This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

I don't believe in dyslexia.

Bloxorus

...

(edited 8 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

benplumley

Original post by Bloxorus

I've always been skeptical as to whether deafness is a real condition.

If someone finds it hard to hear then why does that then have to become a condition? Surely it means nothing more than that they find it hard to hear.

See my point yet?

Reply 2

SmaugTheTerrible

Original post by Paralove

My best friend is dyslexic, and you are an *******.

Original post by Bloxorus

I've always been skeptical as to whether dyslexia is a 'real' condition.

If someone finds it hard to read and write then why does that then have to become a condition? Surely it means nothing more than that they find it hard to read and write.

I think it's just a middle class term which was created to cover up bad teaching.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I think it is a real condition but it isn't as prevalent as it's being made out to be with every Tom, Dick and Harry who finds it slightly harder to read and write being labelled as dyslexic these days.

Reply 3

pane123

You have just copied an article you read. These 'thoughts' of yours are in no way original and to present them as your own is shameful.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-458160/Dyslexia-just-middle-class-way-hide-stupidity.html

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 4

Dez

Original post by Bloxorus

I think you've rather missed the point entirely here. Yes, dyslexia means difficulty learning to read or write. A lot of people have this issue and it is nothing to do with teaching - the same teacher will generally teach 30 pupils, so why should only one or two of them have trouble? The point of identifying dyslexia is so that pupils who have it can get better teaching, and thus overcome the issue.

Reply 5

the mezzil

Original post by Bloxorus

I very much agree with you. Some people just can not read and write, it is not because they have a medical condition, it is because they are not very smart. (I don't agree it is always to do with the teachers, because if that was true the whole class would fail, not just 4 or 5 kids)

Middle class term for the middle class apologists.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 6

username878045

OP, have you ever looked at the evidence?

But anyway, here's what I think: dyslexia is an unhelpful term. It's not an easily classifiable condition - it's not caused by a single gene like Huntington's or Down's Syndrome, nor is it caused by a pathogen. Therefore, it seems sensible to assume that it is caused by a variety of genes. But in this way, it is not actually different from 'normal' behaviour. Almost all human traits, and certainly all human aspects of intelligence, are controlled by a large number of genes; hence why we can't isolate an 'intelligence gene', nor a 'dyslexia gene', or a set of multiple genes. If dyslexics as a group share no major similarity, nor an appreciable difference to non-dyslexics who are bad at reading, what is the use of the term?

Dyslexics are not a homogenous group, so why have one label, especially one that is distinct from 'bad readers'? It is merely because people feel better about themselves/their children/pupils when they have some sort of official label. If people are bad readers, the (incorrect) assumption is that something is wrong with them - they are lazy or stupid, for example - and it is their fault. Whereas a condition takes the blame away from them and gives them something they can blame it on.

Now this doesn't mean that people currently labelled as dyslexic don't deserve extra help. By all means they do, but just as much as any other struggling reader. We would be better off spending the time and money currently spent diagnosing/testing dyslexia on actually helping all struggling readers, regardless of whether they have a label or not.

^This line of argument is based on a similar one used in Asbury & Plomin's (2014) book 'G is for Genes'.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 7

Bloxorus

Original post by benplumley

Hearing is an ability we are born with, we don't need to learn how to do it so if you can't there is legitimately something wrong with you.

If someone finds sports difficult does that mean they have a condition? It might, but that fact alone should not be the definition of the condition. It just means that you aren't good at it.

Reply 8

natnalie

Original post by bloxorus

i've always been skeptical as to whether dyslexia is a 'real' condition.

If someone finds it hard to read and write then why does that then have to become a condition? Surely it means nothing more than that they find it hard to read and write.

I think it's just a middle class term which was created to cover up bad teaching.

posted from tsr mobile

this is literally the most stupid thing i have ever seen!

Reply 9

Nathanielle

Original post by Dez

The point of identifying dyslexia is so that pupils who have it can get better teaching, and thus overcome the issue.

No, a dayslexic would have trouble, no matter how good the teaching is. What they need is more and slower teaching in the areas of their weaknesses, that does not mean, they would show no signs with better teaching. A dyslexic will struggle more than a non-dyslexic, no matter how the teaching conditions are.

What you probably wanted to say, that they need different teaching methods and more teaching.

Reply 10

Bloxorus

Original post by Dez

The one or two have trouble because they are not as good as the rest! Some people are better at some things than others and that includes reading. Yes I agree they should be identified so they can get extra help but they should not be diagnosed with a condition because of it!
If someone finds maths difficult they should get extra help, but that does not mean they have something wrong with them, they're just not good at maths!!

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 11

benplumley

Original post by Bloxorus

Yeah, I agree to be honest. I've read about people losing the ability to read after head trauma, so I do believe it exists, but I think it's just being used as an excuse now for an inability/unwillingness to put the effort into learning. Kind of the same as what Americans seem to be doing by classifying obesity as a condition. I was just playing devil's advocate earlier :tongue:

Reply 12

Snagprophet

I don't believe in Down's Syndrome, or Cancer, or Siamese Twins.

Reply 13

Dez

Original post by Nathanielle

Yes, thanks for that tedious clarification.

Original post by Bloxorus

Right, so instead of "diagnosing as dyslexic", you'd rather we "identify people in need of extra help". You realise the difference here is entirely academic, right? The treatment is going to be exactly the same (i.e. more teaching), it's simply more convenient to give the pupil's condition a name. That is the entire point of the name's existence.

Original post by Bloxorus

If someone finds maths difficult they should get extra help, but that does not mean they have something wrong with them, they're just not good at maths!!

You're not going to be happy about this condition's definition then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyscalculia

Reply 14

username878045

Original post by Snagprophet

I don't believe in Down's Syndrome, or Cancer, or Siamese Twins.

Except they are different to dyslexia because they can be tested for beyond doubt (one by simply looking at them).

Reply 15

lizlaz350

Being dyslexic is more than just being 'stupid' or 'lazy'. Like, my brother was bad at reading for ages and it wasn't because he was dyslexic, he just wasn't very bright and with some extra help he caught up. Being dyslexic is different to that. I know people who are bright and hardworking who read loads but they still struggle with it and have had to find ways round the way their brain processes the words so that they can make sense of them. It's nothing to do with the fact that they're stupid because they're clearly not.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 16

Bloxorus

Original post by Dez

You're not going to be happy about this condition's definition then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyscalculia

So you're saying everyone who finds maths difficult has this? Last time I checked that was the majority of the general population.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 17

Old_Simon

Once schools started receiving additional funding for pupils with disabilities the growth in diagnoses was exponential. The second factor is that the same schools can exempt the pupil from various categories of statistics of academic "performance" for Ofsted purposes. I believe the condition exists but is often a smokescreen for stupidity and / or bad parenting / teaching.

Reply 18

ohhello92x

This has got to be the most stupidest post going!
Just because someone is dyslexic, doesn't mean their stupid! It doesn't necessary affect their IQ!

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 19

Bloxorus

Original post by ohhello92x

This has got to be the most stupidest post going!
Just because someone is dyslexic, doesn't mean their stupid! It doesn't necessary affect their IQ!

Posted from TSR Mobile