Julian Elliot’s lack of confidence in being able to offer a diagnosis of dyslexia is not shared by others. Over the past six years I have read in excess of 500 diagnostic assessments. In probably about 95% of cases the key diagnostic criterion is that of an unexpected literacy discrepancy. Many also make use of an additional criterion – that of one or more cognitive deficits, such as a weak working memory. It is not true, as Elliot claims, that there is no consensus about ‘what diagnostic criteria should be used’. What is striking is the degree of conformity rather than the lack of consensus.
I would agree there is some apparent confusion about what dyslexia is in definitional terms in the research literature, but this confusion appears to me to stem from an expectation that dyslexia is a unitary concept. It is not, and we have known so for more than 60 years. For example, Schonell in the 1940’s identified three subtypes. A child with weak auditory skills but strong visual skills will require a different form of support from a child with weak visual skills but strong auditory skills. The term dyslexia is an umbrella term, and this is reflected in the definition that Symthe and colleagues have recently developed, a definition that captures the neuropsychological variation characteristic of dyslexia.
This cognitive variation is important for dyslexia is not just about difficulties with acquiring literacy skills. It is fundamentally about everyday lived experiences. By knowing about the interplay between a cognitive profile and everyday experiences successful intervention is possible, and I have a number of emails and letters from students who have succeeded – not just in an academic sense but also in terms of self-confidence and adjustment to everyday events.
David Grant, PhD., Chartered Psychologist
dyslexia diagnosis - a specialist service for students
