web viewscreening tests done by educational psychologists are very costly to ... during my school...
TRANSCRIPT
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
The provision for supporting pupils with dyslexia ‘is often lacking’
(Rose, 2009). This essay will provide a definition of dyslexia and go
into detail about ways of identifying dyslexia in a child and the
limitations of these approaches. It will then compare the practice of
two schools where I worked during my school experiences and link
with supporting children with dyslexia. This will be done to explain
where identification and support is often not good enough in
primary schools and to influence practice.
Tunmey and Greaney (2009, p.229) state that there is no
internationally agreed definition of Dyslexia or agreement on its
cause. However Rose’s (2009) definition is generally accepted
across the United Kingdom (Dyslexia Action, 2012).
Rose (2009) defines Dyslexia as a learning difficulty primarily
affecting the skills involved in accurate and fluent word reading and
spelling. This is a working definition providing ways to identify
learners with dyslexia and then offer interventions (Kelly and
Phillips, 2011).
Whereas The British Dyslexia Association (2010, p.1) define dyslexia
as a learning difference, a combination of strengths and weaknesses
which affects the learning process in reading, spelling, writing and
sometimes numeracy. Dyslexic learners may also have
accompanying weaknesses in short term memory, sequencing and
p. 1
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
the speed at which they process information. These are skills that
everyone needs if they are to learn effectively in a busy classroom.
This is a descriptive definition and concentrates on a set of
characteristics which are evident in dyslexic children (Kelly and
Phillips, 2011).
Different definitions go into differing detail and explanations of
dyslexia, depending on their perception of which is most significant.
Most, however, agree dyslexia affects reading and spelling. This is
where the first problem with identifying and supporting dyslexia lies.
My opinion is that for dyslexia to be easily identified and supported
there must be recognised international definitions of the disability,
without this definition, it is harder to identify and support.
It is widely accepted that the earlier dyslexia is identified the more
effective interventions are, and give the greatest chance of dyslexic
children ‘catching up’ with their peers (Ott, 1997; Rose, 2009;
Schnatschneider and Torgessen, 2004; Snowling 2013; Crombie and
Reid, 2009). The Code of Practice states the importance of early
identification, assessment and provision for any child who may have
special educational needs cannot be over-emphasised (DfES, 2001).
Research suggests there are many methods of identifying dyslexia.
Screening tests done by educational psychologists are very costly to
implement and there is a wide range of data and assessments
p. 2
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
available to teachers that are as effective (Ott, 1994; Snowling,
2013).
Fawcett and Nicholson (1996, cited by Ott, 1994, Crombie and Reid,
2009) devised tests for identifying whether children struggle with
areas associated with dyslexia. These tests were called the Dyslexia
Early Screening Test (DEST) for 4.5 to 6.5 year olds. The tests are
administered on entering school and aid early identification of
dyslexia ensuring support can be in place early. DEST involves a
series of subtests to identify signs of the causes of dyslexia and
indicate if a child is ‘at risk’ of future problems (Simpson, Everatt,
2005). If children are found to be ‘At Risk’ further testing from
educational psychologists is required. DEST was designed to be
used by teachers because it is cheap, quick and provides indicators
of dyslexia (Crombie and Reid, 2009, p.72). Simpson and Everatt
(2005) contest this by saying the tests need to be purchased at the
cost of the school. They also argue that tests administered to young
children struggle to give an accurate reading, and that evidence
testing was proven on older children rather than at 4.5 years of age.
I believe DEST tests offer a realistic indicator for dyslexia and that if
they predict literacy difficulties and can be administered to all
children then it is good for schools and the children.
Response to Intervention (RTI) is an American approach to
identifying dyslexia. All children are screened and children who fall
p. 3
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
below a cut off point are deemed to have a high probability of future
struggle in education, and are placed in an appropriate tier of the
system. RTI monitors progress through a programme of
interventions, providing an alternative to screening and assessment
for dyslexia. Progress is monitored at tier 1 in regular classes, tier
two involves small group based tutoring and tier 3 is 1:1 tailored
tutoring, with progress being monitored throughout with movement
between tiers (Snowling, 2013; Shapiro and Clemens, 2009;
Crombie and Reid, 2009, p.73). Blanket screening tests can be
unreliable (Rose 2009, p.43) and a problem with RTI is that it can
produce false positives and negatives, meaning children are placed
in the wrong tier (Shapiro and Clemens 2009). Snowling (2013, p.10)
suggests using RTI when children are identified to have reading
difficulties and their response to intervention is measured as to
whether they need further diagnosis. RTI should be carried out in
early years otherwise children will be identified no earlier than
traditional approaches (Crombie and Reid 2009, p.73).
RTI is appropriate for American school systems and due to
differences is not transferable for the UK. Rose (2009) advocated a
three wave teaching system (not tiers of intervention) for identifying
and supporting dyslexia in the UK, which is very similar to RTI. Wave
one requires high quality first teaching at all times which is the
cornerstone for helping dyslexic children (Rose, 2009, Reid, 2005),
where teachers adjust to suit the differing needs of their pupils
p. 4
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
(BDA, 2010), monitor responses to phonics and use differing rates of
progress as indicators for literacy difficulties. Reviews of progress
and further investigation of difficulties are essential. He also points
out that intervention should not wait until diagnosis, and that
intervention should be put in place when it is noticed that a child is
not responding at Wave one. Screening is done through
standardised reading and spelling tests to identify literacy
difficulties. Wave two involves a more experienced literacy teacher
and SENCO to assess the child’s difficulties and their RTI; Children
receive small group interventions to help with their difficulties and
their response is assessed. Should a child continue to fail at Wave 2
it may be acknowledged to parents that the child appears to have
‘dyslexia difficulties’ with no formal identification? Wave 3 involves
appropriately qualified teachers delivering an individualised
programme based on the child’s needs. Rose (2009) stated that the
best way to identify dyslexia is through monitoring progress, skills
assessment, statements of special educational needs and
monitoring the impact of interventions.
Problems associated with RTI can be applied to Rose’s approach and
therefore both will be evaluated with RTI being referenced. The
major problem with RTI is that it is valuable for prevention of
literacy difficulties for children, however, evidence suggests it
cannot be used for early diagnosis of dyslexia without further
testing (Reynolds and Shaywitz, 2009), and RTI may delay/prevent
p. 5
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
dyslexic children from the support they are entitled to whilst they
are failing which may affect their self-esteem (Glazzard, 2010). It
can be argued that if all children must be tested for RTI, then it is
possible to blanket test for dyslexia meaning that children are
identified specifically as dyslexic and receive targeted approaches
to give them support. It takes time for progress to be witnessed with
RTI and with pressure on teachers to get results this may prove to
be a stumbling block without a diagnosis of dyslexia (Shapiro and
Clemens 2009). I believe these approaches rely heavily on the Wave
(tier) one teaching being of high quality. If there is a failure at Wave
one, this leads to unnecessary increase of numbers at Waves two
and three, meaning that children who do not have SEN are moved
into Wave two unnecessarily. RTI works in supporting dyslexia after
it has been identified, however, it is very reliant on each stage being
done correctly and on teachers being involved and understanding
the needs of their pupils, which should be expected but is not
always the case in practice. Snowling (2013, p. 11) suggests that
teacher assessment in schools, using data for RTI, is an effective
method for identifying dyslexia.
It is my belief that no one method alone is sufficient in identifying
dyslexia, Hale et al (2010) suggest that there is a need for another
method in identification of learning difficulties from RTI. It is my
belief that an RTI model combined with tests is the best method for
identification and support of dyslexia. Wave one is the most obvious
p. 6
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
initial identification pool with all children being in school. However,
after this my beliefs differ from a traditional RTI approach. I believe
all children should be tested for dyslexia at wave one and those who
appear to exhibit ‘at risk’ signs must be placed in the appropriate
level for their needs and have further testing. Children going
straight into wave two will not necessarily benefit or improve from
wave two interventions and this is delaying assistance and is
therefore the major short fall of RTI. The DEST provides a more
concrete identification of needs that can be tailored to children at
Wave three. Whereas an RTI model can be implemented and benefit
many children, it is my belief that we can help the identification of
dyslexia by implementing other methods in addition.
Other ways that help to identify dyslexia are Schools and parents
working together, which is essential (Rose, 2009; Reid, 2009).
Teachers looking for children in their class exhibiting dyslexia
characteristics will aid in dyslexia identification. The Year 1 Phonics
screening test can be used as an indicator of dyslexia (Dyslexia
Action, 2012), due to phonological difficulties associated with
dyslexia. Progress monitoring is the most essential way of
identifying dyslexia (Ott, 1997; Rose, 2009; Schnatschneider and
Torgessen, 2004; Snowling 2013; Crombie and Reid, 2009). EYFS
assessment can be used to identify children at risk of educational
difficulties (Snowling, 2013, p.11), which is backed up by Rose
(2009, p.44). Teachers should raise concerns about a child with
p. 7
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
more experienced teachers or their SENCO when they believe a
child may have dyslexia. These, however, must be done alongside
interventions and assessments to effectively aid in the identification
and support of dyslexia.
None of these ways to identify Dyslexia provide an actual diagnosis;
only psychologists and specialist dyslexia teachers with a practising
certificate can provide diagnosis (Rose, p.53). Before that teachers
can only say they exhibit dyslexic tendencies. These specialists are
called in if high quality teaching and interventions are not effective.
However when a child is labelled ‘at risk’ of dyslexia there should
not be a delay in putting help in place; this prevents further
affecting pupils’ self-esteem (Rose, 2009, p.2; Snowling, 2013,
p.12).
During my school placement I interviewed the SENCO’s from two
schools about their approach to dyslexia. School A does not focus on
diagnosing dyslexia specifically; the school does not like to label
children and feel that it is unfair to do so. Norwich (2009, p.186)
supports this notion by stating that Special Education Needs (SEN) is
best supported and assisted by identifying the needs of the child
rather than labelling them as dyslexic. This means that stating a
child is dyslexic does nothing for them, teachers need to address
what their problems are and target assistance based on this.
Macdonald (2009, p.36) contradicts this by saying that dyslexia
p. 8
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
diagnosis improves self-esteem and can give increased confidence.
He also explains that children may have already been labelled as
lazy, stupid or disruptive and diagnosis can end this. Glazzard
(2010, p.63) elaborates by saying that the label ‘dyslexia’
contributes significantly to pupils’ self-esteem, gives them
ownership of the label and helps to create a positive self-image.
School B, however, diagnose only when they feel it will benefit the
child. Lauchlan and Boyle (2007) back this approach, by stating that
the label of dyslexia can lead to increased funding streams and
makes communicating problems easier for professionals.
It is my opinion that the label is more beneficial to a child because it
gives them an idea of why they struggle with their work, and opens
up their rights to funding and support and empowers the child to
achieve. I feel that the label children often receive of being lazy,
stupid or disruptive (Macdonald, 2009) is far more detrimental to
children’s self-esteem than dyslexia; the label in my opinion benefits
the child.
Both schools buy in services when children exhibit dyslexic
characteristics, the services for school A putting strategies in place
whereas school B’s services do a comprehensive assessment in
reading, writing and spelling and then provide a dyslexic portfolio
for assisting class teachers with the pupil in class. This may suggest
that school B is offering more support for their teachers, however,
p. 9
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
school A put strategies in place with the agencies support and in
addition to this up skill staff through INSET ensuring high quality
Wave One teaching (Rose, 2009), as well as training for all staff
involved with children exhibiting dyslexic tendencies. In addition
School A provides assistance to small groups of SEN children,
though this approach may be delaying or preventing dyslexic
children from having the specific support they require (Reynolds and
Shaywitz, 2009).
School B uses technology such as I-pad apps and it buys laptops if
needed for children to be able to produce better quality work.
School B aims to increase children’s typing speed which the BDA
says increases quality and quantity of work, thereby, taking away
the problems of speed and handwriting (2013), and have apps for
children to dictate their work so as to not need to write, taking away
the stress and fear of failure associated with writing and aids editing
by hearing mistakes (Percival, 2013). Technology is a tool that can
be used in the classroom to aid, support and overcome difficulties
and barriers to learning for dyslexic children and can mean a
lifetime of success in writing (BDA, 2013; Drysdale, 2009; Crivelli,
2013, cited in Percival, 2013; Ott, 2007). There is a vast amount of
technology available to support dyslexia (Peer and Reid, 2005) and
children can be taught to use ICT to increase their performance and
enhance their creativity (Ott, 2007). By using different programs
and removing previous barriers children then have confidence to
p. 10
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
produce better work which creates independent learners, as when
dyslexic children have the tools necessary they can work
independently (Onions, 2013, cited in Percival, 2013). This is an
area where school A is lacking and in my opinion needs to look into
assisting its children who are dyslexic, because children who are not
motivated by traditional teaching methods (i.e. dyslexic children)
often benefit from assistive technology (Nicolson, Fawcett and
Nicolson, 2000, p.203).
School A lower the teacher pupil ratios by employing two teaching
assistants (TA’s) in classes with SEN children, one who works with
the whole class and one to assist the SEN children. However,
dyslexic students see working exclusively with a TA as one of the
worst practices in schools. Webster (2014) also comments that
working with TA’s too much also means that these children miss out
on quality time with the teacher affecting their education, which
leads to children becoming too reliant on the TA. Therefore, it is
good for school A to use teaching assistants, they must also be
aware of the impact on having them working too much with SEN
children. School B could improve provision by using TA’s. Both
schools offer help with spelling and using mnemonics and tutoring,
which is seen as one of the main problems with dyslexia. School A
provides professional development, which focuses on addressing
gaps in staff knowledge on dyslexia (Bagri, 2014; Rose, 2009, p.82).
p. 11
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
School A has three children exhibiting dyslexia tendencies whereas
School B state they have one child who is dyslexic who they are
seeking a diagnosis, but have no children with dyslexic tendencies.
Approximately 10% of the population are dyslexic (British Dyslexia
Association, 2014) a school the size of School A there would be
approximately 80 pupils with Dyslexia to some degree and there
would be roughly 40 pupils with dyslexia to some degree in School
B. However it is acknowledged that dyslexia occurs on a continuum
and that many children have low level problems, or simply have
learnt to cope (Gallagher, Frith and Snowling, 2000). With that being
said both schools are far below the ten per cent level, meaning the
likelihood is that there are many dyslexic children going unnoticed,
which is something that needs to be addressed in their SEN
practice.
Both school A and B offer the assistance to dyslexic children.
However, school A refusing to diagnose can leave some children at
a disadvantage when heading into secondary school, School B’s
diagnosing when necessary helps a child by giving them future
opportunities and more benefits than just the support they required
at the time.
Other ways teachers can support dyslexia in class, is by Multi-
Sensory teaching involving visual, auditory, kinaesthetic and tactile
senses (the eyes, ears, speech and fingers) (Ott, 1994, p.65).
p. 12
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
Dyslexic pupils respond best to structured teaching, being in an
environment where their teacher supports and understands their
needs (Reid, 2005; Snowling, 2013; Johnson, 2004) and need to be
encouraged to achieve independence (Reid, 2005 p.144). Dyslexic
pupils should receive Targeted Phonological skills with reading
interventions, by developing decoding skills proved to be the best
method for intervention (Snowling, 2013, p.12). Teaching
programmes should target: attention, listening, spoken language,
fine motor skills, handwriting and memory (Townsend, 2000, cited in
Reid, 2005). Overlearning by using systematic repetition in order for
new knowledge and skills to become automatic, working with
dyslexic children between lessons helps them learn (Rose, 2009,
p.90). No intervention works for all children and it is therefore
essential to tailor intervention children’s specific needs (Snowling,
2013, p.12; Reid, 2005).
It is clear from research that it is vital to identifying dyslexia early at
schools and that there are many different methods of identifying it.
However, despite it being so important for it to be identified, there is
a lack in provision of schools. This paper shows schools need to do
more to identify dyslexia and then give appropriate interventions.
RTI, is a good starting point, however leaves dyslexic children
lacking the appropriate provision at waves one and two without
identification. It is not appropriate to simply wait to see how children
respond before extra support is given as this will leave children
p. 13
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
without specific support they require (Reynolds and Shaywitz,
2009). Schools must identify dyslexia at the earliest possibility, if
they are unhappy with ‘labelling’ the child they must identify
children as potentially dyslexic and put coping strategies in place
(Stansfield, 2014), this therefore prevents a dyslexic child falling
behind their peers because children who fall behind early in their
school career tend to fall further behind over time (Siegel, 2014). My
conclusion therefore, is that schools need multiple methods to
identify dyslexia, and when a child is identified, they need to be
receiving appropriate support for their problems in class at wave
one and through interventions at waves two and three.
Therefore a whole school approach to dyslexia is required. A school
culture where failure is not acceptable, and that pupils cannot be
allowed to leave without appropriate basic skills; which means
pupils are encouraged to believe they can be the best (BDA, 2010).
School wide Monitoring and evaluation of teaching/ interventions
and looking at what is being done to support dyslexic children
(Rose, 2009, p.98) is essential. Schools must have access to a
trained dyslexic teacher and a teacher with advanced skills of
teaching literacy either in an alliance or on staff (Rose, 2009).
Schools should establish a policy framework for the school by
implementing whole-school screening and monitoring for dyslexia
(Reid, 2005, p.142) through DEST and RTI. Teachers and staff should
p. 14
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
be aware of difficulties associated with dyslexia (Rose, 2009, p.82;
BDA, 2010).
p. 15
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
Bibliography
Aberdeen City Council (ACC). (2011) Dyslexia Aberdeen City Council Dyslexia Practice Guidelines. Available at: http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/web/files/SchoolsColleges/dyslexia_guidlines.pdf (Accessed 26 January 2014).
Australian Dyslexia Association. (2014). Identifying Dyslexia. Available at: http://dyslexiaassociation.org.au/index.php?page=identifying-dyslexia (Accessed 19 January 2014).
Australian Dyslexia Association. (2014). Could it be Dyslexia? Available at: http://dyslexiaassociation.org.au/index.php?page=could-it-be-dyslexia-2 (Accessed 19 January 2014).
Bagri, S. (2014) Conversation with William Seabrook, 23 January.
British Dyslexia Association. (BDA) (2010) Dyslexia Friendly Schools Pack for England. Available at: http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/files/dfs_pack_English.pdf (Accessed: 14 January 2014)
British Dyslexia Association (BDA).(ND) Dyslexia Style Guide. Available at: http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/about-dyslexia/further-information/dyslexia-style-guide.html (Accessed: 26 January 2014).
British Dyslexia Association (BDA). (2013) Using Technology to Support Dyslexic pupils. Available at: http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/files/Technology-for-Literacy-2013.pdf (accessed: 19 January 2014).
Broomfield, H. and Combley, M. (2000) Overcoming Dyslexia: A Practical Handbook for the Classroom. London: Whur Publishers Ltd.
Crombie, M. and Reid, G. (2009) ‘The role of early identification: Models from research to practice’, in Reid, G (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Dyslexia. Oxon: Routledge, PP.71-79.
Davis, R.D. (1992) 37 Common Characteristics of Dyslexia. Available at: http://www.dyslexia.com/library/symptoms.htm (Accessed: 29 January, 2014)
Department for Education and Skills (DfES). (2001)Special Educational Needs Code of Practice. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/0581-2001-SEN-CodeofPractice.pdf (Accessed: 29 January 2014).
p. 16
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
Drysdale, J. (2009) ‘Overcoming the barriers to literacy’, in Reid, G (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Dyslexia. Oxon: Routledge, PP.236-247.
Dyslexia Action. (2012) Dyslexia Still Matters. Egham: Dyslexia Institute Limited.
Everatt, J. and Reid, G. (2009) ‘Dyslexia: An overview of recent research’, in Reid, G (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Dyslexia. Oxon: Routledge, PP.3- 21.
Gallagher, A. Frith, U. and Snowling, M. (2000) ‘Precursors of literacy delay among children at genetic risk of dyslexia’, Journal of Child Psychology and psychiatry, 41 (2), pp.203-213.
Glazzard, J. (2010) ‘Impact of dyslexia on pupil’s self-esteem’, British Journal of Learning Support, 25 (2), pp.63-69.
Hale, J. (2010) ‘Critical issues in Response-to- intervention, comprehensive evaluation, and specific learning disabilities identification and intervention: An expert white paper’, Learning Disability Quarterly, 33 (1), pp.223-236.
Hope, K. (ND) How teachers can accommodate the dyslexic student. Available at: http://www.dyslexiavictoriaonline.com/howtecanacdy.html (accessed, 26 January 2014).
Inclusive technology. (2014) ICT and Specific learning disibilities and or dyslexia, Available at: http://www.inclusive.co.uk/articles/ict-and-specific-learning-difficulties-and-or-dyslexia-a216 (accessed: 1 February 2014).
Johnson, M. (2004) ‘Dyslexia- Friendly teaching’, in in Thomson, M. (ed.) Dyslexia- Perspectives for Classroom Practitioners. Glasgow: Bell & Bain Ltd, pp.9-14.
Kaminski, J. (2012) 5 Early Warning Signs to Identifying Dyslexia. Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpvaVje6oCk (Accessed: 19 January 2014).
Kelly, K. and Phillips, S. (2011) Teaching Literacy to Learners with Dyslexia A Multi-sensory Approach. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Lauchlan, F. and Boyle, C. (2007) ‘Is the use of labels in special education helpful?’, Support For Learning, 22 (1), pp.36-42.
p. 17
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
Lyytinen, H. Ronimu, M. Alanko, A. Poikkeus, AM. And Taanila, M. (2007) ‘Early Identification of dyslexia and the use of computer game-based practice to support reading acquisition’, Nordic Psychology, 59 (2), pp.109- 126.
Macdonald, S. (2009) Towards a Sociology of Dyslexia. London: VDM Publishing.
Norwich, B. (2009) ‘Dyslexia and inclusive education’, , in Reid, G (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Dyslexia. Oxon: Routledge, pp.177-192.
Ott, P. (1997) How to Detect and Manage Dyslexia: A reference and Resource Manual. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers.
Ott, P. (2007) Teaching Children with Dyslexia a Practical Guide. Oxon: Routledge.
Peer, L. (2004) ‘Success for all- dyslexia-friendly schools’, in Thomson, M. (ed.) Dyslexia- Perspectives for Classroom Practitioners. Glasgow: Bell & Bain Ltd, pp.3-8.
Peer, L. (2009) ‘Dyslexia and glue ear: a stick educational problem’, in Reid, G (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Dyslexia. Oxon: Routledge, pp.33-42.
Peer, L. and Reid, G. (2005) Introduction to Dyslexia, London: David Fulton Publishers Ltd.
Percival, S. (2013) ‘Assistive tools’, Nasen Special, March 2013, p.45.
Reid, G. (2005) ‘Dyslexia’, Lewis, A. and Norwich, B. (eds.) Special Teaching for Special Children? a pedagogies for inclusion, Berkshire: Open University Press, pp.138-149.
Reynolds, C. and Shaywitz, S. (2009) ‘Response to Intervention: ready or not? Or, from wait-to-fail to watch-them-fail, School Psychology Quarterly, 24 (2), pp. 1-19.
Rose, J. (2009) Identifying and Teaching Children and Young People with Dyslexia and Learning Difficulties. Available at: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/14790/1/00659-2009DOM-EN.pdf (Accessed: 14 January 2014).
Shapiro, E. (2009) ‘A conceptual model for evaluating system effects of response to intervention’, Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35 (2), pp.3-16.
p. 18
Defining, Identifying and Supporting Dyslexia in a Primary School Classroom.
Siegel, l. (2014) ‘ Early indentification and intervention to prevent reading failure’, Carroll, J. and Saunders, K. (eds) The Dyslexia Handbook 2014, Bracknell: The British Dyslexia Association, pp.107-112.
Simpson, J. and Everatt, J. (2005) ‘Reception Class predictors of literacy skills’, British Journal of Educational Psycholody, 75, pp.171-188.
Singleton, C. (2009) ‘visual stress and Dyslexia’, in Reid, G (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Dyslexia. Oxon: Routledge, PP.43-57.
Stansfield, J. (2014) ‘ Early indentification’, Llewellyn-Jones, D. Carroll, J. and Saunders, K. (eds) The Dyslexia Handbook 2014, Bracknell: The British Dyslexia Association, pp.107-112.
Snowling, M. (2013) ‘Early identification and interventions for dyslexia: a contempory view’, Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 13 (1), pp.7-14.
Schatschneider,C. and Torgesen, J. (2004) ‘Using Our Current Understanding of Dyslexia to Support Early Identification and Intervention’, Journal of Child Neurology, 19 (10), pp.759-765.
The Academic Group. (2012) Teaching the Dyslexic Child. Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkLjGlCfLRw (Accessed 21 January, 2014).
Tunmer, W. and Greaney, K. (2009) ‘Defining Dyslexia’, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(3), pp.229-243.
Webster, R. (2014) ‘Relying on teaching assistant support for SEN students is a false economy’ The Guardian (Teacher Network), 17 April.
p. 19