Rossnagel,
1999; Kling et al., 1999; Knox et al.,
1998; Valas,1999). Finally, research that
et

examines the process

through which
children with LD form judgments
about their self-concept would be beneficial (Harter et al., 1998).
ABOUT THE AUTHORS

is a school counselor at an
school
in
southern
Florida, working
elementary
with the students to meet their educational,
emotional, and social needs. She was previously
a special education teacher for 6 years. She is
working on getting her license as a mental
health counselor and plans to work in private
practice specializing in the treatment of children. Maureen C. Kenny, PhD, is an associate
professor in the Department of Educational and
Psychological Studies at Florida International
University. She teaches in the graduate program
in counselor education. She has published research in the area of child psychopathology and
maltreatment and cross-cultural issues in counseling. She also has a private practice specializing in the treatment of children and their families. Dave L. Ghany, MS, was a research
consultant at the University of Miami. His research interests include exceptional student education and HIVIAIDS in minority populations. Address: Amy Gans, 7750 Southwest 136
St., Miami, FL 33156.

Amy M. Gans, MS,

REFERENCES

American

Psychiatric Association. (1994).

Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (4th ed.) Washington, DC: Author.

Bear, G. G., Clever, A., &

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

Proctor, W. A.

(1991). Self-perceptions of nonhandi-

capped children and children with learn-

294

classes. The

Harter, S. (1987). The determinants and me-

Journal of Special Education, 24, 409-426.

Bear, G. G., & Minke, K. M. (1996). Positive

diational role of global self-worth in children. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Contemporary

topics in developmental psychology (pp. 219242). New York: Wiley.
Harter, S., Whitesell, N. R., & Junkin, L. J.
(1998). Similarities and differences in
domain-specific and global self-evaluations of learning-disabled, behaviorally
disordered, and normally achieving adolescents. American Education Research Journal, 35, 653-680.
Hughes, J. N., & Baker, D. B. (1990). Psychological development: Childrens selfesteem and coping. In S. N. Elliot & J. C.
Witt (Eds.), The clinical child interview
(pp. 53-61). New York: Guilford Press.

ing

disabilities in

integrated

bias in the maintenance of self-worth

among children with LD. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 23-32.

Bear, G. G., Minke, K. M., Griffin, S. M.,

& Deemer, S. A. (1998). Achievementrelated

of children with
learning disabilities and normal achievement : Group and developmental differences.

perceptions

Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31,

91-104.

Beltempo, J., & Achille, P. A. (1990). The effect of a special class placement on the
self-concept of children with learning disabilities. Child Study Journal, 20, 81-103.
Bender, W. N., & Smith, J. K. (1990). Classroom

behavior of children and adoleslearning disabilities. Journal of

cents with

Learning Disabilities, 23, 298-306.

Boetsch, E. A., Green, P. A., & Pennington,
B. F. (1996). Psychosocial correlates of dyslexia across the life span. Development and
Psychopathology, 8, 536-539.
Chapman, J. W. (1988). Learning disabled
childrens self-concepts. Review of Educational Research, 58, 347-371.
Cooley, E. J., & Ayres, J. (1988). Self-concept
and the mildly handicapped: The role of
social comparisons. The Journal of Special
Education, 17, 37-45.

DesRosiers, F., Vrsalovic, W. T., Knauf,

D. E., Vargas, M., & Busch-Rossnagel,
N. A. (1999). Assessing the multiple dimensions of the self-concept of young
children: A focus on Latinos. MerrillPalmer Quarterly, 45, 543-566.

Florida

Department of Education. (2002).

Profiles of Florida school districts 2000-2001.
Tallahassee: Author.

Forman, E. A. (1988). The effects of social

support and school placement on the selfconcept of LD students. Learning Disabil-

ity Quarterly, 11,

115-124.

Gresham, F. M., & MacMillan, D. L. (1997).

Social competence and affective characteristics of students with mild disabilities.
Review of Educational Research, 67, 377415.

Gurney, P. W. (1998). Self-esteem in children

with special educational needs. New York:
Routledge, Chapman & Hall.
Hagborg, W. J. (1996). Self-concept and
middle school students with learning disabilities : A comparison of scholastic competence subgroups. Learning Disability
Quarterly, 19, 117-126.

Impara, J. C., & Murphy, L. L. (Eds.). (1994).

Buros desk reference: Psychological assessment in the schools. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.

Johnson, D. (1995). An overview of learning

disabilities:

Psychoeducational perspecChild Neurology, 10 (Suppl.

tives. Journal of

1 ), S2-S8.
K. C., Hyde, J. S., Showers, C. J., &
Buswell, B. N. (1999). Gender differences

Kling,

in self-esteem: A

meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 470-500.

Kloomok, S., &

Cosden, M. (1994). Self-

learning disabilities : The relationship between global

self-concept, academic "discounting,"
nonacademic self-concept, and perceived
social support. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 140-153.
concept

in children with

Knox, M., Funk, J., Elliot, R., & Bush, G. E.

(1998). Adolescents possible selves and

their relationship to global self-esteem.
Sex Roles, 39
(1/2), 61-77.
Lyon, R. G. (1996). Learning disabilities. The
Future of Children, 6
(1), 54-76.
MacGinitie, W., MacGinitie, R., Maria, K., &
Dryer, L. (2000). Gates-MacGinities reading
tests (4th ed). Itasca, IL: Riverside.
MacMillan, D., & Reschly, D. (1998). Overrepresentation of minority students: The
case for greater specificity or reconsideration of the variables examined. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 15-24.
Martinez, R. O., & Dukes, R. L. (1997). The
effects of ethnic identity, ethnicity, and
gender on adolescent well-being. Journal
of Youth and Adolescence, 26, 503-516.
Meltzer, L., Roditi, B., Houser, R. F., Jr., &
Perlman, M. (1998). Perceptions of academic strategies and competence in students with learning disabilities. Journal of

Learning Disabilities, 31, 437-451.

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015

C. (1967). Psychometric
New York: McGraw-Hill.

Nunally, J.
Office of

Special

Education

theory.

Programs.

(2000). Twenty-second annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Piers, E. V. (1994). Revised manual for the

Piers-Harris Childrens
Los Angeles: Western
vices.

Self-Concept Scale.
Psychological Ser-

& Harter, S. (1989). Impact of

comparisons on the developing
self-perceptions of learning-disabled students. Journal of Educational Psychology,

Renick, M. J.,
social

81
,
631-638.
Rothman, H. R., & Cosden, M. (1995). The

relationship between self-perception of a

learning disability and achievement, selfconcept, and social support. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 203-212.
San Miguel, S. K., Forness, S. R., & Kavale,
K. A. (1996). Social skills deficits in learning disabilities: The psychiatric comor-

bidity hypothesis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 252-260.

Shaw, R. A., & Hiehle, P. (1972). Shaw-Hiehle
individualized computational skills program,
computation test (Form A). Boston: Houghton

Silver,

Mifflin.
L.

(1991). Developmental learning

disabilities. In M. Lewis (Ed), Child and

adolescent psychiatry: A comprehensive textbook (pp. 522-528). Baltimore: Williams &
Wilkins.

Stone, C. A. (1997). Correspondences among

parent, teacher, and student perceptions
of adolescents learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 660-669.
Tansy, M., & Miller, J. (1997). The invariance
of the self-concept construct across White
and Hispanic school populations. Journal

4-14.
of Psychoeducational Assessment, 15,
U.S. Census Bureau. (2000) U.S. census bureau, population division: Difference in
population by race and Hispanic or Latino
origin, for the United States: 1990 to
2000. Retrieved November 19, 2001, from

http://www.census.gov/population/
cen2000/phc-t1 /tab04.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Office of
Civil Rights. (1997). Elementary and secondary school survey. Washington, DC:
Author.

Valas, H. (1999). Students with learning disabilities and

low-achieving

students:

295

Peer

and

acceptance, loneliness, self-esteem,

Social Psychology of Education, 3, 173-192.

Valles, E. (1998). The disproportionate representation of minority students in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 52-54.
Vaughn, S., LaGreca, A. M., & Kuttler, A. F.
(1999). The why, who, and how of social
skills. In W. W. Bender (Ed.), Professional

depression.

issues in

learning disabilities (pp. 187-218).

and academic performance among regular education, learning disabled, and continuation high school students. Adoles-

Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Vaughn, S., Zaragoza, N., Hogan, A., &

Walker, J. (1993). A four-year longitudinal
investigation of the social skills and behavior problems of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Dis-

cence,

Wright-Strawderman, C., & Watson, B. L.

(1992). The prevalence of depressive
symptoms in children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25,

abilities, 26, 404-412.

Wiest, D. J., Wong, E. H., & Kreil, D. A.

(1998).

Predictors of

global

258-264.

self-worth

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING
The Journal of Learning Disabilities (JLD) accepts classified advertising notices announcing professional

opportunities, special services available,

from individuals seeking employment.

and notices

33, 601-618.

....

DEADLINES: Ad copy deadlines are as follows:

January/February issue, October 15; March/April issue, December 15; May/June issue, February 15; July/

August issue, April 15; September/October issue,

RATE: $20 for 25 words or less; each additional word

650. A 10% discount is offered for ads run more than one
time. No telephone orders accepted. Checks must accompany orders. Indicate contact person, telephone
number, and number of times the ad is to run.

June 15; November/December issue, August 15. Send

copy and payment to Journal of Learning Disabilities,

ASSOCIATION OF EDUCATIONAL
THERAPISTS 25TH ANNUAL
NATIONAL CONFERENCE

DORDT COLLEGE EDUCATION

FACULTY POSITIONS

October 23-26, 2003

Berkeley, CA
Featuring Rick Lavoie
on Motivation and Memory

anniversary celebration cruising the San

Francisco Bay aboard the ship the Hornblower!
CEUs for MFTs, LCSWs, Sp/Lang (ASHA)
Information & registration at www.aetonline.org
e-mail: aet@aetonline.org, ph: 800/286-4267

Gala 25th

Classified

Advertising Department,

Blvd., Austin,

TX

8700 Shoal Creek

78757; 512/451-3246.

Three

positions beginning August 2003: Introduction,

upper-level (elementary and secondary methods), and
one position requiring expertise in special education.
EdD or PhD preferred. Qualified persons committed to
a Reformed, biblical perspective and educational philosophy are encouraged to send an e-mail/letter of inquiry and a curriculum vitae/resume to: Dr. Rockne
McCarthy, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Dordt
College, 498 4th Ave., NE, Sioux Center, IA 51250-1697;
Fax: 712/722-4496; e-mail: vpaa@dordt.edu; Web site:

www.dordt.edu/offices/academkL.affairs

Downloaded from ldx.sagepub.com at University of Thessaly on June 22, 2015