Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

This is the hub of the site and the place to post queries, start discussions and join in the conversation!
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Susan - what a find - this review is a 'must read' for anyone interested in this debate as it provides a succinct and fair summary of the book and the debate:

http://edrev.asu.edu/index.php/ER/article/view/1891/509
Reviewed by William L. Brown
Independent Consultant United States
The book outlines interventions for those at risk of reading disability, to enable them to catch up with their peers. Key elements include:

• Phonemic awareness
• Phonics
• Spelling/writing
• Fluency
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension

The authors note that most research studies have shown the particular value of phonics-based approaches for young readers. Schemes with greater emphasis on phonics tend to have greater effects on improving reading ability.

One of the most-cited reading researchers (Stanovich) has been quoted as stating: “No term has so impeded the scientific study of reading, as well as the public’s understanding of reading disability, as the term dyslexia. The retiring of the word is long overdue” (p. 182). Elliott and Grigorenko (2014 web), the authors of this volume, state: “One thing that many parents feel that they can do is lobby for their child. In such circumstances, it is unsurprising that so many parents seek a dyslexia assessment with all the advantages that this promises. However, as The Dyslexia Debate demonstrates, parents are being misled by claims that such assessments are scientifically rigorous, and that a diagnosis will point to more effective forms of treatment” [Emphasis in the original].

Dyslexia is fundamentally a deficiency of decoding skills. Treating the recognition of whole words as the essence of early reading could reasonably be considered as a source of the prevalence of this condition (see Orton, 1929). Moving toward modifying the method for teaching beginning reading, rather than trying to find some deficiency in the intellectual makeup of the young reader, could well become a civil rights initiative in the future.
Please do read the whole review!
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Please note the recommendations for instruction on the previous message and then check here with IFERI recommendations informed by science and leading-edge practice:

http://www.iferi.org/what-science-and-e ... struction/
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

http://iafor.org/the-dyslexia-debate-jo ... -uk-video/
The Dyslexia Debate — Joe Elliot, Durham University, UK (VIDEO)

Posted: September 12, 2014

Category: ACP2014, ACP2014, ACP2015, ECP2014, ECP2015, NACP2014, News, News Updates

You are here: Home » ACP2014 » The Dyslexia Debate — Joe Elliot, Durham University, UK (VIDEO)

“If you struggle to learn to read, it’s a massive threat to your identity,” says Professor Joe Elliot, Durham University, UK. “It’s absolutely soul destroying, not only for the child, but for the family as well. The dyslexia label serves a powerful psychological function. For many people, they don’t want to be told that it’s scientifically fraught because this function is so meaningful to them.”

While the term does hold this function, Elliot argues that scientific understandings about dyslexia are often confused. The term “dyslexia” is too inclusive for some and too exclusive for others.

In this keynote presentation, filmed at The European Conference on Psychology and the Behavioral Sciences 2014, July 25th, in Brighton, UK, Elliot calls for an end to the use of the dyslexia label. He discusses the “false illusions” surrounding dyslexia, the biology behind reading disabilities and what, if anything, intelligence has to do dyslexia.
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

The Dyslexia Debate is being live-streamed via the link below for people who are interested but unable to attend the event personally:
Dear Guest,

I am delighted to inform you that the Dyslexia Debate will be streamed on Thursday 24th September. The debate is due to start at 5.30pm and is scheduled to last until 7.00pm.

Please use the following link to access viewing of this:

https://vscene.jisc.ac.uk/jsp/cs/cs000. ... SE00176168

Kind regards,
Dick Schutz

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Dick Schutz »

Can the debate be viewed in archive? All I ever got form the link was an audio test.
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

The Dyslexia Debate: the British Dyslexia Association response

http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/news/item ... n-response
...We feel the current academic debate serves no useful purpose. In many ways it is undermining to those who experience dyslexia and to their families as well as the many thousands of teachers, including those funded under the government Rose Review recommendations (2009), who have worked extremely hard to complete accredited courses in dyslexia. The British Dyslexia Association accredits courses in Dyslexia through the Accreditation Board and it should be noted that the majority of these courses are validated at University level. In short both the research basis and the practical impact of dyslexia is widely recognised and there is no fresh or convincing evidence to counter this. We therefore feel that this is a redundant debate, is not at all constructive and seeks to destroy the years of good work carried out by professionals in schools, professional associations and parents. Children and adults with dyslexia deserve better than this!

British Dyslexia Association (BDA) Accreditation Board
September 2015
Do read the whole response - link above.
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Please do read the full statement via the link below from CCD - the ARC CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE IN COGNITION AND ITS DISORDERS (Australia) in response to the debate of the use of the word 'dyslexia':

http://www.ccd.edu.au/news/articles/201 ... index.html
CCD Statement on Dyslexia and Reading Impairment

ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders (CCD) - Reading Program
Macquarie University Department of Cognitive Science


Recently there has been debate around the term "dyslexia" and whether or not it is a useful word or concept. Though much of the debate is about how the word "dyslexia" affects things such as treatment decisions, a key part of the argument for eliminating the term is related to the way it is used and understood by the general public. Some researchers and clinicians feel that the term is used much too broadly, and should be eliminated and replaced by something clearer such as "reading disability" or "reading impairment."

We don't plan to settle that debate, but whether we use "dyslexia" or "reading impairment", the question of what that means is critical. To reduce miscommunication between us as researchers and others discussing reading problems, here is what we mean (and don't mean) when we discuss or publish articles about dyslexia and reading impairments:
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

Here is what IFERI committee member, Gordon Askew, had to say about 'dyslexia' (December 2014, prior to the debate about the 'dyslexia' label):

http://ssphonix.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/ ... e-and.html
The dyslexia pandemic: a tale of blame and no blame

The current prevalence of dyslexia in major English speaking countries seems to me to pose three very big questions. These in turn raise fundamental issue for the teaching of reading and are of very great importance to future rates of literacy in English worldwide.

Firstly, what is the reason for the virtually exponential increase over the past thirty years or so in the number of children being assessed, formally or informally, as dyslexic?

Secondly, why, when particular, specific teaching can clearly be shown to correct and, indeed, potentially eliminate most of these instances, do the majority of schools blatantly and often wilfully refuse to implement it?

Thirdly, and very pressingly, what can be done about all this?

Let us consider each in turn...
Do read the full piece - it is really important and Gordon's reference to effective teaching according to the results of England's statutory Year One Phonics Screening Check's in a number of schools illustrates that how teachers teach make a significant difference to the prevalence of 'dyslexia'.

You can read about Gordon's experience in the field of education here:

http://www.iferi.org/cmt-management-team/gordon-askew/
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Debbie_Hepplewhite »

David Didau writes about dyslexia and its label via 'The Learning Spy' blog:
Who is dyslexic and why does it matter?
http://www.learningspy.co.uk/myths/who- ... it-matter/
One thing I’ve learned is that if you’re in any way critical of the label ‘dyslexia’, you’re going to get some grief. This is a highly emotive area and many people feel very strongly that being diagnosed as dyslexic was a positive, life-changing experience. Who am I to ague with that?

And this is at the heat of Elliott & Grigorenko’s research into dyslexia. In this paper they ask, “To what extent should our attempts to derive scientifically valid diagnostic terms be tempered by the functional value that these have for individuals?”

There are no end of psychologists who accept that dyslexia doesn’t really mean anything, but that “maintaining the use of the label is necessary in order to highlight the severity and debilitating nature of developmental reading difficulty and gain public support.” On the face of it, that seems fair enough: if it helps people, where’s the harm?
Do read the whole piece!
User avatar
Susan Godsland
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 1:32 pm

Re: Professor Julian (Joe) Elliott - 'The Dyslexia Debate'

Post by Susan Godsland »

David Didau's latest blog post on dyslexia led to an interesting stream of exchanges on twitter. N.B. not all tweets transcribed.

I started it off by tweeting Prof Joe Elliott to tell him about David's post as it included quotes from his (and Grigorenko) book 'The Dyslexia Debate'.

Prof Elliott:
This is closely in accord with our views..hope it will be persuasive.

Psychologist Dr. James Thompson joined in:
disagree with your [Didau's] statements about intelligence http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.co.uk/2 ... mings.html

Prof. Elliott:
Confusion here between R comprehension & R. accuracy. Only the former is correlated with IQ
please see pp. 17-24 in "The Dyslexia Debate" for a more comprehensive analysis of the relationship between RD and IQ

David Didau:
Also worth considering this paper by Stanovich http://keithstanovich.com/Site/Research ... Q%2005.pdf

Thompson:
My point is that in epidemiological fact they are related, Stanovich notwithstanding

David Didau:
Ok. Is there evidence for that other than the Yule study? Thanks

At this point I mentioned that Diane McGuinness had discussed the Yule and Rutter study in her book 'Why children can't read' p134-5.

David Didau to Thompson:
Now read your post. Yes, reading correlates with g but where's the evidence of a correlation with decoding?

Thompson:
Naively assumed that reading required decoding

David Didau:
Oh sure, it does. But decoding doesn't require language comprehension (which is the bit correlated to g)

Thompson:
How are they to be discriminated (refs please)
Post Reply