Learning Difficulties in Reading, Writing, and Mathematics among Primary School Children with Learning Problems in Assam and Manipur

Inclusive education remains a central priority in India’s educational reform agenda, particularly in light of the Right to Education Act (2009) and Sustainable Development Goal 4, which emphasize equitable and quality education for all. Despite policy commitments, many primary school children continue to experience persistent learning difficulties, particularly in foundational academic domains such as reading, writing, and mathematics. The present study investigates the nature and extent of learning difficulties among primary school children identified with learning problems in Assam and Manipur. A quantitative descriptive research design was adopted. Eighty-four students from Classes I to V were assessed using a researcher-developed tool aligned with NCERT textbooks and grade-level learning outcomes. A three-point scoring system was used to categorize responses: unable to answer, able to answer with support, and answered appropriately. Descriptive statistical analysis was employed to identify grade-wise and gender-wise trends. The findings indicate that learning difficulties increase with grade progression, with Class V students demonstrating the highest difficulty in reading (50.65%) and writing (49.67%), while mathematics difficulty peaked in Classes IV (50.81%) and V (50.23%). Girls demonstrated slightly higher difficulty levels across domains compared to boys. The study highlights the urgent need for early identification, structured remediation, and inclusive pedagogical practices at the primary level.

learning difficulties, inclusive education, primary education, reading difficulty, writing difficulty, mathematics difficulty

1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194059 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Berninger, V. W., & Winn, W. D. (2006). Implications of advancements in brain research and technology for writing development, writing instruction, and educational evolution. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 96–114). Guilford Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Butterworth, B., Varma, S., & Laurillard, D. (2011). Dyscalculia: From brain to education. Science, 332(6033), 1049–1053. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1201536 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 103–127. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018053 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. A. (2018). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Geary, D. C. (2011). Cognitive predictors of achievement growth in mathematics: A five-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1539–1552. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025510 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2000). The role of self-regulation and transcription skills in writing development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2012). Informing writing: The benefits of formative assessment. Alliance for Excellent Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academy Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (2018). Samagra Shiksha: An integrated scheme for school education. Government of India. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. National Council of Educational Research and Training. (2006). Position paper: National focus group on education of children with special needs. NCERT. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Perfetti, C. A., & Stafura, J. Z. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.827687 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Viking Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Shanahan, T. (2016). Relationships between reading and writing development. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed., pp. 194–207). Guilford Press. 22. Singal, N. (2019). Challenges and opportunities in inclusive education in India: A contextual analysis. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7–8), 827–840. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1441333 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Snowling, M. J. (2013). Early identification and interventions for dyslexia: A contemporary view. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 13(1), 7–14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14713802.2012.01262.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360–407. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Swanson, H. L., & Siegel, L. (2001). Learning disabilities as a working memory deficit. Issues in Education, 7(1), 1–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study