5 ms·

> The method for diagnosing dyslexia, known as the discrepancy model, was relatively straightforward: test a child’s IQ and their reading age, and if there was

by bjo590 6y ago

> The method for diagnosing dyslexia, known as the discrepancy model, was relatively straightforward: test a child’s IQ and their reading age, and if there was a discrepancy between the two – average-to-high IQ, low literacy – that child was dyslexic. Elliott felt unsure about these assessments. The children he tested for dyslexia all struggled to read and write – that much was clear – but their literacy difficulties manifested in different ways. I'm a dyslexic, and I was given extra attention is school that significantly helped me. I have a pet theory, and this article seems to agree with it to some extent, that there are several or many different neurological conditions that are often put in the same label 'dyslexia'. I hope that one day more research is done to separate out the different underlying neurological states so we can better teach all children to read. The article's conclusion -- that because dyslexia is an inprecise term we should abandoned it to an even less precise term -- is flawed. We should instead work towards creating more precise language and understanding around the different ways low literacy manifests in children. If I was an incredibly wealthy technocrat this would be a pet research field of mine. If we can improve childhood literacy education it will have massive returns on that person's lifetime contribution to society. Understanding how the brain processes language also has significant implications for other lines of research as well.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bluGill 6y ago
We do have a term: slow to learn to read. We don't need dyslexia or some more specific term unless those terms can be used for better treatment. In this case dyslexia is too specific: kids who don't fit the definition are being actively harmed because the treatment would help them just as much as it fit those who it helps. It may well be dyslexia (or a more specific term) may mean some other treatment can be helpful only for those who have it, and not for the general population of poor readers. This hasn't been suggested (to my knowledge), but it is possible. Though I will note that the definition of Autism has gotten broader over time as treatments have been discovered to help kids who didn't fit the previous definition.
- bjo590 6y ago
  > We do have a term: slow to learn to read. There are dozens of reasons a child can be slow to learn how to read. They could have not have access to education. They could has poor eye sight. They could be malnourished. They could have difficulties learning in general. Dyslexia means "Slow to learn how to read, despite no obvious influencing factors." It's a bit of a catch-all. There might be treatments for dyslexic children that also help other children learn how to read, but it's likely that non-dyslexic children will need treatments that will not apply to dyslexic children. Dyslexia has more than 3 million cases in the US every year. It's common. When given the right treatments their quality of life can be improved greatly. I do not want to remove the classification of dyslexic, because it might jeopardize the way those children receive treatment. EDIT: "Dyslexia has more than 3 million cases in the US every year." You can see the dyslexia in my writing style right there....
  - bluGill 6y ago
    Dyslexia also has an IQ component which means those with low IQ are not dyslexic even if they otherwise have the same symptoms. Perhaps the definition needs to change? Note the above is from the article which is focused on the UK. It could be different in other countries.
    - bjo590 6y ago
      > Dyslexia also has an IQ component which means those with low IQ are not dyslexic even if they otherwise have the same symptoms. A person with IQ 100 (or whatever the mean IQ is) learning to read slower than average is different than a person with IQ 60 learning to read slower than average. You cannot completely remove the IQ component.
      - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
        But doesn't the article make the case that both of your example children need the same treatment?
slg 6y ago
Another dyslexic here, I completely agree with your assessment of the situation and while the article mentions it I don't think it fully grasps it. The definition of dyslexia is basically any difficulty reading that isn't associated with intelligence, eyesight, or education. It is an umbrella definition for a wide variety of both named and unnamed conditions. Of course there isn't going to be a universal way to treat dyslexia because there is not one single cause. Spending extra effort focusing on teaching a dyslexic student is going to help because extra direct teaching to any student is going to help them learn. Everyone learns slightly differently and that is even more true for students with learning disabilities. A one size fits all approach doesn't work whether we are talking about dyslexic students or the entire student population.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- shkkmo 6y ago
  > Spending extra effort focusing on teaching a dyslexic student is going to help because extra direct teaching to any student is going to help them learn. Nobody is disputing that. The issue is that predicating that extra direct teaching on a dyslexia diagnoses serves to further disadvantage the already disadvantaged. The argument is that extra direct teaching should be provided to anyone who has difficulty reading, regardless of diagnosis.
  - slg 6y ago
    I basically answered that here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24518585 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24518585 The extra direct teaching is only one benefit of the diagnosis. The better approach is to get those kids diagnosed so they can get those benefits too.
bsder 6y ago
> I'm a dyslexic, and I was given extra attention is school that significantly helped me. And I suspect that is probably true for most "dyslexics". I have a pet suspicion that there is an actual dyslexia but that most diagnoses are simply a manifestation of 2 standard deviations of "everybody's brain is wired slightly differently and some things require more effort." One of my relatives is really good at mathematical theoretical physics (probably better than I am, and I am no slouch), but doesn't read or write very well. I find it very difficult that someone who manipulates symbols that well has "dyslexia". More probably, he needed to devote more energy to reading but never did because he found it difficult. Unfortunately, our current education system is not set up to handle any student who is outside one standard deviation of "normal" on any dimension.
- nullsense 6y ago
  And only 3 standard deviations is actually a disability?
  - bsder 6y ago
    2SD vs 3SD is a big deal in biological organisms. If we look at height, that's a 6'7"/5'1" male or a 6'1"/4'8" female. At those numbers, the probability that there is a medical issue--malnourishment/endocrine problems/Marfan's syndrome, etc.--starts being non-trivial.
- timhaak 6y ago
  Sorry I’m going to disagree with you here. I was diagnosed with Dyslexia as child but was also always very good with maths. I remember actually really wanting to be able to read but just not being able to get it. After being moved to a class which catered for this and with extra help I managed to eventually be able to start reading. I generally read quiet a bit averaging at least a book a week. From your statement that should mean that the symptoms of dyslexia should be fixed but they aren’t. I still struggle with writing and spelling. Yes, I have put effort in, but I still struggle. The best way I can describe it that I'm blind to the errors. With the sentence structures once it's pointed out I can see them sometimes but not before. My intelligence is on the higher end and I got through an engineer degree, which you don't do if you don't put the effort in. Thankfully tools like Grammarly are helping. If not for my sake then at least for people who have to read what I write
C1sc0cat 6y ago
Its not just dyslexia as a single thing any more dyslexia is one of a group of neurodiverse conditions.

by bjo590 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

bluGill 6y ago

We do have a term: slow to learn to read. We don't need dyslexia or some more specific term unless those terms can be used for better treatment. In this case dyslexia is too specific: kids who don't fit the definition are being actively harmed because the treatment would help them just as much as it fit those who it helps. It may well be dyslexia (or a more specific term) may mean some other treatment can be helpful only for those who have it, and not for the general population of poor readers. This hasn't been suggested (to my knowledge), but it is possible. Though I will note that the definition of Autism has gotten broader over time as treatments have been discovered to help kids who didn't fit the previous definition.

bjo590 6y ago
> We do have a term: slow to learn to read. There are dozens of reasons a child can be slow to learn how to read. They could have not have access to education. They could has poor eye sight. They could be malnourished. They could have difficulties learning in general. Dyslexia means "Slow to learn how to read, despite no obvious influencing factors." It's a bit of a catch-all. There might be treatments for dyslexic children that also help other children learn how to read, but it's likely that non-dyslexic children will need treatments that will not apply to dyslexic children. Dyslexia has more than 3 million cases in the US every year. It's common. When given the right treatments their quality of life can be improved greatly. I do not want to remove the classification of dyslexic, because it might jeopardize the way those children receive treatment. EDIT: "Dyslexia has more than 3 million cases in the US every year." You can see the dyslexia in my writing style right there....
- bluGill 6y ago
  Dyslexia also has an IQ component which means those with low IQ are not dyslexic even if they otherwise have the same symptoms. Perhaps the definition needs to change? Note the above is from the article which is focused on the UK. It could be different in other countries.
  - bjo590 6y ago
    > Dyslexia also has an IQ component which means those with low IQ are not dyslexic even if they otherwise have the same symptoms. A person with IQ 100 (or whatever the mean IQ is) learning to read slower than average is different than a person with IQ 60 learning to read slower than average. You cannot completely remove the IQ component.
    - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
      But doesn't the article make the case that both of your example children need the same treatment?

slg 6y ago

Another dyslexic here, I completely agree with your assessment of the situation and while the article mentions it I don't think it fully grasps it. The definition of dyslexia is basically any difficulty reading that isn't associated with intelligence, eyesight, or education. It is an umbrella definition for a wide variety of both named and unnamed conditions. Of course there isn't going to be a universal way to treat dyslexia because there is not one single cause. Spending extra effort focusing on teaching a dyslexic student is going to help because extra direct teaching to any student is going to help them learn. Everyone learns slightly differently and that is even more true for students with learning disabilities. A one size fits all approach doesn't work whether we are talking about dyslexic students or the entire student population.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
shkkmo 6y ago
> Spending extra effort focusing on teaching a dyslexic student is going to help because extra direct teaching to any student is going to help them learn. Nobody is disputing that. The issue is that predicating that extra direct teaching on a dyslexia diagnoses serves to further disadvantage the already disadvantaged. The argument is that extra direct teaching should be provided to anyone who has difficulty reading, regardless of diagnosis.
- slg 6y ago
  I basically answered that here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24518585 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24518585 The extra direct teaching is only one benefit of the diagnosis. The better approach is to get those kids diagnosed so they can get those benefits too.

bsder 6y ago

> I'm a dyslexic, and I was given extra attention is school that significantly helped me. And I suspect that is probably true for most "dyslexics". I have a pet suspicion that there is an actual dyslexia but that most diagnoses are simply a manifestation of 2 standard deviations of "everybody's brain is wired slightly differently and some things require more effort." One of my relatives is really good at mathematical theoretical physics (probably better than I am, and I am no slouch), but doesn't read or write very well. I find it very difficult that someone who manipulates symbols that well has "dyslexia". More probably, he needed to devote more energy to reading but never did because he found it difficult. Unfortunately, our current education system is not set up to handle any student who is outside one standard deviation of "normal" on any dimension.

nullsense 6y ago
And only 3 standard deviations is actually a disability?
- bsder 6y ago
  2SD vs 3SD is a big deal in biological organisms. If we look at height, that's a 6'7"/5'1" male or a 6'1"/4'8" female. At those numbers, the probability that there is a medical issue--malnourishment/endocrine problems/Marfan's syndrome, etc.--starts being non-trivial.
timhaak 6y ago
Sorry I’m going to disagree with you here. I was diagnosed with Dyslexia as child but was also always very good with maths. I remember actually really wanting to be able to read but just not being able to get it. After being moved to a class which catered for this and with extra help I managed to eventually be able to start reading. I generally read quiet a bit averaging at least a book a week. From your statement that should mean that the symptoms of dyslexia should be fixed but they aren’t. I still struggle with writing and spelling. Yes, I have put effort in, but I still struggle. The best way I can describe it that I'm blind to the errors. With the sentence structures once it's pointed out I can see them sometimes but not before. My intelligence is on the higher end and I got through an engineer degree, which you don't do if you don't put the effort in. Thankfully tools like Grammarly are helping. If not for my sake then at least for people who have to read what I write

C1sc0cat 6y ago

Its not just dyslexia as a single thing any more dyslexia is one of a group of neurodiverse conditions.