AbstractThis study examines the validity of teacher judgment as the primary or sole means for determining eligibility for special education services among pupils referred as learning disabled (LD). The rationale is predicated, in part, upon two premises: (a) the high referral‐to‐placement ratio; (b) the regular education teacher's provision of the most influential data in the eligibility determination process. Results indicate that reliance on the teacher's ability to judge whether or not a student is LD would nearly double the number of students identified as LD and result in far more errors (false positives) than would be acceptable. Any savings associated with reduced testing costs would be more than offset by the doubling of personnel costs associated with increased services. Given the national concern about overidentification of the LD, extreme dependence on the use of “teacher as test” is mi