Identifying Students with Dyslexia: Exploration of Current Assessment Methods, 2023

Daniel, Johny (2024). Identifying Students with Dyslexia: Exploration of Current Assessment Methods, 2023. [Data Collection]. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Service. 10.5255/UKDA-SN-857329

Early identification plays a crucial role in providing timely support to students with learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, in order to overcome their reading difficulties. However, there is significant variability in the methods used for identifying dyslexia. This study aimed to explore and understand the practices of dyslexia identification in the UK. A survey was conducted among 274 dyslexia professionals, including educational psychologists and dyslexia specialists, to investigate the types of assessments they employ, their approach to utilizing assessment data, their decision-making processes, and their conceptualization of dyslexia. Additionally, the study examined whether these professionals held any misconceptions or myths associated with dyslexia. Analysis of the survey data revealed substantial variability in how professionals conceptualize dyslexia, as well as variations in assessment methods. Furthermore, a significant proportion of the survey respondents subscribed to one or more misconceptions regarding dyslexia; the most common misconception identified among professionals was the belief that children with dyslexia read letters in reverse order. The findings highlight the need for standardized approaches to dyslexia identification and debunking prevailing misconceptions. The implications of these findings are discussed, emphasizing the importance of informed policy and practice in supporting students with dyslexia. Recommendations are provided to enhance consistency and accuracy in dyslexia identification, with the aim of facilitating early intervention and support for affected students.

Data description (abstract)

A recruitment email was sent to various UK-based dyslexia and psychological associations. Four dyslexia associations based in the United Kingdom, together with two psychological associations, distributed the survey email and its accompanying link to their members, with the email being sent on one occasion. As well as sharing the survey with dyslexia and psychological associations, online searches were conducted to identify potential participants. This involved searching for the terms ‘dyslexia assessor’ and ‘dyslexia specialist’, and specifying the region. The regions included in the search were UK, England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, North East, North West, South East, and South West of England. These searches allowed us to identify personal websites for individuals offering dyslexia assessment, such as specialist teachers. These individuals were then contacted via the email listed on their website with an invitation to take part in the study and a link to the survey. These professionals were contacted once via email. All survey responses were collected between a four-week period between January and February 2023. Participants To take part in the survey, participants had to work in a role that involved assessing students for dyslexia, such as a dyslexia specialist, specialist assessor or educational psychologist. Participants were asked to indicate their current role and qualifications in identifying school-aged students suspected of having dyslexia. See Table 1 for participant demographic information. Development of Survey Instrument Based on past studies (e.g., Al Dahhan et al., 2021; Andresen & Monsrud, 2022; Benson et al., 2020), we developed a survey to explore how various professionals identify school-age students with dyslexia. The online survey (See Appendix A) included four sections, which were ‘Demographic Information,’ ‘Assessing and Identifying Students with Dyslexia,’ ‘Conceptualising Dyslexia,’ and ‘Thoughts on the Process of Assessment and Identification.’ Before distributing the survey, feedback was obtained from professionals in the field, which resulted in slight changes to the wording of some questions. All survey questions were optional, and participants could choose to skip any of the survey items. The ‘Demographic Information’ section included nine questions about participants’ background, such as their highest degree and relevant qualifications, their role in identifying students with dyslexia and how long they have worked in this role, and the age-groups of students they assess. The ‘Assessing and Identifying Students with Dyslexia’ section included 25 questions on participants’ assessment and identification process. It included questions about the different types of assessments (e.g., phonological awareness, vocabulary, working memory) they used to identify pupils with dyslexia, the standardised assessments they typically use, their use of benchmarks or cut-off points on these assessments, and their reasons for selecting these assessments. Participants are also asked about the referral process, such as reasons for referral, who generally begins the process, and the average time from referral to diagnosis. The survey also asked participants to report if they assessed individuals who are English language learners and the language of assessments used for this subgroup of individuals. The ‘Conceptualising Dyslexia’ section had 27 questions that addressed how respondents conceptualise and define dyslexia. The questions focused on the models that participants use to define dyslexia, and the criteria they use to identify it. In this section, participants are shown a list of criteria and asked to indicate if they would use these to identify dyslexia. These indicators fell under three sub-categories; proximal causes of dyslexia such as poor knowledge of letter names; distal associations of dyslexia such as poor performance on working memory tasks; and myths or misconceptions such as reading letters in reverse order or high levels of creativity. The ‘Thoughts on the Process of Assessment and Identification’ section had two questions that asked participants about their confidence in their assessment of a student having or not having dyslexia, and their perceptions on the reliability of the process in helping them make decisions. The survey included various types of question items. Many questions allowed respondents to select one or more multiple choice options from a list of choices; for example, questions about the types of assessments used to identify dyslexia or the reasons for referrals (e.g., ‘What types of assessments do you use to identify students with dyslexia? Choose all that apply.’). Some items used a Likert scale for responses, where participants rate their agreement or frequency of a particular behaviour or belief; for example, questions about confidence in assessments (e.g., ‘How confident do you feel in your assessment of the child as having or not having a reading disability post your assessment? [0 = Not confident at all; 10 = Certain]’). Participants were also asked open ended questions to elaborate on their choices such as how they used the assessment data in their diagnostic process.

Downloads

Altmetric