This commentary is a response to those of Hall (2016) and Winebrenner (2016), which in turn were responses to the article the authors wrote on modality preferences and learning styles (Lodge, Hansen, & Cottrell, 2016). There are several key points the authors wish to address in this reply. Most importantly, and aligned with the aims and focus…

The author has been asked to respond to Lodge, Hansen, and Cottrell's recent (2015) paper in this journal and they have done a very thorough and scholarly job of dissecting the weaknesses of modality preference theories. They clearly and carefully analyse the nature of the evidence for modality preference and conclude that there is little if any…

This article defends research evaluating similarities and differences in psychometric performances of students with learning disabilities (LD) and students with low achievement (LA), which concluded that psychometric test performance alone was an insufficient basis for differential diagnosis. Recent criticism of the research by Kenneth Kavale and…

Two analyses are provided to demonstrate that the population of students with learning disabilities is distinct from the population of low-achievers. Reasons for different interpretations of Bob Algozzine and colleagues' research are suggested. Assumptions surrounding the reality of learning disability are explored, as are differing perceptions…

This paper examines studies of the Minnesota Institute which were interpreted as demonstrating that students with learning disabilities are not distinguishable from other low-achieving students. Results of the reexamination indicate that learning disabilities and low achievement can be clearly differentiated, even in studies indicating that little…