There's tons of research and empirical evidence already in existence related to RWOL.
The very first "position paper" I wrote in my career way back in about 1988 or so had to do with "the expectancy effect' (aka "the Hawthorne Effect). Just because we learned about it in our undergraduate days doesn't mean it's not a real -- and powerful -- phenomenon!
I'm not pretending my two-page article is research, but I am asserting the expectancy effect, the Hawthorne Effect, and attribution theory are well-founded and steeped in tons of research.
(Hey, don't be too harsh, it was my very first such paper!)
And the research basically states (in real language), that students will act as others expect them to act.
"If you expect a student to act as if they are 'learning disabled,' the s/he will act as if s/he is 'learning disabled' (whatever that is)."
Here's a great social experiment you can try tomorrow in your own district: ask the next one-hundred teachers you see to describe what they expect from "learning disabled" [or, um, any others who have been labelled] students. Then be amazed at how each student is performing exactly how the teacher expects him or her to act!
It's amazing!
When NASP asserts that there is plenty of research already in existence to support RWOL, I agree. And I, as an empiricist, am all for the use of science, research, and data in what we do.
Please share other research in this section to add to our collective base.
