I have just seen on the News that the government is promising extra specialist teachers for children with dyslexia.
Good for them.
It just so happens that all four of my sister's children (and her husband) are to a lesser or greater extent dyslexic.
The specialist teaching at their secondary school has on the whole been good to excellent, BUT there are two problems which are not being addressed.
The first problem is that of general teacher awareness: Jess, for example, often comes home with only a sketchy idea of what her homework actually entails because she cannot write it down correctly in the last few moments of the lessons and has to rely on memory. Simply assigning a good speller to writing instructions down in her homework diary would help. Better still, could the teacher not bring in duplicated strips of instructions for children to stick into their diaries? As it is, if she then produces work which does not fully comply with the required homework Jess (a fairly conscientious student) finds herself in detention for work left undone.
Further than this, there are some teachers (particularly among those who come in on supply) who flatly refuse to believe dyslexia exists and persist in castigating children for poor spelling, untidiness and laziness when they have in fact probably worked harder than most of their fellows.
Which leads to the problem of word processing. Using a computer Jess can produce good work. Dictating work to her mother or myself (people who on the whole don't need a spell checker so don't allow through the odder 'corrections' to their typing) it can be very good indeed. I know that there is always a danger of plagiarism once the computer enters into the equation, but surely allowing children to code their word-processed work would go a long way towards alleviating the problem of unintentional cheating. e.g. Dys 1 - Used word processing including spell check: Dys 2 - Dictated original work to an adult helper who typed it: Dys 3 - Includes passages copied/adapted using the internet (acknowledgements at end of assignment).
[Come to think of it similar coding for all children's work would help because it is very difficult to present wholly original work all the time and knowing that acknowledged help is acceptable and will be taken into account in assessing the work would I am sure be a relief to many children. It would also allow teachers to give clear guidelines assignment by assignment which work has to be original and unaided for assessment purposes and which is a research assignment where multiple sources will be seen as a clear indication of conscientious work.]
The second problem is that of public examinations: some give a certain amount of leeway with everything from allowing extra time to the use of an amanuensis, but there is no consistency. Many jobs and courses have GCSE English (at a variety of levels) as a basic requirement. Intelligent people with severe dyslexia like my nephew Jacob very quickly learn strategies which get around poor literacy including developing an excellent aural memory. No, he is never going to get any sort of GCSE in Written English Language, but what about a special Oral English Exam specially for severe dyslexics which would involve comprehension and evaluating information? And why not (and not merely for dyslexics) have a Literary Appreciation GCSE which is specifically talored to watching and listening rather than the studying of texts? After all, the story-teller predated the novelist by many millennia.
Don't mistake me, I am all in favour of the written word. I love reading. I am a total bibliomaniac - a printoholic. I just feel that the strategies dyslexics need to adopt should be as much an acknowledged part of the examination system as the use of Braille or sign language where they are required. Or maybe I'm naive: is the battle for sign language one which has been wholly won or is it still a fight?
