12/13/2023 0 Comments Badly hidden synonym8) – dyslexia, Elliott and Grigorenko suggest, cannot be differentiated from other reading difficulties. ![]() Broadly-accepted definitions of dyslexia, such as the Rose Review’s (see below), are ‘highly general’ (Elliott & Grigorenko, 2014a, p. Thus, ‘while biologically based reading difficulties exist’, ‘there are very significant differences in the ways in which this label is operationalised, even by leading scholars’ (Elliott & Grigorenko, 2014a, pp. For them, the label is too ambiguous to be helpful. In the science of reading, Joe Elliott and Elena Grigorenko’s book, The Dyslexia Debate, remains dyslexia’s foremost critique. In turn, a conference in early 2019 – organised by leading critic of the term, Joe Elliott, and featuring representatives from Warwickshire County Council – offered further criticism of dyslexia (UCL IOE Media Services, 2019). In response, Lord Watson of Invergowie, a supporter of the term, wondered ‘if, perhaps, it has also advised their residents that the earth is actually flat and that there is no such thing as global warming’ (Hansard, 2018). In late 2018, such debate came to a head after Warwickshire County Council, in a review of its guidance around special educational needs and disabilities, stated that the research field ‘lacked consensus’ and that ‘the diagnosis of dyslexia is scientifically questionable and can be misleading’ (Henshaw, 2018). In recent years, a series of television documentaries, books, media reports and speeches have criticised dyslexia – at best, calling it a term that has lost credibility and should be replaced (Elliott & Grigorenko, 2014a) at worst, a fabrication, based on suspect science (Bennett, 2017) and perpetuated (in significant part) by a biased dyslexia lobby (Liddle, 2014). Introduction: dyslexia and its discontentsĭyslexia remains one of the more controversial terms in education policy and practice. Through this tracing, this account seeks to move discussion beyond the existing either/or binary of dyslexia’s existence. In this article, the origins of the dyslexia debate are traced, showing how queries about the term’s efficacy have marked dyslexia’s history since it was first identified in the 1870s. Largely missing from both sides of the debate, however, is a historical perspective. ![]() Such arguments stand against other research in psychology, and discussion has become contentious. ![]() In these, the principal argument is that the term ‘dyslexia’ is unhelpful – more an emotive word designed to attract funding, than a clearly defined scientific condition. In academic circles, especially psychology, dyslexia critiques are also present. For them, dyslexia is an invention of overly-concerned parents, supported by a clique of private educational psychologists willing to offer a diagnosis – for a fee – even where no condition exists. In the media, a key component of the debate is the notion that dyslexia does not exist, popularised by a series of vociferous commentators.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |