Dyslexia最新文献

Individuals with dyslexia struggle at explaining what it is like to have dyslexia and how they perceive letters and words differently. This led the designer Daniel Britton to create a font that aims to simulate the perceptual experience of how effortful reading can be for individuals with dyslexia (http://danielbritton.info/dyslexia). This font removes forty percent of each character stroke with the aim of increasing reading effort, and in turn empathy and understanding for individuals with dyslexia. However, its efficacy has not yet been empirically tested. In the present study, we compared participants without dyslexia reading texts in the dyslexia simulation font to a group of individuals with dyslexia reading the same texts in Times New Roman font. Results suggest that the simulation font amplifies the struggle of reading, surpassing that experienced by adults with dyslexia-as reflected in increased reading time and overall number of eye movements in the majority of typical readers reading in the simulation font. Future research could compare the performance of the Daniel Britton simulation font against a sample of beginning readers with dyslexia as well as seek to design and empirically test an adapted simulation font with an increased preserved percentage of letter strokes [Correction added on 10 December 2021, after initial online publication. Abstract has been added].

Inconsistencies in the operationalisation of dyslexia in assessment practices are concerning. Variations in different countries' education contexts and education-related legislation could contribute to continuing discrepancies between psychologists' assessment practices. However, an international "snapshot" of these practices is unavailable. An international comparison of psychologists' dyslexia assessment practices could help ascertain whether there are contextual factors that can foster converging practices. Accordingly, this study systematically reviewed the literature to capture how psychologists identify and/or diagnose dyslexia across English-speaking countries. Quantitative and/or qualitative studies, published between 2013 and 2021, that investigated psychologists' self-reported methods for assessing, identifying, and/or diagnosing individuals with dyslexia were included. Eleven studies (published across fourteen papers) met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies sampled school psychologists who work in the USA. Psychologists' dyslexia assessment practices were diverse (including the use of cognitive discrepancy and response-to-intervention methods). The results highlight an international need to develop a consensus operational definition of dyslexia and universal assessment guidelines. Future research might investigate the practices and beliefs of psychologists who work outside of the USA, and to be inclusive of adult populations. Implications for research and training are explored.

In Helland et al. (2021), there is an incorrect reference citation of “6 (2009)” on p. 416, section 1.4 “Sample selection and developmental trajectories”, paragraph 3, last sentence.

Below is the correct reference citation:

At-risk groups should be inclusive for later identification of false and true positives, as proposed by Gabrieli (2009).

We apologize for this error.

Visual search skills develop substantially during the primary school years, and in parallel with children's reading achievement. Reading requires an efficient visual search and exposure to reading from the left to the right could also influence the way we explore space. No study, however, made links between visual search strategies and reading ability. In this study, 70 primary school children performed a cancellation task (Bells test) and reading tests. Our results showed that reading was closely linked to visual search accuracy but also to visual search organization, even after controlling for age for some measures. Along with the development of reading abilities, children made fewer revisitation, moved more to the nearest unmarked targets than to the farthest ones and explored more in lines. It appears, therefore, essential to take more into account the visual search organization of children with reading impairments such as dyslexia.

Kindergarten through second-grade elementary schools that best serve students with dyslexia have principals who are knowledgeable about dyslexia and understand the best practices for providing intervention for students with dyslexia. In this study, three styles of leadership were examined to understand the implication that leadership has on intervention for dyslexia: transformational, instructional, and integrated leadership. However, many students in elementary schools have difficulty learning to read despite good leadership by the principal, with 5-20% of students being diagnosed with dyslexia. While these students need phonetic, multisensory intervention to build necessary reading skills, this study found that many principals lack knowledge of this specialized instruction. The purpose of this research was to explore variables that determine the school-based level of appropriate intervention for students with dyslexia. A questionnaire assessing leadership skills, knowledge, and beliefs about dyslexia, preparation in reading disorders and/or dyslexia received from degree programs and professional development, and services provided to students with dyslexia was given to K-2 principals serving in schools across the United States. Results indicated that regardless of leadership style, principals who have greater knowledge and more correct beliefs about dyslexia provide more appropriate school-based services for students with dyslexia. Eight detailed K-2 principal/practitioner recommendations are included based upon this key finding.

The concept of early 'efforts' has led to discussions for and against introducing language assessment for all kindergarten children. Evidence-based kindergarten screening tools completed by close caregivers could solve this controversy as the children themselves would only be indirectly involved. The aim of this study was to see whether the scores of such early screening tools aiming at developmental dyslexia could predict school marks of literacy competence 10 years later, and to see whether these screening tools would reveal different dyslexia trajectories. The study is part of the Bergen Longitudinal Dyslexia Study, and the results from individual testing are reported elsewhere. Here, the caregivers' views isolated from the rest of the study are focused. Three tools were used: the RI-5, a questionnaire assessing the risk of dyslexia; the TRAS, a non-standardized observation tool of children's communication skills; and the CCC-2, a questionnaire assessing Developmental Language Disorders. Screening was performed at age 5 (TP1), age 11, (TP2) and age 15 (TP3). At TP2, when dyslexia was identified, 13 children formed the dyslexia group, and the rest formed the control group. At TP3, the RI-5 and CCC-2 turned out to be predictive of literacy competence as measured by school marks. Developmental trajectories were seen through the regroupings and scorings into a persistent group, a late onset group and a resolving group. Evidence-based preschool screening tools filled out by close caregivers offer valid information on later literacy developmental trajectories.

Primary school teachers should be able to identify struggling learners who may have dyslexia type learning difficulties, in order to facilitate early intervention. Considering this importance, a nationwide survey was conducted in Sri Lanka with 705 primary school teachers among randomly selected schools in order to investigate teacher readiness to identify learners with dyslexia. Teacher readiness was measured based on three variables (a) teachers' self-reported basic knowledge of dyslexia, (b) their self-reported awareness of local tools and processes used to identify dyslexia and (c) their self-reported attitudes towards engaging in identifying dyslexia. Data were gathered through a structured questionnaire. Logistic regression analyses revealed that the participants had minimal readiness to engage in identifying learners with dyslexia. However, most of them showed positive attitudes towards actively engaging in identifying dyslexia.