Rise in dyslexia support sparks fairness concern

The concerns that are expressed here are not new. It's the bread and buter of our dialogue with some academic staff. But, as the article had the potential to raise the level of that debate somewhat by providing more tangible evidence, I'm a little suprised and disappointed that the author didn't name the report, say where it can be accessed, and provide more quantitative data. Ken

well said, ken grainger. this is not news. the work referred to in the THES piece has been around for a while as far as i know or can tell from a basic search. some clear signposts on the referencing would help a range of THES readers and might also show that this is an area that does have some data and is not all a matter of speculation. the concerns of the university mental health advisors would be related to, but perhaps different from, the academic staff concerns over dyslexia. that's two articles, if not more.

Once again an article appears to question the validity of dyslexia per se and further undermines the valuable work done and gains made over years of painstaking persuasion by suggesting disabled students are gaining an advantage. The imbalance in these articles is staggering and does a disservice to the readership by encouraging thinking born out of ignorance. <p>The impression given by the paragraph relating to providing PC's and non-traditional forms of assessment for all instead of just disabled students is that currently disabled students are gaining an advantage. Whereas infact it demonstrates that the assessments are disadvantaging many of their non-disabled students by failing to take account of the diversity of learning styles present in higher education . The primary aim of the disabled movement as it relates to education is to create an inclusive environment where alternative arrangements specifically aimed at disabled students aren't necessary. <p>The law determines that academic standards are sacrosanct. So tutors who are complaining of unfair advantages should think about how to reframe their courses, learning outcomes and assessment criteria to make them more inclusive and relevant. Too many assessments involve hidden criteria that are often actually irrelevant to the subject area - being able to see, speak, hear or handwrite for example.

The article shows complete ignorance of the fact that the assessment of dyslexia is rigorous and has come about through decades of research from educational psychologists and dyslexia specialists. It never fails to amaze me how people still go on as though dyslexia is a figment of a few people warped minds. But it is not. If, like me, they had worked with adult dyslexics for 20 years or so, they would reolise how wrong they are. And how support for dyslexics needs to be enshrined within the law. I am shocked that an article like this was allowed to be published in the TLS

@ belgravia - I'm shocked that you're shocked! - the article is not saying dyslexia is a myth, jus that our ways of dealing with it are vague and can, in some cases, fail to discriminate properly between dyslexia and various other reasons for being unable to study. In other words, many people might hide behind the label. Also, if you review the literature, there is still a great deal which is not known at a scientific level, and then if you talk to some in learning support, even that which is reasonable scientifically clear is not necessarily well known outside academia. Meanwhile, even in reasonably clear-cut cases, I have some students who I gently upbraid because they use dyslexia as an excuse - sometimes they've been encouraged to! Then there are less clear-cut cases where the line between dyslexia-caused difficulties with text and downright carelessness, or between spelling problems and near-incoherence of thought, is not as sharply defined as it ought to be. Having a dyslexic son, I'm familair with haphazard and random spelling of the same word in four different ways in quick succession. I'm also familiar with him thinking he has written something that he has not. Nevertheless, his thought processes are very clear and rational and so if he has the opportunity (AND takes it!) he can explain quite deep understanding of a subject. Nevertheless, if he just can't be bothered and then uses the dyslexia excuse, he needs pulling up straight away. Unfortunately, on occasion, I get the odd student who has not had the distinction sharply drawn and has evolved a tendency to reach for the dyslexia excuse at the drop of a hat. In the long run, this "dyslexia feeding" isn't in their best interests. What is required is that they understand their individual strengths and weaknesses, and no how to utilise one and ameliorate the other. A blanket 'bending over backwards' doesn't give the individual student what they need. I think that's what the article was getting at.