[bjo590]

> 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.

[slg]

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.

[shkkmo]

> 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]

I basically answered that here.

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]

> 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.

[timhaak]

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

[nullsense]

And only 3 standard deviations is actually a disability?

[bsder]

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.

[bluGill]

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]

> 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....

[marcus_holmes]

The point is not that dyslexia treatments don't help dyslexic kids; it's that those treatments help all kids that struggle with literacy, regardless of cause.

Some kids struggling to read because they "don't have access to education" or are malnourished is as much (or more) of a problem than wealthy kids struggling to read because of a neurological condition.

The article says it all: Dyslexia is a label that is being used to divert special needs funding from disadvanted struggling kids to wealthy struggling kids. No-one denies that all these kids are struggling, and that the special attention does help them with that struggle.

[Someone]

“Dyslexia has more than 3 million cases in the US every year.”

If interpreted as “3 million _new_ cases every year, and dyslexia being incurable, with a life expectancy of 70 years, that would mean way over half the population of the USA would be dyslexic.

I seriously doubt that. So, what do you mean by “every year”?

[bjo590]

I typed "dyslexia" into Google, and on the side bar overview it says "More than 3 million US cases per year"

Edit: I dug a little deeper. It's 5-15% of the population. http://www.ldonline.org/article/10784/

[bluGill]

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]

> 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.

[mjevans]

Their point might be that the ability to read, has a non-zero influence on how intelligence as well knowledge; both of which are what IQ tests try to measure. The two signal values are related to an unknown degree.

[keithnoizu]

And it shouldn't really. Assuming dyslexia is the result of structural differences in how the brain operates and not simply that a person is behind the curve on reading ability.

If say dyslexia behind the scenes looked something like the difference between being left handed or right handed, a persons natural athletic skill (IQ) might improve their odds of throwing a good right handed pass yet regardless of athletic skill their outcomes would be better throwing left handed.

[agd]

It no longer has an IQ component. (This is described in the article).

[6gvONxR4sf7o]

But doesn't the article make the case that both of your example children need the same treatment?

[bluGill]

Exactly but some don't get it because they miss the dyslexic diagnosis even though the same treatment would help if they could get it.

[slg]

Personally getting diagnosed with dyslexia was a huge help to me. Like the article mentions it allows a mindset change when you can put a name to why you can't do something despite a tremendous amount of effort that other people can seemingly do easily. It also becomes a valuable tool to help protect yourself when needed. There were multiple times in my elementary and middle school years in which the ADA needed to be evocated on my behalf in defense against two specific bad teachers I had over those years. I wouldn't have gotten the accommodations and help I needed if the initial diagnose was just "slow to learn to read".

Side note, this was only possible because my parents knew the system, my mom was a teacher, and they had the resources and wherewithal to fight on my behalf. I can certainly see how not having that helps contribute to the inequality talked about in the article. I can also see how parents looking for any advantage for their child might abuse that system. However I don't think the potential for abuse warrants throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[Buge]

Instead of throwing out the benefits that you got from a dyslexia diagnosis, couldn't those benefits be also given to all students with with reading troubles? That's what the article is saying. I bet those bad teachers were also harmful to many other students with reading troubles.

[slg]

Yes and no. As both I and others have said elsewhere in this tread, with the broad definition of dyslexia "students with reading troubles" who will most benefit from extra instruction have dyslexia whether they are diagnosed or not. Getting those kids properly diagnosed is therefore a better strategy because that comes with added benefits that aren't directly related to teaching like the legal protections and the internal psychological benefits I mentioned and that were mentioned in the article. Without that diagnosis, it is easy for the child and the child's peers to view it as a problem with intelligence which can be damaging mentally.

[scotty79]

I've always had great difficulty with remembering things that are not associated with any sort of understanding I could acquire.

Remembering things like names of countries, capitals, seas, rivers for geography class required tremendous effort from me to achieve barely passable result (and to pass I also had to exploit an error that teacher made). All despite me having IQ in top 1% of population.

I'm sure if I was diagnosed with dysrememberia or something this would have been tremendous help to me. But nobody invented such condition. So I just had to accept that I'm just at low end of ability to remember data unconnected to any sense-making.

The system is rigged though and to pass maturity exam I had to ensure dysortography diagnosis for myself so my spelling (which I suck at as well) was ignored while grading.

[keithnoizu]

I was diagnosed, with dyslexia, dyscalculia and disgraphia, although for better or worse I also tested as profoundly gifted.

I think it boils down to, is there a structural difference in the brain that if studied can give insights into learning differences and optimal approaches to addressing learning differences and potential areas where a person with dyslexia or some underlying structural difference might have natural advantages. Such as the theory that dyslexics tend to think visual-spatially rather than lexically which could be advantageous for various engineering and business disciplines where being able to easily think about complex structures from different angles is beneficial.

Although the remedial approaches to addressing difficulties in reading may work equally well for individuals who experience difficulties for disparate causes, if there is in fact an opportunity to glean information on these types of fundamental difference in how the mind works that would likely pay dividends as the students progress into higher education and their careers.

[C1sc0cat]

I am dyslexic When I am writing sql queries other than trivial SELECTS, I visualise them and some times draw out the sets involved.

[keithnoizu]

I find i'm normally a little better at grasping how all of the components work together on large systems than others.

[ben509]

> Though I will note that the definition of Autism has gotten broader over time...

If dyslexia became broader in the manner Autism has, it would simply be going back to its Greek origin, which is already roughly "bad at reading."

[hrktb]

Bi-lingual kids can be in similar cases, especially when character sets are different. Some are fluent reader in one of the language, but have a hard time in the other, skipping or misreading characters as the parsing is completely different.

I talked to a school teacher trying to have a kid labeled as dyslexic because it would make everything easier to ask for extra time to follow the kid, get out of class hours with a specialist etc.

[C1sc0cat]

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