{"title":"Special Educational Needs and Disability tribunals: Dyslexia, scientific validity and equity","authors":"Julian Elliott, Joanna Stanbridge, Kirsten Branigan","doi":"10.1002/berj.4070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper examines the operation of the English Special Educational Needs and Disability tribunal system in relation to children who present with a dyslexia diagnosis. It identifies a number of significant weaknesses; in particular, the absence of clear diagnostic criteria capable of differentiating such children from large numbers of other struggling readers. It then explains why it is inappropriate to identify particular cognitive processes as indicating the presence of dyslexia, as distinct from a broader reading difficulty. The paper subsequently explores the erroneous nature of claims about specialised dyslexia teaching and resourcing that, while often asserted with confidence by some privately funded assessors, are not supported by the scientific literature. It is argued that the tribunal system is an inappropriate method for reconciling the competing needs of a diagnosed dyslexic subgroup in relation to the wider population of struggling readers, estimated to be 20% of the school population.</p>","PeriodicalId":51410,"journal":{"name":"British Educational Research Journal","volume":"51 1","pages":"181-200"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/berj.4070","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Educational Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.4070","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper examines the operation of the English Special Educational Needs and Disability tribunal system in relation to children who present with a dyslexia diagnosis. It identifies a number of significant weaknesses; in particular, the absence of clear diagnostic criteria capable of differentiating such children from large numbers of other struggling readers. It then explains why it is inappropriate to identify particular cognitive processes as indicating the presence of dyslexia, as distinct from a broader reading difficulty. The paper subsequently explores the erroneous nature of claims about specialised dyslexia teaching and resourcing that, while often asserted with confidence by some privately funded assessors, are not supported by the scientific literature. It is argued that the tribunal system is an inappropriate method for reconciling the competing needs of a diagnosed dyslexic subgroup in relation to the wider population of struggling readers, estimated to be 20% of the school population.
期刊介绍:
The British Educational Research Journal is an international peer reviewed medium for the publication of articles of interest to researchers in education and has rapidly become a major focal point for the publication of educational research from throughout the world. For further information on the association please visit the British Educational Research Association web site. The journal is interdisciplinary in approach, and includes reports of case studies, experiments and surveys, discussions of conceptual and methodological issues and of underlying assumptions in educational research, accounts of research in progress, and book reviews.