index by author
index by subject
| |
home index by author index by subject |
Friday stream 3 Session 11.35 - 12.50 Length 25 minutes
Pamela Deponio
Department of Equity Studies and Special Education, Moray House Institute, University of Edinburgh Pamela.Deponio@ed.ac.uk
Abstract
This research uncovers the perspectives of pupils who have been confirmed as dyslexic. By focusing on their understanding of dyslexia, interesting data was gathered which clearly has implications for the use of the term 'dyslexia' and for issues relating to self-esteem and learning. By focusing on school experience, issues for secondary schools arise. Implications are drawn and suggestions are offered which are likely to enhance the learning experience of dyslexic pupils.
Introduction
The research involved 22 pupils (twenty boys and two girls), aged between fourteen and fifteen years and attempted to gain insights into how dyslexic pupils perceived dyslexia and the implications of their perceptions for self- esteem and consequently, success in learning.
Dyslexia is now viewed from a broad perspective which alludes to a continuum of difficulties (Reid 1998, Tonnessen 1997, Miles 1995, Stanovich 1988). The effect of this has been the identification of pupils as dyslexic who may not have otherwise received the degree of attention which usually accompanies such a 'label.' In many cases the use of a label is necessary, though not always desirable, to access specific interventions and examination allowances. One key question which accompanies this situation is what kind of impact does such a label and its implications have on the pupil? It was therefore hypothesised that pupils who had been provided with detailed and appropriate information on dyslexia would be more likely to display a positive self-concept.
Methodology
Both quantitative and qualitative means for collecting data were used. A list of pupils confirmed as dyslexic was obtained from three education authorities and pupils were selected at random for the study. The eventual sample came from fourteen different schools.
Dyslexia was defined using established definitions from the literature (BDA 1996, Miles 1995, Reid 1998) and self-esteem was viewed as emerging from the self-concept literature (Lawrence 1996). The view of a reciprocal relationship between self-concept and achievement is well documented (Burns 1979, Jorm et al 1986, Lawrence 1996).
Self concept data was collected using the Piers-Harris Children's Self Concept Scale which was selected because its reliability and validity are also well documented (Piers 1996, Lawrence 1996). Eighty brief sentences are presented as statements reflecting the way some pupils feel about themselves. Respondents are invited to indicate whether or not each statement applies to them. This instrument has the added value of presenting the data in cluster scores to represent different facets of self-concept such as 'behaviour.' 'intellectual and social status,' 'physical appearance,' 'anxiety,' 'popularity' and 'happiness and satisfaction.'
The dyslexia data was obtained through a semi structured interview focusing on such areas as 'insights into dyslexia,' 'strategies employed,' 'subject choices,' and 'peer perceptions.' Pupils were questioned on such areas as when they became aware of their difficulties and whether or not the difficulties had been explained. Further questions attempted to explore the pupils' feelings in coping with dyslexia. An attempt was made to discover whether there had been discussion about difficulties in general and dyslexia in particular. Pupils were asked if they were aware of others with similar difficulties. Finally, questions were included to determine future aspirations.
Results and discussion of quantitative data
From the Piers-Harris Self-Concept Scale, results from the 22 pupils were considered. For the purpose of presenting the data, raw scores were converted into 'T' scores which have a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. The aggregate scale (see figure1, appendix1), appears to present an overall optimistic picture. However, examination of each pupil's individual scores highlighted the fact that half emerged with a 'T' score of more than 65 in one or more clusters which Piers (1996) suggests may include a positive self-evaluation, but may also reflect a need to appear supremely self-confident. Almost all pupils emerged with the dimension 'intellectual and social status' as the lowest or second lowest possible self concept score. Overall however, only a few fell into the category regarded as a serious indicator of low self concept.
An item analysis was completed for the 'intellectual and social status' cluster scores. It was found that a high percentage of pupils regarded themselves as important members of their family yet few regarded themselves as an important member of the class. Almost all pupils thought that they had good ideas, claimed their friends thought they had good ideas and stated they could give a good report in front of the class but three quarters indicated that they did not often volunteer in school. Half indicated that they were slow in finishing their work and half admitted they were nervous when the teacher called on them.
Such figures could suggest that some pupils had developed coping strategies in class which involved not allowing themselves to be put in a situation where they might appear to fail.
More than half of the pupils emerged with 'popularity' as their highest or second highest score. Of these, a few had a 'T' score of 65 or above, again, suggesting responses in this area may have been exaggerated. Some pupils had high scores in the 'anxiety' cluster. Scores for 'behaviour,' 'happiness and satisfaction' and 'physical appearance and attributes' were more evenly distributed.
Results and discussion of qualitative data
Almost all pupils stated they had been told they were dyslexic. Of these, most thought that dyslexia implied that they would experience difficulty with reading, writing or spelling. One third thought that being dyslexic simply implied they would write words or letters in the wrong order whilst a third mentioned a connection with the brain. A few described dyslexia as a learning difficulty. Only a very few pupils appreciated that there could be problems with memory and two were aware of possible visual difficulties.
A high percentage of pupils had therefore been told that they were dyslexic. It would appear that the pupils had a good appreciation of some of the main difficulties associated with dyslexia however, some pupils appeared to be confused. One pupil assumed that the difficulty applied to all subjects whilst another considered the implications to be an inability to do things for himself. Of the pupils who mentioned that dyslexia was connected to the brain, two thought that there was something 'wrong' with the brain.
When questioned about areas of the curriculum where most success was experienced more than half said that they performed in sports or PE activities better than or as well as their friends. One third mentioned an aptitude for imaginative writing, practical subjects and Art. Other pupils mentioned such areas as giving a talk, answering questions, playing an instrument, drama, doing investigations, electronics, graphics and 'fixing things' as areas where they felt they performed well.
Half of the pupils felt that there were no advantages to being dyslexic. Other pupils felt that there were advantages, such as having more time to complete work, having readers and scribes, being given extra help and access to computers. Only one pupil appeared to be aware of the fact that some of his strengths could perhaps be attributed to the fact that he was dyslexic by responding that he thought having a better memory than his friends was an advantage.
Some questions attempted to discover how great an understanding the pupils had of dyslexia. Half said they felt that they did not understand, one quarter felt that they 'sort of' understood and a quarter said they did understand. Pupils who said they did understand gave various reasons for being dyslexic:
'It's because I didn't really pay attention in primary school.'
'I know why I got it - because my Mum and Dad kept breaking up and I kept moving high schools.'
A pupil who claimed to 'not completely' understand his difficulties went on to say that he did not understand, '... how it works ... how it happens ... how you solve it.'
Some pupils admitted to having very little understanding:
'When they say I have trouble, I don't know how I got trouble.'
'I don't understand any of it.'
'No, I don't understand what it is and how I've got it.'
The frustrations of some pupils were summed up in the phrase 'why me?'
There is obvious confusion in this area. Pupils who most confidently stated that they understood their difficulties demonstrated that they did not by claiming that they experienced difficulties because they attended numerous schools or did not pay attention in school. Other pupils expressed confusion and frustration at not fully appreciating the nature of their difficulties.
An attempt was made to discover whether pupils were aware of others with similar difficulties. Most confessed they did not know which of their peer group experienced similar problems and when questioned about famous dyslexics few were known. When, at the end of the interview, pupils were made familiar with the names of some famous dyslexics, all displayed surprise and stated they felt more confident with this knowledge.
An attempt was made in the questionnaire to determine whether pupils had worked out any strategies for learning. It emerged that few pupils had. No pupils mentioned the use of study skills or the awareness of their learning styles or metacognitive factors.
Pupils were questioned about their subject choices. One quarter answered that they had not avoided any subjects when making their choices. Of those pupils who had avoided subjects PE, Home Economics, Art and Drama were mentioned. Reasons for not selecting these subjects included the fact that too much writing was involved (PE and Home Economics), the subjects were in the same column of choices, or all the places had been taken:
'I didn't take any social subjects because I thought there might be too much writing in them.'
'I'd like to have taken a language if there hadn't been so much writing involved.'
'I chose things that had little reading or writing.'
'I avoided PE. I would have liked to do that because I'm quite good at sports but there's writing involved.'
'Home Economics. They say I had to write a big essay.'
'I picked subjects that wouldn't involve reading.'
'I'd like to have done biology but it's all tests.'
'I wanted drama but all the places were filled. I fancied acting but didn't get a chance to prove myself.'
Whilst it could be claimed that the avoidance of subjects with a high written requirement demonstrated good tactics, it is interesting to note that some of the subjects avoided were the very subjects in which the pupils felt they could perform well.
Questions on the perceptions of classmates revealed areas of tension with only a few pupils believing that their difficulties were appreciated by classmates and claiming that only friends understood. One pupil said that his class did not say anything but that he felt they did not think he was as good as everyone else. Another said his class thought he was 'someone stupid,' one further said members of his class 'slag me off,' and another said some of his class made a fool of him.
When questioned on future aspirations most pupils mentioned practical, skilled employment. Joiner, mechanic, painter/decorator, cook, electrician and welder were given as possible occupations. Some pupils expressed a desire to be involved in a professional capacity with subjects they enjoyed, professional sports person, actor and professional musician being mentioned in particular.
Summary and Implications
The quantitative data suggests that some pupils may have felt the need to appear self confident. The confidence experienced amongst family and close friends was not mirrored within class. Pupils recognised their own strengths and abilities yet there was a reluctance to participate fully in class activities. Despite a high percentage claiming popularity with peers, this fact is not necessarily supported by the qualitative data.
The qualitative data revealed that a high percentage of pupils were familiar with the term 'dyslexia,' however, most expressed feelings of frustration when asked how they felt about their difficulties and said they did not fully understand them. They reported that they would have appreciated knowing at an earlier age that they had a specific learning difficulty. Most pupils considered that being dyslexic implied difficulties in areas traditionally associated with dyslexia, those of reading, writing and spelling. No mention was made of other aspects associated with dyslexia such as poor concept of time, organisational difficulties and sequencing problems. Subjects which could be referred to as practical, creative or artistic were listed as favourite subjects in school. Interests out with school were also in these areas. More than half considered themselves to be as good as, if not better than others in their classes in these areas. Strengths and abilities did not appear to be used to develop strategies for learning, nor were these strengths perceived as being associated with dyslexia. Pupils were aware of only very few famous or successful dyslexics. Subjects which were enjoyed were not selected for study at GCSE/Standard grade level because of required written assessments.
The study therefore revealed interesting data with implications for the full inclusion of dyslexic pupils. The principal implication for schools would be that pupils could be 'counselled,' following confirmation of dyslexia. There is much to be found in the literature promoting informal counselling following confirmation of a learning difficulty (Lawrence 1996, Hales 1995, Peer 1997). Informal counselling or 'demystifying' (Levine 1994), offers each pupil an explanation for the difficulties experienced and assures that the school appreciates these difficulties and will make efforts to facilitate access to the curriculum. Each pupil's particular pattern of difficulties could be stated but, more importantly, the particular pattern of strengths and abilities could be highlighted (Peer, 1997). The discovery of individual learning styles (Given and Reid, 1999), and the facilitation of good study skills are likely to further enhance self-concept and subsequently, success in learning.
It is also likely that opportunities to find out about famous and otherwise successful dyslexics and the positive aspects of being dyslexic will enhance the self-concept (West 1997). The use of peer support groups could offer a positive avenue for support. Pupils benefit from the appreciation that others experience similar difficulties and the opportunity to meet together to discuss strategies and study skills is likely to be beneficial. Finally, at times of subject choices schools could facilitate the selection of subjects where the pupils display areas of strength.
References
BDA. (1996) Your Questions Answered. Bath: Reading, BDA.
BURNS, R.B. (1979) Self Concept, Theory, Measurement, Development & Behaviour. London: Longman.
GIVEN, B.K. and REID, G. (1999) Learning Styles. St Annes-on -Sea: Red Rose Publications.
HALES, G. Dyslexia Matters. London: Whurr Publications, 1995.
JORM, A.F. SHARE, D.L, MATTHEWS, R. MacLEAN, R. (1986) Behaviour Problems in Specific reading Retarded and General Reading Backward children: A Longitudinal Study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 27(1), 33.
LAWRENCE, D. (1996) Self Esteem in the Classroom. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
LEVINE, M. (1994) Educational Care, Massachusetts, Educators Publishing Service Inc.
MILES, E. (1995) Can there be a single definition of dyslexia? Dyslexia, 1, 37.
PEER, L. (1997) A Young Person's Guide to Dyslexia. Reading: British Dyslexia Association.
PIERS, E.V. (1996) Piers-Harris Children's Self Concept Scale. Revised Manuel. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
REID, G. (1998) Dyslexia a Practitioner's Handbook. Chichester: Wiley
STANOVICH, K.E. (1998) Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden variety poor reader: the phonological core variable model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21 pp590-612.
TONNESSEN, F.E. (1997) How Can We Best Define Dyslexia? Dyslexia, 3 (2), 78-92.
Appendix 1
Key to cluster scales
Beh. = Behaviour
I&SS = Intellectual and Social Status
PA&A = Physical Appearance and Attributes
Anx. = Anxiety
Pop. = Popularity
Hap. = Happiness
 |
 |