**2. General studies on LD and families**

There is currently a dearth of scientific production addressing the family environment of children with LD. This is perhaps due to the atypical legal recognition of these problems (Dyson, 2010; Feagans, Merriwether, & Haldane, 1991). Most of the research focuses on the socioemotional context of pupils of the subgroup named Special Educational Needs (Hegarty, 2008). However, due to international interest in this area, and due to the legal recognition attained in Spain (LOE, 2006), there is an increasing production of studies in this area. Thus, when we use international databases specialized in social education we find that the terms learning disabilities, specific learning disabilities, dyslexia, dyscalculia, dysgraphya and together with terms referring to the family (parents, parental, family, home) produce studies with differing orientations. One focuses on the relationship between genetics and LD. Most of these studies confirm LDs are inherited, though they agree that their course can be determined by environmental variables. They point towards the influence of purely educational factors, such as the role of teachers, the teaching method or procedures followed, as well as family variables related to home provision of resources, parental level of education or the family's socioeconomic situation (Berninger, Abbott & Thompson, 2001; Lyytinen, Eklund, & Lyytinen, 2005; Monuteaux, Faraone, Herzig, Navsaria, & Biederman, 2005; Shalev, et al., 2001; Snowling, et al., 2007). The thesis that despite the LD being part of the individual there is a high influence of environmental aspects on its course and severity is further reinforced by these studies.

Another group of studies (some of which are summarized in Table 1) focus on analyzing and evaluating families' knowledge of LD, what they are, their origin, course, consequences, etc. They evaluate the impact of these disorders on family members as well as the functioning on the family microsystem. They also analyze the type of attention granted by relatives and the involvement, especially of parents, in education and their level of satisfaction with schools or teachers (Buswell, Norwich, & Burden, 2004; Espina, Fernández, & Pumar, 2001; Norwich, Griffits, & Burden, 2005). There are also studies that focus either on the effects of LD on the family (acceptance, coping, stress) or on the consequences of family variables on LD (socioeconomic status, family atmosphere, parents' training, parents' perception of the child, etc.) (Antshel & Joseph, 2006; Strnadová, 2006).

Bodovski & Youn, 2010; Dyson, 2010; Foley, 2011; Ghazarian & Buehler, 2010; Heiman, Zinck, & Heath, 2008; Marks 2006; Pérez, Ferri, Melià, & Miranda, 2007; Ruiz, 2001). Therefore, specific interventions aimed at promoting protecting factors and minimizing risk factors require identifying these prior to the intervention, contextually and in a wide sense. This enables a global intervention which fosters all the positive aspects and tries to reduce

Based on the above, the present research aims to offer a wide view of possible contextual interventions regarding LD in the home. In order to do so, we start by providing a detailed analysis of international research that has focused on the family as a means of improving the situation of children with LD. We analyze the main points of interest of these interventions, describing them in detail. We also analyze some procedures to stimulate families' collaboration in helping children with LD with their homework. Finally, we justify the need to work directly with parents, and suggest procedures or resources related to the development of programs for parents, support groups or associations that would be efficient in this respect.

There is currently a dearth of scientific production addressing the family environment of children with LD. This is perhaps due to the atypical legal recognition of these problems (Dyson, 2010; Feagans, Merriwether, & Haldane, 1991). Most of the research focuses on the socioemotional context of pupils of the subgroup named Special Educational Needs (Hegarty, 2008). However, due to international interest in this area, and due to the legal recognition attained in Spain (LOE, 2006), there is an increasing production of studies in this area. Thus, when we use international databases specialized in social education we find that the terms learning disabilities, specific learning disabilities, dyslexia, dyscalculia, dysgraphya and together with terms referring to the family (parents, parental, family, home) produce studies with differing orientations. One focuses on the relationship between genetics and LD. Most of these studies confirm LDs are inherited, though they agree that their course can be determined by environmental variables. They point towards the influence of purely educational factors, such as the role of teachers, the teaching method or procedures followed, as well as family variables related to home provision of resources, parental level of education or the family's socioeconomic situation (Berninger, Abbott & Thompson, 2001; Lyytinen, Eklund, & Lyytinen, 2005; Monuteaux, Faraone, Herzig, Navsaria, & Biederman, 2005; Shalev, et al., 2001; Snowling, et al., 2007). The thesis that despite the LD being part of the individual there is a high influence of environmental

Another group of studies (some of which are summarized in Table 1) focus on analyzing and evaluating families' knowledge of LD, what they are, their origin, course, consequences, etc. They evaluate the impact of these disorders on family members as well as the functioning on the family microsystem. They also analyze the type of attention granted by relatives and the involvement, especially of parents, in education and their level of satisfaction with schools or teachers (Buswell, Norwich, & Burden, 2004; Espina, Fernández, & Pumar, 2001; Norwich, Griffits, & Burden, 2005). There are also studies that focus either on the effects of LD on the family (acceptance, coping, stress) or on the consequences of family variables on LD (socioeconomic status, family atmosphere, parents' training, parents'

aspects on its course and severity is further reinforced by these studies.

perception of the child, etc.) (Antshel & Joseph, 2006; Strnadová, 2006).

the negative ones.

**2. General studies on LD and families** 


Interventions in Specific Learning Disabilities Through Families 91

Finally, we have located a third group of studies, which based on the results of the above, address specific interventions in the family context for pupils with LD from different perspectives. It is precisely this set of studies that are the subject analysis of the present

Naturalist approaches consider the ideal to be to support the student through all his/her surrounding formal and informal educational agents. This is especially important if s/he presents problems in learning and requires specific personal measures and materials (Gortmaker, Daly, McCurdy, Persampieri, & Hergenrader, 2007; Polloway, Bursuck, & Epstein, 2001). Also, regarding treatment, it is important to start intervention as soon as possible in order to guarantee higher efficacy. Based on all this, we can posit the family

Families have a great potential to help students, as well as being capable of increasing learning environments and opportunities. They can also offer children individualized attention and make immediate modifications when the child requires it. Despite all this, parents are often not aware of how to play these aspects to their advantage. They often lack the strategic knowledge needed to help their children with academic tasks, even though with adequate support, they can be very effective intervention agents (Persampieri, Gortmaker, Daly, Sheridan, & McCurdy, 2006), which makes work with families highly commendable. There are two branches of intervention in LD using the family. The first focuses on getting the families to help in consolidating specific knowledge and/or to continue teachers' work at home. The second branch focuses on improving family interactions and helping parents naturally stimulate the development of the child's area of difficulty at home. Both branches can be used at the same time and are often enriched through family training activities. In spite of this, there is not yet a systematic and organized approach to collaboration with families in the current support model for LD. This model is still not very specific or developed in most Spanish regions. Another factor is that specialists in LD do not have much time to work with the children, since they travel between different schools. There are, therefore, time and space constraints that hinder the development of

Prueba de evaluación de las relaciones intrafamiliares (FF-SIL). Cuestionario de afrontamiento familiar.

Funcionamiento familiar inadecuado en niños con DEA. Estilo afrontamiento más utilizado fue el centrado

en el problema.

*Objectives Participants Evaluation Results* 

43 familias de alumnos de primaria con trastornos del aprendizaje.

Table 1. Empirical research about family and LD.

**3. LD interventions in the family context** 

context as the optimal space for work in this area.

collaboration with the family.

Domínguez y Pérez,

afrontamiento de dificultad y del ingreso en educación

2003. Determinar funcionamiento de familias de niños con

DEA, su

especial.

work.


Parents: Family assessment measures; Parent-adolescent communication scale.

Students: People in my life; Social

Children;

Competence Scale for Children; Reynolds Child Depression scale; Delinquency rating scale of self and others; Seattle Personality Questionnaire for

Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction Scale. Peer Nomination Inventory. McMaster Family Functioning Model Scale. Raven.

Analysis of students'

(individual transition plan), observations, focus groups and individual interviews.

documents

socioeconomic status and lack of collaboration in teaching mathematics to children are risk factors for

Both parents perceive their children over-or underinvolved with them and identify the same

communication problems. Students identify bigger problems with maternal involvement than recognized by them. Students perceive less openness and more communication problems

Relationships with parents, teachers, peers, associated with social, behavioral and emotional adjustment of students with LD.

Communication with parents associated with lower crime.

Positive correlation between peer acceptance and family functioning. Lack of relation between family functioning

Students feel that their selfdetermination efforts are thwarted at school and have more opportunities at home when they are supported by

and loneliness.

parents .

than parents.

LD.

*Objectives Participants Evaluation Results* 

104 families of students, 12- 15 years old; 52 LD and 52 without LD.

96 Primary students with

borderline, or

34 students with LD, 64 students without LD, enrolled in 4th-6th year of Primary and their families.

15 students with LD (16- 19 years old) divided into:

Afro-American, Europeans and Hispanic

LD,

with emotionalbehavioral problems.

Heiman, Zinck, & Heath, 2008.

Examine perceptions of parents and children of family relationships and communication.

Murray & Greenberg,

To examine children's perceptions of their relationships with parents, teachers, peers and social, behavioral and emotional development.

Guoliang, Zhang, &

Explore characteristics and relations between loneliness, acceptance

Yan, 2005.

and family functioning in children with and without LD.

Trainor, 2005. Examine perceptions of self-determination for students with LD during transition and students' perceptions of parents' and teachers' influence.

2006.


Table 1. Empirical research about family and LD.

Finally, we have located a third group of studies, which based on the results of the above, address specific interventions in the family context for pupils with LD from different perspectives. It is precisely this set of studies that are the subject analysis of the present work.
