What’s in a word? Australian experts’ knowledge, views and experiences using the term dyslexia

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties Pub Date : 2015-07-03 DOI:10.1080/19404158.2015.1089916
T. Serry, L. Hammond
{"title":"What’s in a word? Australian experts’ knowledge, views and experiences using the term dyslexia","authors":"T. Serry, L. Hammond","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2015.1089916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study was to examine Australian learning difficulties specialists’ knowledge about, and the use of, the term dyslexia. An online survey was constructed based on a current definition of, and evidence about, dyslexia and distributed to members of relevant professional associations. A total of 179 participants responded to the survey. Statistical tests were used to identify significant differences in questionnaire scores between a number of demographic subgroups which included special professional interest group, professional discipline, years of experience and engagement in reading-related university study. Results indicated that these Australian professionals all possess a similar and generally high level of accurate research-based knowledge about dyslexia and how to support individuals with significant reading issues. However, while affirming the relevancy of the term dyslexia in their professional work, most participants preferred another term and favoured a combination of words including reading, learning and the less pejorative term difficulty as opposed to disability. As the term dyslexia is commonly used by Australian educators, policy-makers, support organisation and parents to make decisions about the support individuals receive, an understanding of what is currently understood by this label is critical.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"20 1","pages":"143 - 161"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2015.1089916","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2015.1089916","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine Australian learning difficulties specialists’ knowledge about, and the use of, the term dyslexia. An online survey was constructed based on a current definition of, and evidence about, dyslexia and distributed to members of relevant professional associations. A total of 179 participants responded to the survey. Statistical tests were used to identify significant differences in questionnaire scores between a number of demographic subgroups which included special professional interest group, professional discipline, years of experience and engagement in reading-related university study. Results indicated that these Australian professionals all possess a similar and generally high level of accurate research-based knowledge about dyslexia and how to support individuals with significant reading issues. However, while affirming the relevancy of the term dyslexia in their professional work, most participants preferred another term and favoured a combination of words including reading, learning and the less pejorative term difficulty as opposed to disability. As the term dyslexia is commonly used by Australian educators, policy-makers, support organisation and parents to make decisions about the support individuals receive, an understanding of what is currently understood by this label is critical.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一个词有什么意思?澳大利亚专家使用“阅读障碍”一词的知识、观点和经验
本研究的目的是考察澳大利亚学习困难专家对“阅读障碍”一词的了解和使用情况。一项在线调查基于阅读障碍的当前定义和证据,并分发给相关专业协会的成员。共有179名参与者参与了调查。使用统计检验来确定一些人口统计亚组之间问卷得分的显著差异,这些亚组包括特殊专业兴趣组、专业学科、经验年限和参与阅读相关的大学学习。结果表明,这些澳大利亚专业人士都拥有相似的,普遍高水平的准确的基于研究的知识,关于阅读障碍和如何支持有重大阅读问题的个人。然而,虽然在他们的专业工作中肯定了阅读障碍这一术语的相关性,但大多数参与者更喜欢另一个术语,他们更喜欢包括阅读、学习和不那么贬义的术语“困难”在内的单词组合,而不是残疾。由于澳大利亚的教育工作者、政策制定者、支持组织和家长经常使用“阅读障碍”这个词来决定个人接受的支持,因此了解这个标签目前的理解是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Build it and they will come: responses to the provision of online science of language and reading professional learning “It is more than the average parent goes through”: using the experiences of Australian parents of dyslexic children to draw a distinction between advocacy and allyship The impact of an online training program on pre-service teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about dyslexia An implementation case study for the Response to Intervention (RTI) approach for oral language and reading instruction in the early years of primary school A Linguistic Approach to the Study of Dyslexia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1