Current Issues in Schools for Identifying Students with Dyslexia

By Marianne Rice

Recent advocacy efforts have led to nearly every state in the United States passing legislation related to dyslexia identification or services in schools. When state legislation is passed, wide variation in the implementation of identification practices can result as local education agencies are often left to interpret these policies. Advocacy groups supporting dyslexia-specific legislation hoped these policies would address the under-identification of dyslexia in schools. However, separate policies for dyslexia screening and intervention have led to confusion about whether dyslexia is a specific learning disability that should be evaluated and served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Additionally, the lack of one clear definition for dyslexia among researchers and policy makers adds to the confusion.

While researchers and policy experts may be watching for these unintended consequences of dyslexia legislation, school personnel are left to make decisions about how to meet the requirements to identify students with dyslexia, screen for dyslexia risk, and provide interventions. So, what should school personnel know and consider in order to implement best practices now?

Use hybrid identification models that include responsiveness to intervention when evaluating a student for dyslexia.

Evaluate the accuracy of screening tools being used and how progress monitoring, or tracking improvement while providing intervention, can improve risk identification.
Examine how progress monitoring data is collected and used to make decisions in a response-to-intervention framework.

Key researchers in dyslexia identification recommend hybrid models with multiple components in evaluating students. Key components include low achievement in accurate or fluent word reading or spelling and poor response to effective intervention. Some researchers also recommend evaluating phonological processing, such as through decoding nonsense words, and considering the “unexpectedness” of dyslexia. Although consensus on how to consider “unexpectedness” is still lacking, suggestions have included comparing a student’s listening comprehension abilities compared to reading comprehension.

Screening for risk of dyslexia is also a key feature of many states’ dyslexia legislation. Identifying students at-risk early, such as in kindergarten, allows for intervention to be provided when it will be most effective. However, screening tools can vary widely in accuracy rates and may over- or under-identify students as being at-risk. Much like for identification, screening tools should have multiple components and may need to incorporate progress monitoring data to improve accuracy. Studies have found the use of progress monitoring data over as little as 5 weeks have increased accuracy in screening decisions.

Given that progress monitoring data are important in both screening for and identifying dyslexia, school personnel should examine how these data are collected and used to make decisions about students. A recent survey found nearly half, or 48%, of teachers reported that they did not collect or use progress monitoring data. Progress monitoring and screening tools need to be carefully selected to ensure assessments provide adequate accuracy and can be administered efficiently. Schools will also need to consider how to make decisions about students and interventions based on the data collected.

Although schools face challenges related to current issues surrounding dyslexia-specific state legislation, these issues can be addressed by considering hybrid identification models, improving screening practices, and using data to drive intervention decisions. More information on these issues in schools can be found in our article “Dyslexia Identification: Tackling Current Issues in Schools” in Intervention in School and Clinic.

READ THE ARTICLE

Article Details
Dyslexia Identification: Tackling Current Issues in Schools
Marianne Rice, MEd and Carly B. Gilson, PhD
First Published March 3, 2022
DOI: 10.1177/10534512221081278
Intervention in School and Clinic

About the Author

Featured

Marianne Rice is currently a doctoral student in the Department of Educational Psychology at Texas A&M University. She holds a bachelor’s degree in early childhood education from Vanderbilt University and a master’s degree in literacy development from the University of Texas at Austin. She has over 10 years of experience in public education as an elementary teacher, reading interventionist, and community college instructor. Her research focuses on the early identification and intervention for students with reading difficulties and disabilities, as well as how to identify and support students with dyslexia. Twitter: @marianne_rice21.