8/2/2019 My LD

1/17

MarshallH. Raskind, Malka Margalit,and EleanorL. Higgins

Abstract. This study examined children's presentations of the"LD experience" as expressed in online messages on a public web-site designed for children with learning and attention problems.Earlier research has demonstrated that children view the Internetas a social medium that enables communication and promotespersonal relationships. In the current study, we assumed that stu-dents with LD would treat this specially designed website as a"safe environment," enabling them to present their self-identitiesas children with LD and to share the personal meaning of theirchallenges. By studying their online messages, we sought todevelop a deeper understanding of the children's thoughts, feel-ings and attitudes, as well as the ways they present themselvesonline. Theme analysis was performed on 4,903 e-mails sent from164 self-identified LD participants ages 9-18. Six major themesemerged: (a) LD identity presentation; (b) disclosure of academicdifficulties; (c-d) disclosure of emotional problems and social dis-tress; (e) requests for help; and (f) description of positive aspects ofLD . Results demonstrated the potential the study of online mes-saging has for understanding the LD experience. Implications forpractice, considerations regarding future studies, and study limi-tations are discussed.

MARSHALL H. RASKIND, Charlesand Helen Schwab Foundation,San Mateo, California.MALKA MAIRGALMT, Tel-Aviv University,Tel Aviv, Israel.

ELEANOR L. HIGGINS, SierraMadre, California.

In the 1999 surreal film comedy BeingJohn Malkovich,a man accidentally finds a passageway, or "portal," intothe mind of actor John Malkovich. Anyone enteringthis portal sees and experiences the world as Mr.Malkovich. As researchers, we can only fantasize abouthow such a portal into the mind of a child with learn-ing disabilities (LD) would enhance our knowledge andunderstanding of the "LD experience." Although sucha possibility is merely fantasy, the entry of the Internetinto the lives of children may provide a window fromwhich to view the "inner life" of children with LD.

Thus, the establishment of virtual, but authentic com-munities, where children exchange electronic commu-nications on topics of personal significance and interestin what they consider to be a comfortable and "safe"environment presents researchers with a new and richdata source for understanding the "insiders' perspec-tive." Indeed, these virtual communities may be theclosest thing we have to a portal into the minds of chil-dren with LD.

The current descriptive study examined children'spresentations of the "LD experience" as expressed in

Volume 29, Fall2006 253

"MY LD": CHILDREN'S VOICESON THE INTERNET

8/2/2019 My LD

2/17

their online messages written on a pre-existing publicwebsite designed for children with learning and atten-tion problems (see p. 257 for website description).1,2 Weassumed that students with LD would treat the Internetas a "safe environment," allowing them to present andshare the personal meaning of their LD. By studyingtheir online messages, we sought to develop a deeperunderstanding of their thoughts, feelings, and attitudes -both positive and negative - as well as the ways in whichthey present themselves online. Thus, their messageswere used as a portal to view the hopes, fears, needs,joys, as well as difficulties and frustrations of childrenwith LD. Our research utilized a "child-centered"approach, viewing children as active agents in the vir-tual environment, establishing their personal and socialidentities, exhibiting their strengths and struggling withtheir difficulties. This research also sought to explorechildren's descriptions of their difficulties and abilitiesrelative to those described in the research literature.

In the first part of this article we present a survey ofthe literature and the conceptual underpinnings forstudying people's (including those with LD) self-ex-pression, self-perception, and self-presentation on theInternet. W e believe such a theoretical review is neces-sary considering the promise virtual environments holdfor clarifying inner experiences and the limited researchin this area to date.

Existent life stories of adults with LD (McNulty, 2003;Rodis, Garrod, & Boscardin, 2001; Wambsgan, 1990)provide insight into distressed experiences, but do sofrom a retrospective point of view. Studies investigatingthe LD experience from the child's "insider perspective"are quite limited (MacArthur, 2003). Additionally, whilethese studies (e.g., Albinger, 1995; Guterman, 1995; Reid& Button, 1995) have shed light on the insider's view,they included a small number of children, and employedinterview, discussion, and writing prompts initiated byadults. In contrast, the present study investigated theself-initiated communications of a relatively large num-ber of children with learning difficulties in a virtual, butnonetheless authentic environment.

One study (Ferri, 2000) did use an electronic-mail dis-cussion group to study the experiences of women livingwith LD. However, this study focused on adults and,therefore, wa s not representative of children's voices. Todate, we have not been able to find published studiesthat have used the Internet to explore the emotional andsocial experiences of children with LD as they unfoldedin "real time" through self-generated electronic commu-nication.

DIFFICULTIES OF STUDENTS WITH LDWhile acknowledging the heterogeneity and individ-

ual differences of children with LD, the academic, social,

and emotional difficulties of this population have beenwell documented (e.g., Bryan, Burstein, & Ergul, 2004;Kavale & Forness, 1995; Kavale & Mostert, 2004;Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2003; Swanson, Hoskyn,& Lee, 1999; Swanson & Keogh, 1990; Vaughn,Elbaum, Schumm, & Hughes, 1998). Many studentswith LD experience and report academic difficulties insuch areas as reading, writing, speaking, listening,math, organization, and memory (e.g., Stone & May,2002). Additionally, research indicates that childrenwith LD are often socially rejected by their peers, andhave difficulties establishing and maintaining friend-ships (Wiener, 2002, 2004; Wiener & Schneider, 2002).Furthermore, children with LD are at greater risk forexperiencing loneliness, low self-esteem, anxiety, anddepression than nondisabled peers (Margalit, 1994;Margalit & AI-Yagon, 2002).

It is important to note that not all students with LDexperience this range of difficulties. Indeed studieshave documented a resilient group of individuals whosucceed in coping with their challenges (e.g., Margalit,2003). Our research and interest in resilience andempowering approaches for students with LD directedour attention to the possibilities of the Internet as anenvironment that may enhance resilience and help stu-dents with LD to cope with their distress by openlysharing their identities and concerns. Without dis-counting theoretical approaches that consider LD asocial construct - locating learning and learning prob-lems in the context of human relations and activity(Dudley-Marling, 2004; Reid & Valle, 2004) - we con-sider students with LD as active individuals who strug-gle with their difficulties. In order to empower theirefforts, we explore their self-perception and interper-sonal experiences, searching for a clear identification oftheir differentiated needs for help, support and under-standing,The Internetas a Safe EnvironmentforInterpersonalCommunication

The entry of the Internet into the lives of childrenpresents a new opportunity for them to disclose theirinner lives, and for researchers to gain a deeper under-standing of children's self-perceptions, thoughts, feel-ings, and attitudes. Computers and the Internet haveprompted many changes in the lives of students withand without disabilities, comparable to, and evenbeyond, the impact of television (Cole et al., 2004).Thus, the Internet is a social medium for many children,enabling communication and prompting the formationof personal relationships. Therefore, it may be consid-ered influential in transforming the social life of young-sters and affecting their communication andself-expression (Kraut et al., 2002).

LearningDisabilityQuarterly 254

8/2/2019 My LD

3/17

The Internet enables new forms of communication,extending the boundaries of time and space, freeingindividuals from the constraints of geography, andpossibly the isolation brought on by disability or poorsocial skills during typical face-to-face interactions.Further, the Internet allows people to join groups on thebasis of common interests without dependence on theaccurate expression and interpretation of the social cuesrequired during face-to-face interactions (Kraut et al.,1998). At the same time, it is unclear whether theInternet, in some instances, is causing people to becomesocially isolated and to be cut off from face-to-face socialrelations, as they are able to communicate with anony-mous strangers through a "socially impoverished"medium (Turkle, 1996). Recent surveys of studiesexploring the effects of the Internet (Bargh & McKenna,2004) have shown that, at present, no clear socialimpact can be generalized and that people's individualgoals, as well as their unique personalities, interactdynamically with the distinctive characteristics of theInternet.

Surveys of studies (Bargh & McKenna, 2004;McKenna, Green, & Gleason 2002) reveal that (a) peo-ple are better able to express their "true selves" (thoseaspects of themselves that they feel are important, butthat they are usually unable or not ready to present inpublic) to their partners over the Internet than duringface-to-face communication; and (b) when Internetpartners like each other, they tend (more than duringface-to-face interactions) to project qualities of theirideal friends onto each other. According to McKenna etal. (2002), people who are lonely or socially anxious areespecially able to find their "true selves" on line, whichleads to the formation of close and meaningful onlinerelationships that appear to be durable and stable overtime. These results are important for students with LD ,since studies of their social experiences have revealedthat, as a group, they report higher levels of loneliness(Margalit, 1994; Margalit & A1-Yagon, 2002) as well associal skill deficits (Wiener, 2002, 2004; Wiener &Schneider, 2002) than their nondisabled peers.

The relative anonymity of the Internet may con-tribute to the formation of close relationships and trustby reducing the risks inherent in self-disclosure. Further,because self-disclosure contributes to a sense of inti-macy, making self-disclosure easier should facilitaterelationship formation. In this regard, Internet commu-nication resembles the "strangers on a train" phenome-non described by Rubin (1975), whereby intimatedetails of one's "self" may be disclosed to a strangereven more so than to one's friends or family. The inti-macy developed on the Internet may serve to increasethe rate of interpersonal trust (Bargh & McKenna,2004). Overall, the evidence suggests that, rather than

being a personally and socially isolating maladaptiveactivity, communicating with others over the Internetnot only helps to maintain close ties with one's familyand friends, but also, if the individual is so inclined, tofacilitate the formation of close and meaningful newrelationships within what is felt to be a relatively safeenvironment. In order to increase an understanding ofthis process, we now present the theoretical basis of self-disclosure.Self-Disclosure and Self-IdentitySelf-disclosure is the act of revealing personal infor-mation to others (Archer, 1980). Usually, the behaviorof self-disclosure is associated with close relationshipsand friendships. However, Internet-based behavior canbe characterized as fostering high levels of trust, leadingto increased self-disclosure even among people who arenot initially in close personal relationships with eachother.

Several explanations have been offered for this phe-nomenon. Some researchers have suggested that com-puter-mediated communication (CMC), because of itsreduced social cues, may lead to a reduction in socialconstraints (Joinson, 2001). However, this interpreta-tion is not without criticism. Joinson (2001) has stressedthat the anonymity of online interactions allows theindividual to express his or her "true mind," or "authen-tic self," unfettered by concerns of self-presentation(e.g., physical appearance, nonverbal communicationdeficits) and the outcomes of face-to-face self-disclosure.People disclose more information about themselves dur-ing CM C compared to face-to-face communication.This is not necessarily due to any de-individuationexperience (loss of internal, self-regulated control overbehavior resulting from anonymity and reduced privateself-awareness [Bargh, 2002]), but may be due to theinteraction between anonymity (i.e., reduced publicself-awareness) and heightened private self-awareness.Thus, it is possible that the environment in which peo-ple engage in CM C encourages private self-focus. SinceCM C is often undertaken in a quiet room as a solitaryactivity, it may foster the development of an introspec-tive and/or reflective state of mind.

A further explanation may be that the computer actsas a "mirror" that reflects back to the communicantsthemselves, leading to private self-focusing. While emo-tions are usually expressed face-to-face (e.g., we smile inresponse to a smile), an electronic text-based communi-cation sent in private may lead to heightened self-awareness by focusing the user on his or her innerfeelings rather than reacting to another person face-to-face. The ability to communicate within a virtual envi-ronment without the need for face-to-face interactionmay be particularly liberating and have compensatory

Volume 29, Fall2006 255

8/2/2019 My LD

4/17

value for children with LD who have difficulties inface-to-face nonverbal communication (Axelrod, 1982;Dimitrovsky, Spector, Levy-Schiff, & Vakil, 1998;Nabuzoka & Smith, 1995; Sisterhen & Gerber, 1989).Alternatively, it is not known whether the writingdifficulties of children with LD might interfere withthe spontaneous disclosure of their "selves" - theirthoughts, feelings, and attitudes.Research indicates that our selves are portrayed byboth physical and psychological features (Harter, 1998).Therefore, the anonymous nature of online interactionsmay provide the freedom to present the self in otherways that are less constrained by the realities of "real-world" settings (Calvert, 2002). Several projects inspiredby Turkle's analysis of a "culture of simulation" (Turkle,1995) argue that children use computers to experimentwith themes of selfhood and identity (Livingstone,2003). In this regard, online interactions may provide aforum for self-expression and self-exploration, makingit an important venue for examining how childrendevelop their identities and communicate with oneanother (Calvert, Mahler, Zehnder, Jenkins, & Lee,2003).

According to social identity theory, our social identityis determined by the groups to which we belong(Abrams & Hogg, 1990). If we acknowledge belongingto a certain group, the known characteristics of thegroup are likely to be reflected in our behavior. Thus, agroup's members accept assigned social category mem-berships as a relevant self-definition in a given interper-sonal context (e.g., "we," "the LD"). This socialidentification in turn leads us to perceive ourselves interms of the characteristics we share with other mem-bers of our in-groups (our shared social identity) ratherthan in terms of the idiosyncratic characteristics thatdifferentiate us from other individuals (Michinov,Michinov, & Toczek-Capelle, 2004; Sassenberg &Postmes, 2002; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, &Wetherell, 1987).

Existing autobiographic reports of adults with LD pro-vide detailed descriptions of their distressed experiencesas children and their continuing struggles as adults withtheir self-perceptions and identity issues (McNulty,2003; Rodis et al., 2001). However, they were providedfrom the adults' perspectives. The Internet, on the otherhand, enables and encourages children to share theircurrent concerns. Thus, we expect these children toexpress themselves through their identification with theLD group, as well as raise important aspects of theirindividual self-identities, reflected in their interactiveelectronic messaging on the Internet. Since peopledevelop personal as well as group identities an d closeconnectivity with online groups an d virtual communi-ties (Michinov et al., 2004), this research provides an

opportunity to examine both the self- and group iden-tity that children with LD present online.Purposeof the Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the presen-tation of the LD experience and "LD identity" asexpressed in the e-mail narratives of children commu-nicating on a pre-existing, free-of-charge public websitedesigned for children with learning and attention prob-lems. Based on the self-disclosure conceptualization pre-sented above, we assumed that some children with LDwould consider the website a safe environment thatenables them to disclose and share aspects of their LDidentity (identity as a child with an LD), and reveal theirthoughts, feelings, and attitudes toward living withtheir LD. (It is important to emphasize that this studywas not intended to evaluate the efficacy of the web-site.)

In keeping with a qualitative ethnographic approach(SpradIey, 1979, 1980), we attempted to refrain fromimposing any rigid preconceived notions regardingemergent themes, focusing instead on capturing the"insider's perspective." Nevertheless, knowledge of pastresearch in LD inevitably led us to form several expecta-tions regarding emerging 'themes. For example, webelieved that disclosure regarding LD might encompassacademic, social, and emotional domains.

While recognizing the possible emergence of themesrelated to difficulties in the aforementioned domains,we did not want to be limited to deficit-driven expres-sions of LD. Therefore, a general category of positiveexpression of LD was formulated. This theme was con-ceived prior to the natural emergence of other themesin the analysis. We believed that a category dealing withpositive expressions was necessary in light of LD litera-ture suggesting the importance of special talents,refraining, self-awareness, goodness-of-fit, and compart-mentalization in achieving positive life outcomes(Goldberg, Higgins, Raskind, & Herman, 2003; Higgins,Raskind, Goldberg, & Herman, 2002; Poplin, 1995;Raskind, Goldberg, Higgins, & Herman, 1999; Reiff,Gerber, & Ginsberg, 1997; West, 1991).

METHODParticipantsTo date, no protocol for selecting a sample of childrenwith LD from an Internet website has been established,which presented challenges in the current study. Forexample, the information necessary (e.g., cognitive andacademic achievement levels) to meet the criteria foridentifying LD study participants (e.g., Rosenberg et al.,1992) is not likely to be available from electronic mes-sages or online data. Furthermore, federal legislation(i.e., Children's Online Privacy Protection Ac t of 1998

LearningDisability Quarterly 256

8/2/2019 My LD

5/17

[COPPA]) limits access to personal information about achild. Although it might be possible to contact and col-lect data directly from research participants (or gate-keepers, such as parents or teachers), such contact -even with consent - may threaten Internet anonymityand, thereby, influence the nature and authenticity ofsubsequent online messaging, as well as children's will-ingness to continue using a website.

Consequently, for this type of research newapproaches need to be developed to ensure that, to thegreatest extent possible, participants are, in fact, LD.The method described below for selecting the LD sam-ple in this study is a first attempt at establishing a pro-tocol for identifying children with LD on a publicwebsite. Inevitably, it is not as rigorous as selection cri-teria currently recommended (Rosenberg et al., 1992)for conducting LD research, but it is hoped it will serveas a starting point for a dialogue between researchersabout the possibilities and risks of online research.

The sample consisted of 16 4 children, ages 9 to 18(mean age: 12.5, SD: 1.65), who were "self-identified" ashaving an LD. Participants were drawn from a popula-tion of approximately 30,000 active, registered usersthroughout the United States on the free-of-charge pub-lic website SparkTop.org (see Website). Of the 164 chil-dren participating in the study, 10 8 were female and 56were male. This proportion is in line with gender pref-erences indicated in research on children's messagesonline (Calvert, 2002; Calvert et al., 2003).

The site had been advertised and promoted toresource specialists and LD/special education teachersthroughout the United States, as well as directly tochildren through national television commercials onNickelodeon and the Disney channel. (The televisionspots did not indicate that the website was designed forchildren with LD.) No information was available regard-ing the participants' SES or ethnicity. Additionally, nodiagnostic information was available. Children accessedthe website from home and school.

The following procedure was adopted to establish self-identification of a learning disability. At the first stage,an online survey of 240 regular users of the website wasadministered in October of 2004. (The survey was notpart of the current research, but was used by the websitedevelopers to evaluate the inpact of the site.) This elec-tronic survey, which also incorporated voice support(i.e., the respondent could hear the question read aloudby a recorded human voice as an accommodation forchildren with reading difficulties), included the ques-tion "Do you have a learning disability?" Respondentsanswering "yes" were included in the sample. An addi-tional question on the survey asked "D o you have diffi-culties with learning or paying attention?" Childrenwho answered positively to this question, and who also

answered "yes" to additional questions indicating spe-cific difficulties in reading, writing, and/or learning ingeneral, were also included. However, children whoreported problems only in math were not included.

Further, over 1,000,000 electronic communications(e-mails, message board submissions) from approxi-mately 30,000 active, registered users were reviewed forcontent indicating the presence of LD. That is, searcheswere conducted electronically by key words/phrases,including "I have LD," "my LD," "my learning disabil-ity," "I have dyslexia," and "my dyslexia." A wide vari-ety of misspellings of these terms were used in thesearch. Users who indicated difficulties only in atten-tion or math were not included. (Examples of contentindicating the presence of LD are provided in theAppendix.)Website

SparkTop.org, the website used to study the onlinecommunication of children with LD, was developed bySchwabLearning, a program of the Charles and HelenSchwab Foundation. Formally launched in fall 2003, thesite was designed for children with learning and atten-tion problems, ages 8-12, to provide an online experi-ence and create a virtual community where childrencould "connect" with other children, build self-esteem,develop self-awareness, enhance self-advocacy, gainknowledge of learning strategies, create art, play games,as well as receive accurate information about learningand attention problems. Although the target users arechildren with learning and attention problems, the siteis open to all children.

The site was planned as a "kid-centered" normalizingenvironment representing current youth culture, whereal l children are "free to be themselves and accepted forwho they are" (Allen Goldblatt, personal communica-tion,January 4, 2005). The website utilizes the most cur-rent technological tools, design principles, and "pop"culture trends in children's media and entertainment tohelp ensure the creation of a "cool site," and not a seg-regated site for "children with problems." Design andcontent for the site were based on two years of research,including national surveys of children with LD, focusgroups of children with LD and attention problems andtheir families, ethnographic interviews of children withLD and attention problems, usability testing of childrenwith and without LD and attention problems, reviewsof the LD and attention problem literature, and consul-tation with LD researchers and professionals.

The website provides for multiple modes of input,including writing, speech, drawing, and photography.Animations are provided to support activities and con-tent, and recorded human speech is available to supporttext. Children communicate with other children in

Volume 29, Fall2006 257

8/2/2019 My LD

6/17

multiple ways, including e-mails that are sent directlyfrom one child to another, message board postings thatare displayed for all users, graphic submissions, instantmessaging (with controlled vocabulary), and games.All communications are reviewed prior to posting.Submissions are reviewed by a professional team con-sisting of an educational psychologist and a former cre-dentialed teacher. All approved submissions are postedwithin 24 hours, seven days per week. Messages thatinclude insensitivity to other children, expressions ofrude, abusive, and biased language, or include remarksof a sexual nature, have religious overtones, or containcopyrighted material are not posted. The site's privacypolicy informs users and their parents that all commu-nications are subject to review and approval fromwebsite staff and that nonpersonally identifiable infor-mation may be used to analyze site usage. In fact, everytime a child sends an electronic message, a screenappears that alerts the child that the message will beread and reviewed by site staff.

Finally, the site is compliant with COPPA. Thus, chil-dren must register through an adult (parent, guardian,or a teacher) by means of Privo, a parent permissioningservice. No personally identifiable information is puton the site (e.g., name, address, phone number, e-mailaddress). Personally identifiable information is alsowithheld from SparkTop.org staff. The authors consid-ered this site to be a safe and secure base for childrenwith LD to self-disclose and share their thoughts, feel-ings, and experiences of living with an LD.Researchers

The research team consisted of three individuals. Eachresearcher has over 30 years of teaching, clinical, andresearch experience in the field of LD . All researchers arewell-published in peer-reviewed journals with a com-bined total of approximately 200 professional papers.Their specific areas of expertise include psychology,anthropological linguistics, and sociolinguistics. Thethree researchers also have particular interests in LDas related to social/emotional functioning, risk andresilience models, and technology.Procedure

The three researchers reviewed 4,903 e-mails sentfrom the 16 4 self-identified LD participants to otherusers on the site between July 15, 2003, and February 8,2005. These messages had been sent to other self-iden-tified LD participants, registered users who did not "self-identify" as LD, and guests. 3 Messages sent to fouranimated fictionalized characters were also reviewed.These fictionalized characters are based on three actualteenagers ("teen mentors"), as well as an adult doctoral-level "LD Expert." All characters were described as hav-ing learning and attention problems.

The researchers worked with a website programmer todevelop a data-mining software tool that allowedsearching for e-mails sent to/from specific users duringdesignated time periods from the entire database ofelectronic messages (Dringus & Ellis, 2005). This toolalso enabled the researchers to search messages by keywords and phrases (e.g., "sad," "my LD"). Further, a spe-cial function allowed for the conversion of the databaseinto a Microsoft- Excel file to facilitate data manage-ment and analysis. The database contained informationon the age and sex of both sender and recipient,date/time of messages, and the actual written message.No personally identifiable information was available.

A content analysis was conducted (Krippendorff,1980; Kupferberg & Ben-Peretz, 2004; Mayring, 2000) inorder to search for expressions of "LD self-presentation"in the online messages. Qualitative approaches previ-ously used to study the narratives of parents, children,and teachers on the Internet (Fleischmann, 2004;Kupferberg & Ben-Peretz, 2004) revealed that mostmethodological conceptualizations are relevant forunderstanding online communications (Kim & Weaver,2002). In our study, we examined children's commu-nicative behavior. We assumed that the site wouldenable children to share the experience of living withan LD, revealing their thoughts, feelings, and attitudestoward navigating the world with learning problems.

The data analysis procedures used were as follows: (a)Researchers independently read hard copies of 4,903messages that had been generated from a MicrosoftOExcel' Workbook, searching for themes representativeof participants' experiences and portrayals of their LD.Each researcher developed and wrote his or her owncodes/category labels directly on the hard copies next tospecific messages. In some instances codes representedgeneral themes (e.g., academic difficulties, social prob-lems) while in other instances, codes may have beenmore specific and reflective of general theme subcate-gories (e.g., reading problems and teasing, respectively).It is important to note, that coding was not a rigid, lin-ear process. Rather, general, specific and overlappingthemes often emerged simultaneously as the researchersread the messages in what may be described as a holis-tic and organic process. Additionally, each researcherbegan an ongoing process of clustering individualthemes/codes with similar content/meaning into gen-eral themes, differentiating within general themes andadding more specific and refined codes as they emergedin the reading of the messages.(b) An initial meeting between the researchers washeld to share independent findings, brainstorm generalthemes, and begin formulation of a set of refined andspecific themes representative of the messages.Overlapping, redundant and related thematic categories

LeamingDisabilityQuarterly 258

8/2/2019 My LD

7/17

8/2/2019 My LD

8/17

12"); their sex (e.g., 'I have an LD and I am a girl'";and their location in terms of a state or city (e.g., "I livein ... "). Several children provided physical descriptions("I am short, real short'"; disclosed information abouttheir families (parents, brothers, and sisters); revealedpersonal preferences regarding youth culture (teenidols, music, movies, TV , clothing, favorite colors); anddiscussed hobbies. Many messages contained informa-tion about themselves and their areas of competenceand interest: "I know I am great at drawing, basketball,and volleyball" or "I am really into sports," showing thatthe LD identification is only part of how they definethemselves.

The children seem to share the same "global" youthculture documented in the United States (Alvermann,2004; Bucholtz, 2002) and as children in other coun-tries such as Israel (Margalit & Ziman, 2004). However,at the same time, and side by side with age-appropriatedescriptors of self-identity, they provided distinctiveinformation about their LD. Although individual chil-dren used various identifiers to describe their difficul-ties (e.g., LD, dyslexia), and disclosed them in differentways (e.g., questions of causation, validation), it seemsthat having an LD was presented as part of the chil-dren's personal identity, as well as the "social identity"of belonging to a group of individuals with LD.

The idea that these children appear to identify with agroup of other children with LD is an interestingnotion. This finding is somewhat in contrast to previ-ous research, at least as reported by adults with LD . AsHiggins et al. (2002) found in a longitudinal study,despite a sense of "differentness," persons with LDdo not consider themselves to be part of a separategroup, culture, or "community" as do other "disabilitygroups" such as the Deaf Community. However, theextent to which children in the present study actuallyview themselves as a distinct group cannot be dis-cemed from the messages.

In summary, it appears that the Internet served as asafe virtual environment, enabling children with LD toexplore and present the "totality" of their identity.Furthermore, the feeling that they are not alone inexperiencing difficulties - their belonging to a group ofchildren who share similar difficulties - was regardedby several children as a source of relief.DisclosureofAcademic Difficulties

Although there is existing research on the academicdifficulties of students with LD, we were particularlyintrigued by the children's personal views of their prob-lems. The information provided by the children aboutthe nature of their LD is varied. Several provided veryshort and direct information, stating, for example, "IhaveLD," sometimes minimizing it, "I have a little bit of

a LD," or in some cases exploring how serious it is: "I'mnot good at any of the normal subjects, like Social studies,Math, English and Science. And, I'm in SPED. Does thismean I've got like A MajorLD?"

Interesting, a few of these self-identified childrenposed questions regarding the validation/identificationof LD, asking "How do you know if you have an LD?". "Idon'tknow for sure if I have an LD ornot but I don'tknowif I could get tested for on e at my school!"; and specificqueries like "Is there such thing as LD for handwriting,because if there is I might have it."

Most children who sent e-mails on the site knew anddescribed their LD, relating it to different academicsubjects but without relating it directly to their com-petence: "MyLD isMATH"; "MyLD is reading."In someinstances they even used professional labels such as"I have Dyslexia" or "I have ADD." Others presentedtheir LD using emotional terminology ("my handwrit-ing is TERRIBLEL!!!Y") and relating it to competencyissues ("I can'tspell"'), or in a seemingly joking manner("spelling is not my strongpoint").Other children wrote:"I have dyslexia. I have troublewith reading, readslowerand it some times affects others by lettersgettingmixed upbut I just read a little slow. I have trouble with spellingbymemorizing';. "Do you have a struggle with spelling?Because I do", and "basicallyeverything in math is hardfor me I'm in 5th grade and don't even know all my addi-tion yet." Several children mentioned having LD inmore than one subject: "I have two LD - they are mathand reading"; "My LD's are dyslexia andADD"; "My Id isADD and distracting rom my work"; "I can'tpay attentionin class. But I already have two LD's. Does that mean Ihave a third LD?"; one of the children even wrote "Ihave LD with everything." One child described a"unique LD," writing, "My LD is having trouble askingfor help." The difficulties described by the children arereflective of the full range of academic problemsdescribed in the research literature (e.g., reading, writ-ing, spelling, math). However, from these self-initiatedmessages we are able to understand more about the"personal nature" of their academic struggles and con-cerns, in addition to what we may learn from a purelyquantitative analysis of their academic deficits.

Some children described the help they received atschool using such statements as "Igo o a classthat helpsme with my LD on math"; "I am in the LD class," andmaking references to "specialed." Most of these descrip-tors seemed isolated from emotional expressions. Theirtone was objective, providing facts, similar to statingone's age and sex. Several children expressed negativeaffect related to their educational placement or status.In some cases, children shared "secrets" such as "I justwanted to tell you a secret, I take specialpills and it helpsme with my LD!"

LearningDisabilityQuarterly 260

8/2/2019 My LD

9/17

8/2/2019 My LD

10/17

tion stating "[why are] children are afraid of me? I'm justa girl with ADHD?" Other children expressed hurt feel-ings, and identified themselves as inferior throughsocial comparisons with their peers, "I feel like myfriends are better than me at every thingIMIMM!!!!!!"Whether it is a result of "passive distancing" by otherchildren, or direct teasing and bullying, these messagesclearly illustrate the deep and profound effect socialrejection has upon children with LD.

Through their messages, the children openly sharedtheir social identity, disclosing that having an LD hascritical social ramifications (e.g., teasing, ridicule,social rejection). Several students expressed a fear ofsharing their LD identity with friends, writing "IfI ellmy friend I have a LD he just laughs. What do I do?"Another child expressed a desire to hide the LD iden-tity, "How do not show that have a Id so people won'tmake fun of me."

It appears that these children were not merely com-municating hypothetical fears, but were describing dif-ficult and hurtful social experiences: "Peoplemake fin ofme and ask me so mean questions"; "I have no friends";and "Why do childrenpick on me, do they know I have aLD?" They complained about social rejection fromboth same- and different-sex peers. One boy wrote,"How come all the pretty girls at my school hate me justfrom my LD," and a girl stated, "This girl at my schoolkeeps teasingme because I have LD."

The children's complaints about the cruelty of theirpeers are vivid and emotional. For example, "My friendssometimes say that I am stupid.I don'tknow if they meanit as a little oke or if they reallymean it. They neversit withme at lunch and they never play with me at recess."Another child expressed her emotions quite openlyregarding her only friend and her self-identity as an iso-lated and different child:

My friend is the only friend I've got and if he doesn'twant to be friends with me anymore then it will be justlike lastyearwhen I have to stand alone andeverybodywill just stare at me and think I'm a freak!And if theyvote me the weirdo of the school then none will want tobe my friend!Not even the only friendI have rightnow!What do I do!!!!!!!!!!!!!?I?I?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Several children described how they requested helpfrom significant adults (teachers, parents) to deal withtheir social problems, "This girl at my school keeps teas-ing me because I have a LD. I told teachers and theirpar-ents but she keeps bugging me about it." Some childrennoted that their requests for help from teachers weremet with a lack of concern, "This boy ... won't leaveme alone. I tell him to stop bugging me. But he won't. Ieven told my teachershe won't do anything about it. Howdo I get him to shut his mouth?" Other children wereannoyed when teachers showed special consideration,

"Teachers treatme LD and allI want to be treatedme thesame." The emotional expressions of social distresswere often accompanied by expressions of dissatisfac-tion with the LD identity, even a readiness to give upaccommodations necessary for school success such astyping assignments on the computer. Evidently, thechildren wanted their teachers to treat them similarlyto their peers in order to avoid being identified as dif-ferent, rejected, and even abused by peers. This is aninteresting finding in light of previous research.Higgins et al. (2002) reported a similar finding amongadults with LD who reported a willingness to give upsupport services so not as to be identified as "LD."

In conclusion, the descriptors of social rejection anddistress, negative affect, and fear demonstrate that theidentity of LD was related not only to academic diffi-culties, but also to social exclusion from peer activities,adversely affecting the basic need for positive related-ness to their classmates. Although there were rareinstances when children indicated positive social rela-tionships, (e.g., "everyone wants to be my friend";. "I havelots of friends.), the group as a whole overwhelminglyexpressed social difficulties. Some children's decision torefrain from disclosing their LD to their peers reflectstheir identity struggle, a struggle that demands greatpersonal energy. The contrast between the children'sattempt to hold back knowledge about their LD topeers and the self-disclosure in their online messagesreveals the importance of the Internet as a potentialoutlet for dealing with anxiety-provoking situations.Although individual children may have varied in theway they expressed their negative social experience(e.g., through general expressions or specific instances;groups vs . individuals), these children shared theirexperiences on the Internet in an open and elaboratedmanner, something they appeared to have greater dif-ficulty doing in face-to-face interactions.Asking for Help

Although not every child wrote messages asking forhelp, the vast majority did. The children often com-plained that they were distressed and not getting thehelp they needed. In some instances, it appeared thatthey did not feel trusting enough to ask for help fromfriends, family members, teachers, or other adults.However, many children appeared to trust the virtualcharacters (teen mentors, "LD Expert") as well as otherchildren on the website, and seemed more than willingto share their difficulties and seek the advice of thosewith whom they identified (e.g., "some people don'tunderstandmie and I hope you do"). Fo r example, childrenasked for advice in school/academic, emotional, andsocial areas. Examples of school-related requests forhelp included:

LeanfingDisabilityQuarterly 262

8/2/2019 My LD

11/17

General requests. "I have trouble in school what shouldI do"; "Hi Kyle I'm not good at readingor spellingwritingwhat shouldI do?"

Focus on homework. "How can I get my homework inon time"; "WMhy do I hate school and homework;" "How doIget ridof my Id whatcan I do to make homework more eas-ier?"Focus on low grades. "I get bad grades even when Istudy really hard. What should I do?"; "I need help! Mygrades are falling and my homework isn'tgetting done...VVhat shouldI do?"

Focus on attentionaldifficulties. "What should I doin class when I try so so so so hard to pay attention but Ican't... I wonder off thinkingabout things totally off sub-ject. How can I stay more focused?"

Focus on specific academic difficulties. "Iam havingtroublewith writingcan you help me if you can send a mes-sage"; "I'm really confused on my math homework becauseof my LD, got any tips?"

Children also asked for help in the social arena withsuch questions as "How can I get ... people to stop pick-ing on me"; "I'm not good at spelling, and, The OtherChildren make fun of me for it ... What should I do?"There were also requests for assistance in the emotionalarea such as "I know I've got to ask for help, but I'm embar-rassed, and,I don't know ho w to ask for help. Do you haveany tips on this?"; "I really feel bad what can I do"; "Wasup Kyle I don't like Id what can I do;" and "Kyle, when ufind it hadL.D, did u feel u were stupid."

In turn, children showed appreciation to those offer-ing advice and described how it helped them; for exam-ple, "Thanks for telling me abouthow you feel ... it helps";"Hey Thanks for the nice comment"; "I really ike all ofyouradvice and your advice is better than anyone else"; "Heydude Thanks for the advice. My teacher was totally coolabout t and saidshe'd 'talk' to the otherkids..."; "Thanksyour advice really helped! Now I have like 1 millionfriends!"

From statements such as these, it can be concludedthat the advice provided in reply to children's requestsoften helped relieve their distress. It is not clear, how-ever, if the children actually used the advice or simplybenefited from the attention, support, relatedness, andopportunity to freely express their distress. It should benoted that about two thirds of the requests for help andadvice were directed towards the teen mentors and theadult "LD Expert" (virtual characters with LD) and onlyone third to online peers. However, children also rou-tinely reacted to one another, sharing worries and frus-trations.

The children's request for help over the Internet wereparticularly intriguing to us in light of previous researchindicating the importance of seeking and acceptinghelp from others in achieving positive life outcomes for

persons with LD (e.g., Raskind et al., 1999). The possi-bility that the Internet may provide an easily accessible,comfortable, and effective medium for requesting andreceiving help in such a wide range of areas served tofacilitate, if not necessitate, the identification and con-struction of this thematic category.Positive LDAs discussed under Purpose of Study, we not onlywanted to consider difficulties/deficits associated withLD, but also sought to explore positive manifestationsin light of literature suggesting the importance of spe-cial talents, refraining, self-awareness, goodness-of-fit,and compartmentalization in achieving positive lifeoutcomes for persons with LD. However, despite ourfocused attempt to locate such expressions, only a fewchildren made positive statements regarding their LD,or challenged negative attitudes toward their LD; "Whatis bad abouthaving an LD," or about educational alter-natives such as home schooling: "It's nice to be homeschooled because I have an LD." Others expressed satis-faction with attempts to challenge their difficulties: "IhaveDyslexia. I am overcoming it though." Some reportedachievements and triumph over difficulties (e.g., "I canread a lot better in 5th grade thanks"; and "You can stillgetgoodgradesif you have LD'). In addition to these pos-itive expressions being rare, they also appeared some-what "subdued." In sum, none of the messages could beconsidered "strong" or passionate positive emotionalreactions to living with an LD. The lack of positiveexpressions of LD was a disappointment to us consider-ing their relationship to positive life outcomes.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSThis study examined how children with LD presentthemselves online to peers and virtual characters inmessages written on a public website designed for chil-dren with learning and attention problems. Weassumed that the Internet medium would be consid-ered a safe environment that promoted enough trust bythe children to prompt self-disclosure, includingaspects of their "LD identity," as well as their thoughts,feelings, and attitudes regarding living with an LD.Results of this study are consistent with studies indi-cating that individuals tend to self-disclose online(Joinson, 2001; Maczewski, 2002; VanLear, Sheehan,Withers, & Walker, 2005) and provide unique anddirect insight into children's perceptions and concernsregarding their self-identity as individuals with LD.

This is the first study to show self-disclosure behaviorand the sharing of "inner life" on the Internet by chil-dren with self-identified LD through self-initiated mes-sages. It appeared in several instances that the childrenwere more willing to self-disclose through online mes-sages than in face-to-face "real-world" interactions (e.g.,

Volume 29 , Fall2006 263

8/2/2019 My LD

12/17

"How do not show thathave a Id so peoplewon't make fitnof me . 'I "I know I've got to ask for help, but I'm embar-rassed,and, I don't know how to ask for help. Do you haveany tips on this?",I'm also embarrassed o ask the teacher.What should I do?"). This finding is consistent with pastresearch regarding the formation of online relationships(Bargh & McKenna, 2004) and self-disclosure Goinson,2001) and has special importance for a population ofchildren who often have social skill deficits and areprone to social rejection, as the virtual environmentmay offer a social context that does not accentuate theirdeficits, and provides a place where they are more likelyto experience positive interactions with their peers.Results of the study also corroborate existing researchon the challenges experienced by children with LD,including academic difficulties, emotional problems,and social distress (e.g., Kavale & Forness, 1995;Swanson et al., 1999; Swanson & Keogh, 1990; Vaughnet al., 1998) as well as other qualitative studies of chil-dren (e.g., Albinger, 1995; Gutterman, 1995; Reid &Button, 1995) and adults (Goldberg et al., 2003;McNulty, 2003; Reiff et al., 1997; Rodis et al., 2001;Wambsgan, 1990) aimed at capturing the insider per-spective.These results document that a large number of chil-dren demonstrate knowledge and understanding of theirdifficulties in line with current LD research (e.g., read-ing, writing, math, memory, processing speed), whereasothers continue to ask such questions as "What is LD?"Most children expressed negative emotions, complain-ing not only about varied academic difficulties, but alsoabout their emotional distress and social isolation. Inaddition, many reported negative attitudes from theirpeers and, in several instances, even abusive behavior, inline with the research on peer relations (Bryan, 1999;Kavale & Forness, 1995; Vaughn et al., 1998; Weiner,2002). Their messages often expressed negative pastexperiences, as well as concerns and fears regardingfuture school experiences and peer interactions.

The social and emotional distress expressed by thesechildren is consistent with the finding of the limitednumber of previous studies also focused on capturingthe inner voices of children with LD. For example,Guterman (1995) found that elementary and secondarystudents with LD felt their typically achieving peers hadnegative stereotypes of LD and viewed them as lessintelligent, resulting in efforts to conceal their LD.Albinger (1995) reported that elementary students withLD complained that other students called them names(e.g., "stupid," "dumb"), which made them feel "sad."Similarly, Reid and Button (1995) found that elemen-tary students with LD in grades 6-7 expressed feelingisolated from, and victimized by, their peers. It is dis-concerting to think that now - more than 10 years since

these studies were published - children with LD con-tinue to face the same kinds of social rejection and vic-timization.

Most of the children also wrote messages asking forhelp from both their peers and the virtual characters onthe site. The importance of helping resources for stu-dents with LD has been established in earlier studies(Stone, 2004). In our study, the children's reactions gen-erally indicated that they were satisfied with theresponse to their requests for help and advice.Considering that several children appeared hesitant toask for help in the "real" world, and were afraid of theirpeers' reactions, the virtual world of the Internet mightprovide an important alternative, or complement, toassisting and supporting children with LD. The poten-tial of the Internet as a support system is particularlyimportant in light of research showing that individualswith LD who are willing to ask for and receive help fromothers are more likely to attain "life success." Fo r exam-ple, longitudinal research by Raskind and colleagues(Goldberg et al., 2003; Raskind et al., 1999) has shownthat successful individuals with LD were more likely toseek and accept support offered by others than a groupof LD adults with less positive life outcomes. Similarly,Reiff et al. (1997) found that "social ecologies" (sup-portive and helpful people) play a crucial role in the lifesuccess of persons with LD.

Only a few children reported positive expectationsfor a better future, the likelihood/possibility of over-coming difficulties, or expressed any positive aspects oftheir LD . Thus, based on their online messages, mostchildren considered their LD and "associated difficul-ties" as an undesired part of their identity. They usedpossessive language like "I have LD," and "my LD,"self-disclosing their LD identity along with words indi-cating a lack of competence, such as "I cannot," "Havetrouble with. . . ," and ".... is hard." Several childrenwent further, expressing negative attitudes towardstheir deficits and a desire to "get rid of" their LD. Thisfinding presents a challenge for counselors and educa-tors to help empower these youngsters to cope withtheir difficulties and "reframe" them (Reiff et al., 1997).Thus, as suggested by Higgins et al. (2002), individualswith LD who are able to view their disability as a posi-tive source in their lives may be in a better position toachieve positive life outcomes. Future interventionalstudies should explore ways to help children with LDdevelop positive views of their day-to-day challenges,moving beyond a mere focus on deficits.

Beyond the disclosure of difficulties and LD identities,the online messages illustrate that the participatingchildren shared age-appropriate youth culture (e.g.,music, fashion, movies, "romance") (Alvermann, 2004)and that their LD's represented only part of their world.

LearningDisabilityQuarterly 264

8/2/2019 My LD

13/17

8/2/2019 My LD

14/17

nities may provide children the opportunity to exploreand accentuate their strengths, abilities and special tal-ents, removed from the real world that often places agreater emphasis on deficits.Despite its positive contributions, this study has sev-eral limitations. It is a descriptive study that, due tolegal, practical, and ethical concerns, cannot validatethe identification of the sample as "LD." Self-identifica-tion of LD was used, with the recognition that researchon the Internet ultimately requires the development ofinnovative procedures to ensure the validity of the sam-ple and the authenticity of the information retrieved.This is a key consideration for future research as theInternet can provide "insider information" that other-wise may not be available.

Further, the study only included children who identi-fied themselves as "LD," and the majority of registeredusers of the site did not identify themselves as LD. Thus,it is not clear if the children who did not identify them-selves as LD are actually not LD, or whether they are,but did not want to disclose their LD identity. Clearly,the study sample may be biased if it primarily consistedof LD children who already had a propensity towardself-disclosure and, therefore, were not reflective ofthe range of individual differences within the LD popu-lation. Unfortunately, at this time, we are unable todetermine the hetero- or homogeneity of the sample.Regardless, even if the sample possesses a certain bias,we have been able to capture the self-presentations andinner lives of a group of children with self-identified LD.

Despite its limitations, we believe that this study hasshown that the Internet can serve as a safe environmentthat enables children through self-initiated messages todisclose their LD identity and openly share the experi-ence of living with an LD. In the absence of any "magi-ca l passageway," the Internet may be one of the bestportals we have into the minds of children with LD and,ultimately, as a medium for addressing their diverseneeds.

REFERENCESAbrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (1990). Social identity theory. Ne w York:Harvester.Albinger, P. (1995). Stories from the resource room: Piano lessons,imaginary illness and broken-down cars. Journal of LearningDisabilities,28(10), 615-621.Alvermann, D. E. (2004). Media, information communicationtechnologies, and youth literacies: A cultural studies perspec-tive. The American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 78-84.Al-Yagon, M., & Mikulincer, M. (2004). Socioemotional and aca-demic adjustment among children with learning disorders: Th emediational role of attachment-based factors. Journalof SpecialEducation, 38, 111-124.Archer, J. L. (1980). Self-disclosure. In T. Wegner & V. D. (Eds.),The self in social psychology (pp. 183-204). London: OxfordUniversity Press.

Axelrod, L. (1982). Social perception in learning disabled adoles-cents. JournalofLearningDisabilities,15(10), 610-613.

Bargh J. A. (2002). Beyond simple truths: The human-Internetinteraction. JournalofSocial Issues, 58, 1-8.

Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K.Y.A. (2004). The Internet and sociallife. AnnualReview in Psychology, 55, 573-590.

Bauminger, N., Edelsztein, H. S., & Morash, J. (2005). Social infor-mation processing and emotional understanding in childrenwith LD . Journalof LearningDisabilities,38(1), 45-61.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. New York: Basic Books.Bryan, T. (1998). Social competence of students with learning dis-

abilities. In B.Y.L. Wong (Ed.), Learningabout earningdisabilities(pp. 237-275). San Diego, CA : Academic Press

Bryan, T. (1999). Reflections on a research career: It ain't over tillit's over. ExceptionalChildren, 65(4), 438-448.

Bryan, T., Burstein, K. S., & Ergul, C. (2004). The social-emotionalside of learning disabilities: A science-based presentation of thestate of the art. LearningDisabilityQuarterly, 27(1) 45-

Bucholtz, M. (2002). Youth and cultural practice. Annual Review ofAnthropologD;31, 525-553.

Calvert, S. L. (2002). Identity construction on the Internet. In S. L.Calvert, A. B. Jordan, & R. R. Cocking (Eds.), Children in the dig-ital age:Influences of electronic media on development (pp. 57-70).Westport, CT : Praeger.

Calvert, S. L., Mahler, B. A., Zehnder, S. M., Jenkins, A., & Lee,M. S. (2003). Gender differences in preadolescent children'sonline interactions: Symbolic modes of self-presentation andself-expression. Applied DevelopmentalPsychology, 24, 627-644.

Cole, J. I., Suman, S., Schramm, P., Lunn, R., Aquino,J. S., Fortier, D.,Gussin, P., Hanson, K., Huang, W., West, M., & Zusman, E. (2004).The digital future report: Surveying the digital fiuture, Year four.http://www.digitalcenter.org/downloads/DigitalFutureReport-Year4-2004.pdf.

Children's Online Privacy and Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA), 15US C 6501 et seq.Dimitrovsk-y, L., Spector, H., Levy-Schiff, R., & Vakil, E. (1998).Interpretation of facial expressions of affect in children withlearning disabilities with verbal or nonverbal deficits. JournalofLearningDisabilities,31(3), 286-293, 312.

Dringus, L. P., & Ellis, T. (2005). Using data mining as a strategyfor assessing asynchronous discussion forums. Computers &Education,45, 141-160.

Dudley-Marling, C. (2004). The social construction of learning dis-abilities. Journalof LearningDisabilities,37(6), 482-490.

Elbaum, B., & Vaughn, S. (2003). Self-concept and students withlearning disabilities. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham(Eds.), The handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 229-241). NewYork: Guilford Press.Ferri, B. A. (2000). The hidden cost of difference: Women withlearning disabilities. Learning Disabilities:A MultidisciplinaryJournal,10(3), 129-138.

Fleischmann, A. (2004). Narratives published on the Internet byparents of children with autism: What do they reveal and whyis it important? Focus on Autism and Other DevelopmentalDisabilities,19(1), 35-43.

Goldberg, R. J., Higgins, E. L., Raskind, M. H., & Herman, K. L.(2003). Predictors of success in individuals with learning dis-abilities: A qualitative analysis of a 20-year longitudinal study.LearningDisabilitiesResearch and Practice,18(4), 222-236.

Guterman, B. R. (1995). The validity of learning disabilities cate-gorical services: The consumer's view. Exceptional Children, 62,111-124.

Harter, S. (1998). The development of self-representations. In W.Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Social, emotional and personality

LearningDisabilityQuarterly 266

8/2/2019 My LD

15/17

development (5th ed.). Handbook of childpsychology (Vol. 3, pp.533-617). New York: Wiley.

Higgins, E. L., Raskind, M. H., Goldberg, R. J., & Herman, K. L.(2002). Stages of acceptance of a learning disability: The impactof labeling. LearningDisability Quarterly,25, 3-18.

Huntington, D. D. , & Bender, W. N. (1993). Adolescence withlearning disabilities at risk? Emotional well-being, depression,suicide. JournalofLearningDisabilities,26, 159-166.Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated com-munication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity.EuropeanJournalofSocial Psychology, 31, 177-192.

Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1995). Social skill deficits and train-ing: A meta-analysis of the research in learning disabilities.Advances in LearningandBehavioralDisabilities,119-160.

Kavale, K. A., & Mostert, M. P. (2004). Social skills interventionsfor individuals with learning disabilities. Learning DisabilityQuarterly,27(1), 31-44.

Kim, S. T., & Weaver, D. (2002). Communication research aboutthe Internet: A thematic meta-analysis. New Media & Society,4(4), 518-538.

Kraut, R. E., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., &Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. JournalofSocialIssues, 58(1), 49-74.Kraut, R. E., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukhopad-hyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social tech-nology that reduces social involvement and psychologicalwell-being. American Psychologist,53, 1017-1032.

Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to itsmethodology. Newbury Park, CA : Sage.

Kupferberg, I., & Ben-Peretz, M. (2004). Emerging and experi-enced professional selves in cyber discourse. In C. Vrasidas &G. V. Glass (Eds.), Online professional development for teachers.Current perspectives on applied infornation technologies: Onlineprofessionaldevelopment (Vol. 2, pp. 105-121). Greenwich, CT:IAP.

La Greca, A. M., & Stone, W. L. (1990). LD status and achievement:Confounding variables in the study of children's social status,self-esteem and behavioral functioning. Journal of LearningDisabilities,23(8) 483-490.

Livingstone, S. (2003). Children's use of the Internet: Reflectionson the emerging research agenda. Ne w Media & Society, 5(2),147-166.

MacArthur, C. (2003). What have we learned about learning dis-abilities from qualitative research: A review of studies. In H. L.Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), The handbook oflearn-ing disabilities (pp. 532-549). New York: Guilford Press.

Maczewski, M. (2002). Exploring identities through the Internet:Youth experiences online. Child and Youth CareForum, 31(2),111-129.

Margalit, M. (1994). Loneliness among children with special needs:Theory, research, coping and intervention. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Margalit, M. (1998). Loneliness and coherence among preschoolchildren with learning disabilities. Journal of LearningDisabil-ities, 31(2) 173-180.

Margalit, M. (2003). Resilience model among individuals withlearning disabilities: Proximal and distal influences. LearningDisabilitiesResearch & Practice,18(2), 82-86.

Margalit, M., & Al-Yagon, M. (2002). The loneliness experience ofchildren with learning disabilities. In B.Y.L. Wong & M.Donahue (Eds., The socialdimensions of learningdisabilities (pp.53-75). Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Margalit, M., & Zak, I. (1984). Anxiety and self-concept of learningdisabled children. JournalofLearningDisabilities,17, 537-539.

Margalit, M., & Ziman, T. (2004). Virtual friendship comparisonsofe-messages between students with and withoutLD. Unpublishedresearch report, School of Education, Tel-Aviv University.

Mayring, Ph. (2000). Qualitative nhaltsanalyse.Grundlagenund tech-niken (7th ed.). Weinheim, Germany: Deutscher Studien Verlag.

McKenna, K.Y.A., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M.EJ. (2002).Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attrac-tion? Journal ofSocial Issues,58, 19-31.

McNulty, M. A. (2003). Dyslexia and the life course. Journal ofLearningDisabilities,36(4), 363-381.

Michinov, N., Michinov, E., & Toczek-Capelle, M. C. (2004). Socialidentity, group processes, and performance in synchronouscomputer-mediated communication. Group Dynamics: Theory,Research, and Practice,8(1), 27-39.

Nabuzoka, D., & Smith, P.K. (1995). Identification of expressionsof emotions by children with and without learning disabilities.LearningDisabilitiesResearch andPractice, 10(2), 91-101.

Poplin, M. (1995). The dialectic nature of technology and holism:Use of technology to liberate individuals with learning disabili-ties. LearningDisabilityQuarterly,18, 131-140.

Raskind, M. H., Goldberg, R. J., Higgins, E. L., & Herman, K. L.(1999). Patterns of change and predictors of success in individ-uals with learning disabilities: Results from a twenty-year longi-tudinal study. LearningDisabilitiesResearch and Practice,14(1),35-49.

Reid, D. K., & Button, L. J. (1995). Anna's story: Narratives of per-sonal experience about being labeled learning disabled. JournalofLearningDisabilities,28(10), 602-614.

Reid, D. K., & Valle, J. W. (2004). The discursive practice oflearning disability: Implications for instruction and parent-school relations. JournalofLearningDisabilities,37(6), 466-482.

Reiff, H. B., Gerber, P.J., & Ginsberg, R. (1997). Exceeding expecta-tions: Successfid adults with learningdisabilities.Austin, TX : Pro-Ed .

Rodis, P., Garrod, A., & Boscardin, M. L. (2001). Learningdisabili-ties and life stories. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Rosenberg, M. S., Bott, D. , Majsterek, D. , Chiang, B., Gartland, D.,& Wesson, C. (1992). Minimum standards for the description ofparticipants in learning disabilities research. LearningDisabilityQuarterly,15, 114-121.

Rubin, Z. (1975). Disclosing oneself to a stranger: reciprocity andits limits. journalof ExperimentalSocial Psychology, 11, 233-260.

San Miguel, S. K., Forness, S. R., & Kavale, K. A. (1996). Social skillsdeficits in learning disabilities: The psychiatric comorbidityhypothesis. LearningDisability Quarterly,19, 252-261.

Sassenberg, K., & Postmes, T. (2002). Cognitive and strategicprocesses in small groups: Effects of anonymity of the self andanonymity of the group on social influence. British Journal ofSocial Psychology, 41, 463-480.

Sisterhen, D. H., & Gerber, P.J. (1989). Auditory, visual and mul-tisensory nonverbal social perception in adolescents with andwithout learning disabilities. Journal of LearningDisabilities,22(4), 245-249, 257.

Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic nterview. New York: Holt,Rinehart, & Winston.Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participantobservation. New York: Holt,

Rinehart, & Winston.Stone, C. A. (2004). The role of social support and congruency of

perspectives in moderating threats to self-concept in high-func-tioning adolescents with learning disabilities: A preliminaryreport. Thalamus, 22(1), 40-49.

Stone, C. A., & May, A. L. (2002). The accuracy of academic self-evaluations in adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal ofLearningDisabilities,35(4), 370-383.

Volume 29, Fall 2006 267

8/2/2019 My LD

16/17

Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (Eds.). (2003). Handbookof learning disabilities.New York: Guilford Press

Swanson, H. L., Hoskyn, M., & Lee, C. (1999). Interventions or stu-dents with learning disabilities:A meta-analysis of treabnentout-comes. New York: Guilford Press.

Swanson, H. L., & Keogh, B. (1990). Learningdisabilities:Theoreticaland research issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. EducationalPsychology, 25(6), 631-645.Turkle, S. (1995). Life on tire screen: Identity in the age of the Internet.

New York: Simon & Schuster.Turkle, S. (1996). Virtuality and its discontents: Searching for com-

munity in cyberspace. The American Prospect,24, 50-57.Turner, J. C. , Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P., Reicher, S. D. , & Wetherell,

M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorizationtheory. Oxford, England: Blackwell.

VanLear, C. A., Sheehan, M., Withers, L. A., &Walker, R. A. (2005).AA Online: The enactment of supportive computer mediatedcommunication. Western Journalof Communication, 69(1), 5-27.

Vaughn, S., Elbaum, B., Schumm, J. S., & Hughes, M. T. (1998).Social outcomes for students with and without learning disabil-ities in inclusive classrooms. Journal of LearningDisabilities,31(5), 428-436.Wambsgan, D. T. (1990). Being successful with dyslexia. JournalofLearningDisabilities,23(1), 9-10.

Werner, E. E. (1993). Risk and resilience in individuals with learn-ing disabilities: Lessons learned from the Kauai longitudinalstudy. LearningDisabilitiesResearch & Practice,8, 28-35.

West, T. C. (1991). In the mind's eye. Buffalo, NY : PrometheusBooks.

Wiener, J. (2002). Friendship and social adjustment of childrenwith learning disabilities, in B. Wong & M. Donahue (Eds.), Thesocial dimensions of learning disabilities (pp. 93-114). Chicago:Erlbaunm.

Wiener, J. (2004). Do peer relationships foster behavioral adjust-ment in children with learning disabilities? LearningDisabilityQuarterly,27, 21-30.

Wiener, J., & Schneider, B. H. (2002). A multisource exploration ofthe friendship patterns of children with and without learningdisabilities. JournalofAbnonnal Child Psychology, 30, 127-141.

Wright, K. B. (2004). Online relational maintenance strategiesand perceptions of partners within exclusively Internet-basedand primary Internet-based relations. Communication Studies,55(2), 239-254.

FOOTNOTES1 An independent institutional review board (IRB) found this

research fully compliant with U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services' regulations governing the protection ofhuman subjects and exempt from IRB review. This opinion wasbased on the fact that "there were no human subjects under theCommon Rule definition" (45 CF R 46.102(f)). Further, accord-ing to the IRB, even if there were human subjects in this study,the research would be exempt under category (b)(2) since "thereis (i) no identifiable information and (ii) disclosure would notreasonably place the children at risk for being damaged."

2 The first author of this paper is employed as director of researchby the foundation that developed and operates the website.Although he was not involved in the initial development ofthe website, he has provided ongoing consultation regardingcontent, accessibility, and user communications since its publiclaunch in the fall of 2003.3 Guests include non-registered users, as well as registered userswho may have signed on as guests.4 Participation in the study was based on self-identification of LDfrom surveys, message board posts, and e-mails. Please note thatnot all participants self-identified again in emails

APPENDIXExamples of Message Content Indicating Presence of LD/Dyslexia

(Spellingerrors have not been corrected)LDWas up Kyle I don't like ld what can I do?wy do i get teased at school beacausei have an LDI haveLD in readingwhat can I do to helpWhy did i have to be the one with Id and my sister wants id to.I haveLDI have a LD and peoplemake fin of me because have am havespeal ed

i can'tspell hI have a LD problem andpeople don't want to be aroundme or hangout with me!

I am in the LD class.do you have an Ld like me.Why do i have LD?My boyfriend doesn'tknow that I have a LD.I arm 10 and live in ... my Id is writingi want to tell nmy friend s about my Id but idont know how, can you

help?i have 2 Id.ivy do i get teased at school beacause i have an LD

I haveLD in readingwhat can I do to helpHow doIget rid of my IdDyslexiai also have dyslexiaI'm sorry aboutyour dyslexia. but I have it toI have dyslexia and am in the 3rdgrade.yes. i have Id or dyslexia. do you?I have dyslexia, ifI told my friends that would they still like me.

AUTHOR NOTEThe authors would like to express their gratitude to the staff ofSparkTop.org for their assistance in conducting this research.Although we gratefully acknowledge all staff for their extraordi-nary efforts, we are particularly thankful to Rajiv Gadkari for devel-oping the data-mining tool that enabled a detailed and systematicanalysis of the online messages. Finally, our deepest appreciationgoes to the children in this study who revealed their experiencesof living with learning disabilities.Address correspondence to: Marshall H. Raskind, Charles andHelen Schwab Foundation, 1650 S. Amphlett Blvd., Suite 300, SanMateo, CA 94402; mraskinCschwablearning.org

LeaningDisabilityQuarterly 268

8/2/2019 My LD

17/17

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: |DdMy LD|DD: Childrens Voices on the Internet

SOURCE: Learning Disability Quarterly 29 no4 Fall 2006

PAGE(S): 253-68

WN: 0628801916004

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it

is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in

violation of the copyright is prohibited.

Copyright 1982-2006 The H.W. Wilson Company. All rights reserved.