In this issue - Dyslexia Action

The Journal of The Dyslexia GuildSummer 2008 Volume 19 Number 3

In this issueSupporting Adults atWork

Working Memory,Reading Developmentand Dyslexia

Dyslexia: DifferentCultures, SimilarBehavioural Signs

Dyslexia ReviewThe Journal of the Dyslexia Guild

3

Editorial

I was extremely pleased and honoured to be offered therole of guest editor for this special edition of DyslexiaReview that has articles which were stimulated by thisyear’s 7th BDA International Conference held at theHarrogate Conference Centre and supported byOlympus. The conference’s planning committee, chairedby Maggie Snowling, produced an extremely successfulconference with an amazing array of high-quality keylectures, symposia, workshops, and exhibitions.Understandably, the conference’s programme ofabstracts could not provide detailed accounts of theseinputs because of lack of space and time. It wastherefore very much the hope of the conference’splanning committee that the journals Dyslexia andDyslexia Review would be able to provide alternativemeans by which these inputs and offers could berecognised in the form of published journal articles. Thesubsequent response to the call for papers for DyslexiaReview was considerable and, to date, there evenappears to be a sufficient number to consider a 2nd

journal edition.

Barry Johnson

Editor: Barry JohnsonEditorialCommittee: Steve Chinn

Estelle DoctorJohn RackAnne SheddickMargaret Snowling

Dyslexia Review is published three times a year by

Dyslexia ActionPark House, Wick Road, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0HHT 01784 222 300www.dyslexiaaction.org.uk

Contents

page

4 Working Memory, Reading Developmentand Dyslexiaby Susan Atkinson & Helen Whiteley

8 The Mathematical Profiles of DyslexicChildren: Implications for Practitionersby Fiona Simmons

12 Exams on Computer: Results of Trials ofSQA Digital Question Papersby Paul Nisbet

19 Dyslexia: Different Cultures, SimilarBehavioural Signsby Lay Wah Lee

27 Neurodiversity in Higher Educationby Edward Griffin & David Pollak

32 Supporting Adults with Dyslexia at Workby Katherine Kindersley

35 Broadening Access to Specialist DyslexiaTuition Using Freely Available WebBased Video Tools by Jane Dupree

37 Book Reviews

Cover: Inside Tate Modernby Barry Johnson

Dyslexia Review Summer 2008, Volume 19 Number 3

©Dyslexia Action

Working Memory, Reading Developmentand DyslexiaDr Susan Atkinson and Professor Helen Whiteley

4

Short-term memory skills help us carry out tasksimportant in everyday life such as remembering atelephone number while we dial it or remembering whatwas in the fridge while we write a shopping list. Theseshort-term memory skills are not only concerned withcapacity – with the amount of information we can recall –but also with interactions between different kinds ofinformation and representations from long-term memory.It is aspects of these skills which we suggest in thispaper are compromised in children at risk of readingdifficulties.

An influential model of this form of short-term memory isBaddeley’s (2000) working memory model. According tothis model, working memory consists of threesubordinate systems controlled and coordinated by acentral executive (CE). The sub-systems are thephonological loop (PL), the visuo-spatial sketchpad(VSSP) and the episodic buffer (EB). Acoustic and verbalinformation, such as music played on the radio orconversation has automatic access to the PL, where itcan be maintained by rehearsal. Visual and spatialstimuli, such as the detail of a picture or images of acricket match visualised whilst listening to a commentary,similarly have automatic access to the VSSP formaintenance and rehearsal. The EB is thought to interactwith long-term memory and to be able to access and usevisual, semantic and auditory information. Withoutrehearsal, information can only be held within thesecomponents for a matter of seconds. The CE overseesthese subsidiary components, and can both hold andmanipulate information from multiple modalities – verbal,acoustic, visual and spatial. Key functions of the CE asidentified by Baddeley (1996) include inhibition ofcompeting or interfering information or responses inorder to coordinate performance on multiple tasksthrough allocating attention and to plan and switchbetween tasks, and retrieval of information from long-term memory.

The different components of working memory have beenshown to be important in cognitive attainment, includingvocabulary acquisition (Gathercole & Baddeley 1990),maths development (Holmes & Adams 2006), andNational Curriculum attainment at 11 and 14 years(Jarvis & Gathercole 2003). There is also extensiveevidence suggesting that phonological memory isimpaired in people with developmental dyslexia (e.g.Smith-Spark et al 2003), though whether this is due toPL deficits as such, or more general phonological

processing difficulties is open to debate (for example,Fawcett & Nicolson, 1995).

Recent research also suggests that CE deficits may bean underlying difficulty in dyslexia. For example,Pickering (2004) argues that children with dyslexia inboth English and Greek populations show deficits in boththe PL and the CE. Smith-Spark and Fisk (2007) havefound CE deficits in students in Higher Education with adiagnosis of dyslexia. While these studies suggest adeficit in the CE, Palmer (2000a, b) argues for a deficitspecifically in the inhibition function of the CE. Shesuggests that for successful word reading, one needs torecode the visual stimuli into phonologicalrepresentations automatically whilst inhibiting thedominant visual code. Thus, inhibition is necessary forefficient reading, to focus attention and cognitiveresources on phonological coding, and to suppresscompeting or interfering visual codes and activatedrepresentations from long-term memory. Children whoare struggling to do this at the age of 7/8 years showmore positive indicators for dyslexia (Palmer, 2000a),and this skill continues to be impaired in teenagers withdyslexia (Palmer, 2000b).

This research raises the question of whether CE skillsgenerally, and in particular inhibition skills, can predictreading and spelling ability in the early school years,and, more specifically, whether they predict positiveindices of dyslexia. The study described here formedpart of a longitudinal study, following children from theirschool Reception year to Year 3. The children werescreened for risk of literacy difficulties in the Receptionclass, and were then re-assessed with measures ofacademic attainment and working memory skills eachyear.

MethodDesignOne hundred and eight children were screened for risk ofliteracy difficulties in the Reception class (age 4-5 years),using the Dyslexia Early Screening Test (DEST, Nicolson& Fawcett, 1996). Raven’s Coloured ProgressiveMatrices was also administered as a measure of generalnonverbal ability (Raven 1995). Further assessment wascarried out in school Years 1, 2 and 3. Results reportedhere are for the one hundred and two children presentthroughout the study. The Dyslexia Screening Test (DST,Fawcett & Nicolson 1996) was used as a final screeningmeasure in Year 3. All the children were in mainstream


5

primary schools, and none of them were on the schools’special needs registers at the beginning of the study.

Materials and procedureThe children’s academic attainment was measured usingthe British Picture Vocabulary Scales (Dunn et al 1982)and the Wide Range Achievement Test reading andspelling subtests (Jastak & Wilkinson 1984). Workingmemory capacity was assessed using forward digit spanwith two trials at each length, beginning with 2 digits upto a maximum of 9, presented at a rate of 1 per second(Henry, 2001). As a measure of processing speed, the‘sky search’ subtest from the Test of Everyday Attentionfor Children (Manly et al 2001) was used. Children areasked to mark target matching pairs of spaceships in anA3 sky scene filled with distractor unmatched pairs asquickly as possible. To assess CE functioning, taskswere selected to measure the key functions of long-termmemory retrieval (rapid naming, semantic fluency andalliteration fluency) and inhibition (holding andmanipulating information whilst suppressing a dominantresponse: sentence verification and reverse digit spantasks).

Rapid naming: naming pictures with single syllablenames as quickly as possible. The score is the timetaken plus a five second penalty for each incorrectresponse.

Semantic fluency: This task was taken from thePhonological Assessment Battery (PhAB: Muter, Hulme& Snowling 1996) and involved recalling as manycategory exemplars as possible within 30 seconds, forexample, ‘things to eat’ and ‘animals’. The number ofresponses for both categories was summed andrecorded, minus repetitions or non-category exemplars.

Alliteration fluency: Again, this task was taken from thePhAB and involved generating as many words aspossible beginning with a particular sound, for example,/m/ in 30 seconds. The number of correct responsesminus repetitions was recorded.

Sentence verification: the children were asked to listento sentences, decide whether they were true or false,and then recall the final words in each sentence at theend of the series. For example: grass grows in the house... False ...recall: house. They started with one sentence,increasing up to five sentences, one sentence at a time,provided they correctly recalled the final words in two outof the three trials at each length. The score recordedwas the final list length recalled correctly.

Reverse digit span: the children were asked to listen toa series of digits presented at the rate of one per second(Henry, 2001), then repeat them back in reverse order,eg 7 2 3 ... 3 2 7. They began with two digits, increasingby one digit in length on successful completion of each

trial. Each trial consisted of two attempts: the childrenprogressed to the next length if they got one right. Thescore recorded was the final list length recalled correctly.All the children were able to repeat back at least one setof 2 digits in reverse order at the beginning of the study.

ResultsInitial screeningThe DEST put 29% of the sample in the At Risk category(Raven’s score range: 6 - 19), 36% Not At Risk (Raven’sscore range: 11-21), and 35% in a ‘middle’ category(Raven’s score range: 8-25). Because the scoringsystem for the DEST splits age categories into 3-4month blocks, the average age for the Not At Risk groupwas lower than that for the other groups, though notsignificantly so (At Risk: 62.83 months; Middle: 62.39months; Not At Risk group: 62.03 months).

Assessment measuresAnalysis of covariance allowed us to statistically controlfor differences between the groups in working memorycapacity, processing speed and non-verbal ability.Differences between the three groups throughout thestudy for spelling and reading remained significant aftercontrolling for these other factors (p<0.0005). Figure 1shows the mean reading scores for each group at eachassessment time.

Figure 1: Mean reading scores for each group

Figure 2 shows the mean spelling scores for each groupat each assessment time.

Figure 2: Mean spelling scores for each group

These figures indicate that there are differencesthroughout the study in reading and spelling.


6

Exploratory Factor Analysis was used with the data fromeach year of the study to examine whether the CEmeasures were all measuring the same component ornot. Results reveal two primary factors: Factor 1,comprising reverse digit span and sentence verification,which is assumed to be measuring inhibition skill sinceboth tasks require the holding and manipulation ofinformation whilst suppressing the dominant or obviousresponse, and Factor 2, where each variable measureslong-term memory retrieval: rapid naming, semanticfluency and alliteration fluency.

Standard multiple regressions were performed toinvestigate which of the CE measures in Years 1, 2 and3 predict the Year 3 outcomes of reading, spelling andDST at risk quotient. The arrows in the diagram indicatewhich of the CE measures on the left predict theoutcome measures on the right. Measures with noarrows were not significant predictors.

Figure 3: CE measures in Year 1 predicting Year 3outcomes of reading, spelling and DST at risk

quotient


quotient

Multiple regressions show that reverse digit spanconsistently predicts reading, spelling and DST outcomein each year, and the sentence verification task predictsreading and spelling in Year 1, and DST in Years 2 and3. Of the long-term memory retrieval measures, semanticfluency is never a significant predictor of any of theoutcome measures. Alliteration fluency, a measure ofaccess to phonological representations in long-termmemory, is a significant predictor of reading, spelling and

DST outcome in Years 1 and 2, but only of DST outcomein Year 3. Rapid naming predicts reading and DST.


quotient

DiscussionThere are significant differences between the groupsthroughout the study for reading and spelling aftercontrolling for general non-verbal ability, working memorycapacity and processing speed. This means that literacydifferences between the groups cannot be attributedsolely to differences in any of these three factors.Analyses indicate that it is the At Risk group whosereading and spelling scores are significantly lower thanthe other groups’ at each point in time. This suggeststhat the DEST is a reliable early indicator of risk forliteracy difficulties: the At Risk group remain poorerreaders and spellers throughout the study.

Factor analysis indicates that the CE measures areassessing two different CE components, inhibition andlong-term memory retrieval. The multiple regressionresults show that the inhibition measures, particularlyreverse digit span, predict reading, spelling and DSToutcome throughout the study. Of the long-term memorymeasures, alliteration fluency is a significant predictor ofall the outcome measures in Years 1 and 2, but not inYear 3, when it only predicts DST outcome. Rapidnaming becomes a predictor of DST outcome andreading in Year 3. It could be argued that at this point, asmost children become more efficient in their recodingskills, access to specific phonological representationsbecomes less of an issue in comparison to speed ofaccess to representations. That is, fluency becomesincreasingly important as reading proficiency developsand resources need to be freed up to focus oncomprehension processes.

The finding that the CE inhibition tests consistentlypredict reading and spelling scores and positiveindicators of dyslexia (ie DST scores) supports the workof Pickering (2004) and Smith-Spark et al (2003, 2007)in identifying a CE deficit underlying literacy difficulties.More specifically, the findings provide support for Palmer(2000a, b), giving a central role to the inhibition function


7

of the CE in developing fluent, automatic reading andsuggesting that this skill is not developing as rapidly inchildren at risk for reading difficulties as it is in childrenwho are not at risk. This therefore supports a role for theCE in understanding reading development and dyslexia.Working memory deficits in dyslexia are not just relatedto the phonological loop component: they cannot beexplained in terms of differences in PL capacity,phonological processing or processing speed alone.

It is possible that central executive deficits underliecontinued difficulties in organisation, sequencing andtime estimation experienced by many individuals withdyslexia, which continue after reading and spellingdifficulties have been remediated. Problems in theseareas can be the main presenting difficulties for thoseaccessing further and higher education where there isincreasing emphasis on independent learning andorganisational skills in planning work to meet deadlines.

There is contradictory evidence on the possibility andbenefits of training working memory skills, but the studyreported here raises the question of whether CE trainingcould remediate some of the symptoms of dyslexia.Making inhibition skills explicit through practice may helpto address some of the difficulties. Graded activities andexercises which gradually increase in difficulty, utilisingvideo or Playstation- type games, or puzzle activitiessuch as Sudokus might be useful. The authors wouldwelcome further ideas or suggestions from readers.

Dr Susan Atkinson and Professor Helen Whiteley

Dr Susan Atkinson is Senior lecturer at LeedsMetropolitan University [email protected]

Professor Helen Whiteley is Head of Social andPsychological Sciences at Edge Hill [email protected]

ReferencesBaddeley A (1996)

Exploring the Central Executive Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol 49App 5-28

Baddeley A (2000) The episodic buffer: A new component of workingmemory? Trends in Cognitive Science Vol 4 pp 417-422

Dunn L I M Dunn L M Whetton C & Pintillie D (1982) British Picture Vocabulary Scale Windsor: NFER-Nelson

Fawcett A J & Nicolson R I (1995) Persistence of phonological awareness deficits in olderchildren with Dyslexia Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal Vol 7pp361-376

Fawcett A J & Nicolson R I (1996) The Dyslexia Screening Test Manual. London: The Psychological Corporation

Gathercole S E & Baddeley A D (1990) The role of phonological memory in vocabularyacquisition: a study of young children learning newnames British Journal of Psychology Vol 81 pp 439-454

Henry L (2001)How does the severity of a learning disability affectworking memory performance? Memory Vol 9 Issue 4/5/6 pp233-247

Holmes J & Adams J W (2006) Working memory and Children’s mathematical skills:Implications for mathematical development andmathematics curricula Educational Psychology Vol 26 No 3 pp 339-366

Jarvis H L & Gathercole S E (2003) Verbal and nonverbal working memory andachievements on national curriculum tests at 11 and 14years of ageEducational and Child Psychology Vol 20 pp123-140

Jastak J J & Wilkinson G (1984) Manual: The Wide Range Achievement Test – RevisedWilmington DE: Jastak Associates

Manly T Robertson I H Anderson V & Nimmo-Smith I (1999) The Test of Everyday Attention for Children Bury St Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Co Ltd

Muter V Hulme C & Snowling M (1996) Phonological Abilities TestLondon: The Psychological Corporation

Nicolson R & Fawcett A (1996) Dyslexia Early Screening TestThe Psychological Corporation London

Palmer S (2000a) Working Memory: a developmental study of phonologicalrecodingMemory Vol 8 No 3 pp179-193

Palmer S (2000b) Phonological recoding deficit in working memory ofdyslexic teenagers Journal of Research in Reading Vol 23 No 1 pp 28-40

Pickering S J (2004) Working memory in dyslexia: Beyond the phonologicalloop Paper presented at the Sixth BDA InternationalConference, March 2004

Raven J C (1995)Coloured Progressive Matrices, Sets A, AB, B. Oxford Psychologists Press Oxford

Smith-Spark J H Fisk J E Fawcett A & Nicolson R I (2003) Investigating the central executive in adult dyslexics:Evidence from phonological and visual spatial workingmemory performance The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology Vol 15No 4 pp 567-587.

Smith-Spark J H & Fisk J E (2007) Working memory functioning in developmental dyslexia Memory Vol 15 No 1pp 34-56


The Mathematical Profiles of DyslexicChildren: Implications for PractitionersDr Fiona Simmons

8

The causes of mathematical difficulties in dyslexicchildren: Two opposing viewpoints?Tim Miles was one of the first researchers to note thatchildren with dyslexia have problems recallingmultiplication facts (Miles 1983). This finding has beenconfirmed by a number of studies that indicate that bothchildren and adults with dyslexia have difficultiesrecalling arithmetic facts (see Simmons & Singleton2008a for a review). In recent years there has beenincreasing interest in the cognitive causes underpinningthese arithmetic fact difficulties. It has been suggestedthat the same cognitive weakness that underlies dyslexicchildren’s reading and spelling difficulties also impacts onsome aspects of mathematics. Neuropsychologicalevidence (Dehaene et al. 1999, Dehaene et al. 2003)suggests that during all mathematical tasks people utilisesemantic, domain-specific representations of numbers.These representations are associated with activation inthe intraparietal sulcus. However depending on the typeof mathematical task, individuals may also utilise verbalor visual representations of number. Verbalrepresentations of number are activated during arithmeticfact retrieval and are associated with activation in lefthemisphere language areas. Neuropsychologicalstudies suggest that these left hemisphere languageareas are atypical in people with dyslexia (Lishman2003). I have argued that weak phonological processingimpacts on dyslexic children’s ability to complete verballymediated aspects of mathematics (e.g. counting speed,retrieval of arithmetic facts), but leaves other aspects ofmathematics (e.g. place value understanding)unimpaired (Simmons & Singleton, 2008a). Thisargument is consistent with evidence that suggests thataspects of phonological processing predict arithmeticattainment (e.g. Leather & Henry 1994, Hecht et al.2001, Simmons et al. in press).

An alternative view suggests that phonologicalprocessing weaknesses are not the cause of dyslexicchildren’s arithmetic fact recall difficulties, but rather theyare caused by an additional domain specific cognitivedeficit. Butterworth and his colleagues suggest thatsome children with dyslexia have an additional cognitiveimpairment, namely an impaired number module(Butterworth 2005, Landerl et al. 2004). The numbermodule is believed to be responsible for understandingnumerosity. Basic number processing tasks are used totap the efficacy of the number module. Basic numberprocessing tasks include number comparison (where thechild has to decide which of two single digit numbers is

larger) and dot enumeration (where the child has toquantify a small number of dots). It is suggested thatonly dyslexic children with an impaired number modulehave severe mathematical difficulties. Butterworthargues that an impaired number module underpinssevere mathematical difficulties regardless of whetherthe child also has reading difficulties. This view issupported by the results of Landerl et al. (2004). Theyfound that children with severe arithmetic difficulties inthe absence of reading difficulties and children withsevere arithmetic difficulties with reading difficulties haddeficits on tests of basic number processing, whereaschildren with reading difficulties in the absence of severearithmetic difficulties did not.

My own research has examined the mathematicalprofiles of children with dyslexia and considers whethertheir profiles can be accounted for by the alternativecognitive accounts (Simmons & Singleton 2008b). Icompared 38 children with dyslexia to 126 childrenwithout special educational needs on tests of countingspeed, arithmetic fact recall and place valueunderstanding. The children completed three differentarithmetic tests all presented via a computer. In thearithmetic facts test the children attempted addition,subtraction and multiplication fact questions that werevisually presented. In the place value understanding testthree multi-digit numbers were presented. The child hadto identify which was the largest. In the counting speedtest children had to count red dots that were displayedon the screen as quickly as they could. There were twotypes of counting trials. In the first trials (with memoryaides) the children could click on the dots, which thenchanged colour, as they counted. This enabled the childto keep track of the dots that they had already counted.In the second set of trials (without memory aides) nosupport was given to help the child keep track of theircounting. There were statistically significant differencesbetween the groups on the test of arithmetic fact recalland the assessment of counting speed (without memoryaides), but no statistically significant differences on thetest of place value understanding. A follow-up studywhere 12 children with dyslexia were matched with 12children without dyslexia on intellectual ability revealed asimilar pattern of strengths and weaknesses. Thedyslexic children performed more poorly on thearithmetic fact recall test and both counting speed tests,but at a similar level to their typically developing peerson the place value understanding test. Together theseresults suggest that whilst children with dyslexia are slow


9

at counting and have difficulties recalling arithmetic factstheir understanding of place value is similar to theirtypically developing peers.

These results (Simmons & Singleton 2008b) can be seenas broadly consistent with phonological processingimpacting on dyslexic children’s mathematicaldevelopment, because verbally mediated aspects ofmathematics, that appear reliant on phonologicalprocessing, are impaired, but other areas including placevalue understanding that appear less reliant onphonological processing, are unimpaired. Whilst weakphonological processing provides a logical account of themathematical profiles of dyslexic children, the possibilitythat this profile of difficulties could be accounted for byan impaired number module needs to be considered. Animpaired number module could only explain dyslexicchildren’s arithmetic weaknesses, if children identified ashaving an impaired number module display a similarprofile of mathematical strengths and weaknesses todyslexic children (i.e. weak arithmetic fact recall butunimpaired place value understanding). At the presenttime, the wider mathematical profiles of children with animpaired number module have not been fullyinvestigated. Until further empirical evidence isgathered, it is not possible to reject the impaired numbermodule account of the arithmetic fact recall difficulties ofdyslexic children. It may be the case that differentchildren with dyslexia have difficulties with mathematicsfor different reasons. Some dyslexic children may havesubtle and circumscribed difficulties with arithmetic factrecall, which are due to their phonological processingdifficulties, whereas other children may have morefundamental and severe difficulties with mathematics dueto an impaired number module. Children with this morefundamental difficulty with mathematics would, perhaps,be better described as having dyslexia and dyscalculia.Dyscalculia is defined by the Department for Educationand Skills (2001) as, ‘A condition that affects the ability toacquire arithmetical skills. Dyscalculic learners mayhave difficulty understanding simple number concepts,lack an intuitive grasp of numbers, and have problemslearning number facts and procedures’ (p. 2, my italics).Children with an impaired number module would conformto this definition. However dyslexic children whosearithmetic fact recall difficulties are due to phonologicalprocessing weaknesses may be confident with basicnumber concepts and therefore this label may beinappropriate for them.

Implications for practiceWhilst there is debate over the reasons for the arithmeticfact recall difficulties of dyslexic children, the evidencethat this aspect of mathematics is difficult for them isfairly consistent. Furthermore, my own findings suggestthat these difficulties with arithmetic fact recall maycoexist alongside relative strengths in other areas ofmathematics. This interpretation is consistent with the

findings of Geary et al. (2000). They found that childrenwith reading difficulties, who did not have significantdifficulties on a standardised mathematics test, still haddifficulties rapidly recalling arithmetic facts. Similarly,Rourke and his colleagues, who examined the cognitiveprofiles of large numbers of children with specificlearning difficulties, highlighted that children with a basicphonological processing disorder had strongermathematical reasoning than mechanical arithmetic (seeRourke & Del Dotto 1994 for a review). The view that the rapid recall of arithmetic facts indyslexic children is not necessarily indicative offundamental and widespread problems with mathematicsneeds to be communicated. Guidance from theDepartment for Education and Skills (2001) may becommunicating an unduly pessimistic picture. Thisguidance simply lists a wide variety of mathematicalskills that are viewed as potential difficulties for childrenwith dyslexia. Areas identified as potential difficultiesinclude place value understanding, counting objects,understanding the structure of the number system,understanding number lines, understanding fractions,using calculators, recognising number patterns anddrawing shapes. Whilst many children both with andwithout dyslexia will have difficulties in these areas,empirical evidence is not cited to suggest that they aredifferentially difficult for dyslexic children. Currently theonly area of mathematics that converging evidence froma number of empirical studies indicates is differentiallydifficult for dyslexic children is arithmetic fact recall. Untilthese other aspects of mathematics are subjected tofurther empirical scrutiny the guidance from theDepartment for Education and Skills (2001) needs to beviewed with caution. It may create unduly lowexpectations of the potential mathematical attainment ofdyslexic children.

The arithmetic fact recall difficulties of dyslexic childrenare particularly important considering the emphasisplaced on the use of mental methods in the ‘The PrimaryFramework for Mathematics’ (Department for Educationand Skills 2006). The heavy emphasis on mentalmethods is illustrated by the following quote: ‘Therevised Framework places an emphasis in Key Stage 1and the first two years of Key Stage 2 on securingchildren’s knowledge of number facts and mentalcalculation strategies’ (Department for Children, Schoolsand families, n d, p. 4). During the primary years eachdaily mathematics lesson starts with an oral and mentalstarter. This emphasis on the aspect of mathematicsthat dyslexic children find most difficult may impact ontheir motivation and enjoyment during mathematicslessons. It may result in them believing that they are ‘nogood at maths’ even if they have strengths in other areasof mathematics.

Dyslexic children may appear to perform poorly atmathematics in school, because of the heavy emphasis


10

on mental methods. Assessment can help determinewhether a child with dyslexia has a circumscribeddifficulty with mental arithmetic or a more fundamentaldifficulty with a range of mathematical skills of adyscalculic nature. One assessment tool that might beemployed is the Dyscalculia Screener (Butterworth2003). The screener employs two tests to tap children’ssense of numerosity (dot enumeration and numbercomparison), and a test of their arithmetic fact recall. Allthe tests assess reaction times, not accuracy. If a childperforms poorly on both the tests of arithmetic fact recalland the tests of numerosity, it is assumed that theirdifficulties are of a dyscalculic nature and are due to animpaired number module. However, if they performpoorly on the arithmetic fact recall test, but show nodeficits on the tests of numerosity the child’s difficultiesare attributed to other causes. Three potential causesfor such a profile are suggested: absence frommathematics classes, anxiety about mathematics orinappropriate teaching. Butterworth (2003) does notsuggest the possibility that such children may have adomain-general cognitive weakness (such asphonological processing weaknesses or centralexecutive weaknesses) that impacts on their arithmeticfact recall. I would argue that this alternative explanationneeds to be considered. Interpreting poor scores on thetests of numerosity and the test of arithmetic fact recallalso needs careful consideration. Viewing such a profileas evidence of an impaired number module requires thatperformance on these tests is not influenced by domaingeneral cognitive abilities or environmental influences.Miles (2004) suggests that difficulty with left and rightdiscrimination could influence children’s scores.Furthermore, children with weak phonologicalrepresentations may perform more poorly on the dotenumeration task, because they are slower to retrievethe phonological codes for number words. Similarly,children who have had more intensive mathematicalexperiences at home and at school may do better onboth tasks because they have developed strongerrepresentations of numbers (see Berch (2005) for adiscussion of the issues in assessing children’s innateunderstanding of numerosity).

Whilst Dyscalculia Screener may give some indication ofwhether dyslexic children are slower at basic numericalprocesses than their peers, a broader assessment isneeded to profile both areas of difficulty and areas ofstrength. The importance of assessment for teaching isemphasised by Kay & Yeo (2003). Standardisedmathematics tests can be used in tandem withunstandardised mathematics tasks to identify dyslexicchildren’s current level of attainment. This assessmentenables teaching to be targeted at the appropriate level.One assessment tool that might be consideredparticularly useful is the WIAT-IIUK (Wechsler 2005).The WIAT-IIUK includes both tests of numericaloperations and mathematical reasoning, allowing the

assessor to consider the child’s ability to performarithmetic operations relative to their mathematicalreasoning. It has the advantage of not requiring anyreading. Unfortunately, this test is only available tochartered psychologists, the parallel version of the testthat is available to teachers (WIAT-IIUK-T, Wechsler,2006) includes the literacy but not the mathematicssubtests.

If a child has a circumscribed difficulty with recallingarithmetic facts, aides such as multiplication squares andcalculators may help them access the wider mathematicscurriculum and gain enjoyment from being able to utilisetheir mathematical reasoning without being constrainedby their mental arithmetic. However, slow and inaccuratearithmetic fact recall will impact on such children’sperformance on national assessments where such aidesare not permitted (e.g. the mental arithmetic componentof GCSE mathematics examinations). A number ofauthors suggest strategies for increasing dyslexicchildren’s facility with arithmetic facts (e.g. Chinn &Ashcroft 2007, Kay & Yeo 2003, Turner Ellis 2004),which may be helpful in addressing this difficulty. Suchtechniques often rely on derived fact strategies thatrequire an understanding of mathematical principles(e.g. the communicative principle) and may therefore bemore easily accessible to children with securemathematical reasoning. Butterworth (2003) argues thatif children show evidence of an impaired number moduleinterventions should target their understanding ofnumerosities using concrete objects and counting tasks.It appears logical that different approaches would beappropriate for children whose difficulties withmathematics are underpinned by different cognitivecauses. However, specific remediation techniques havenot been subject to empirical scrutiny and theinteractions between the cause of children’s mathematicsdifficulties and the type of teaching that is most suitableare not yet understood.

Fiona Simmons

Fiona Simmons completed her PhD focussing on themathematical profiles of children with dyslexia at theUniversity of Hull. She is now a lecturer in psychology atLiverpool John Moores University.

ReferencesBerch D B (2005)

Making sense of number sense: Implications forchildren with mathematical disabilities Journal of Learning Disabilities 38 pp333-339

Butterworth B (2003)Dyscalculia screener London: Nfer-Nelson

Butterworth B (2005)Developmental dyscalculiaIn J I D Campbell (Ed.) Handbook of MathematicalCognition pp 455-467New York: Psychology Press


11

Chinn S & Ashcroft R (2007)Mathematics for Dyslexics including Dyscalculia (3rd Edition)Chichester: Wiley

Dehaene S Piazza M Pinel P and Cohen L (2003)Three parietal circuits for number processingCognitive Neuropsychology 20 pp487-506

Dehaene S Spelke E Pinel P Stanescu R & Tsivkin S (1999)Sources of mathematical thinking: Behavioural andbrain-imaging evidenceScience 284 pp970-974

Department for Children, Schools and Families (n d) The use of calculators in the teaching and learning ofmathematics Retrieved 8 April 2008 fromwww.standards.dfes.gov.uk/primaryframework/mathematics/Papers/Calculators/page004/

Department for Education and Skills (2001)Guidance to support pupils with dyslexia and dyscalculiaLondon: Department of Education and Skills

Department for Education and Skills (2006)The primary framework for teaching literacy andmathematics London: DfES Publications

Geary D C Hamson C & Hoard M K (2000)Numerical and arithmetical cognition: A longitudinalstudy of process and concept deficits in children withlearning disability Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 77 pp236-263

Hecht S A Torgesen J K Wagner R K Rashotte C A (2001) The relations between phonological processing abilitiesand emerging individual differences in mathematicalcomputation skills: A longitudinal study from second tofifth grades Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 79 pp192-227

Kay J & Yeo D (2003)Dyslexia and MathsLondon: David Fulton

Landerl K Bevan A & Butterworth B (2004)Developmental dyscalculia and basic numericalcapacities: a study of 8-9-year-old studentsCognition 93 pp 99-125

Leather C V & Henry L A (1994)Working memory span and phonological awarenesstasks as predictors of early reading abilityJournal of Experimental Child Psychology 58 pp88-111

Lishman W A (2003) Developmental dyslexiaJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 74pp1603-1605

Miles T R (1983)Dyslexia: The pattern of difficulties 1st edOxford: Blackwell

Miles T R (2004)Theoretical background In Miles T R & Miles E (Eds) Dyslexia and Mathematics2nd ed pp 1-20London Routledge: Falmer

Rourke B P & Del Dotto J E (1994)Learning disabilities: A neuropsychological perspectiveThousand Oaks: California Sage Publications

Simmons F & Singleton C (2008a) Do weak phonological representations impact onarithmetic development? A review of research intoarithmetic and dyslexiaDyslexia 14 pp77-94

Simmons F & Singleton C (2008b)The mathematical profiles of dyslexic childrenPaper presented at the 7th British Dyslexia AssociationInternational Conference, Harrogate, Yorkshire

Simmons F R Singleton C & Horne J (in press)Phonological processing and visual-spatial sketchpadfunctioning predict early mathematical attainment:Evidence from a longitudinal studyEuropean Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Turner Ellis S A (2004)Steering a way through number factsIn Miles, Miles T R & Miles E EdsDyslexia andmathematics 2nd Ed pp 120-138London: Routledge Falmer

Wechsler D (2005)Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - Second UKEditionLondon: Psychological Corporation

Wechsler D (2006) Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - Second UKEdition for Teachers London Psychological Corporation


Would YOU like to teach for Dyslexia Action?Northern Region: J KeoganT 01423 705605E [email protected]

Central Region: Helen BoyceT 02476 224082E [email protected]

Southern Region: M Saunders T 01784 7222348E [email protected]

• If you have trained with us or on a similarrecognised course and would like to teach withinour organisation, we would be happy to discussthis with you.

• Our improved salary structure and excellentInservice training will make teaching with DyslexiaAction a wise choice.

• If you would like to discuss this further, pleasecontact:

Exams on Computer: Results of Trials ofSQA Digital Question PapersPaul D Nisbet

12

AbstractThis paper describes the development and trial of digitalquestion papers by pupils with additional support needs,including dyslexia, sitting Scottish Qualification Authority(SQA) examinations. Digital papers were developed andthen used by pupils in ‘live’ Scottish Standard Grade,Intermediate and Higher examinations in 2006 and againin 2007. The trials were evaluated and marks achievedby pupils analysed. Results indicate that the papers werereliable; pupils preferred using the digital papers toconventional methods of support, such as reader orscribe; and teachers believe that demands on staffingand accommodation are in general reduced.

IntroductionSince 1995 there has been a 340% increase in thenumber of requests for ‘Assessment Arrangements’ forcandidates sitting Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA)examinations: from 3,094 candidates in 1995, to 10,660in 2006 (SQA 2006). Approximately 7% of all candidatessitting SQA examinations now use AssessmentArrangements. It is likely that this increase has been dueto a number of factors, including improvements inprofessional practice and provision and also the impactof legislation such as the Disability Discrimination Act1995, and the Disability Equality Duty. AssessmentArrangements (previously ‘Alternative AssessmentArrangements’ and ‘Special Arrangements’) are intendedto ‘ensure that all candidates have an equal opportunityto show that they can achieve the national standardsrequired for Units and Courses’ (SQA 2007). Themajority of the candidates for whom assessmentarrangements are requested are described as havingspecific learning difficulties including dyslexia (Table 1)(Source: SQA Annual Statistical Reports 2003, 2004,2005, 2006; www.sqa.org.uk).

Schools and centres who present candidates forexaminations may request the use of appropriate

assessment arrangements to meet the specific needs ofthe candidate and the assessment. There were 43,291requests made in 2006 on behalf of the 10,660candidates, and in most cases, presenting centresrequested more than one type of support (Table 2). Themost common type of support requested was Extra Time(34,803 requests) followed by the use of a reader(16,815 requests) and then use of a scribe (15,059)(Source: data provided by SQA to the author).

Centres may request the paper to be supplied by SQA inan alternative format such as Braille, Large Print,Modified print, and on coloured paper to suit the needsof the candidate. In 2006, 5,369 individual adaptedformat question papers were provided (Table 3, (SQA2006 p13).

The Adapted Digital Question papers were developed inresponse to a number of factors and observations.Firstly, many pupils with additional support needsroutinely use assistive technology in school and at hometo access the curriculum: they should therefore also beable to use the same technology in an examination,provided that this does not give the candidate an unfairadvantage. Secondly, use of information andcommunication technology (ICT) offers a moreindependent method of writing than using a scribe, whichis clearly relevant in an assessment context. Thirdly, thewidespread use of readers and scribes is expensive interms of staffing and accommodation given that eachpupil requires the amanuensis, a separate room, and aninvigilator.

Adapted Digital Question PapersThe SQA Adapted Digital Question papers are electronicversions, in Adobe PDF, of the hard copy paper. Thelayout and design of the digital version is similar to thatof the paper copy which permits candidates to refer toboth digital and paper copies, and also ensures that the


Table 1: Number of candidates and entries for whom Assessment Arrangements were requested

2003 2004 2005 2006Difficulty Candidates Entries Candidates Entries Candidates Entries Candidates Requests

Specific Learning 5,742 27,532 6,660 31,545 6,625 28,419 6,965 29,002DifficultiesVarious other 2,506 11,116 3,238 13,563 2,531 10,122 3,393 12,932difficulties (including temporary difficulties)Visual difficulties 102 535 473 2,084 713 2,913 302 1,357Total 8,350 39,183 10,371 47,192 9,869 41,454 10,660 43,291

13

assessment itself remains unaltered. The disadvantageof this is that some questions (particularly inmathematics or science papers) do not suit the digitalformat given that the papers were originally designed tobe accessed and completed using pen and paper.

The digital papers have been adapted in two ways: firstlythe question and answer papers have ‘answer boxes’ sothat a candidate can type into the paper on screen.Candidates can use assistive technologies such asalternative or on-screen keyboards or speech recognitionprograms, to generate text. Candidates with spelling orwriting difficulties use the built-in Acrobat Readerspellchecker or word prediction programs to support theirwriting (where such support does not give an unfairadvantage). Secondly, the papers are ‘speech enabled’(using TextHelp Systems’ PDFaloud Stamping kit) so thatcandidates with visual or reading difficulties can listen tothe text spoken out by the computer.

PDF was chosen in preference to other formats such asDOC, HTML or Daisy because PDF is stable andreliable; accessible for the majority of candidates whorequire assessment arrangements; interactive (i.e.

candidates can type answers and draw on the digitalpapers); and low cost in terms of production and use (theAdobe Reader and Browsealoud software that is used bypupils to access the papers is free).

The papers are delivered to schools on CD (one CD perentry per candidate) so that they can be accessed oneither networked or standalone computers. Whilenetworked machines are recommended because of easeof installation and use, some schools appear to havedifficulties getting specialist software (e.g. Browsealoud)installed on networks. When a candidate has completedthe assessment, the paper is printed out and returned toSQA for marking with the other candidates’ handwrittenor word processed scripts.

Pilot trials and evaluation2006 pilot trialsSeventy-three pupils trialled digital versions of pastpapers in 2005. Staff and pupils were supplied withsoftware and supported by researchers from the projectteam. Thirty-four students in eight different schoolssubsequently chose to request Adapted Digital Papersfor use in 111 examinations in 2006 (Nisbet et al. 2006).


Table 2: SQA Assessment Arrangements requests, 2006

Type of support requested No of requestsExtra Time 34,803Reader 16,815Scribe 15,059Use of ICT 3,063PA Referral 2,480Coloured Paper 1,327Transcription with correction 1,190Calculator 892Enlarged Print 889Transcription without correction 678Question Paper signed to candidate 69Candidate Signs Responses 56Braille 28Use of tape recorder for responses 25

Table 3: Types of Adapted Paper provided, 2006

Type of Adapted Paper No of papers providedWhite paper 1662Large Print 1071Colour copies 938N14 - N18 font 562Reader copy 408N20 -N28 font 259Adapted content 139N36 - N48 font 104Digital question papers 146Braille 80

14

The majority of the group (20 out of 34 pupils) weredescribed as dyslexic and 7 were dyspraxic. SQAadapted 57 different digital papers, for 19 subject areas,across Intermediate 1 and 2, Standard Grade, andHigher levels. English was the most commonlyrequested digital paper.

Candidates were asked to complete an evaluation formafter sitting each paper and 76 questionnaires werereturned in respect of 92 out of 105 (83%) examinations.Students were asked to give the reasons why they choseto use the digital papers; the amount of practice that theyhad undertaken prior to the examination; whether or notthey used the text-to-speech facility; how they answeredthe paper; whether they required help from staff; whetherthey would use digital papers again; and whether theyfelt that SQA should provide digital papers for candidateswith additional support needs.

The majority of the pupils chose to use digital papersbecause they had difficulties with reading, handwriting orspelling, offering comments such as: ‘Typing into thepaper is much easier than writing. Prolonged writing isdifficult and causes a lot of pain’; ‘It avoids the need for ascribe. I don’t like using a scribe’; ‘It is preferable to seethe question when typing in an answer, rather thantyping into a blank document with a word processor’; ‘Itwould allow me to choose to reread and read any part ofthe exam quickly without requiring a reader at the time.’.

Text to speech software was used to support reading in35 out of 92 examinations (36%) by 10 of the 31students. Most of students who did not choose to usetext-to-speech did not have a reading difficulty and wereusing the digital papers to support their writing orspelling. 9 out of 10 students used text-to-speech toaccess all of their digital papers, demonstrating that text-to-speech can be helpful for accessing a range ofsubjects, including for example Biology, Craft andDesign, Geography and Physics.

30 out of 31 students felt that SQA should offer digitalpapers for examinations, suggesting that, for example: ‘itis much easier to use than a reader’; ‘it would be easierfor markers to read it’; ‘you can see what you’ve written ifyour writing is bad’; ‘not as stressful. It’s fairer’. Onestudent felt that papers should only be offered ‘to certainpeople’ and that ‘there should be a choice’.

It is important to consider whether the digital papersconfer an advantage (or a disadvantage) compared withcandidates who are using traditional papers, and alsowhether digital papers impact on results compared withother types of support such as readers and scribes. Thesmall numbers of pupils and the wide range for papersmade meaningful analysis impossible, but SQAstatisticians stated that ‘Candidates’ results from digitalpapers are similar to their teachers’ estimates’ and ‘thereappears to be little difference between [marks awardedfor] entries using digital papers and the other entries satby the same candidates’.

Staff completed an evaluation questionnaire and Figure1 shows that the staff (n=7) felt that pupils were moreconfident, independent, motivated and expert when usingthe digital papers compared with traditional papers andmethods of support.

Staff were asked to score the reliability of the digitalpapers themselves, and the computers in their schools,on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 is best). On average staff ratedthe paper reliability 4.75 out of 5 (n=8). The productionand quality control procedures developed by SQAtherefore appeared to be very effective. The averagescore for general computer reliability was 4.875.

One of the reasons for developing and trailing the digitalpapers was because of the demands on staff andaccommodation when using scribes and readers, andFigure 2 shows that staff felt that resource demandswere lower when using digital papers compared to


Figure 1: Staff views on pupils’ abilities when using digital papers

15

traditional methods of support. One teacher noted that‘We really appreciate this format of exam paper. Thepupils are generally much happier to be independentrather than depend on scribes and readers. This year allour S3 and S4s sat the SG English examination at thesame time. If we had had to provide readers and/orscribes for this we would not have been able to staff it.’

2007 pilot trialsFollowing the successful 2006 trials, more schools wereinvited to pilot the papers in 2007. Schools wereprovided with software and digital past papers on CD,and 200 requests for digital papers for 2007examinations were made by 12 schools on behalf of 80candidates (Nisbet 2007). 10 of the 12 schools weremainstream secondary, one was a special school forpupils with physical disabilities, and one was a specialistvisual impairment support unit attached to a mainstreamschool.

Again, papers were requested across a wide range ofsubjects (Table 4) and levels (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Digital Papers requested in 2007, brokendown by Level


Accommodation

Figure 2: Resource demands with digital papers compared to traditional forms of support

Table 4: Number of Digital Papers requested in 2007, by subject

Subject Digital papers requested Subject Digital papers requested English 219 German 8Computing 41 Business Management 6Geography 32 Mathematics 4French 31 Art & Design 3Craft & Design 24 Science 2Administration 19 Social & Voc Skills 2Biology 17 Accounting 1History 17 Accounting and Finance 1Physical Education 11 ESOL 1Home Economics 10 Human Biology 1Modern Studies 10 Media Studies 1Physics 10 Product Design 1Chemistry 9 Psychology 1Drama 8

Total number of Digital Question Papers Requested: 490

16

We did not feel it was reasonable to ask staff and pupilsto complete the same detailed questionnaires that wereused in 2006, and so staff were asked to provideinformation about which pupils used the digital papersand whether or not candidates used the text-to-speechfacility. Returns showed that digital papers were used in80% of the entries for which they had been requestedand were not used in 6.5% (no data was returned for theremaining 13.5%). Compared with 2006, a smallerpercentage of actual digital papers were reported to beused (70% compared to 95%) and upon furtherinvestigation this was found to be because the procedurein 2007 required schools to request digital papers foreach examination entry rather than for each individualpaper. For example, a request for digital papers forStandard Grade English (the most popular entry) wouldresult in five digital papers being delivered by SQA. Apupil with both reading and writing difficulties would useall five papers, but a pupil with writing difficulties onlywould probably only use the two question and answerpapers.

Digital papers compared with other methods ofsupporting pupilsOne aim of introducing digital papers was to try andreduce reliance on readers and scribes. Table 5 givesthe total number of requests for different types of writingsupport in the twelve schools.

Use of different types of support varies widely across theschools, but taken together, there were more requestsfor use of a word processor and/or digital paper (Figure4) than there were for scribes. This is very encouragingbecause nationally, as we saw in Table 1, there arealmost five times as many requests for scribes as thereare for use of ICT and so the experience in the pilotschools suggests there is considerable potential forreducing the number of scribes used in schools.

Figure 4: Total number of requests to support writingacross all 12 schools

A comparison of the number of requests to supportreading is given in Table 6. Only four out of twelveschools used digital papers with text-to-speech software.Uptake varied widely between the different schools,reflecting different needs, policies and also staff andpupil attitudes. Overall, the use of human readersoutnumbers the pupils who used digital papers with text-to-speech software by a factor of 18 (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Total number of requests to supportreading across all 12 schools


Table 5: 2007 Requests for Assessment Arrangements to support writing and recording (number of entries)

School School School School School School School School School School School School A B C D E F G H I J K L

Scribe 24 21 16 9 144 44 27 109 85 5 45 37ICT (word 28 67 24 34 33 13 1 114 13 82 21 17processor)

Digital Papers 8 5 20 34 13 7 1 40 8 38 25 1Transcription 0 7 5 2 5 0 1 0 15 1 1 13with correctionTranscription 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 13without correctionPA Referral 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 9 0 0Use of tape 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0recorder for responsesTotal 60 101 65 80 195 67 31 263 122 135 100 81ICT and DPs : 3:2 24:7 11: 4 68:9 23:72 5:11 2:27 154:109 21:85 42:1 46:45 18:37scribes

17

That staff and pupils appear happier to adopt ICT anddigital papers in preference to a scribe, but less keen touse digital papers with text-to-speech in place of areader may be due to several factors which requirefurther investigation. For example, there may be issueswith the quality or accuracy of the synthetic voice; thefact that additional specialist software must be installed;or pupils may simply be less familiar and practiced withtext-to-speech tools compared to typing. Nonetheless,since usage of text-to-speech did increase significantly inthe four schools (from reading 35 papers in 2006 to 95 in2007), once text-to-speech is introduced it seems that itis well received by pupils and staff.

From examinations to Books for AllFollowing the success of the two pilots, SQA approvedthe use of Adapted Digital Question papers for anycandidate who requires assessment arrangements inScotland and in 2008, 509 requests were made by 48schools on behalf of 209 candidates.

One of the four principles underpinning SQA’s policy onassessment arrangements is that ‘Any adjustment to theassessment arrangements should reflect, as far aspossible, the candidate’s normal way of learning andproducing work’. Therefore, if a pupil intends to usedigital papers in an examination, one would expect thesame techniques to be used in class. This has impactedon policy and provision in some of the schools who haveadopted the digital papers, whereby staff have started tocreate and adapt prelim1 examination papers,worksheets, workbooks and textbooks into accessibledigital formats: ‘We were very pleased with how thewhole Pilot went and this year our prelims and third yearexams were in digital format using Word and WordTalkas well as class tests. We have now purchased AcrobatProfessional and are working on converting all our classtests into a format similar to that of the SQA exams.’(Nisbet 2007 p.27)

If there are measurable educational, personal and costbenefits that can be obtained by offering pupils the

option of using digital examination papers for a fewweeks in May and June, then it is reasonable to suggestthat there are likely to be even greater benefits to begained from providing pupils with books and otherlearning materials in accessible alternative formatsthroughout the previous eleven years or so of theirschool education. This wider perspective was the subjectof research which was published last year (Nisbet &Aitken 2007). The Books for All report investigated theneed for and availability of learning materials inaccessible formats for pupils who are ‘print-disabled’ andoffers a roadmap for developing provision in Scotland. Inthe year since the report was published a number ofissues identified in the report have been addressed: from1st April 2008, Scottish schools are able to adaptcopyright books and other resources into accessibleformats for any disabled pupil (including those withdyslexia) without having to seek permission from therightsholder (previously this dispensation only applied topupils with visual or physical impairments); a high-qualitycomputer voice with a Scottish accent is now availablefree of charge from CALL Scotland; a free text-to-speechtool for Microsoft Word is also available from CALLScotland; and a pilot database for cataloguing andsharing learning materials in accessible formats hasbeen developed by CALL Scotland, Learning andTeaching Scotland and SCRAN.

Examinations are seen as being of great importance bymany pupils, parents, staff and by society in general, andthe uptake of Adapted Digital Papers demonstrates howthis can be used to engender significant change inschools.

Paul D Nisbet

Paul D Nisbet is a Senior Research Fellow at CALL(Communication, Access, Literacy and Learning)Scotland, The Moray House School of Education,University of Edinburgh.


Table 6: 2007 Requests for and use of Assessment Arrangements to support reading (number of entries)

School School School School School School School School School School School School A B C D E F G H I J K L

Braille Paper 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3Coloured Paper 2 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 10 0 0Enlarged Print 4 0 0 0 0 3 0 6 0 0 0 28Reader 4 64 27 10 140 49 24 110 100 5 34 51Digital Paper with 0 3 6 5 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0text to speech softwareTotal 10 85 33 15 140 52 24 136 150 15 34 82TRS : Reader 0:1 3:64 2:9 1:2 0:1 0:1 0:1 2:11 0:1 0:1 0:1 0:1

1 Pupils sit prelim (preliminary) papers a few months before the exam, for practice and also as evidence for appeal, for example, should the pupil be absent on the dayof the actual examination.

18

Web linksTextHelp Systems: http://www.texthelp.com/page.asp Browsealoud text-to-speech software: http://www.browsealoud.com/ SQA Assessment Arrangements:http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/14977.html CALL Scotland sites:Adapted Digital Papers: http://www.AdaptedDigitalExams.org.ukThe Scottish Voice:http://www.theScottishVoice.org.uk WordTalk:http://www.wordtalk.org.uk Books for All:http://www.booksforall.org.uk CALL Scotland:http://callcentrescotland.org.uk

ReferencesSQA (2006)

Disability Equality Scheme 2007-09 Scottish Qualifications Authorityhttp://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/17086.html

SQA (2007) Assessment Arrangements Resource Pack: draftversion. Scottish Qualifications Authorityhttp://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/31129.html

Nisbet P D (2007) SQA Adapted Examination Papers in Digital Format:2007 Pilot Project Report to Scottish QualificationsAuthority. September 2007CALL Centre, University of Edinburgh http://www.AdaptedDigitalExams.org.uk/Pilot Trial/

Nisbet P D & Aitken S (2007) Books for All: Accessible Curriculum Materials for Pupilswith Additional Support Needs. Report to ScottishGovernment Education Department. Scottish Government ISBN 978 0 7559 1535 4 (webonly publication)http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/06/05081600/0

Nisbet P D Shearer N Balfour F Aitken S (2006) SQA Adapted Examination Papers in Digital Format:Feasibility Study 2005 - 2006: Final Report to ScottishQualifications Authority October 2006CALL Centre, University of Edinburghhttp://www.AdaptedDigitalExams.org.uk/Pilot Trial/


Council for the Registration of Schools Teaching Dyslexic Pupils

Are you looking for a school for your

dyslexic child?

Call CReSTeD for your freeRegister of schools approved

for their dyslexia provision

Tel/Fax: 01242 604852Email: [email protected]

www.crested.org.uk

Registered Charity No. 1052103

CReSTeDWRAT-4

The fourth edition of the world’s most widely-used short

test now includes a new Sentence Reading sub-test to

measure reading comprehension along with the original

sub-tests.

Norms extend from 5 years to 75 years, solving

assessment problems with older individuals.

Two parallel forms and a third combined form allow

re-testing after a period of teaching.

Available from DI Trading Ltd

Dyslexia ActionPark House, Wick Road, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0HH

T 01784 222300 F 01784 222333

DYSLEXIA ACTIONis a major UK distributor.

Dyslexia: Different Cultures, SimilarBehavioural SignsLay Wah Lee

19

AbstractThe behavioural signs shown by a group of 3 childrenfrom Malaysia who have been diagnosed with dyslexiaare analysed against the preschool and primary schoolHandy Hints (checklists) of the British DyslexiaAssociation (BDA). The results of this analysis showedthat even though the children are from different culturesand are learning different languages, there is a goodmatch between the behavioural signs and symptomsexhibited by the children in Malaysia and the signs andsymptoms in the BDA checklists. This result suggeststhat with some adaptations the BDA checklists can beused as a screening tool to identify children with dyslexiain Malaysia. Another implication that warrants furtherinvestigation is that the underlying cognitive deficit toexplain dyslexia in English may also apply for children inMalaysia.

MalaysiaMalaysia is a multi-ethnic country comprised of Malays,Chinese, Indians and people of other races. The multi-ethnicity of Malaysians is reflected in the Malaysianeducational system which has four languages as mediaof instruction in primary schools. The national languageis the Malaysian language (Bahasa Malaysia) which isalso the spoken language of the Malay race. English isthe second official language in Malaysia and is used as amedium of instruction for Science and Mathematicssubjects in schools. Mandarin and Tamil are also usedas media of instruction in national type primary schools.This means that Malaysians are either bilingual ortrilingual.

The Malaysian writing system is based on similar 26letters in the English alphabet. However, unlike English,Malaysian is a highly transparent language with analmost perfect spelling-sound relationship. Even thoughthe writing system is phoneme-based, syllables aresalient units in Malaysian as most words are bi- andmultisyllabic with clear syllable boundaries. For example‘cat’ in Malaysian is ‘kucing’ which is made up of thesyllables ‘ku + cing’. The language also has a richtransparent system of affixation. For example the word‘running’ in Malaysian is ‘berlari’ which is made up of thethe prefix ‘ber’ and a two syllable root word ‘lari’ ( whichmeans ‘run’).

Preschool education is accessible to most childrenbetween the ages of 4 to 6 and is provided by manyorganisations, namely the private sector, the Ministry of

Education, other government organisations as well asnon-government organisations. Generally, the languagesused in preschool settings are also reflective of the multi-lingual situation in the primary schools. Formal readinginstruction starts at preschool level and most childrenespecially those in the urban areas know the letternames by the time they are enrolled in Year One.

Dyslexia in MalaysiaDyslexia awareness in Malaysia has been steadilyincreasing in the past ten years. There are currently afew dyslexia associations and support groups formed inurban areas which are spearheaded by parents ofchildren with dyslexia. These support groups are quiteactive in promoting dyslexia awareness but only a verysmall number provide assessment and interventionservices. The government, under the Ministry ofEducation, also initiated the National Dyslexiaprogramme in 2001 (Gomez 2004). The Ministry ofEducation defines children with dyslexia as children whoare experiencing significant difficulties in reading, writingor spelling despite having a mental ability which iscomparable to or above those of average children (Haniz2003). A screening checklist has been developed by theMinistry of Education to screen for dyslexia among YearOne children whose average age is 7 years. Screeningis conducted by the school teachers and children at riskof dyslexia are sent for formal assessment atgovernment hospitals. The Ministry of Education hasalso set up the Specific Reading Difficulties Programmeto provide intervention for children with dyslexia basedon the pull-out delivery system model. However, thisprogramme is only available in a limited number ofschools throughout Malaysia. Dyslexia awareness ishigh in these schools but it is not widespread in otherschools in Malaysia. Most school teachers are currentlystill not aware of the signs and symptoms of dyslexiaeven though they might have heard of the term dyslexia.The situation is also quite acute at the preschool level ascurrently there is no systematic identification of childrenwho are at risk of dyslexia at preschool. There arecurrently no screening checklists or tools to helpteachers identify children at risk of dyslexia at thepreschool level.

Signs and Symptoms across Different CulturesIn this paper, the behavioural signs and symptoms ofthree children with dyslexia in Malaysia are comparedwith the signs and symptoms found in the BritishDyslexia Association Handy Hints (checklists) for


20

preschool (Peer 2002a) and primary school (Peer2002b). Sam, Teik Seng and Ken’s signs and symptomswere described by their mothers (Lee, 2004). All threemothers reported that their children had great difficulty inreading, writing and spelling, even though their childrenappear to be bright and intelligent. The children’sproblems came to light after they had started formalschooling in Year One. Despite almost a year of formalprimary school instruction, they still had great difficulty inreading, writing and spelling. The search for answersinevitably led them to dyslexia and these three childrenwere subsequently diagnosed with the problem ofdyslexia. Sam was diagnosed at the age of nine, Ken atage eight and Teik Seng at age seven. As there were no

instruments in Malaysian to assess for dyslexia,information for diagnosis conducted by doctors andpsychologists in Malaysia is usually gathered usinginstruments in English which have not been normed forMalaysian children.

Comparison with the BDA Preschool ChecklistThe signs and symptoms are grouped intodevelopmental areas that are affected by dyslexia. Theresults of the comparison with the BDA preschool andprimary school checklists are shown in Tables 1 to 9below. The author would like to thank the BDA for theirapproval in allowing the reproduction of the preschooland primary school checklists in this article.


Table 1: Signs and symptoms related to phonological awareness

BDA Sam Teik Seng KenHas difficulty learning Does not like nursery - -nursery rhyme rhymes from young.

Has difficulty keeping - - -simple rhymes

Gets words muddled - Confuses ‘banana’ -e.g. cubumber, fluterfly as ‘bamama’,

‘kepala’ as ‘kelapa’.

Finds difficult to select Cannot hear the - -the ‘odd one out’ in difference betweengroups of either objects, ‘70’ and ‘17’,pictures or words ‘50’ and ‘15’.

Table 2: Signs and symptoms related to memory

BDA Sam Teik Seng KenFinds it hard to carry out Cannot remember a - -two or more instructions list of instructions.at one time, but is fine iftasks are presented in Cannot understandsmaller units if 4 or 5 instructions

are given together.

Forgets names of Forgets names of - Forgets what isfriends, teachers, friends, teachers being taught thecolours etc and family moment the back

members and will is turned.use phrases like‘that boy’, ‘thatauntie’ assubstitute.

21


Has difficulty cutting,sticking and crayoning incomparison with theirpeers Has persistent difficulty indressingPuts clothes the wrongway round Has difficulty with catching,kicking or throwing a ballOften trips, bumps intothings and falls overHas difficulty hopping orskipping

-

-

-

Has difficulty catching aball.Appears clumsy.

-

-

-

-

Tends to fall over whenyoung.When asked why, he’ll say‘don’t know why’.

-

-

-

-

Clumsy, often trips orbumps into things, like Mr Bean from the TVshow.

Table 3: Signs and symptoms related to motor skills

BDA Sam Teik Seng Ken

Comparison With The BDA Primary School Checklist

Table 4: Signs and symptoms related to reading


Makes poor readingprogress, especially usinglook and say methods

Finds it difficult to blendletters together

Has difficulty inestablishing syllabledivision or knowing thebeginnings and endings ofwords

Pronunciation of words isunusualNo expression in reading-comprehension poor Is hesitant and laboured inreading, especially whenreading aloud

Poor in reading

-

-

-

-

Inaccurate word readingwhich gets worse underpressure.

Will memorise the words inorder to read it aloud.

Difficulty joining thesounds of the letters toform words, example‘saya’ is read as letternames ‘S’, ‘A’ and ‘Y’, ‘A’

Does not know where tobegin to break the word toread, for example‘menggunakan’, does notknow where to start.

Deterioration of readingskills when under stress,for example, when calledto read aloud in class.

Very poor in reading.Parent downgraded childback to Year One.

-

-

-

22


Misses out words whenreading, or adds extrawordsFails to recognise familiarwords

Loses the point of thestory being read or writtenHas difficulty in picking outthe most important pointsfrom a passage

Confuses simple smallwords such as ‘dia’ and‘dan’.

High proportion of errors inreading, for example,cannot differentiatebetween ‘contoh’ and ‘ciri’.

-

-

-

-

-

Cannot recognize evensimple words.When it was firstdiscovered, he could noteven read ‘cat’.

-

-

Has poor standard ofwritten work comparedwith oral ability

Produces messy work withmany crossings out andwords tried several timesIs persistently confused byletters which look similar,particularly b/d, p/g, p/q,n/u, m/w

Has poor handwriting withmany ‘reversals’ and badlyformed letters

Spells a word severaldifferent ways in one pieceof writing

His new science teacherhad thought he wasplaying the fool when hehanded in his report withall the wrong answersbecause he was the onewho had asked all the rightand intelligent questionsduring the experiment.

Does not know how to puthis thoughts into words.-

-

-

Inconsistent spellingerrors, for example ‘tissue’can be spelt differently atdifferent times such as‘tusi’ or ‘tisu’.

Confused by letters ‘b/d’and ‘j/g’ when writing .

Problems forming letters,example ‘b’ is written as‘c l’.Often writes in reverse.-

A talkative and expressivechild, so did not suspectanything was wrong untilhe started to fail all hissubjects in Year One.

Problems differentiatingbetween ‘b/d’ and ‘j/g’ .

-

-

Table 5: Signs and symptoms related to writing


23


Makes anagrams of words,e.g. tired for triedProduces badly set-outwritten work, doesn’t stayclose to the margin

Has poor pencil gripProduces phonetic bizarrespelling, not age/abilityappropriateUses unusual sequencingof letters or words

-

-

-Makes spelling errors.

Words are all joinedtogether with no space inbetween.


-

-


Table 6: Signs and symptoms related to numeracy


Shows confusion withnumber order, eg. units,tens, hundredsIs confused by symbolssuch as + and x signsHas difficulty rememberinganything in a sequentialorder e.g. tables, days ofweeks, the alphabet

-

-

Cannot understand if 4 or5 instructions are giventogether.

Cannot remember a list ofinstructions.

-

-

Cannot remember themonths of the year insequence.

-

-

-

Table 7: Signs and symptoms related to the concept of time


Has difficulty in learning totell the time

Shows poor time keepingand general awareness

Has poor personalorganisationHas difficulty rememberingwhat day of the week it is,his/her birth date, seasonsof the year, months of theyear

Difficulty with concepts-yesterday, today, tomorrow

-

Prefers not to tell time orto wear a watch.

-

-

Cannot comprehend theduration of time, forexample, hisbirthday is 37 days away,but he cannot comprehendhow long that is.

-

-

-

Keeps asking when is hisbirthday.

Tells time wrongly. Twoo’clock becomes teno’clock.-

What happened a weekago is comprehended ashappening justyesterday.

24

DiscussionBased on the descriptive comparisons above, it can beseen that some of the items in the BDA checklist such as‘having difficulty in keeping to simple rhymes’ is notreported by any of the three parents even though it is asignificant early indicator of poor phonologicalawareness. This could be because unlike in UK, nurseryrhymes are not emphasized in Malaysian preschoolsettings, hence it would not be a symptom that wouldhave stood out as significant. In addition, it is also not awidespread habit among Malaysian parents to readtogether with their children and hence it is not surprising

that items such as ‘no expression in reading-comprehension poor’, ‘loses the point of the story beingread or written’ or ‘has difficulty in picking out the mostimportant points from a passage’ were not reported bythe parents. However, there are enough otherbehavioural signs and symptoms which are similar to theitems in the BDA checklists. These signs and symptomscan be summarised to indicate that these three childrenhave weaknesses in similar developmental areas thatare indicated in the BDA checklists: phonologicalprocessing, memory, reading, writing, time, directionaland motor coordination deficits. It would appear that


Table 8: Other signs and symptoms


Has poor motor skills,leading to weaknesses inspeed, control andaccuracy of the pencilHas a limitedunderstanding of non-verbal communicationIs confused by thedifference between left andright, up and down, eastand westHas indeterminate handpreferencePerforms unevenly fromday to day

-

-

Confuses left and right.

-

-

-

-

Will say right when hemeant left.

-

-

-

-

Confuses between frontand back.

-

-

Table 9: Signs and symptoms related to behaviour


Employs work avoidancetactics such as sharpeningpencils and looking for booksSeems to ‘dream’, does notseem to listenIs easily distracted

Is the class clown or isdisruptive or withdrawn

Is excessively tired due toamount of concentrationand effort required

-

-

Easily distracted.

-

-

-

-

-

-

Cannot read for longbecause of eyestrain andheadache. Reddishblack ring will appearbelow the eye whenreading for a longertime.

-

-

Hyperactive with shortattention span.Can be disruptive and runsaround the class.

-

25

there are enough similar behavioural signs andsymptoms across the two different cultures andlanguages to suggest the possibility of similar underlyingcauses of dyslexia.

The phonological representation deficit hypothesis hasbeen put forward as a way of integrating the disparatesigns and symptoms of dyslexia (Hatcher & Snowling2002). There is evidence to show that these childrenhave deficits in phonological processing. For example,at the more primitive level of processing, Sam could notdifferentiate between ‘17’ and ‘70’ nor ‘15’ and ‘50’, andat the higher level of processing, Teik Seng indicated aninability to blend the letter sounds of S+A+Y+A to formthe word ‘saya’ (which means me) or to segment wordssuch as ‘menggunakan’ (which means using). However,Ken’s mother did not know how to describe his problemsbased on phonology and only reported that Ken did noteven know how to read simple words like cat. Theimportance of phonological processing in reading andspelling is already well established in developedcountries (eg. Wagner & Torgesen, 1987). However, thisknowledge domain is still not widely known orunderstood by most educators or lay persons inMalaysia. This lack of understanding could be one of themajor reasons why dyslexia is still not a widelyunderstood phenomenon in Malaysia. In addition tophonological awareness, the children also indicatedweaknesses in verbal short-term memory (cannotremember a list of instructions) and long-term memory(cannot recall familiar names and months in a year).

Even though Malaysian is a much more transparentlanguage compared to English, as is suggested byZiegler and Goswami (2005), the signs and symptomsabove indicate that a transparent language does notnecessarily prevent dyslexic features emerging. If a childhas problems in phonological awareness, phonologicalmemory or short term memory, then the child is likely tohave problems in reading, writing and spelling acrossdifferent languages and cultures. In other words, if achild cannot blend or segment, then the child cannotread regardless of the transparency of language. Recentresearch conducted by Lee (2008) indicated thatphonological awareness is the most significant predictorof word-level literacy skills in Malay with rapid namingmaking independent secondary contributions. Thisresearch provided evidence to support the phonologicalprocessing deficit as an explanation for dyslexia inMalaysian.

ConclusionThe results from this comparison imply that the BDAHandy Hints can be of potential use to screen Malaysianchildren for dyslexia. However, there is evidence tosuggest that the checklists need to be adapted in orderto be more sensitive towards local practices andcontexts. For example, some items especially those

related to deficits in phonological processing need to beillustrated with more examples which are locally relevant.Brief explanations would also be necessary to beincluded into the checklists as it cannot be assumed thatteachers, especially preschool teachers, are aware of theunderlying constructs of the items. This would helpteachers make better decisions. A valid screeningchecklist would help to increase early identification andprevention. This is imperative as there is strong evidenceto suggest that children who start poorly in reading rarelycatch up (Torgesen 1998). Early identification would alsohelp to prevent emotional trauma and loss of self-esteem.

Lay Wah Lee

Lay Wah Lee is a senior special education lecturer at theSchool of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia.Her area of specialisation is in dyslexia studies. Lay Wahcan be contacted at [email protected] or [email protected]

ReferencesGomez C (2004)

Dyslexia in Malaysia. In I Smythe, J Everatt & R Salter (Eds), Supplementarymaterials of the International Book of Dyslexia: A guideto practice and resources.UK Wiley.Retrieved March 13, 2004, fromhttp://www.wiley.com/legacy/wileychi/dyslexia/supp/Malaysia.pdf

Haniz I (2003)Programme bermasalah pembelajaran spesifik disleksiaKementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.[Programme fordyslexia specific learning disability, Ministry ofEducation].Paper presented at the 3rd National Special EducationSeminar, Special Education Department, Ministry ofEducation, KL (Oct)

Hatcher J & Snowling M J (2002)The phonological representations hypothesis of dyslexia:From theory to practice. In G Reid & J Wearmouth (Eds)Dyslexia and literacy: Theory and practice pp 69-84West Sussex UK Wiley.

Lee L W (2004)Understanding Dyslexia in Malaysia from the Parents’PerspectiveProceedings of the Hawaii International Conference onEducation 2004 pp 3709-3722

Lee L W (2008) Development and validation of a reading-relatedassessment battery in Malay for the purpose of dyslexiaassessment. Annals of Dyslexia 58 pp37-57

Peer L (2002a)How can I tell if a pre-school child may be at risk ofdyslexia? Handy hints for educators working with pre-school aged children (3 to 5 years)In M Johnson & L Peer (Eds) The dyslexia handbook2002 pp 89-91The British Dyslexia AssociationLondon UK


26

Peer L (2002b)How can I tell if a primary school child may be dyslexic?Handy hints for primary school teachers pp 92-97In M Johnson & L Peer (Eds) The dyslexia handbook2002The British Dyslexia AssociationLondon UK

Torgesen, J K (1998)Catch them before they fail: Identification andassessment to prevent reading failure in young childrenAmerican Educator Spring/Summer pp 1-8

Wagner R K & Torgesen J K (1987)The nature of phonological processing and its causalrole in the acquisition of reading skillsPsychological Bulletin 101 pp 192-212

Ziegler J C & Goswami U (2005)Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilledreading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain sizetheoryPsychological Bulletin 131 pp 2-29


Dyslexia Review Advertising rates

FULL PAGE MONO (18 cms x 25.7 cms) £220

HALF PAGE MONO Horizontal or vertical £135

(18 cms x 12.5 cms or 8.6 cms x 25.7 cms)

QUARTER PAGE MONO (8.6 cms x 12.5 cms) £85

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING (single insert, max. 30 words) £15

A4 INSERT £250

Prices quoted are based on camera ready artwork. Design facility available at extra charge.10% discount for a series of 3 advertisements.

All advertisers will be sent a complimentary copy.

For further details please contact Lesley Freedman on 020 7730 9202

Copy deadline for AUTUMN issueOctober 6th 2008

PERMISSION TO COPY FROM

Dyslexia ReviewAny interested person may copy or reprint articlesappearing in Dyslexia Review, provided that credit isgiven in the following manner:

‘Reprinted with permission from Dyslexia Review, theJournal of the Dyslexia Action Guild, volume number, issuenumber, date and author.’

THE DYSLEXIA GUILD

2, Grosvenor Gardens, London, SW1W 0DH

Accessibility Strategies Survey

Dyslexia Action is conducting an on-line survey on the accessibility strategies used by dyslexic students inschools and colleges. We need at least 100 students between the ages of 14 and 20 to take part. If you areworking with students of this age and would like to help us please contact [email protected] fordetails. We need students working across the range of institutions: maintained and private sector, FE,comprehensive, academies.

The survey will take place in the first week of October 2008 and the results will be profiled at the Dyslexia GuildSymposium on November 22nd and in Dyslexia Review.

Margaret RoomsHead of Educational DevelopmentDyslexia Action

Neurodiversity in Higher EducationEdward Griffin & David Pollak

27

BRAIN.HE (Best Resources for Attainment andIntervention regarding Neurodiversity in HigherEducation) is a National Teaching Fellowship Schemeproject funded by the Higher Education Academy. Theproject started in 2005 and combines qualitativeresearch and analysis with an active support andresource website for neurodiverse students and staffteaching them (www.brainhe.com). The website alsoprovides support for neurodiverse staff teaching in highereducation (HE).

There is a substantial amount of literature whichdescribes people with learning differences as if they areafflicted by some terrible disorder. The use of words like‘suffering from’ and ‘severely dyslexic’ do little toempower such people. The BRAIN.HE project is aboutcelebrating learning differences, and encouragingstudents to explore and develop their strengths, eventhough current educational environments do not alwaysprovide the best arena for this. We prefer the termlearning difference to what is often referred to as‘specific learning difficulty’ (UK) or ‘learning disability’(USA); we find it a more socially acceptable and lessjudgemental term, and believe that its use is becomingmore widespread.

Medical and social models of disabilityTwo main models have influenced modern thinking aboutdisability: the medical model and the social model. Bothcan be applied to learning differences (Cooper 2006) andhave had a powerful influence on how people withimpairments are treated by society. The most dominanthas been the medical model, which focuses onidentifying and treating deficits. The medical model oflearning disabilities regards disability as a direct result ofthe cognitive impairments within the individual. Oliver(1988) proposes a social model of disability, whichargues that disability is constructed by the practices ofsociety, and it is often the barriers of society whichdisable people. We believe that this is partly the case inthe educational system in the UK and whilst things aregetting better, we are still seeing examples of theeducational system disabling students with impairments.The BRAIN.HE project supports and promotes the socialmodel of disability and the concept of neurodiversity.

Neurodiversity‘Neurodiversity’ is an umbrella term for many types oflearning difference. It encapsulates the more positiveand empowering notion of ‘difference’ as opposed to‘deficit’. Neurodiversity is both a concept and a civilrights movement, developed by online groups of autistic

individuals in the late 1990s. It argues that learningdifferences arise out of natural human diversity,characterised by atypical neurological wiring, and shouldbe tolerated and respected by society in the same wayas any other human difference. Stein (2006) believesthat learning differences such as dyslexia are highlyhereditary. He asserts that if the existence ofneurodiverse brains were entirely disadvantageous to thehuman race, evolution would have eliminated them overthe course of time.

BRAIN.HE websiteBRAIN.HE.com was launched in January 2005 and is anon-commercial/non-profit making resource websitemanaged at De Montfort University, Leicester, UK. It is(to the best of our knowledge) the first and only websiteto assist and support students and staff in HE with awide range of learning differences. These includeAD(H)D, Meares-Irlen syndrome, Asperger’s syndrome,Tourette’s syndrome, autism, dyscalculia, dysgraphia,dyslexia, dyspraxia and mental health difficulties. Thewebsite also supports HE staff teaching students withlearning differences.

Websites are an effective way of reaching out to largenumbers of people all over the world. Computer andinternet usage is very prominent within most HE coursesand an easily accessible website provides an excellentplatform for the delivery of information. The inspirationbehind BRAIN.HE.com was that it would pull together,evaluate and make accessible a mass of informationabout learning differences, which was previouslyscattered. It would also encourage networking andcommunication between likeminded students and staff,by the use of weblogs and forums.

AccessibilityA main consideration when designing the website was toensure that it would be accessible for its users. Informaldiscussions with neurodiverse students indicated thatmany experienced problems using conventionalwebsites. Many of these problems seemed to conflict,not just between different types of neurodiversity, butalso within the different types. Some favoured particulartypes of text, others preferred audio to text. Somefavoured simplicity, whereas others felt that simpledesigns were not stimulating enough to retain attention.A balance was achieved when creating the website. Asimple and clean design was combined with a bright andcolourful logo, which did not distract from the logicalorganisation of each page. A software package was alsoadded to the website which allows users to effortlessly


28

redesign the pages to suit their viewing preferences.The Textic Toolbar and Talkbar (www.textic.com) entitlesviewers to adjust the typeface, the size and colour of thetext, and the colour and design of the background. Theproduct also enables viewers to have the page read tothem, and supplies an audio dictionary and thesaurus.

Many neurodiverse students prefer multi-sensorylearning to a linear text delivery of information. Whilstthe nature of the BRAINHE website requires it to besomewhat text-heavy, it has made attempts to reducethis by including a large amount of audio and video.This includes neurodiverse students and staff talkingabout their experiences in HE, videos about differenttypes of neurodiversity and recordings of relevantconferences. Visual mind maps have also beenincorporated into the website. They display the keysections on each webpage in a diagrammatic form.These mind maps were further developed to include hotlinks which direct the user to the various sections of thepage, by clicking their mouse on the appropriate box.Other accessible features were generated from feedbackleft by users, including a site-specific search engine, andcolour co-ordinated sections.

Resources, usage and implicationsBRAIN.HE.com has grown into a sizable resource, withover 100 pages of information. For students the siteoffers information about learning strategies, legislation,identification, models of learning differences, real stories,links to any new information within the field and muchmore. For Staff, BRAINHE also offers information aboutinclusive learning and teaching, how learning differencesmay affect students in HE, and the strengths oftenassociated with neurodiversity. Statistics have revealedthat the website is ever increasing in popularity. Thelatest report from April 2008 indicated that the averagenumber of daily visits had passed 200. Two years agothe average daily visits was just 25. With advertisingleaflets being distributed to many higher educationalinstitutions, and prominent websites reciprocating links toBRAIN.HE.com, it is anticipated that the number of visitswill continue to increase.

Feedback from users has been very positive andencouraging, particularly about the site’s accessibility.BRAIN.HE.com is frequently cited as a good example ofan accessible website. Many users have also reportedpositively relating to the video and audio interviews withneurodiverse students, notably where the studentsdiscuss their difficulties and the strategies used toovercome them. Other positive feedback has been aboutthe philosophical stance the website takes and the‘useful’ learning strategies guide. It is exciting to hearthat the BRAINHE website is helping students bothnationally and internationally, and it is hoped that otherinstitutions will embrace positive approaches toneurodiversity.

BRAIN.HE Research projectThe BRAIN.HE research project is currently beingreviewed for publication, and therefore only a summarywill be presented here. The implementation of thewebsite and interaction with its users indicated that therewere elements associated with neurodiversity in HE thatwould be interesting to explore. Firstly, ‘beingneurodiverse’ seemed to consist of considerably morethan possessing deficits in certain areas; for manystudents it encompassed a whole life style. Secondly,there seemed to be comparable similarities in howneurodiverse students interacted with the educationalsystem, and the meanings they derived from theseinteractions. This inspired the development of aqualitative research project exploring the studentexperience of neurodiversity.

HESA statistics have shown that increasing numbers ofBritish students identified with dyslexia and autism areenrolling on UK university courses (HESA, 1995, 2004,2005, 2006). Universities have responded to disabilitylegislation by offering general support to all students whodeclare learning differences and many support tutorshave acknowledged greater numbers of students comingforward with other types of neurodiversity includingdyspraxia, dyscalculia and ADHD. Riddell et al. (2005)report research which has evaluated initiatives basedupon the academic achievements of students withlearning differences in HE, but surprisingly there hasbeen very little research aimed at qualitativelyunderstanding the lives of such students. A handful ofpublications have examined the experiences of studentswith a particular type of learning difference, such asdyslexia (Pollak 2005), and Asperger’s Syndrome(Jamieson & Jamieson 2004). To the best of ourknowledge, there have been no studies to date exploringsuch experiences amongst students with a range oflearning differences. The BRAIN.HE research projectaims to build theory about the life experiences ofneurodiverse students in HE, and their development ofidentity. The research questions were:

1. How do these students deal with their identity asbeing neurologically diverse, and how has theiridentity developed?

2. What are the commonalities between the HE lives ofstudents identified with various learning differences?

3. What are the lessons for the sector?

Interviews and analysisTwenty seven participants took part in the investigation.Semi-structured interviews allowed respondents theflexibility to explore their ideas, whilst maintaining focuson the topics to be covered. Open-ended questionsencouraged the interviewee to talk about a broad rangeof experiences. The data was analysed using thematicanalysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) with the help of thequalitative research software package NVIVO 7.


29

Results and DiscussionBeing neurodiverse meant that many of the participantsinterviewed for this project entered HE with extraemotional ‘baggage’ from their school days, a findingwhich was highlighted by Pollak (2005). Many studentsreported feeling inferior to their peers at school andindicated that their educational environment was notgiving them the chance to develop their strengths. Thiswas particularly relevant to those who were not identifieduntil they entered HE. They frequently experiencednegative criticism from their teachers, and some wereoften branded as ‘lazy’, ‘thick’ and as ‘oddballs’. Theolder participants talked of more harrowing ordeals,particularly those who were in education before disabilitylegislation was introduced. Whilst it is clear that HEinstitutions have become more accommodating overrecent years, there were still current students who talkedabout experiencing negative attitudes from universitystaff towards their neurodiversity. Whilst attitudestowards neurodiversity are generally improving, there isstill some way to go.

The research explored identification and what ‘having alabel’ meant to the student. There seemed to be twogeneral and distinct ways in which the students viewedtheir neurodiversity; most of the participants adhered toone of these ways. Ten participants adopted a‘medical/deficit’ view of their neurodiversity. Theyindicated that they viewed their learning difference(s) asan entirely negative matter, either a single deficit, orseveral deficits. When asked about strengths andweaknesses related to their neurodiversity, they wouldreadily talk about their weaknesses but found it verydifficult to identify any strengths. If these participantswere pushed to talk about strengths, they would notassociate them with their neurodiversity. Theseparticipants frequently used medical discourse andterminology. Most of the students in this group also usedlanguage which indicated a low academic self-esteem,and whilst a limited number acknowledged that they hadachieved against all odds, most had limited ambition andcareer prospects, expressing confusion, uncertainty andminimal optimism about their future. Of the participantswho expressed a dislike of their label, most belonged tothis group.

Pollak (2005) found similar subgroups within his cohortof students with dyslexia. Whilst Pollak madedistinctions within this subgroup, he noted that there wasa lack of self esteem associated with the negativemedical discourse. The participants seemed to bemirroring the language and discourses which have beenpresented to them, and those readily available in themedia and on the internet. The UK media still tend toportray stereotypical negative representations of peoplewith learning differences and use negative languagesuch as ‘suffering from word blindness’, or ‘she does notlet it hold her back’, which imply that learning differences

are basically a problem. A medical label and discourseis also a requirement for obtaining the Disabled StudentsAllowance (DSA), which can help the student purchasefunding for any support.

Eleven of the participants viewed their neurodiversity in amore positive and empowering way. This group viewedtheir neurodiversity as a difference which provided themwith both strengths and weaknesses. These participantswere keen to talk about strengths associated with theirneurodiversity, and two of the participants started bytalking about strengths when asked what their labelmeant to them. These participants generally avoided(although not entirely) negative medical terminology anddeficit discourses. They also indicated higher academicand social self-esteem and many had positive and clearcareer ambition. Surprisingly, these participants weremore likely to have experienced unpleasant epithets fromteachers and lecturers, and were prone to showelements of the ‘campaigner’ discourse of dyslexiaidentified by Pollak (2005). It is possible that negativeexperiences at earlier educational levels may have giventhe participant a more determined approach toeducation. Interestingly, many of these participantsinitially viewed their neurodiversity as a deficit, and theirviews changed by joining groups such as theDevelopmental Adult Neurodiversity Association(www.danda.org.uk), or just by meeting other people witha similar type of neurodiversity.

The participants in this study who had a medical/deficitview of their neurodiversity were clearly less confident intheir ability and showed lower self esteem than theparticipants who viewed their neurodiversity as adifference. This raises questions as to whether theprocesses of formal identification and the processes forobtaining the DSA are too focused on encouraging themedical/deficit model.

Many of the students were happy that their ‘condition’had been ‘diagnosed’, and were excited that they werereceiving support from the DSA. Essentially the DSAcompensates neurodiverse students for their disability,but does little to make the educational system moreinclusive. The ‘severity’ of their deficits often determinesthe amount of additional funding obtained. However,many of the students felt that the support via the DSAwas paramount to their success on their course. Theparticipants in the study also indicated that there werepositive aspects of psychological assessment.Intelligence testing often affirms that the student is not‘thick’, and a recognised label gives the student moreoptions and a greater self understanding.

A striking finding which occurred throughout many of thethemes was that the interviewees, irrespective of theirtype of learning difference, shared many similarexperiences. These participants interacted with the


30

education, social and medical systems in similar waysand generated comparable meanings in response tothese interactions. These included similar experiences atschool and leading up to formal assessment, similaritiesin how the participants constructed their identity as beingneurodiverse, parallel experiences with universitysupport and comparable preferences for certain teachingand learning styles. Grant (2005) and Deponio (2004)have noted that there are considerable overlaps betweenthe various types of neurodiversity in terms of theirindicators. Whilst most of the similarities reported byparticipants in this study were experiential, a preferencefor visual learning styles, and organisational strategiesmay indicate similar visual cognitive processes. Theseoverlaps may suggest more similarity between types ofneurodiversity than a separate categorisation systemallows.

Participants had a mixed response about universitysupport. For some it seemed that the support came fromindividual areas within the institution, but there was alack of unilateral support. Those who received supportfrom the disability offices, support tutors and mentorswere generally pleased with it, and for many it exceededexpectations. A large proportion of the intervieweesexperienced inconsistency in the level of support offeredby the lecturers and tutors on their courses. The generalperception was that some lecturers and tutors were wellinformed about neurodiversity and made all efforts tomodel inclusive learning and teaching. Some even talkedof lecturers recognising that the student may have had alearning difference, and starting formal procedures. Thisrecognition of neurodiversity certainly seems to be anencouraging development. Unfortunately most of theinterviewees also experienced a small number oflecturers and tutors whose approaches wereunsatisfactory. Criticisms included a lack of awarenessand ‘ignorance’, inaccessible teaching, lecturers ignoringlearning support agreements (or equivalent) and in somecases lecturers denying the existence of certain learningdifferences.

HE institutions have become more accommodating overrecent years and probably on paper, they would be seento have adequately responded to disability legislation.There is however a need for greater communicationbetween various departments, and a betterunderstanding of neurodiversity and inclusive learningand teaching amongst academic staff. New governmenttargets aim to increase numbers of young people atuniversity. This will unquestionably mean that HE willencounter greater numbers of neurodiverse students.Whilst course delivery and assessment procedures areslowly becoming more accommodating, certain aspectsof HE are still largely inaccessible.

National projects such as AchieveAbility(www.achieveability.org.uk) and InCurriculum

(www.incurriculum.org.uk) are encouraging the‘mainstreaming’ of inclusive learning and teachingpractices for all. The BRAIN.HE website complementsthese by providing a wealth of information aboutneurodiversity and helping to increase the recognitionand understanding of learning differences amongststudents and staff. The BRAIN.HE research project hasshown that there is more to the lives of neurodiverseindividuals than just their label. Findings have indicatedthat identity as being neurodiverse is related to theeducational system, procedures of identification and selfesteem. It would be particularly interesting to examinewhether discourses of neurodiversity are related toacademic success. Awareness among academic staffcan be inadequate, but there is a very good reservoir ofknowledge in learning support and disability units. This‘glass wall’ should be demolished and ultimately,inclusive learning and teaching practices should be builtin to all courses.

Edward Griffin and David Pollak

Edward Griffin is a Doctoral Research Student at DeMontfort University, Leicester, UK

David Pollak is a Principal Lecturer in Learning Supportat De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

ReferencesBraun V & Clarke V (2006)

Using thematic analysis in psychologyQualitative Research in Psychology 3: 77-101

Cooper R (2006)Social Model of DyslexiaLondon South Bank University

Deponio P (2004)The co-occurrence of specific learning difficulties:implications for identification and assessmentIn Reid G & Fawcett A, Dyslexia in Context: ResearchPolicy and PracticeWhurr London.

Grant D W (2005)That’s the Way I Think: Dyslexia and DyspraxiaExplainedDavid Fulton London

HESA (1995, 2004, 2005, 2006) Students and Qualifiers data table: disabilitywww.hesa.ac.uk. (accessed January 5th 2008).

Jamieson J & Jamieson C (2004)Managing Asperger Syndrome at College and University:A resource for students, tutors and support servicesLondon Fulton

Oliver M (1988)The Social and Political Context of Educational Policy:The case of special needsIn Barton L (Ed) The Politics of Special EducationalNeedsLewes Falmer Press

Pollak D E (2005)Dyslexia, the Self and Higher Education: Learning lifehistories of students identified as dyslexic. Stoke on Trent Trentham


31

Riddell S Tinklin T & Wilson A (2005)Disabled Students in Higher Education: Perspectives onwidening access and changing policyLondon Routledge

Stein J (2006)Dietary supplements and specific learning difficulties:myth or magic?Public lecture, De Montfort University, 14 June 2006


Have Your Say: Two chancesto influence government policyon dyslexia

A website for teachers, parents, young people and others with an interest in dyslexia was launchedin July by Sir Jim Rose as part of his review into how children with dyslexia learn best. Sir Jim isasking for personal accounts and experiences as well as details of published research to helpinform his development of recommendations to the Secretary of State for Children, Schools andFamilies. The website will also contain regular updates and information about the review.

Many members of the Dyslexia Guild will know, having heard his presentations at our Symposia,that Sir Jim Rose is committed to improving practice to support those with dyslexia. Launching thenew Review, Sir Jim commented:"Many years ago I read an article entitled: ‘Dyslexics of the world untie.’ In those days, the natureof dyslexia was little understood. There were many who believed that dyslexia was not only hard todefine but also questioned whether it existed at all. Nowadays we know better. Dyslexia is no joke. I am pleased to be asked by the Secretary of State, Ed Balls to look at the current position ontackling dyslexia and to make recommendations about the identification of this learning difficultyand the teaching needed to overcome it. I will be drawing strongly on the help of expert advisersand we will look at other learning difficulties, such as dyscalculia and dyspraxia, which may overlapin some respects with dyslexia. Whilst research evidence is very important I’m eager to hearpersonal accounts and I would urge parents, teachers, children and young people to have a lookat my website and tell me what has worked well, and what has worked less well, to improve theprogress made by children with dyslexia.”

The website address is: www.dcsf.gov.uk/jimroseanddyslexia/ or you can access it from the Homescreen of Dyslexia Action’s website www.dyslexiaaction.org.ukAccounts of experience and details of research evidence can be e-mailed [email protected]

John Rack is one of the members of Sir Jim’s Expert Advisory Group and has been asked to lookat a number of specific questions about screening and assessment as well as the evidenceconcerning early intervention. John would be very grateful to collect the views of Dyslexia Guildmembers in relation to these issues and therefore we are setting up a web-link so that informationcan be provided online and collated. John’s view is that a clear message that reflects theconsensus views of expert practitioners will carry considerable influence. For details of this link(live by the end of August) please email [email protected] to receivedirections to the survey.

Supporting Adults with Dyslexia at WorkKatherine Kindersley

32

AbstractThe article looks at how adults with dyslexia can besupported at work through assessment, theimplementation of reasonable adjustments (includingspecialist training and assistive technology), and thecreation of dyslexia-friendly workplaces. It emphasiseshow important it is to make links between the employee,the manager/s, and the organisation as a whole if thereis to be an understanding of dyslexia in the workplace,an acceptance of different ways of achieving results, anda successful outcome.

IntroductionMost of the adults that are seen at Dyslexia Assessment& Consultancy have been referred by their organisationbecause of the problems they have been experiencing atwork. Often there is a performance/ capability procedurein progress or there is some form of conflict or disputebetween the employee and the managers.

The particular causes of disputes around dyslexia can beas varied as the world of employment itself. Considerthe variables in any given situation: the workplaceenvironment, the range of operational and managementstyles, the complex mix of individual personalitiesworking alongside one another, and the work andorganisational culture. Yet when I look at the reasons forthe varying conflicts which arise, some clear themesemerge. I believe that if these themes are recognised,then timely action can often be taken to prevent conflictand disputes arising.

Below I am going to explore what I consider to be themost dominant theme, that of change. I have chosen aparticular case, a recent one, which illustrates whychanges at work can cause such difficulty for people withdyslexia, and how conflicts can be resolved by a timelyintervention.

However, let us look first at the demands of theworkplace.

In general:• it is assumed that employees are literate • most jobs require some degree of literacy • there is a focus on memory, communication and time-

management skills• help is only given if requested or if there are

performance problems• workplace relationships are often long-term

Further, workplaces have become more pressurised over

recent years and so can be difficult environments forpeople with dyslexia, or other neuro-diverse profiles.Particular demands commonly include:• working to short timescales / tight deadlines• strong / speedy written and verbal communication

skills • long hours with a heavy workload• multi-tasking skills

There is emphasis on:• process rather than outcome• performance management and surveillance

Change at WorkIn the context of such demands, change is a majorcause of the difficulties that arise: it affects both the workperformance and the emotional well-being of anemployee with dyslexia. Various changes which mayoccur are:

Change of JobA change of job may bring new and challengingresponsibilities.

PromotionPromotion is not always good news for a dyslexicemployee. For example, an employee who had excelledin a previous post with his good practical problem-solvingskills may suddenly find himself in a role which makesincreased demands on literacy. He may be required tokeep accurate written records, manage his owncorrespondence and write reports.

RestructuringAs a result of re-structuring, there may be a new linemanager. The manager perhaps introduces a verydifferent style of management which is less sympatheticto a dyslexic employee. This leads to clashes with theemployee, who has been accustomed to doing his job ina particular way: he may have been masking hisdifficulties by taking work home, working longer hours, oravoiding a task or activity altogether.

Change in appraisal systemsNew appraisal systems may record performance in amore detailed way. More monitoring and supervision canhighlight weak performance.

Loss of a Support SystemA particularly supportive colleague has moved on - forexample, the secretary who was willing to proof-read allthe e-mails and documents before they were sent out.


33

Or a change in a relationship outside work may meanthat there is no longer someone at home who can checkdocuments for the employee.

Case study: a conflict arising from changeHerbert is a structural engineer who has dyspraxicdifficulties. These were recognised when he was atschool but he has never received any specialist help forthem. For sixteen years, he seems to have copedreasonably well with his job, yet suddenly he finds that,with the appointment of a new line manager, his usualcoping strategies and support mechanisms are sweptaway. He has now instigated a grievance procedure,claiming harassment and unfair treatment.

My initial contact was with Herbert’s line manager,Margaret, who asked me to advise on his case. Iattended a meeting with Margaret and Stephano, the HRmanager.

Points to consider. Where exactly were the difficulties?What were the attitudes? Where was the clash?

Stephano acknowledged that Herbert had worked for thefirm for a long time and, although he did not know all thedetails, had the impression that Herbert had previouslymanaged projects satisfactorily. Over the past year,however, his performance had sharply declined; and hehad become uncharacteristically moody and unco-operative.

Margaret’s perspectiveMargaret was crisp and efficient. She said that Herbert’ssurvival for sixteen years was due to the fact that he hadnever had proper supervision and management. In heropinion, the department had been run in an inefficientand unprofessional way. Arriving as a new manager, shehad wanted to introduce different systems. She had re-organised work allocations so that engineers were nowresponsible for managing individual projects, instead ofsharing the responsibility between design teams. Shewas now able to monitor individual performance.

Margaret said that the truth was that Herbert was simplynot up to his job. Now that he had to work moreindependently, it was clear that there were manyproblems with his performance:

• he miscalculated figures• he was unable to plan schedules and organise outside

suppliers• he could not communicate clearly with draftsmen and

technicians • he could not work at speed - in fact he worked

exceptionally slowly

I asked Margaret why she thought that after sixteenyears Herbert had become so difficult and unco-

operative, and had felt the need to take out a grievanceprocedure. Margaret thought that he was simply upsetthat his weaknesses had been exposed, and she wasconfident that, if the case came to court, it would beseen that all her monitoring and supervision had beennecessary and fair.

She herself had offered him additional support throughextra meetings and supervision sessions. She hadarranged to have his desk moved to a more secludedpart of the office so that he could work withoutinterruptions. She had sent him on computer trainingand CAD courses because he was still producing hisdrawings by hand.

Point to consider. How far was Margaret’s perspectiveaccurate? How much had her ‘support’ really helpedHerbert?

Margaret seemed to have already dismissed Herbert asa hopeless case. I noticed that she was an extremelyquick-thinking, rapid-talking person with a brisk, possiblyslightly abrasive manner. She complained that she foundHerbert very frustrating in supervision sessions. Hewould begin a sentence and stop, and so she wouldfinish off his sentence, or move on to the next topic -otherwise, she said, they would be there all morning. Hecontributed little to the discussion and he was slow tocatch on. He always seemed rather bewildered as if hecould not quite absorb what she was saying.

Point to consider. Did Margaret’s brisk, perhaps ratherimpatient, manner cause a further problem in herrelationship with Herbert - given that Herbert wasdescribed as being generally slow both in his work and incommunicating with people?

Following this meeting with Stephano and Margaret, itwas arranged that I would carry out a re-assessment ofHerbert’s difficulties and also conduct a workplace needsassessment.

Herbert’s perspective

I met with Herbert who was pleasant and cooperative butseemed slightly depressed. He gave his perspective onthe situation:

Change in working methods:Herbert had not welcomed the change from teamresponsibility to individual responsibility. He complainedabout the loss of team comradeship, shared knowledgeand collaboration.

Supervision:He felt from the beginning that Margaret was hostile tohim - she was always hovering over him and checking tosee what he was doing.


34

Meetings:Margaret never gave him time to present his ideas; shewas always taking over.

Desk position:Without proper discussion, she had moved him into adifferent part of the office and this made him feel isolatedand without support. Previously he had been able togain advice and help from his colleagues, who werequite happy to support him.

Computers:He said he liked to draw by hand, as this allowed him tosee the whole drawing more clearly, and he was able tothink about it as he went along. He found computersconfusing with their busy screens and multiple tool bars.

Training courses:These had not helped. The pace had been too fast, andin a large group he had not felt able to ask questions.The trainers had talked a lot about what to do, but theyhad not shown him how to do things.

Post-assessment meetingAt a further meeting with Stephano and Margaret I gavefeedback, explaining that Herbert did indeed havedyspraxic difficulties, but that he also had some dyslexicdifficulties and a very severe problem with visual stress,which made it difficult for him to track numbers andletters on a computer screen.

I explained why he felt rather humiliated about his deskbeing repositioned without any discussion. I also talkedabout the problems with training courses which did nottake account of people with dyspraxia or similardifficulties. In particular, I explained to Margaret thatHerbert couldn’t help being slow in processinginformation, and the fact that he needed time toformulate his ideas verbally did not mean that he wasunable to find a good solution to design problems orcomplete projects successfully. I also pointed out thatHerbert had felt under pressure during the last year to doeverything quickly, and so had become increasinglystressed, which had further impaired his performance.

Stephano and Margaret both showed themselves readyto try to gain a fuller understanding of Herbert’sdifficulties, and to find better ways of managing him.

I then made specific recommendations for a programmeof individual specialist training as well as IT support forHerbert. We also discussed the possibility of arranging

an awareness day for managers so that they too couldalso become better informed about ‘hidden’ disabilities ordifferences, and how to develop a best-practiceapproach.

OutcomesThere were further meetings, and the outcome to date is:• Herbert is making good progress with his training• Margaret is making equally good progress with her

dyspraxia awareness. She recognises that herimpatience had made Herbert more stressed and thatshe had perhaps missed hearing some of his creativedesign solutions

• Herbert has been moved back to his old position inthe office close to his colleagues

• the number of his projects has been reduced while histraining continues

• he is becoming more able to talk openly about hisdifficulties to colleagues and managers, enablingfurther adjustments to be made

• it seems likely that this story will have a happy ending- Herbert has dropped his grievance procedure.

In conclusionDisputes around dyslexia often arise when there arechanges at work which uncover or highlight anindividual’s difficulties. Specialist training and assistivetechnology support may be needed. The line managerneeds to understand the nature of hidden differences, sothat he/she can effectively manage the employee.Further, it is vital that awareness of hidden differencesspreads beyond a particular manager or team andextends to the whole organisation, thereby creating aninclusive workplace.

Inclusive workplaces are those where there is a wholeorganisational understanding that adjustments may beneeded to support people who have difficulties or whowork differently. In fact we need to embed theunderstanding of difference in the culture of anorganisation, so that adjustments are accepted as thenorm, and all employees are able to work to theirstrengths and to the best of their abilities. It is then thatdisputes around dyslexia will drop away.

Katherine Kindersley

Katherine Kindersley is the director of DyslexiaAssessment & [email protected]


35

The case for web based video lessonsThere are an increasing number of specialist dyslexiacourses that provide training for teachers and tutors withthe skills to deliver an individualised structured multi-sensory language programme. However, there are still alarge number of students who require specialiseddyslexia tuition but who have no access to qualifiedspecialists. Over the last few years there has been aproliferation of low cost tool sets, such as Skype andMSN video, which, with increasing access to broadband,now make e-learning an alternative solution. Combinedwith most students’ natural flair and confidence for usingsuch tools, I have successfully trialled this method ofproviding tuition and this article discusses thepracticalities, strengths and pitfalls of this method ofteaching.

E-learning, incorporating web based video links hasenormous potential for supporting students with dyslexiaand widening access to provision. Most homes nowhave access to reasonably priced broadband facilitiesand students confidently use tools such as MSN andSkype as part of their daily communication with friendsand family. Whilst adults are mostly ‘IT immigrants’ andhence may consider this method of tuition a second bestalternative, many of our students are ‘IT natives’ and donot find the idea of lessons delivered through E-learninganything other than normal; the student and tutor cansee each other and hear each other clearly; worksheetscan be sent to and fro in an instant using the ‘Send File’facility; so that tutors can provide instant feedback; videocameras can be angled carefully to enable tutors towatch even the youngest of students as they practisetheir letter formation and handwriting skills, andemoticons can be used to give instant praise.

The set up and usage costs for individuals are very low.In addition, there are an increasing number of newapplications being designed for web based video tuition.(Skype can get very busy in the evening thus reducingvideo quality and speed.) Elluminate offer virtualclassrooms with facilities which allow 3 users to worktogether. Tools, such as Unyte, allow shared control ofprotected sections of the teacher’s computer thus givingthe student access to the same range of the tutor’sresources and teaching software as students receivingface to face lessons.

In my opinion e-learning can be used in all 1:1 tutoringsituations. Students are not required to travel to lessons,therefore, widening access, reducing travel expense andtime commitment for parents and producing less fatiguefor students. In addition parents can choose to learnalongside their children, thus creating additional supportfor their child in a stress free environment. E-learningcan also be used in school situations. For example,allowing one LA specialist teacher to reach morestudents, whilst at the same time training learningsupport assistants and ensuring the integrity and qualityof the teaching and learning outcomes. Lessons can berecorded and played back, allowing over-learning bystudents, and consolidation of teaching points bylearning assistants for transfer across the curriculum.This maximises the effectiveness of the intervention.

So how did this new teaching situation emerge forme?A parent approached me to ask for specialist tuition forher child. We lived 40 miles apart, and I was the nearestspecialist tutor. The parent could not drive. I suggestedwe trialled using MSN or Skype to deliver lessons. Thelessons were successful and after an initial trial otherstudents asked to use e-learning for their lessons. Somestudents have all lessons through e-learning. Othershave a combination of face to face and e-learninglessons. Using their disabled students’ allowance otherstudents at university do not have regular lessons, but‘book’ a lesson through e-mail when required and use itto help organise, research, plan and re draft course workassignments.

In summary here are the strengths and weakness that Ihave discovered so far.

The strengths of web based video tuitionFor the student

• Relaxed in their own environment• No travel time• Utilises technology they are comfortable with • Allows them more control of their learning• Accessibility - They will sometimes Skype you a

question whilst doing their homework• Develops self assessment skills• Develops key board and technological skills

alongside literacy, numeracy and study skills


Broadening Access to Specialist DyslexiaTuition Using Freely Available Web BasedVideo Tools by Jane Dupree

36

• Provides flexible support for students atUniversity who can book lessons as required

For the teacher• There appears to be no difference in the working

relationship with students that develops remotelyor face to face

• There appears to be no difference to thedevelopment of skills

• You can have several aspects of the lessonopen on the screen at once.

• Evidence is easily saved and recorded • You do not get their colds• You can be shown pets at a safe distance (I

was shown a student’s pet snake!)

Weaknesses of using web based video tuition• At busy times of the day the call can drop out.

(You have to keep ahead of the majority by usingnew software.)

• Younger children are dependent on parental ITskills

• For some students the relationship needs to bedeveloped face to face first.

• Parents can interrupt and disturb theteacher/student relationship; you need an agreedset of rules about the lesson environment in theirhome before you start. I learned this the hardway.

• I can’t find any others. For me - it is the wayforward. It is very adaptable.

I have now been using web based video tuition withseveral students for over one year. I am still learning,trialling and adapting my teaching techniques to this newmethod of tutoring. It can work extremely well. As oneof my students, who has only ever seen me virtually andfrom the waist upwards, said last week ¨Jane’s lessonsrock!¨

Training courses are now available to enable you tobegin using this method of tutoring. For moreinformation e-mail [email protected] [email protected] Jane Dupree

Jane Dupree is a specialist dyslexia consultant


37

Book Reviews

Teaching Children with Dyslexia - a practical guideby Philomena Ott

Publisher: RoutledgeISBN: 978-0-415-32454-0Price: £34.99

I approached reading this book with great enthusiasm,having been a great fan of Philomena Ott since readingher previous, very accessible volume ‘How to Detect andManage Dyslexia’.

From the title, I had expected lots of practical ideas forteaching dyslexic children. Instead what I found, forexample, was an outline of the history of educationalpractices which although interesting, is not essential forteaching purposes. Similarly, there is a large section onapproaches to spelling but little practical advice.

Another criticism is that there are only eight shortreferences to multisensory methods. Although dyslexiaspecialist teachers would take this ‘as read’, I feel thatthe ‘parents, carers, teachers and professionals’ thisbook is aimed at may not be specialists and thus notpresent materials appropriately. Surely, what we want forour dyslexic children is that teaching and learning areeffective?

But enough of this negative feedback! Perhaps therewere good reasons for being repetitive. You can selectany section without having to read the whole volume andthe outlines and summaries are useful. The parts inshaded boxes give practical ‘Hints and Suggestions’ orfocus on ‘Guidelines’, so again you can just ‘dip in’ tofind your solutions.

A bonus is that a lot of space is given to discussion ofdyspraxia, which is useful, as we recognise there can beoverlaps with dyslexia. Dyslexia- and dyspraxia-friendlyenvironments are discussed, with plenty of practicaladvice. I had not expected that from the title!

Would I recommend this book? Yes, if you are new todyslexia and need background information. Yes, if youwant practical suggestions and are prepared to skim-read to find solutions. And yes, if you want to find outmore about dyspraxia!Helen Boyce

Helen Boyce is Central Regional Principal for DyslexiaAction

Helen has a dyslexic daughter and is watching her firstgrandchild (who is not quite two years old) for any signs!!

How to Manage Spelling SuccessfullyActivities for Successful Spellingby Philomena Ott

Publisher: RoutledgeISBN: 978-0-415-40732-8

978-0-415-38574-9Price: £39.99

£34.99

I have for many years used and recommendedPhilomena Ott’s book How to Detect and ManageDyslexia so I was looking forward to reading her twolatest books. How to Manage Spelling Successfully is adescribed as an essential handbook for anyone teachingspelling and covers the theory and practice of spelling,as well as giving spelling rules. The accompanyingbook, Activities for Successful Spelling, describes how toteach the various aspects of spelling and includes manyphotocopiable activities.

The first seven chapters of How to Manage SpellingSuccessfully deal with the underpinning history andtheory, covering the history of the English language, thephonics debate, the role of phonological awareness andthe various types of spelling instruction. These are wide-ranging and interesting chapters, packed full ofinformation from research, with all the referencescarefully listed. This would be useful for someone on aliteracy course as it gives a good overview of the subject.

The next six chapters discuss teaching methods, spellingrules, segmentation and affixing. The basic concept isgood: spelling needs to be taught using phonics in astructured multi-sensory way, teaching the commonspelling patterns first before moving on to the rarervariations. Unfortunately this message is rather lost inthe confusion of lists and rules. The final chapter is onICT. This is a useful addition to a book on spelling and itcovers a wide range of software, not all relevant tospelling.

There is a massive amount of information in these booksand it is unfortunate that is presented in such a way thatit could well muddle a teacher or teaching assistant. Ateacher needs to be clear about the difference betweenphonemes and graphemes and this distinction is notmade clear in these books. The coding system that isused could also lead to confusion.

Ott observes that “To spell well, children need to learnthe rules.” This is true, but the rules need to bepresented much more simply and in a clearer fashionthan in these books. A new teacher looking for spellingrules would be better advised to refer to Ott’s first book,How to Detect and Manage Dyslexia.Sue LomasSue Lomas teaches at Dyslexia Action Leeds Centre


38

Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of theReading BrainBy Maryanne Wolf

Publisher: Icon BooksISBN: 978-184046867-0Price: £12.99

Maryanne Wolf, neuroscientist, always tells a good storywhether you are lucky enough to hear her speak at aconference, on radio 4, or whether you read ‘Proust andthe Squid’. This is her first book aimed at the generalpublic and as such it has a more relaxed style than isusually associated with academic texts. However, sheprovides extensive chapter notes at the end of the bookfor those readers who wish to explore the subject areafurther or who require more formal references.

Wolf explores the dynamic relationship between readingand brain development from three directions. The firstpart considers the development or evolution of readingas a human skill; taking the reader on a journey of over2000 years from the early forms of writing, includingSumerian cuneiform and Egyptian hieroglyphs, to thefirst formal alphabet of the Greeks. The seconddiscusses the acquisition of reading within the individual,

i.e. how the brain adapts and develops as an individuallearns to read in ever more complex ways. The thirdreflects on what happens when learning to read doesn’tfollow the usual scheme of things i.e. dyslexia.

Wolf draws on a mixture of science and observations inorder to stimulate the reader to reflect on what lessonscan be learnt from these approaches in terms of theteaching of reading and of becoming proficient readers.

This book provides a useful overview of the processesand development of reading from the historical, ‘intra’,and ‘inter’ brain perspectives. It would be of particularuse to specialist teachers/practitioners and mainstreamteachers wishing to expand their understanding ofreading, and of those individuals for whom reading isproblematic. It also provides an accessible introductionto the field of reading for fledgling researchers from anydiscipline. Dr Lisa Lynch

Dr Lisa Lynch BA, Ph.D., Dip., has worked as aresearcher, practitioner, and post graduate teachertrainer in the field of reading and dyslexia over the last10 years.


The Dyslexia Guild 2 Grosvenor Gardens, London SW1W 0DHT 020 7730 9202 E [email protected]

Dyslexia Action Park House, Wick Road, Egham, Surrey TW20 0HHT 01784 222300 F 01784 222333 E [email protected] www.dyslexiaaction.org.ukRegistered in England Company No. 1179975 Charity No. 268502

Dyslexia Action is the working name for the Dyslexia Institute ISSN 0308 6275

Dyslexia Action Directory

Bath 01225 420554Bolton 01204 395500Bristol 0117 923 9166Chelmsford 01245 259656Coventry 02476 257041Darlington 01325 283580Derby 01332 365359Egham 01784 222325Harrogate 01423 522111Hull 01482 329416Leeds 0113 288 8144

0113 288 8155Leicester 01162 511525Lincoln 01522 539267Liverpool 0151 428 6987London 0207 730 8890Newcastle Upon Tyne 0191 281 8381Nottingham 0115 948 3849Peterborough 01733 234956Sheffield 0114 281 5905Stone 01785 818783Sutton Coldfield 0121 354 6855Tonbridge 01732 352762Wilmslow 01625 530158Winchester 01962 856195York 01904 432930

ScotlandGlasgow 0141 334 4549

WalesCardiff 02920 481122

National Training OfficeEgham 01784 222344

In this issue - Dyslexia Action

Documents