THE DATA ACCUMULATION AND ANALYSIS WERE LIMITED BY TWO PROBLEMS -- THE LACK OF A PROPER DEFINITION OF LEARNING DISABILITY AND THE IMPRACTICALITY OF BRINGING THE STUDENTS TO THE TESTING SITE ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION. THE DATA WERE RESTRICTED TO WHAT COULD BE ACCUMULATED ON ONE TESTING AND INTERVIEW SESSION. SEVERAL OF THE DIAGNOSTIC TESTS ARE EXPLAINED, AND THE TYPE OF LD THEY DETERMINED IS NOTED. AN ATTEMPT IS MADE TO DEFINE LD, BUT AS NO STANDING DEFINITION SEEMED ACCEPTABLE, A COMBINATION OF SEVERAL DIFFERENT ONES WAS USED. DUE TO THE LACK OF A CLEAR DEFINITION, DECISION RULES HAD TO BE MADE TO EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE. DISCREPANCIES WERE STILL APPARENT IN THE COLLECTION OF TEST AND INTERVIEW RESULTS. THE DECISION RULES AND REVIEW PROCESSES ARE DESCRIBED IN DETAIL, WITH EXPLANATIONS OF HOW THE VARIOUS GROUPS WERE CLASSIFIED AND EVALUATIONS MADE. CLINICAL DIAGNOSIS OF LD, EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE, AND ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL WERE SOME OF THE ASPECTS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THE DECISION RULES. THE STUDENTS WITH EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE OR MENTAL RETARDATION WERE SCREENED OUT DURING THIS PROCESS. FOLLOWING INTERVIEWS AND DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT, THE DECISION RULES WERE APPLIED ONCE AGAIN, AND CASES OF LD WERE DETERMINED. AS A QUALITY CONTROL MEASURE, MONITORING TEAMS WERE SENT OUT DURING THE TESTING AND THE DIAGNOSTICIANS WERE GIVEN A TRAINING SESSION BEFORE THE TESTING. DATA ON THE TEST SCORES AND REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (BAC)