Please note that the work on this blog is the copyright of the writers and may not be reproduced without their permission.

Friday 23 January 2009

"Dyslexia is a Myth" ? -- by Ebren

"Dyslexia is a myth" is the title of Labour MP Graham Stringer's recent column for Manchester Confidential.

His argument – which you can read in full here: http://www.manchesterconfidential.com/index.asp?Sessionx=IpqiNw86JD7rIpqiNwF6IHqi&realname=Dyslexia_is_a_myth – is that dyslexia was invented to cover up poor teaching of reading and writing.

In his own words: "The reason that so many children fail to read and write is because the wrong teaching methods are used. The education establishment, rather than admit that their eclectic and incomplete methods for instruction are at fault, have invented a brain disorder called dyslexia.

"To label children as dyslexic because they're confused by poor teaching methods is wicked.

"Dyslexia is a cruel fiction, it is no more real than the 19th century scientific construction of 'the æther' to explain how light travels through a vacuum.

"The sooner it is consigned to the same dustbin of history, the better."

To back up his argument, Stringer - MP for Blackley in north Manchester – points out that other countries have literacy rates of close to 100%. If dyslexia were a genetic condition then this would not be possible.

He also argues that illiteracy is linked to crime rates – quoting that 80% of the residents of Strangeways prison are illiterate and 80% use illegal drugs. "I am not, for one minute, implying that all functionally illiterate people take illegal drugs and engage in criminal activities, but, the huge correlation between illiteracy and criminal activity is striking," he adds.

But there's a gap here. Arguing that illiteracy is the same as dyslexia, it's not. Many dyslexics can read and write – often to a high level. In fact, the best-selling novelist of all time, Agatha Christie, has been identified as dyslexic http://www.dyslexiamentor.com/famous/famousdyslexics_000.php.

What's more – Stringer uses some strange definition of literacy. "Functional literacy" is something that sounds nice – but you can't then compare it to international literacy rates ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate ). The UK has 99% literacy rates using international comparisons, the same or higher than South Korea and Nicaragua – the countries he lists when "proving" dyslexia doesn't exist.

The idea that the shadowy overlords of the "educational establishment" have invented dyslexia is another argument I find intriguing.

When I was six weeks old, the doctors thought I had a brain tumour. I was given a brain scan, and while I was clear of a tumour, the doctors noted I had a funny-shaped brain. It didn't mean anything to them at the time, just something worth noting. At the age of six, after being asked to leave my junior school as they believed "he would never pass an exam", my mother had me tested for dyslexia.

My dyslexia and my funny-shaped brain were not something anyone connected until years later. I find it hard to believe the shadowy world of educators meeting to discuss my failure and blaming it on an invented disorder could quite have planned that far ahead – or faked a brain scan.

Now, I'm not saying that dyslexia is not over-diagnosed or seized-upon by parents and teachers as a reason that conveniently explains their own or their child's under-performance. Or that teaching is not often poor. But, really, what are the downsides to this "cruel fiction"?

Dyslexics, real or imagined, have trouble reading and writing. They are given help. Should we really deny help to people who have trouble reading and writing?

Personally, I never received help from the state – either in the form of financial aid or extra time in exams. I have, at times, had to work harder to get things done. But no more than someone who has no talent for art, maths or music has to work to pass those exams.

I received extra tuition in reading - not using the "synthetic phonics" system that Stringer seems to believe would help cure the nation of dyslexia, but using more old-fashioned teaching methods that are used to teach "normal" children, just with individual attention and patience on the part of the teacher. I struggled again when becoming an editor, but was given help by friends and colleagues (unaware of my dyslexia) and worked hard to overcome it.

The only "cruel fiction" I have ever found about dyslexia is that it is a disability. So my brain happens to be wired differently to "normal". The same could be said for people with aptitudes or difficulties at art, sport, music or maths.

Everyone has different natural strengths and weaknesses, claiming that one of these differences is a fiction – when there is so much information (http://ent.med.nyu.edu/conditions-we-treat/conditions/dyslexia) and scientific evidence (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4384414.stm) to the contrary seems at best ill-informed. Perhaps poor teaching is to blame?

9 comments:

Zephirine said...

(The links should be working OK now)

Well, I wouldn't want Stringer as my MP. The man seems incapable of logical thought.

"Many prisoners are illiterate" - I think we all knew that already.

"Improving literacy would help prevent crime" - sounds sensible, though there are plenty of other causes.

"Illiteracy is due to poor education" - yes, combined with environment and home influences.

"Poor education results from the invention of a thing called dyslexia which doesn't exist." Sorry???

As you rightly say, Ebren, dyslexia is used as an excuse by poor teachers, and probably much too often. But how does Stringer get from there to saying it doesn't exist? Or does he think that dyslexia means 'being completely unable to learn to read and write at all'? That might at least explain his throwing all these literacy figures around, but it shows his ignorance.

I understand from friends in the teaching profession that synthetic phonics is a pretty good system (quite old-fashioned itself, in fact) but that all reading systems require good teaching and personal attention.

I think Mr Stringer's just headline-grabbing, but it's interesting to learn about your unusually-shaped brain, Ebren:)

file said...

interesting and surprising piece Ebren;

interesting because I've never considered educators (or MP's) qualified to professionally diagnose neurological conditions (or even to conclude whether or not complex learning difficulties are neurologically based).

That there is evidence which indicates dyslexia has a neurological root and evidence which indicates that it is a learning disorder which can be rectified by pedagogical strategy only suggests to me that the condition is not fully understood, and I wouldn't look to anecdotal (and possibly politically motivated) opinion for clarification.

surprising (coming from you) because of the literary eloquence you have consistently demonstrated (this is not a Suck-Up :), I know adults diagnosed as dyslexic who aren't able to read your work never mind write it). Surprising because the public contention that dyslexia is a myth is a polemic which can only be hurtful (to those who were diagnosed - possibly the reason for this piece? and to their families who have struggled with the perceived stigma attached to any learning difficulty and to those educators who have striven to develop kids (and adults) who have been diagnosed by others as being dyslexic.

The literacy rates in South Korea and Nicaragua are interesting and while I'm not qualified to fully understand their import I would certainly want verification of their accuracy before incorporating them into any position on the subject - these statistics may well be politically motivated too and we all know how numbers can be manipulated (even in West Dumbartonshire).

The incidence of illiterate prisoners likewise fails to convince; there are many, many reasons why folk end up in jail and to isolate one (perceived) commonality is an unrealistic and potentially dangerous over-simplification; it would be just as easy to suggest (with the same stats.) that drug use leads to criminal activity (which has often been posited) but then I know recreational drug-users to whom drugs are the only illegal activity they have ever been involved in, familial conditioning and social background are also factors in criminality and there have even been suggestions of a criminal gene! It might be reasonable to suggest that there are many factors that contribute to criminal activity (duh!) and literacy may be one of them but to highlight it as if it was a question of cause/effect is arrogant and mistaken.

By all means work to understand the issue of reading difficulty, it may even be constructive to move past the name Dyslexia but it helps nobody to announce in the media that "Dyslexia is a Myth". Much less spectacular but far more helpful would be to reiterate that reading difficulties may (in some cases) be offset by the development of advanced pedagogy and consideration for those who need it but then we all know that, even if it doesn't get MP's faces in the papers.

As one who has designed phonics programs for non-native speakers of English (and evaluated their comparative success) I can testify that there are far more efficient strategies than the 'old-school' methods. I am quite willing to believe that even more effective approaches will come and that they will in turn benefit individuals and society as a whole but I don't feel the need to risk hurting folk who have struggled with challenging non-homogeneity in the process.

Brave piece too Ebren, I'm sure I speak for all Pseuds (and many GU readers) when I say that your success in overcoming your difficulties is a Wonderful Thing and a mighty accomplishment and has brought a lot of pleasure to many. You deserve respect above the ordinary for this and sincere gratitude.

Zeph, the links in the article aren't working, not sure why as they look good. For Stringer piece Others might try this:

http://www.manchesterconfidential.co.uk/index.asp?Sessionx=IpqiNw86JD7rIpqiNwF6IHqi&realname=Dyslexia_is_a_myth

file said...

doh! cross posted again Zeph, ta for fixing the links

offsideintahiti said...

I suppose I'll have to call you Ebrain from now on...

Anonymous said...

Great Ebren,
if dislexia is not a myth, I have a good excuse about my incapacity with the English language.
Very informative stuff, I understand that it's genetic and one canadian out of 6 is dislexic.Therefore you may have something in common with another pseuds-Just assuming-
The good news, dislexia has nothing to do with your intellect capacity and (this is big time suck-up) you are this theory. living proof

Anonymous said...

so by Stringer's theory, there should be a direct correlation between dyslexic population and high crime rates? So Canada should be a seething hotbed of criminal activity?

I also want to know more about those international literacy rates, as I suspect that the criteria used in different countries varies widely.

Ebren, your brain: funny-shaped, how? It's interesting that you say dyslexia is over-diagnosed. I would have guessed the opposite, based on the experience of a dyslexic friend, and also knowing how kids who have trouble with reading, or other basic skills, can become very, very good at bluffing.

Unknown said...

Thanks for the comments all. And the warm regards.

Munni - funny shaped how? Both sides of my brain are exactly even - meaning I have no natural right-left dominance. I can play pool and darts with either hand (although habit means I have got more used to using my left).

When I said over-diagnosed I should have clarified. I would say that it was over-diagnosed among certain groups. If the child is from an area of - how do you say this without being a snob? - lower educational attainment then there is no way the diagnosis would be made.

By contrast among more pushy parts of the population, I think that it has been used as a rather convenient excuse. As I said, it's a way of explaining failure without attributing blame. Sometimes accurate, sometimes convenient.

One could add that most prisoners are male, so I think it's entirely fair to blame the invented concept of gender for this.

Prudence said...

First of all I'd like to say that I'm new to all this, so I hope I don't rant too long or say something stupid or offensive, anyway I'm sure I'll know about it if I do!

I asked my friend about this in the pub last night. He's an English teacher in a school which has been heavily criticised for poor standards. On the face of it his only answer was to look at me, not without contempt, and to say something like, "Well it's all complete rubbish isn't it? He wants to try teaching these kids himself." It seemed that the conversation had ended there but then in teacher mode he posed a question, which I think is pertinent to this whole issue if given some more thought... "What did people with diabetes do in the olden days before they knew it existed?"

What did people do? Did they just lie down and die? Or did they try all the sorts of housewife's remedies to see what made them feel better, take a spoon of honey or chew on a bit of bark, or whatever?. People always find a way to struggle on with what's wrong with them, regardless of whether they've got a label to put on to it.

To be labelled dyslexic you have to pass a few tests. Tests which have been devised by scientific types who understand how learning difficulties work and believe in their existence. They have applied scientific reasoning, and have not done all that work because they want to give lazy teachers and lazy children an easy get-out clause from doing any work.

A friend of mine who had a very advanced reading age and was incredibly intelligent, but who had the worst spelling and handwriting I've ever seen in a teenager (plus a tendency towards malepropism) turned out to have a neurological condition (neurofibromatosis to those of you in the know), discovered in her adulthood, which caused learning difficulties akin to dyslexia, but not exactly the same. One local educational authority tested her over and over for dyslexia, but she didn't fit within the criteria, but clearly something was wrong. She was NOT diagnosed as dyslexic. She was NOT just given this get out of jail free card which is alleged to have been given with abandon. Her specialists (and I apologise for not knowing what type of specifialists) were very close to piecing together that she had some other learning difficulty when she moved to another area - none the wiser about her condition, which sadly killed her before it was discovered. Under the next LEA the possibility of any learning difficulty was dismissed out of hand and she was labelled as lazy and stupid. Something which deeply upset her and she ended up with few qualifications, working in a factory. I believe she was as intelligent as me and I have a degree. She was failed by the education system precisely because she could NOT prove herself as dyslexic and because they were NOT just handing out dyslexia labels to underachievers. But more importantly they were unprepared to find out what was wrong and gave the easy answer to their mind, which was idleness and stupidity (flying in the face of the report quite frankly).

Dyslexia exists. If it's being used as an excuse for poor teaching then that's not a reason to deny it. Whoever is diagnosing these children need to be checked to make sure they are applying the correct criteria and anyone who claims they are dyslexic should have to prove it like any other medical condition. Most importantly of all, problems in children leading to illiteracy need to be investigated in a wholistic way - involving the educational, medical and social professions. If the people investigating my friend's learning difficulties had talked to the people who knew her medical history maybe she would have been diagnosed in time to save her life? - we'll never know!

Zephirine said...

Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Prudence.