UPSKILL EDUCATION
In a dyslexia-friendly school, a clear protocol in identification and response system is outlined within a school policy that is accessible to all. This policy is enforced by school administration and regularly reviewed to examine its relevance, practicality, and utility. A continuum of support framework similar to that of the NEPS SEN Guidelines (2007) promotes timely intervention. Many schools call this process RTI or MTSS.
A big issue that needs to be explored and addressed is the confidence level of staff in teaching dyslexic learners. . Confidence is a natural outcome of adequate targeted training as it equips you with the knowledge and skills to become a more competent teacher. They say that all teachers are special needs teachers, too, and yet teachers aren’t trained in special needs. New teachers are not required to learn about dyslexia, therefore they come into the classroom ill-equipped and lacking in confidence in addressing the learning needs of students.
A study conducted by the Driver Youth Trust (2014) highlighted the need for training for classroom teachers to support children who struggle to read and write. According to their research, 69% of teacher training providers only spend less than a day training students on dyslexia (p. 15) and that 74% of teachers felt that did not feel that their training ‘provided them with skills they need to identify and teach children with dyslexia (p. 19). Training in special education seems to be limited to those preparing to be in SPED. This whole scenario is contrary to the ethos of a dyslexia-friendly school where teachers are knowledgeable and therefore feel empowered in helping children deal with their learning challenges. In his article, Learned Helplessness and Dyslexia, H. Kerr discussed the predicament that teachers faced when dealing with students who have been diagnosed as dyslexic (2001). A study involving ABE teachers was conducted to determine knowledge and attitudes of teachers towards dyslexia. Two very interesting outcomes were observed: one, was there seemed to be a lot of confusion about what dyslexia is, what it entailed, its cause or origin was or even if it’s even an accepted learning disability. The second very interesting finding was that majority of the respondents showed ‘considerable disempowerment, or learned helplessness’ (H. Kerr, 2001, p.83). This means that teachers feel inadequate or poorly equipped in addressing the needs of their dyslexic students. Similarly, a study conducted by Waddlington, E & Waddlington, P. (2005) aligned with Kerr’s findings: there exists a level of confusion amongst educators with regard to dyslexia which could lead to misconceptions. This is due to ambiguity and overlapping definitions and differing views. Unfortunately, the undesirable outcome of teachers’ inadequacy of knowledge is lowering of expectations. Teachers water down or dumb down the curriculum because they feel that the dyslexic student will not be able to cope with the demanding nature of the programme in comparison with their neurotypical peers. A vicious cycle of low-expectations / low performance is observed in such scenarios. The reverse Pygmalion (Golem) effect impacts the learners. An obvious response is that management should support training in specific learning difficulties to upskill staff. Staff confidence will improve with the right training to address knowledge gaps.
A big issue that needs to be explored and addressed is the confidence level of staff in teaching dyslexic learners. . Confidence is a natural outcome of adequate targeted training as it equips you with the knowledge and skills to become a more competent teacher. They say that all teachers are special needs teachers, too, and yet teachers aren’t trained in special needs. New teachers are not required to learn about dyslexia, therefore they come into the classroom ill-equipped and lacking in confidence in addressing the learning needs of students.
A study conducted by the Driver Youth Trust (2014) highlighted the need for training for classroom teachers to support children who struggle to read and write. According to their research, 69% of teacher training providers only spend less than a day training students on dyslexia (p. 15) and that 74% of teachers felt that did not feel that their training ‘provided them with skills they need to identify and teach children with dyslexia (p. 19). Training in special education seems to be limited to those preparing to be in SPED. This whole scenario is contrary to the ethos of a dyslexia-friendly school where teachers are knowledgeable and therefore feel empowered in helping children deal with their learning challenges. In his article, Learned Helplessness and Dyslexia, H. Kerr discussed the predicament that teachers faced when dealing with students who have been diagnosed as dyslexic (2001). A study involving ABE teachers was conducted to determine knowledge and attitudes of teachers towards dyslexia. Two very interesting outcomes were observed: one, was there seemed to be a lot of confusion about what dyslexia is, what it entailed, its cause or origin was or even if it’s even an accepted learning disability. The second very interesting finding was that majority of the respondents showed ‘considerable disempowerment, or learned helplessness’ (H. Kerr, 2001, p.83). This means that teachers feel inadequate or poorly equipped in addressing the needs of their dyslexic students. Similarly, a study conducted by Waddlington, E & Waddlington, P. (2005) aligned with Kerr’s findings: there exists a level of confusion amongst educators with regard to dyslexia which could lead to misconceptions. This is due to ambiguity and overlapping definitions and differing views. Unfortunately, the undesirable outcome of teachers’ inadequacy of knowledge is lowering of expectations. Teachers water down or dumb down the curriculum because they feel that the dyslexic student will not be able to cope with the demanding nature of the programme in comparison with their neurotypical peers. A vicious cycle of low-expectations / low performance is observed in such scenarios. The reverse Pygmalion (Golem) effect impacts the learners. An obvious response is that management should support training in specific learning difficulties to upskill staff. Staff confidence will improve with the right training to address knowledge gaps.
There are numerous advantages to developing a dyslexia-friendly school:
Whole-school commitment. A DFS takes a whole-school approach (Mackay, 2001). All stakeholders will be committed to practising dyslexia friendly approaches, from the leadership team to the smallest unit of the school.
A sound dyslexia policy. A strong DFS campaign is driven by a sound dyslexia policy. An established framework of guidelines would mean that efforts will be sustained and continuously improved through efficient monitoring and evaluation.
Teacher empowerment. A DFS approach is committed to continuous training and upskilling of staff. As an effect, teachers will be knowledgeable and competent in addressing individual learning needs.
Enhanced learning for all students. Increased competency means all students will benefit from improved teaching practices. DFS promotes inclusive learning thereby giving all students access to high-quality education. Expectations will be high and there is little or no room for failure.
A compassionate and nurturing environment. A DFS is populated by people who have genuine concern for their students. They understand their strengths and challenges, their motivations and aspirations. Children with dyslexia as seen as individuals with their unique qualities rather than as just numbers.
The challenges:
Financial resources: Access to resources would be one of the biggest roadblocks for many schools. Allocating provision to pupils comes at a high cost and most government-subsidized schools are dependent on public funding. Private schools are be self-reliant as costs need to be carefully considered.
Time. Aspiring to be a dyslexia friendly school requires a big investment of time. All undertaking, from policy-writing to CPD requires strong commitment from everyone as it will take a lot of time away from what they normally do.
Leadership support. Most of the time, school leaders already already have their hands full with various endeavours. But to roll out something as important and big as this requires strong support from the top down. The SENCo can initiate the campaign but writing a policy requires the participation of all stakeholders, most importantly, the administrators who are instrumental in making this happen.
Misconceptions. Do dyslexia-friendly schools only take children with dyslexia? Or, will my child’s learning be compromised in order to accommodate other children’s learning needs? Is the school a special needs school? These and many other questions may arise from establishing a dyslexia-friendly school. Effective communication tools will have to be utilized and lengthy discussions will have to be made to address concerns and correct misconceptions from the onset.
What are your thoughts?
image: freepik
REFERENCES:
Fish in the tree report and drive for literacy. Retrieved from: https://www.driveryouthtrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/DYT-FishintheTree-LR.pdf 82-85. school , 166 - 173
MacKay, N. (2004). The case for dyslexia-friendly schools. Dyslexia in Context: Research, Policy and Practice, 223-236.
MacKay, N. (2011). ‘Dyslexia Scotland Education Conference’ [Powerpoint presentation]. Developing Dyslexia Friendly Primary Schools in South Ayrshire. Available at link:
Morgan, W. P. (1896). A case of congenital word blindness. British medical journal, 2(1871), 1378.
National Educational Psychological Service [powerpoint slides]. (2007). Special Education Needs: A Continuum of Support. Retrieved from: https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Services/National-Educational-Psychological-Service-NEPS-/neps_special_needs_guidelines.pdf
Pavey, B., Meehan, M., & Waugh, A. (2009). Dyslexia-friendly further and higher education. Sage.
Rose, J. (2009). Identifying and teaching children and young people with dyslexia and literacy difficulties: An independent report.
Ruttle, K. (2013). Target Ladders: Dyslexia. Cheshire, UK. LDA
Wadlington, E. M., & Wadlington, P. L. (2005). What educators really believe about dyslexia. Reading Improvement, 42(1), 16-33.
Whole-school commitment. A DFS takes a whole-school approach (Mackay, 2001). All stakeholders will be committed to practising dyslexia friendly approaches, from the leadership team to the smallest unit of the school.
A sound dyslexia policy. A strong DFS campaign is driven by a sound dyslexia policy. An established framework of guidelines would mean that efforts will be sustained and continuously improved through efficient monitoring and evaluation.
Teacher empowerment. A DFS approach is committed to continuous training and upskilling of staff. As an effect, teachers will be knowledgeable and competent in addressing individual learning needs.
Enhanced learning for all students. Increased competency means all students will benefit from improved teaching practices. DFS promotes inclusive learning thereby giving all students access to high-quality education. Expectations will be high and there is little or no room for failure.
A compassionate and nurturing environment. A DFS is populated by people who have genuine concern for their students. They understand their strengths and challenges, their motivations and aspirations. Children with dyslexia as seen as individuals with their unique qualities rather than as just numbers.
The challenges:
Financial resources: Access to resources would be one of the biggest roadblocks for many schools. Allocating provision to pupils comes at a high cost and most government-subsidized schools are dependent on public funding. Private schools are be self-reliant as costs need to be carefully considered.
Time. Aspiring to be a dyslexia friendly school requires a big investment of time. All undertaking, from policy-writing to CPD requires strong commitment from everyone as it will take a lot of time away from what they normally do.
Leadership support. Most of the time, school leaders already already have their hands full with various endeavours. But to roll out something as important and big as this requires strong support from the top down. The SENCo can initiate the campaign but writing a policy requires the participation of all stakeholders, most importantly, the administrators who are instrumental in making this happen.
Misconceptions. Do dyslexia-friendly schools only take children with dyslexia? Or, will my child’s learning be compromised in order to accommodate other children’s learning needs? Is the school a special needs school? These and many other questions may arise from establishing a dyslexia-friendly school. Effective communication tools will have to be utilized and lengthy discussions will have to be made to address concerns and correct misconceptions from the onset.
What are your thoughts?
image: freepik
REFERENCES:
Fish in the tree report and drive for literacy. Retrieved from: https://www.driveryouthtrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/DYT-FishintheTree-LR.pdf 82-85. school , 166 - 173
MacKay, N. (2004). The case for dyslexia-friendly schools. Dyslexia in Context: Research, Policy and Practice, 223-236.
MacKay, N. (2011). ‘Dyslexia Scotland Education Conference’ [Powerpoint presentation]. Developing Dyslexia Friendly Primary Schools in South Ayrshire. Available at link:
Morgan, W. P. (1896). A case of congenital word blindness. British medical journal, 2(1871), 1378.
National Educational Psychological Service [powerpoint slides]. (2007). Special Education Needs: A Continuum of Support. Retrieved from: https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Services/National-Educational-Psychological-Service-NEPS-/neps_special_needs_guidelines.pdf
Pavey, B., Meehan, M., & Waugh, A. (2009). Dyslexia-friendly further and higher education. Sage.
Rose, J. (2009). Identifying and teaching children and young people with dyslexia and literacy difficulties: An independent report.
Ruttle, K. (2013). Target Ladders: Dyslexia. Cheshire, UK. LDA
Wadlington, E. M., & Wadlington, P. L. (2005). What educators really believe about dyslexia. Reading Improvement, 42(1), 16-33.