Education for learners with dyslexia · EDUCATION FOR LEARNERS WITH DYSLEXIA iv. FOREWORD I am on record as saying that the most effective schools are those which value each child

Education for learners withdyslexia

Education for learners withdyslexia

EDUCATION FOR LEARNERS WITH DYSLEXIA

ii

© Crown copyright 2008

ISBN: 978-0-7053-1148-9

HM Inspectorate of EducationDenholm HouseAlmondvale Business ParkAlmondvale WayLivingstonEH54 6GA

Tel: 01506 600 200Fax: 01506 600 337Email: [email protected]

Produced for HMIE by RR Donnelley B57055 10/08

Published by HMIE, October, 2008

This material may be copied without further permission by education authoritiesand education institutions in Scotland for use in school self-evaluation and planning.

The report may be produced in part, except for commercial purposes, or in connectionwith a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.

CONTENTS

Page

Foreword v

1. Background 1

2. The range and quality of learning and teaching approaches used to support learners 3with dyslexia

3. Meeting learning needs 7

4. Partnership with parents, children and young people 11

5. Staff training, review and development 14

6. Planning to meet the needs of children with dyslexia in schools 17

7. Leadership and quality assurance 19

8. An overview of provision for students in Scotland’s colleges 21

9. Issues arising from discussions with teacher education universities 24

10. The way ahead 27

Appendix 1: Acknowledgements 28

Appendix 2: References and sources of support 29

iii

CONTENTS


iv

FOREWORD

I am on record as saying that the most effectiveschools are those which value each child as anindividual. Meeting the needs of every learner is thekey purpose of any educational organisation,whether it is an early years centre, a school, aservice providing outreach provision for pupils in arange of settings or a strategic service such as aneducation authority. The approaches taken tosupport learning in effective classrooms are also theapproaches needed to support children withdyslexia.

In our Count Us In report, HMIE explored theoverarching ideas involved in inclusive education.We carried that thinking forward when wedeveloped The Journey to Excellence and embeddedit in the quality indicators in the third edition ofHow good is our school?. Recently, and in thecontext of inclusion, we have examined a series ofchallenges facing Scottish Education, includingautism spectrum disorders, dealing with youngpeople in danger of missing out on chances andchoices in education, deaf children andanti-sectarianism. This report tackles a similarlydifficult challenge facing Scottish education –providing the best help we can to young peoplewith dyslexia.

A worldwide debate continues around what wedescribe as ‘dyslexia’ – its original meaning is‘difficulty with words’ – and which encompasseslearning difficulties related to literacy and languageskills. The debate revolves around, among otheraspects, an agreed definition of dyslexia. In mostpractice in Scotland a medical model, where thereis a diagnosis and a prognosis that assumes youngpeople with dyslexia need different strategies fromother learners in relation to literacy and languageacquisition, has been replaced by a widerperspective. Dyslexia is now seen widely as part of a

continuum of needs that relate to approaches todeveloping language and literacy skills. It does notalways come unaccompanied. Learners often face arange of other challenges to various degrees ofseverity. A further perspective comes from theOrganisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment (OECD)1 which suggests that dyslexiadoes not exist to the same extent in every culture,language and education system.

As with a range of other additional learning needs,the key is to assess accurately the communicationdifficulties being experienced and to find whatworks for each learner. In the case of dyslexia, thisinvolves a deep understanding of how youngpeople learn to read and the skilled interactiveteaching of phonics and language developmentand processing skills. In turn this has implicationsfor staff development, ‘recovery’ programmes forlearners and a clarification of the set of skillsrequired to attain fluency in reading. To thatextent, Curriculum for Excellence provides theopportunity to develop a new emphasis on theacquisition of literacy skills, in a thinking andproblem solving approach to inclusion and successfor all. Such an approach strengthens the role ofteachers’ knowledge and professional developmentto ensure better outcomes for all learners.

It is not the purpose of this report to settle a longrunning and global debate, but rather to take apragmatic look at the services provided byeducation authorities and schools for learners withliteracy and language skills difficulties. In the report,we use the term ‘dyslexia’ throughout to conveydifficulties which affect literacy and languagerelated skills that some authorities overtly call‘dyslexia’ and others deal with through a wideapproach to meeting pupils’ learning needs andstaged interventions.

v

FOREWORD

1 Understanding the Brain: The Birth of a Learning Science (P91), OECD, 2007.

The report has surveyed the views of children,parents, schools and authorities. A mixed picturehas emerged in which, sometimes due to thestance being taken and the varied level of skills inschools and authorities, not all young people werehaving their learning needs addressed sufficientlyrigorously and some authorities were not able totake an evidence-based and well-informed strategicoverview. At the same time we have someoutstanding practice on which to build. It is nowfor the profession to ensure that language skills andliteracy acquisition are optimised for everyone. Ouraim is to maximise the potential of every learnerand to meet the learning needs of every youngperson.

As part of this task, HMIE has identified goodpractice and made recommendations for movingforward. I commend this report to you as animportant contribution to our understanding ofdyslexia and the extent to which the needs ofpupils with literacy and language skills difficultiesare currently being met.


vi

BACKGROUND

1. BACKGROUND

Over the period 2007-2008, HM Inspectorate ofEducation (HMIE) undertook a broad evaluation ofprovision for children, young people and adultswith dyslexia in Scotland. The investigationidentified the range and quality of provision inScotland across all sectors. Inspectors visited anumber of pre-school centres, primary, secondary,independent and special schools, Scotland’scolleges and faculties of education in Scottishuniversities. In addition, the work of HMIE wasinformed by a literature review of currentapproaches to the provision of education forchildren with dyslexia2 and other recent researchcarried out by Scottish Government, universities,education authorities and voluntary agencies. HMIEalso drew on a survey of provision in Scottish localauthorities and the views of voluntary agencies,teachers, parents, children and young people. Thescope of this task was informed by a nationaladvisory group which included parents, teachers,members of the voluntary sector, educationalpsychologists, and Scottish Qualifications Authority(SQA), local authority, college and universityrepresentatives.

In recent years, a recurrent theme in the media hasbeen concern expressed by learners and theirfamilies about the readiness of schools and localauthorities to respond to and meet the needs ofchildren, young people and adults with dyslexia.Diverse views have been presented about whatexactly dyslexia is, its origin, methods of identifyingand assessing it and appropriate interventions.

Significantly, the majority of local authorities usedthe British Psychological Society’s view of dyslexia.

Dyslexia is evident when accurate and fluentword reading and/or spelling develops veryincompletely or with great difficulty. This focuseson literacy learning at the word level and impliesthat the problem is severe and persistent despiteappropriate learning opportunities. It providesthe basis for a staged process of assessmentthrough teaching.3

This view recognises that children with dyslexia candemonstrate marked differences in terms of theircompetence in different areas, particularly in regardto oral versus text-based skills. Many authoritiesadopted this view because they thought it did notrely on a particular profile of cognitive skills andwas broadly inclusive. Another key feature of thisview is its focus on persistent problems in learningto read, write and spell, on a continuum from verymild to severe, the level of intervention dependingon the degree to which learning is impaired. Thisview also articulated well with authorities’ stagedintervention processes of assessment.

A few authorities reported forcibly that the mosteffective approach to dyslexia was to guide staff inthe assessment and identification of needs ratherthan to identify dyslexia as a means of accessingresources, support and provision. A small numberdid not hold to a specific view and were concernedabout linking resources to the categorisation of adisability. Others rejected any approach whichappeared to isolate one particular disability asunhelpful, citing that many children experiencedassociated difficulties.

To assist in identifying schools where good practiceinitiatives in the field of dyslexia featured, HMIEcarried out a detailed survey of all educationauthorities in Scotland.

The key issues raised in the survey of educationauthorities included:

• the views held and description of dyslexia usedby authorities;

• the range of provision including earlyintervention schemes, specialist units andresources and specialist teachers;

• teaching approaches, programmes andtechnological support used across the authority;

• opportunities for staff to undertake training andprofessional development related to dyslexia andthe number of teaching staff with specialistqualifications;

1

2 Literature Review of Current Approaches to the Provision of Education for Children with Dyslexia, Dely L Elliott, Julia K Davidson and Jon Lewin,HM Inspectorate of Education, May 2007.

3 British Psychological Society, Division of Educational and Child Psychology Working party Report, 1999.

• research into the effectiveness of the authority’sapproaches to meet the needs of learners withdyslexia; and

• effective practice in meeting the needs ofchildren and young people with dyslexia.

Provision across authorities varied. Some haddeveloped whole-authority and whole-schoolapproaches to addressing dyslexia, includingaccredited approaches. Nevertheless, good practiceexisted in many schools which had adoptedalternative or non-accredited approaches.

The aim of this report is to help schools, collegesand universities to take forward improvements bydescribing good and improving practice inaddressing the needs of learners with dyslexia.Research suggests4 that when learners are givenappropriate support, this can make a positivedifference to their emotional and learningdevelopment as well as their overall achievement.This report highlights the most effective forms ofsupport for learners in Scottish schools and collegesand provides signposts for improvement. It alsodescribes the key strengths and areas fordevelopment.

Description of evaluative terms used in thisreportThe following words are used to describe numbersand proportions throughout the report:

almost all over 90%

most 75-90%

majority 50-74%

less than half 15-49%

few up to 15%


2

4 ‘Journal of Educational Psychology’, 88(4) pp601-638. Vellutino F. (1996).

THE RANGE AND QUALITY OF LEARNING AND TEACHING APPROACHES USED TO SUPPORT LEARNERS WITH DYSLEXIA

2. THE RANGE AND QUALITY OF LEARNING AND TEACHING APPROACHESUSED TO SUPPORT LEARNERS WITH DYSLEXIA

• Programmes to support pupils’ learning.

• Pupils’ progress and attainment.

• Quality of pupils’ learning experiences.

The range and quality of learning and teachingapproaches used to support learners with dyslexiawere appropriate in the majority of schools andvery effective in a few. Where teachers and supportfor learning staff had specialist qualifications ortraining, the quality of learning and teaching wasoften high and children with dyslexia were morelikely to be identified at an earlier stage, andappropriate learning and teaching strategies andresources put in place promptly. In some of theseschools, practice was innovative, making full use ofthe wider learning environment of the school andits community. Parents and pupils in these schoolswere confident that such approaches had helpedpupils to make progress and pupils had positivelearning experiences.

A few authorities offered specialist facilities forchildren with dyslexia, such as a language centre orliteracy base. Almost all such facilities offered directsupport to young people for part of the week andoutreach support at a mainstream primary school.Specialist centres or bases were sometimes difficultto access and most were for pupils at the primarystages only. A few authorities had recently takenpart in a transition programme5 to prepare P7pupils with dyslexia for secondary school, someinvolving parents. These programmes were helpfulin addressing issues related to self-esteem andpreparing children for their new setting. Otherservices included systems for tracking pupils’

progress, and mentoring for teachers by an advisoron dyslexia. Around half of authorities offered nospecialist facilities, although children with dyslexiawere often supported effectively by educationalpsychologists, learning assistants or networksupport staff. Eight authorities had specialistteachers, centrally deployed teachers or educationofficers whose main focus was on dyslexia. Mostauthorities reported that specialist teachers wereeffective but limited in number.

Most authorities considered that the key features ofeffective learning and teaching for children andyoung people with dyslexia should bemulti-sensory, well structured and interactive andthat they should raise self-esteem and be relevantand meaningful. Pupils responded well to self-helpstrategies when these were offered, for example,voice-activated computer programs and mindmapping. Many pupils felt that these strategiesencouraged independence.

The majority had adopted a range of approacheswhich reflected a shared understanding of the wayyoung people learn. Learning and teachingapproaches often comprised:

• metacognitive approaches6

• small group and one-to-one teaching

• reciprocal teaching7

• scaffolding8

• reading recovery9

• synthetic phonics

• structured phonics programmes10

3

5 The Dyslexia at Transition Project Team consisted of staff from Edinburgh, Strathclyde and Aberdeen Universities and education authorities. The team workedwith school staff, parents and pupils to produce a DVD and support pack ‘Dyslexia at Transition’. The DVD, commissioned by the (then) Scottish Executive,was launched in 2007 and provides examples of best practice to help schools to support the move of pupils with dyslexia from primary to secondary school

6 In his book, ‘Metacognition’, (1976), Flavell J refers to ‘metacognition’ (P323) as developing ‘knowledge of one’s own cognitive processes’. When applied ineducation, it is a method which develops and encourages learners to understand better and control their own learning.

7 Reciprocal teaching is a method in which a teacher and learner alternate roles. It involves developing learners’ skills in predicting, questioning, summarisingand clarifying.

8 Scaffolding approaches include ‘help sheets’ used to assist learners who experience difficulty in developing their ideas in writing. ‘Help sheets’ usually providelearners with a framework for writing which includes prompts in the form of sentences or phrases and vocabulary which help learners to develop their ideasin writing.

9 Reading recovery is an intensive reading programme that aims to help children experiencing reading difficulties to catch up with their peers. Developed byNew Zealand educationalist, Dr Marie Clay (1970), it focuses on the development of phonological awareness and using contextual information to assistreading.

10 Structured phonics programmes develop incrementally, learners’ understanding of the relationship between the letters and the letter sound in the Englishlanguage.

• paired reading with peers

• paired reading with parents

• differentiation

• multi-sensory teaching11

• preferred learning styles

• support for learning as an option choice atsecondary school

• intensive support for early literacy.

The best practices developed for pupils withdyslexia were adopted in some authorities for alllearners. For example, learners found that thedisplay of visual prompts was helpful. One exampleof an inclusive project involved blocks ofmulti-sensory teaching which proved successful inraising the attainment of all pupils.

Almost all authorities were able to describe a verywide range of multi-sensory resources used tosupport learning. However, sometimes within thesame school cluster, staff used a range ofassessment tools and teachers varied significantly intheir awareness and use of information andcommunication technology (ICT) to supportlearners. In a few authorities, a specialist ICTsupport teacher made specific recommendationsfor support for pupils with dyslexia. Theserecommendations frequently included the use ofvoice-activated software, dictaphones and wordprocessors. The sensory impairment support teamin one authority was exploring the use of theDAISY12 system.

Some authorities reported that Irlen’s13 approacheshad helped individual pupils to make progress intheir learning using coloured filters to help pupils toovercome a range of difficulties including attention,perception, light sensitivity and reading andwriting.

The quality of learning and teachingapproaches in pre-school centresOver a third of authorities identified earlyintervention schemes in pre-school provision as ameans of ensuring that concerns about children’sdevelopment would be addressed at an early stage.The best of these schemes focused on developingfoundations of literacy and building children’slanguage skills and self-confidence. Teachers inthese centres used a range of teaching approaches,focusing on integrating language and the visualand motor components of reading, spelling andwriting. Almost all nursery teachers felt that amulti-sensory learning and teaching approachfocusing on phonological awareness was mosteffective in developing children’s pre-literacy skills.In almost all centres, children with additionalsupport needs had individualised educationalprogrammes (IEPs). Increasingly, effective systemsensured that one member of staff knew a child welland took responsibility for individual planning. Inthe case of children with more complex needs, akey worker provided a consistent link with agenciesand families.

The quality of learning and teachingapproaches in primary schools.Almost all primary schools used multi-sensoryreading schemes14. Specialist teachers commentedon the positive impact of these schemes on pupils’reading. Most schools selected approaches from arange of strategies including:

• touch typing

• paired reading with an older reading partner

• scribing

• laptop computers and Alphasmarts

• phonics programmes.


4

11 Multi-sensory teaching programmes use the senses including visual, auditory and concrete clues to assist learners to understand the meaning of words andovercome reading and writing difficulties. They provide memory hooks for pupils to remember the sound or shape of words, for reading, or spelling.

12 The DAISY (Digital Accessible Information System) is an open, international standard for accessible multimedia. The DAISY Consortium was set up inSwitzerland by leading not-for-profit organisations from around the world serving blind and dyslexic people in order to develop and maintain the standard.

13 Helen Irlen’s method has been used for over 25 years to identify and help people with a type of processing problem called Irlen Syndrome, formerly knownas Scotopic Sensitivity Syndrome (SSS). Irlen Syndrome is described as a problem with the brain’s ability to process visual information. This problem tends torun in families and is not currently identified by other tests.

14 The most common multi-sensory reading scheme generally used in the upper primary school and secondary schools builds up children’s word attack skills invery small steps for short but regular periods using initial letter blends, visual cues and blending of chunks of words.

THE RANGE AND QUALITY OF LEARNING AND TEACHING APPROACHES USED TO SUPPORT LEARNERS WITH DYSLEXIA

A few primary schools had developed successfultransition groups which engaged learners inconfidence-building activities, role play, self-helpstrategies and sharing of experiences. The mostinnovative schools provided a multi-sensorylearning environment with a range of prompts toassist pupils’ learning. Such prompts included dailyplanners or visual timetables of activities displayedon walls, attention to class layout to minimisedistraction, seating plans, visual menus atlunchtime, cue cards to prompt pupils’ responses,traffic light systems for pupils to let teachers knowwhen they were experiencing difficulty, andconcrete and tactile material and objects ofreference. There were good examples ofpartnership working between schools and specialistsupport staff within authorities to jointly deliveractive literacy programmes. These involved usinglanguage in real-life contexts.

Supporting transitionsIn one council, the Literacy Support service has akey role in supporting pupils with literacy difficultiesin making the transition to secondary school. Pupilsand parents feel well supported at a crucial timeand the secondary schools value the liaison.

In an increasing number of primary schools, stafftook account of the range of difficulties associatedwith dyslexia by introducing fine motor skillsprogrammes to improve co-ordination, andself-help strategies to encourage independence.Although parents welcomed these approaches andfelt they had helped their children to makeprogress, a few were critical of delays in accessingsuch programmes and wanted them to beintroduced at an earlier stage in the primary school.ICT was not well integrated into programmes ofsupport and generally featured as an ‘add on’ tothe curriculum. All pupils benefited fromwell-planned literacy programmes that developedphonological awareness including letter and wordrecognition, motor control and co-ordination andcommunication skills including speech formation.

Programmes and resourcesIn one council, a network audit identified effectivecombinations of programmes and resources whichhave been very successful for a number of pupilsacross the authority. The direct input from thenetwork specialist teachers and the supportassistant has been very effective. Schools continuedprogrammes set up by the specialist teachers andpurchased resources to support these programmes.The success of this approach was evident in pre-and post-assessment results and in progress inmeeting targets outlined in IEPs.

The quality of learning and teachingapproaches in secondary schools.Almost all secondary schools, includingindependent schools, used a range of learning andteaching approaches which included multi-sensoryreading programmes, paired reading for pupils inthe lower stages, after-school study classes andlunchtime clubs. The frequency and regularity ofthese activities varied from daily to weeklydepending on the staff available. Although supportfor learning staff often shared and modelled helpfullearning and teaching strategies, which includedsubject-specific word lists and the use ofmnemonics and differentiated resources andworksheets, the overall implementation of suchapproaches by teachers across schools was weak.Pupils expressed concern about inconsistency intheir use across classes. Pupils’ learning experiencesvaried significantly. A majority felt that extractiondisrupted their progress. Some phonic programmeswere not age-appropriate. In most schools, teachershad limited expertise in dealing with dyslexia andwere not aware of other difficulties whichco-occurred with dyslexia, including auditory,co-ordination and sequencing difficulties.

In most schools, including independent schools,learning and teaching focused too heavily ontextbooks and activities on reading and writing. ICTwas not readily accessible within the classroom orsufficiently integrated into pupils’ learning

5

experiences. One independent school haddeveloped a helpful system where pupils had ateacher who knew them well and took a specialinterest in their learning and progress. Schoollibrarians often provided effective support for pupilsthrough literacy and reading groups held atlunchtimes.

Multi-disciplinary workingIn one council, support for learning teams in threesecondary schools are working with speech andlanguage therapists to produce a resource forschools called ‘Speaking Up for Scotland’. Theapproaches used in the project have benefited allchildren with difficulties in literacy and provide avery good example of partnership working to meetthe needs of pupils with dyslexia.

The range and quality of learning and teachingapproaches in special schools includingresidential special schools and secure careaccommodationMost day special schools offered a helpful range ofsupportive strategies across the curriculum whichbenefited all learners. The use of alternativecommunication strategies using pictures, symbols,photographs and objects of reference created atotal communication environment. Children withdyslexia in these schools also often had complexlearning difficulties. Most schools had good linkswith speech and language therapists whosometimes worked in partnership with staff tomodel good practice and advise on appropriateresources such as tactile material, including sand, topractise letter formation. The strong focus on lifeskills and personal and social development ensuredthat pupils had good opportunities to useappropriate language and communication in ameaningful context. The majority of special schoolstook good account of pupils’ preferred learningstyles. In specialist language units and centres, staffoffered an imaginative range of approaches tolearning and teaching, including very effective useof interactive whiteboards, audio resources andpersonalised dictionaries.

The experience and qualifications of staff in allresidential special schools and secure care servicesstrongly influenced the quality and range ofteaching and learning experiences. Most offered ahelpful and appropriate focus on developing pupils’life skills linked to literacy, numeracy and widerachievements. However, many young people,particularly in schools and units for those withsocial, emotional and behavioural difficulties, hadexperienced gaps in their education. In mostservices, there was no information about whetheryoung people who were due to leave residentialcare had access to continuing support and to adultliteracy schemes.

Key strengths• Innovative use of the school environment to

support learning experiences in a few schools.

• Partnership working with speech and languagetherapists and specialist support staff modellinggood practice and advising on appropriateresources.

• The strong focus on life skills and personal andsocial development in special schools and unitswhich ensured that pupils had goodopportunities to use appropriate language andcommunication in real-life contexts.

Areas for development• Teachers’ knowledge of appropriate learning and

teaching approaches for children and youngpeople with dyslexia.

• Consistency of teachers’ use of appropriatelearning and teaching strategies, particularly insecondary schools.

• Use of ICT to support pupils’ learningexperiences.

• Access to adult literacy schemes for youngpeople leaving school care accommodationservices.


6

MEETING LEARNING NEEDS

3. MEETING LEARNING NEEDS

• Effectiveness of approaches to identification.

• Range and effectiveness of assessment.

• Effectiveness in matching tasks and activities toindividual pupils.

It was difficult to establish the extent of expertise,experience, staff development and specialistqualifications among teachers across Scotland fromthe information provided by authorities. A third ofauthorities were unable to provide any informationabout how many teachers had gained specialistqualifications in dyslexia between 2003 and 2007.Only one was able to provide a breakdown of staffwith specialist qualifications in each sector for thisperiod. Of the remainder, numbers variedsignificantly, ranging from individual authoritieshaving between zero and twenty teachers in 2007.A few authorities provided information about smallnumbers of teachers who had undertakenpost-graduate certificates or diplomas in support forlearning but were unsure whether this included anymodules on supporting dyslexia. Around a fifth hadrecorded approximately one or two teachersundertaking accredited courses per year.

Almost all authorities had detailed informationabout the attendance of teachers and support forlearning assistants at in-house courses with a focuson dyslexia. In a few larger authorities, numbersaccessing training were regularly 200 or more peryear. Where an authority had specialist resources orcentres with specialist staff who delivered outreachtraining and support, the number of teachersaccessing specific staff development wasconsiderably higher. Almost all authorities provideda range of training on dyslexia for support forlearning assistants within the authority, oftendelivered by educational psychologists.

Only a small number of authorities held specificinformation about the number of children andyoung people with dyslexia for whom theycurrently provided support. Some authoritiesquestioned the need for collecting such informationwithin an inclusive system which does notcategorise children. However, where suchinformation was collated, it assisted authorities to

plan more effectively to meet learners’ needs withintheir staged intervention processes. Thoseauthorities which did not hold such informationacknowledged that some children needed specialistsupport to acquire and maintain functional literacyskills and made provision within their stagedintervention processes for supporting pupils whoneeded it.

In Gaelic medium settings, pupils with literacydifficulties may experience additional challengeswhen they begin to study English. The Gaeliccommunity was taking positive steps within anational facility to develop and share resourcesdesigned specifically for pupils in Gaelic mediumsettings who experience difficulties with literacy.

Meeting children’s learning needs inpre-school centresOver a third of authorities identified earlyintervention schemes in pre-school provision as ameans of ensuring that concerns about children’sdevelopment would be tackled before they becameproblematic. The best practices emphasised theimportance of developing foundations of literacyand building children’s language skills andself-confidence. These practices used a range ofteaching approaches, focusing on integratinglanguage and the visual and motor components ofreading, spelling and writing. The majority ofauthorities agreed that children who showed signsof difficulty in learning to read or spell needed tobe assessed as early as possible. In the bestpractices, as soon as children were identified, theaccuracy and fluency of their phonics skills wereassessed. Any weaknesses or lack of fluency werethen addressed using a variety of age-appropriatematerials. A few authorities treated earlyintervention as a front-line educational strategy inaddressing dyslexia. Much work had been done bypsychologists and others in a few authorities todevelop such approaches. However, almost all werereluctant to categorise communication difficultiesformally as dyslexia at the pre-five and earlyprimary school stages, instead assisting children toovercome developmental immaturities.

7

Although no centres specifically focused ondyslexia, in the best practice they implemented anauthority drive on literacy. Many of these centresdeployed an early intervention teacher who focusedon supporting groups or providing individualsupport in play contexts for children experiencingdifficulty with language, early literacy andcommunication. Group work focused onphonological awareness, syllables, rhyming andawareness of print. Along with centre staff, theearly intervention teachers compiled a transitiondocument for each primary school containingdetailed information on each child’s competency inliteracy, alerting primary staff to any concerns.Primary schools found this very helpful in assistingthem to meet all children’s needs. Many pre-schoolcentres which did not have early interventionteachers were also providing children with similarlyeffective learning experiences.

Early interventionAs part of its early intervention researchprogramme one council carries out an annual,baseline assessment at the pre-school, primary 1and 2 stages. The results of a research programmeclearly demonstrate the impact of the literacyapproaches being undertaken at the early stages.The authority also studies the impact of itsprogrammes at transition stages between primaryand secondary schools to ensure continuousprogress and impact on pupils’ learning.

Meeting pupils’ learning needs in primaryschoolsIn most primary schools, staff preferred to identifychildren’s learning needs through assessmentslinked directly to programmes which built on pupilsexisting skills. These assessments provided a startingpoint, appropriate resources and a helpful means ofmonitoring and recording pupils’ progress. Progress

would then be linked to IEP targets. Pupilsbenefited from early identification of potentiallanguage development problems and access to anindividual programme with therapists. Whereprimary schools had teachers with additionalqualifications, parents reported a difference inchildren’s confidence in using self-help strategies. Afew class teachers in ‘dyslexia-friendly’15 schoolswere skilled in differentiating tasks to meet learners’needs. In most schools, detailed information aboutpupils’ needs was effectively transferred tosecondary schools to ensure continuity of support.Many staff felt that transition arrangements hadsignificantly improved. The best practices identifieda range of opportunities to build children’sself-confidence. Almost all pupils made goodprogress when they and their parents were directlyinvolved in setting appropriate, specific andmeasurable targets within IEPs. Pupils with dyslexiaalso benefited where schools employed ongoingliteracy profiles to track pupils’ progress.

Information about pupils’ learning needs was notalways consistently or effectively passed on to allteachers. Many pupils were uncomfortable aboutexplaining their difficulties to new or supplyteachers. The provision of alternative assessmentarrangements such as the use of ICT and readersand scribes in primary schools was inconsistent.Few parents and children were aware of the rangeof alternative forms of assessment. In Gaelicschools, early identification of pupils with dyslexiawas a challenge as there were few Gaelic-speakingpsychologists. Reading and writing in Gaelic startsat P1 and P2 and pupils begin to write in English ataround P3 or P4. Pupils begin reading and writingEnglish when they are competent in reading Gaelic.An advisory group with representations fromeducation authorities had identified this issue andwas looking at appropriate strategies andresources.16


8

15 Independent consultants have been running the Dyslexia-Friendly Schools Award Programme since 2002. Becoming a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ school requires aschool to put in place changes to allow the early identification and assessment of children with dyslexia, and to put in place appropriate support processesfor them. These changes are also intended to promote a change in culture within the school which leads to inclusion and understanding, not just of childrenwith dyslexia, but of children with a range of additional support needs.

16 Storlann is a national resource centre with representations from education authorities which makes decisions about appropriate resources and strategies formeeting Gaelic learners’ needs.

MEETING LEARNING NEEDS

Screening and assessmentIn one council, pre-school screening for signs oflearning difficulties including dyslexia has beeneffective in identifying and addressing the learningneeds of children at an early stage. All NurseryCo-ordinator Teachers have had training andoversee the screening in all pre-school centres.There is an emphasis at this stage on pre-emptinglater difficulties, and not labelling childrenprematurely.

In another council, a phonological awarenessscreening initiative enables teachers of P1 classesto identify children who are at risk of literacydifficulties and provide them with effective support.Teachers are expected to monitor the progress ofthese pupils rigorously and provide them withcurricular support on a class or small group basisusing play.

In a third council, a multi-disciplinary consultativeapproach to the assessment and identification ofdyslexia is being piloted within some of its learningcommunities with positive results.

Meeting pupils’ learning needs in secondaryschoolsIn almost all secondary schools, support for learningstaff were skilled at matching tasks to pupils’learning needs. Most programmes for individualsand groups were of a good standard and pupils feltthat they were making progress. Almost all supportfor learning and visiting specialist staff were familiarwith alternative assessment arrangements. Themajority of staff felt that SQA results for thosepupils with dyslexia had improved and theyperformed better than pupils had done in the past.In a few schools, including independent schools,senior pupils acted as peer tutors for younger pupilsin subject classes. Teachers reported animprovement in the performance of pupils

receiving such support. Pupils’ IEP targets werebased on an holistic assessment and most schoolshad in place effective systems of referral. Schoolshad a range of assessment material to assist supportfor learning staff to identify learning needs. Transferof information from primary to secondary aboutchildren with additional support needs, includingthose with dyslexia, was usually timeous andallowed support for learning staff to passinformation to subject teachers prior to pupils’arrival in the school. The involvement ofpsychological services in transitional planning hadimproved outcomes for pupils including those withdyslexia. However, not all teachers made sufficientuse of this information to guide their teaching andplanning to meet pupils’ needs. A particularly goodexample of practice involved close monitoring andtracking of the progress of learners with dyslexia.Schools arranged conferences for pupils to identifyinconsistencies across the school and share theirexperiences of effective practices. Classwork andhomework were seldom differentiated effectively inmost schools. In addition, few secondary subjectteachers had sufficient awareness of accessibilitylegislation and their responsibilities within thislegislation to support pupils to access thecurriculum.17 Often, pupils had an understandingof their own difficulties which enabled them to askteachers for appropriate support. Senior pupils withdyslexia benefited from links with CareersScotland’s ACTIVATE18 programme.

In independent primary and secondary schools,support for learning staff targeted learners’ needsthrough small group teaching, usually byextraction. Examination arrangements were welldeveloped in independent secondary schools butdifferentiation of tasks to meet learners’ needswithin subject classes was patchy. A few schoolshad published assessment materials and resources.In the best practices, most staff recognised that thelearning and teaching strategies adapted for pupils

9

17 The Education (Disabilities and Pupils Educational Records) (Scotland) Act 2002, requires education authorities and independent schools (as responsiblebodies) to ensure that teachers provide access to the curriculum, the physical environment of the school and school information. Responsible bodies are alsoobliged to produce a plan setting out targets for improving access in consultation with stakeholders. The plan is revised on a three year basis.

18 ACTIVATE is an experiential careers education programme delivered by Careers Scotland Advisers to support young people with additional support needs.

with dyslexia were the same approaches thatworked for all pupils. These schools made veryeffective use of multi-sensory teaching in bothprimary and secondary school departments. In oneindependent school, pupils benefited from accessto a range of therapists including an orthoptist19,an auditory therapist20 and a movement therapist.

Meeting pupils’ learning needs in specialschools including residential special schoolsand secure care accommodationIn day special and residential special schools, staffprovided considerable individual support to meetlearners’ needs. Although a few residential specialschools were improving approaches to meetinglearners’ needs across care and education, suchjoint approaches were often at an early stage ofdevelopment. In secure care services, children wereusually assessed on arrival, for example, beforemoving on to an allocated class. In the bestpractices, day special and residential special schoolsoffered a range of therapeutic interventionsincluding emotional literacy programmes21. Staffreported that these therapeutic interventions had apositive effect on learning outcomes for youngpeople. However, only a few schools had goodaccess to these. In language centres and specialistunits, staff offered a highly structured curriculumframework emphasising core phonics, sharedlearning intentions, imaginative language prompts,visual prompts, ICT and interactive activities andoral learning. Although learners’ needs weregenerally well met by these specialist centres,partner schools varied in their response to outreachsupport.

Use of ICT to support learningSince 2003-2004, the support service in onecouncil has promoted a substantial investment insupport software across the council. This inclusiveapproach resulted in the council being one of thefirst authorities to make specific softwareapplications readily available to all pupils,particularly those with dyslexia. Currently oneparticular application is being provided to allprimary schools.

Key strengths• Positive steps being taken to exploit the work of

a national Gaelic resource centre to develop andshare resources designed specifically for Gaelicmedium pupils with dyslexia.

• The quality of assessments when linked directlyto programmes of study

• The impact on pupils’ attainments of access toappropriate SQA alternative assessmentarrangements.

• The role of assessment classes in residentialspecial schools in identifying and meetinglearners’ needs.

Areas for development• Awareness among teachers of accessibility

legislation and their role within that legislation.

• The limited range of therapeutic interventions tosupport learners’ needs.

• The information held centrally in authoritiesabout staff qualifications and continuingprofessional development.


10

19 An orthoptist investigates, and addresses weaknesses of binocular vision and eye movement.20 An auditory therapist teaches a child to develop hearing as a more active sense.21 Emotional literacy programmes and Reasoning and Reacting take a rounded view of the learner and focus on building confidence and self-esteem.

PARTNERSHIP WITH PARENTS, CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE

4. PARTNERSHIP WITH PARENTS, CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE

• Encouragement given to parents to be involvedin their children’s learning.

• Procedures for communicating with parents.

• Information to parents about the school’s workincluding training.

• Encouragement given to children and youngpeople to be involved in and to make choicesabout their own learning.

Almost all parents were invited to attend reviews oftheir children’s progress and contribute to theirtargets set within IEPs. The quality of information toparents varied with some information provided onlocal authority websites and most through leafletsand policies which were available to parents onrequest. However, very few parents or pupils weresufficiently informed about the educationauthority’s or school’s policy related to dyslexia.Similarly, the extent to which schools involvedparents and pupils in setting targets varied. Mostschools informed parents about the targets ratherthan involving them in setting targets. Parents werecritical of long delays in accessing specialist supportfor their children though that was in the belief thatonly with such support could their child progress.Schools were often slow to respond to parents’initial concerns despite provision for seekingassessment being available through additionalsupport for learning legislation. A notable numberof parents described significant social, emotionaland behavioural difficulties in their children where,in their opinion, support was inadequate.

Partnership with parents, children and youngpeople in pre-school centresAlmost all pre-school centres had good links withparents of children with additional support needs,mostly due to concerns about children’s maturity.Some research shows22 that earlier intervention isvery effective for learners with dyslexia and that it isthe parents of children who are often the first toraise concerns. Most pre-school centres providesupport while avoiding ‘labelling’. Closecollaboration between staff and parents at this

stage ensures that parents and carers are moreinformed and aware of the positive role they canplay in supporting their children’s learning.

Primary schools and partnership with parentsand childrenMost primary schools involved parents in a range ofways to support their children. These includedtermly attendance at IEP review meetings,additional time at parents’ evenings, home-schooldiaries and opportunities to meet with aneducational psychologist, particularly aroundtransition times to secondary school. A few primaryschools shared their support for learning policy withparents and offered information sessions about thedifficulties experienced by their children and waysin which parents could provide support. The bestpractices included children directly in developingIEP targets and encouraged them to attend reviewsof their progress. Most children felt that they weremaking progress with appropriate help. However, afew felt that reading material was sometimes notage-appropriate and failed to engage their interest.

Some parents were not confident that the schoolhad recognised their own difficulties with literacyand did not have the confidence to raise issuesrelating to their children. Although most schoolshad offered sessions on awareness of dyslexia, thesewere not organised frequently enough to avoidmissing newer parents.

Building pupils’ confidence and self-esteemMany schools in one council used a range ofinitiatives to build pupils’ self-confidence andself-esteem. Schools prepared pupils for SQAexaminations by ensuring that, where possible, thesame person read and scribed for pupils withdyslexia to enable relationships to be built. Schoolsin two remoter areas worked closely with pupilsdue to transfer to secondary school in order toidentify their preferred support strategies. Teachersensured that secondary schools were aware ofpupils’ learning styles, including strengths, andpreferred support strategies prior to transfer.

11

22 Literature Review of Current Approaches to the Provision of Education for Children with Dyslexia, p33, Elliot DL, Davidson K and Lewin J, April 2007.

Partnership with parents and young people insecondary schoolsParents felt that support for learning staff insecondary schools were approachable andknowledgeable about dyslexia. In independentschools with a primary and secondary department,this view was particularly notable. Almost allparents and most pupils described very positiverelationships with support for learning staff whomthey regarded as the key contact in schools. Mostparents felt that schools made good attempts topromote their children’s wider achievements byproviding them with opportunities to attend arange of clubs and youth projects. Some wereencouraged to participate in the Scottish YouthParliament. A few parents disliked pastoral caresystems where guidance staff changed periodicallyand preferred continuity through the sameguidance teacher or a key worker system where amember of staff acted at times as an advocate onbehalf of their children. In most secondary schools,parents were consulted about appropriate targetsset within IEPs through attendance at reviews oftheir children’s progress. However, in the majorityof schools, pupils needed to be involved more withthe development of their own targets.

Partnership with parents and young people inspecial schools including residential specialschools and secure care accommodationIn a few special schools, parents experienceddifficulties travelling to schools if their children wereplaced some distance from home, or in anotherauthority. This was particularly true of residentialspecial and secure care services. All of these servicestook good account of the distance that parents hadto travel. To address this problem, most madeeffective arrangements for key staff to visit orcontact families at home directly. A few had set upparent support groups to encourage parents toprovide support for each other. All parents ofchildren attending units and language centresoffering specialist support for children with dyslexiafelt that they were encouraged to become more

involved with their children’s learning. All hadvisited the centres or units and a few hadappreciated the opportunity to observe specialistclasses. Home-school diaries were well used tocommunicate with parents in day special schoolsand units. Almost all parents received regularreports about their children’s progress and attendedregular reviews. Almost all pupils felt that they weremaking progress and had benefited from additionalspecialist support, particularly those attendingresidential special schools who had significant gapsin their previous school attendance. In commonwith children and young people with dyslexiaattending mainstream schools, pupils felt that theywere insufficiently involved in setting targets withintheir IEPs.

Resolving disagreementsSection 16 of the Education (Additional Support forLearning) (Scotland) Act 2004, requires educationauthorities to put in place procedures to resolvedisputes which arise between the authority and anyparents or young people belonging to the localauthority’s area. Authorities have a duty to ensurethat parents are aware of these procedures in caseswhere a dispute arises between parents and theresponsible authority. Such approaches areintended to resolve disagreements or prevent themfrom escalating into more serious disputes.23

Provisions to resolve disagreements includeindependent, free mediation services where amediator acts as an impartial third party; disputeresolution by independent adjudication where anadjudicator reviews a case and makesrecommendations on meeting a child’s needs; andAdditional Support Needs Tribunals where issuesrelating to co-ordinated support plans are decided.

Key strengths• Parents’ involvement in their children’s review of

progress.

• The knowledge and approachability of mostsupport for learning staff in linking with parentsand providing appropriate curriculum support.


12

23 Chapter 7 of ‘Supporting Children’s Learning, Code of Practice’, Scottish Executive, Edinburgh 2005 provides details about the forms of mediation anddispute resolution for which the Act makes provision.

PARTNERSHIP WITH PARENTS, CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE

• Learning strategies which helped pupils toovercome difficulties independently.

• Effectiveness of arrangements for key staff inspecial schools and residential special schools tovisit pupils and their families at home to providesupport.

Areas for development• Involving parents and young people in setting

targets in IEPs.

• Delays in obtaining an assessment of childrenwho may have dyslexia.

• Delays in providing the right support for childrenwith dyslexia.

• Raising awareness among parents of difficultiesassociated with dyslexia and helpful supportstrategies.

13

• Quality of advice, training and continuingprofessional development.

• Confidence of newly qualified teachers inrecognising dyslexia.

• Knowledge and understanding of dyslexia.

• Shared understanding of approaches tosupporting children with dyslexia across theestablishment.

Few authorities held information centrally aboutstaff qualifications or continuing professionaldevelopment courses undertaken by staffspecifically relevant to dyslexia. Where authoritieshad carried out a training audit, this was not alwaystaken into account in their strategic planning tomeet learners’ needs. The quality and extent of stafftraining in schools was inconsistent. A fewauthorities provided a clear and supportiveframework which covered training opportunities.Most offered optional, informative twilight courseswhich could be accessed by teachers within acatalogue of continuing professional development.However, with the exception of ‘dyslexia-friendly’schools, which offered regular training updatesdelivered in-house, specific training was offered onan irregular basis by schools, often with long gapsbetween training sessions of up to five years. Thishad a particular impact on new, temporary orsupply staff. In all authorities, support for learningstaff were the most confident overall in theirknowledge and understanding of dyslexia. Almostall had a key role to play in delivering appropriatetraining for staff within their schools and services.Newly qualified teachers were not confident inidentifying and addressing the needs of childrenand young people with dyslexia. Most ‘learned onthe job’, supported by other teachers.

Quality of advice and support in pre-schoolcentresThe majority of pre-school centres were satisfiedwith the support and advice provided to staff byeducation authority officers, particularly in relationto the Education (Additional Support for Learning)(Scotland) Act 2004. Additional support wasprovided directly by specialist teachers in those

centres located within or attached to primaryschools. Although almost all centres received someform of phonological awareness training, therewere very few examples of awareness raising aboutearly indicators of dyslexia. A small number ofauthorities had produced helpful guidelines for theirearly years staff on early identification of literacydifficulties or pre-school screening guidelines whichincluded signs of literacy difficulties. The intentionof such guidelines was to ensure that childrenwhose profiles were a cause for concern receivedthe appropriate intervention at the earliest stage intheir education. Educational psychologists played akey role in working with centres to developappropriate forms of intervention.

Training and staff development in primaryschoolsIn primary schools where teachers had undertakenadditional qualifications or modules fromuniversities specifically related to dyslexia, teachersfelt more confident in recognising indicators ofdyslexia and addressing children’s needs. Suchschools also had a broader range of appropriateresources to support learners. A few authorities hadissued helpful booklets of support strategies to bothteachers and parents to encourage consistency.These practical resources were valued by classteachers. Almost all teachers working in specialunits and language centres had undertaken someform of specific training or additional specialistqualifications. These ‘specialist’ staff often acted asconsultants to colleagues in cluster or partnerschools. In ‘dyslexia-friendly’ primary schools, allstaff had good access to regular in-house training.A few schools offered as many as three sessions peryear in addition to drop-in or support sessions forall staff with the support for learning teacher andlearning support co-ordinator. This training wasfurther supplemented by learning support teacherswho modelled learning and teaching approachesfor class teachers and support for learningassistants. Teachers found that they gainedconfidence and additional skills through this formof sharing practice. The majority of schools haddeveloped some form of staff development librarywhich contained a variety of useful advice about


5. STAFF TRAINING, REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT

14

STAFF TRAINING, REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT

how to support children with additional supportneeds including dyslexia. Providing sufficient timeto specialist teachers and support for learningassistants for consultation with class teachers was aconstant challenge. A few schools enabled teachersto cascade good practice across other schools intheir local authority. A few provided staff withopportunities to reflect on and develop theirpractice as a team to ensure consistency.

Training and staff development in secondaryschoolsAcross authorities and secondary schools, thequality of training was variable. One authorityoffered training on-line and used its educationalpsychologists to provide professional developmentfor school staff. In almost all schools, support forlearning staff had received at least a basic level oftraining and felt confident that they could identifyand meet the needs of learners with dyslexia. Mostsupport for learning staff demonstrated a goodunderstanding of resources for assessment andintervention, some of which they had developedthemselves. Such resources often included ahandbook for teachers with practical strategies forsubject teachers in supporting pupils withadditional support needs including dyslexia. Mosthad offered seminars or workshops for interestedstaff. However, these sessions were not deliveredregularly and most support strategies focused onvisual discrepancy although not all pupils withdyslexia are affected by this. Newly qualifiedteachers received specific training from mostschools and authorities although the quality andquantity of their professional development sessionsvaried. Too few schools evaluated the effectivenessand impact on pupils’ learning of their own trainingand of the strategies used by subject teachers. Mostsubject teachers wanted help and advice inensuring the experiences on offer met the needs oflearners. The main focus of in-class support wasEnglish and mathematics, although pupilsexperienced literacy difficulties across the curriculum.

A few secondary schools were using DyslexiaScotland’s ‘subject specific’ guidelines andresources. These materials had been issued widely.

In the most effective practices, technical wordswhich were likely to cause difficulty in a subjectwere identified and explained. In a few authorities,Dyslexia Scotland offered well-received ‘twilight’sessions.

Most newly qualified teachers reported that theydid not have sufficient awareness of the issuesrelating to dyslexia or a secure grasp ofmethodology and strategies that could be used toteach literacy and numeracy skills to all children.The quality of training in independent schoolsdepended to a large extent on the nature of theprovision, and the qualifications and expertise ofstaff. In some schools, a very high degree ofexpertise existed and all members of the supportfor learning department held a formal qualificationrelating to dyslexia. However, staff in independentschools were not always clear about their legalobligations or responsibilities relating toaccessibility. A few were unaware of basic supportstrategies.

Using digital examination arrangements tosupport independenceIn one council, pupils have experiencedindependence and success through the use ofDigital Examination arrangements. One school usesa ‘dyslexia-friendly’ approach with specific input tostaff, pupils and parents.

Training and staff development in specialschools including residential special schoolsand secure care accommodationLocal authorities ensured that staff from day specialschools attended training events and funded staffto attend external courses. Dyslexia was notconsidered a priority for staff development inschools where children and young people had arange of additional support needs. Nevertheless inalmost all schools, the close monitoring of IEPtargets meant that many staff had become skilled insetting appropriate targets to help pupils to makeprogress with their language and communication.In many cases, teachers received considerablesupport and advice from speech and language

15

therapists to assist them in setting appropriatetargets. All special and mainstream schools whichhad sought advice and training on digitalexaminations for pupils undertaking SQAqualifications, had commended the support andadvice provided by voluntary agencies.

In the best practices in residential special schoolsand secure care services, care staff workedalongside teachers to deliver language andcommunication targets. A few teachers hadachieved modules from universities specificallyrelating to dyslexia. Most residential care workershad undertaken SVQ qualifications at level 3 andmany had undertaken degree courses in social workincluding pastoral care to support young people’sneeds more effectively. A small number of serviceshad used the Transitions DVD, produced by theScottish Executive and the Dyslexia at Transitionproject team, to raise awareness of dyslexia issuesat transition. Although staff varied considerably intheir understanding of and confidence in meetingthe needs of learners with dyslexia, many teachershad developed their own knowledge of dyslexiathrough personal research. All staff needed to betrained to at least a basic level of understanding ofdyslexia.

Key strengths• The role of support for learning support staff and

educational psychologists in deliveringappropriate in-house training for staff within theirschools and services.

• The work of voluntary agencies in promotinggood practice and providing training, advice andsupport on digital examinations and ICT,appropriate resources and training, advice andsupport for a wide range of schools, colleges andagencies.

Areas for development• The quality and extent of professional

development in schools and across authorities.

• The content of courses on additional supportneeds, including dyslexia in university faculties ofeducation.

• Frequency and regularity of professionaldevelopment in schools relating to appropriatesupport strategies.

• Staff confidence in, and understanding ofstrategies to address learners’ needs inresidential special schools and secure careservices.


16

PLANNING TO MEET THE NEEDS OF CHILDREN WITH DYSLEXIA IN SCHOOLS

6. PLANNING TO MEET THE NEEDS OF CHILDREN WITH DYSLEXIA INSCHOOLS

• Quality of planning at education authority level.

• Quality of planning at establishment level –whole school policies and approaches.

• Shared understanding of the concept of dyslexia.

• Quality assurance and self-evaluation.

The quality of planning varied notably acrossauthorities and between schools. Almost allauthorities planned provision for children andyoung people with dyslexia within broader policiesfor inclusion, support for learning or additionalsupport needs. Schools in these authorities used asimilar approach. In the few authorities which hadpolicies for ‘dyslexia- friendly’ schools manyindividual schools had developed their own policieson dyslexia. In such schools, staff demonstrated aclearer understanding of dyslexia and its impact.These authorities tended to locate literacydifficulties within a staged intervention framework.As a consequence, planning in schools wasgenerally more effective. In the best practices, staffused a comprehensive set of data to monitor andtrack pupils’ progress and evaluate the impact oflearning and teaching strategies and the use ofresources to support learning. Self-evaluation ofpractice in meeting the needs of learners withdyslexia was not a key feature of practice in mostschools.

Strategic planningMost authorities had steering groups with remitsfor additional support needs including provision forlearners with dyslexia. Around a fifth had set upadvisory or steering groups which developedstrategic approaches to meeting the needs oflearners with dyslexia. In these authorities, schoolswere more aware of the range of strategies tosupport children and young people. One authorityhad appointed both an advisory group and adesignated education officer and had highlyeffective programme of training for‘dyslexia-friendly’ schools which aimed to meet theneeds of pupils with dyslexia.

Dyslexia-friendly schoolsIn one authority, all primary and secondary schoolshad gained the Dyslexia-Friendly Schools Award byend March 2007. The award was based on anexternal consultant’s evaluation of the effectivenessof schools in meeting the needs of pupils withdyslexia. One member of staff in each school hadbeen trained as an advisor on dyslexia. Schoolshad structured continuing professionaldevelopment programmes and systems for trackingpupils’ progress. Most children with dyslexia at theprimary and secondary stages were makingnotable progress.

This approach has been adopted by otherauthorities, for example, by two councils working inpartnership to produce a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ resourcepack.

Planning in pre-school and at the primarystagesPlanning to deal specifically with children withdyslexia at the pre-school stages was deemed to beinappropriate. Planning in most primary schoolswas not based on a specific policy on dyslexiaunless they were a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ establishment.However, a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ policy was notessential for good practice to be present. Planningin the best practices was based on meeting theneeds of individual pupils through IEPs and, whereappropriate, co-ordinated support plans. In the bestpractices, planning had encouraged close workingrelationships among staff from the school and otheragencies.

Planning at the secondary stagesIn authorities with a specific policy on supportingyoung people with dyslexia, planning to meet theneeds of learners with dyslexia in secondary schoolswas more effective. Support for learning staffdemonstrated a shared understanding of dyslexiaand staff in general had a greater understanding ofthe barriers to learning experienced by pupils withdyslexia. Most schools with specific policies on

17

dyslexia had well-established assessmentarrangements with SQA and information-sharingprotocols to ensure that staff were aware of pupils’needs. In the most effective practice, theinformation was also shared with pupils.

Although most support for pupils staff sharedinformation effectively with subject teachers aboutpupils experiencing difficulties with their learning,teachers in some subjects did not make use ofindividualised learning plans or show appropriateawareness of pupils’ needs. Planning to meetpupils’ needs was not embedded in teachingpractices and planning for differentiation acrosssubject departments was often inconsistent.Self-evaluation was not a strong feature of planningand most schools needed to review theirprocedures for identifying and assessing pupils withdyslexia within whole school approaches toidentifying and meeting learners’ needs.

Planning in special schools includingresidential special schools and secure careaccommodationIn special schools, all pupils have additional supportneeds. Most special schools demonstrated a strongfocus on literacy and robust screening in order toidentify individual needs. Programmes wereindividualised in order to meet specific needs andall pupils had IEPs.

There were examples of well-thought-outapproaches in a small number of secure careservices. In these services, senior managers madevery good use of tracking systems which providedup-to-date details about young people’s additional

support needs and prior achievements includingaccreditation. Such practice allowed the service tosource information rapidly and respond quickly andappropriately to the needs of young people. In oneservice, young people benefited from placement inan induction class to allow detailed assessment andacclimatisation to a new learning environment.New pupils were also interviewed in order toestablish their preferred learning styles and to selectthe most helpful resources. Young people withdyslexia found this particularly helpful. In manyservices, however, dyslexia was often masked bysocial, emotional and behavioural difficulties whichwere the main focus of support. The quality andextent of multi-agency planning to support youngpeople varied.

Key strengths• The impact of schools with specific policies and

approaches to dealing with dyslexia (for example,‘dyslexia-friendly’ schools) on pupils’ progress.

• The key role of language centres as part of astaged intervention process to support schoolsand children and young people with dyslexia.

• Systems for rapid assessment and meetingindividual needs used in secure care services.

Areas for development• Planning to meet the needs of learners with

dyslexia across authorities.

• Personalising aspects of the curriculum to meetpupils’ needs in secondary schools.

• Quality assurance linked to planning to meet theneeds of learners with dyslexia.


18

LEADERSHIP AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

7. LEADERSHIP AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

• Strategic management of provision.

• Quality of teamwork and partnerships forsupporting children and young people.

• Creative and innovative approaches used to meetlearners’ needs.

• Self-evaluation.

• Capacity for continuous improvement.

The strategic management of provision for childrenand young people with dyslexia depended largelyon the level of commitment of authorities andschools. Approaches to strategic managementvaried, especially in relation to identification andintervention. Most authorities and schools haddeveloped early intervention programmes with afocus on literacy and programmes of support forpupils in the later stages of primary school and insecondary school. A few authorities had developedcreative and innovative approaches although thesewere not widely shared. At authority level, qualityassurance of provision was normally located withinaccessibility strategies or inclusion policies. Aspectsof these strategies, policies, or authority-levelimprovement plans were often reflected in schoolimprovement plans.

Around a third of authorities had carried out anevaluation of the effectiveness of provision tosupport learners with dyslexia. In the best practices,this included taking account of the views oflearners. In the majority of cases, authorities hadsought information about the use of ICT in meetingneeds. Given the general scarcity of data on boththe numbers of pupils with dyslexia and the extentof expertise and experience among teachers, therewas considerable scope for authorities to determinemore accurately the effectiveness of services inmeeting the needs of learners.

Leadership and quality assurance at thepre-school stagesAll early years managers and headteachers ofpre-school centres worked closely with educationauthorities and a range of partner agencies toensure that children’s needs were met. Almost all

adopted what they considered to be proactiveapproaches to preventing difficulties associatedwith developing phonological awareness. Allheadteachers expressed reservations about earlyindicators of dyslexia.

Focusing on spoken languageIn one council, a Spoken Language Initiative – ajoint venture between education and speech andlanguage therapist services – has been piloted inone cluster. This package supports nursery schoolsand classes in promoting speaking and listening,placing a strong emphasis on co-operative,multi-agency working.

Leadership and quality assurance in primaryschoolsIn primary schools, the empathy and awareness ofthe headteacher and senior managers was a keyfactor in the effectiveness of the school in meetinglearners’ needs. The impact on learners’ progresswas particularly marked where schools were wellsupported and strategically managed at authoritylevel in meeting the needs of learners with dyslexia.Important approaches encouraged by seniormanagers in developing a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ ethosincluded:

• making time for effective teamwork among classteachers, support for learning teachers andvisiting specialists;

• monitoring and evaluating children’s learningexperiences and the appropriateness of IEPtargets for meeting the learning and personaland social development needs of children withdyslexia;

• ensuring opportunities for children to experiencesuccess and receive reassurance;

• developing a well-structured learningenvironment;

• sourcing opportunities for staff development; and

• planning effective transition arrangements forchildren going to secondary school.

19

Leadership and quality assurance in secondaryschoolsIn most secondary schools, senior managersconsciously attempted to promote a culture ofinclusion where class teachers were responsible formeeting the needs of pupils with dyslexia,supported and advised by specialist staff. Mostevaluated how effectively they met learners’ needs,as part of an annual cycle of quality assurance andimprovement planning. Almost all secondaryschools were improving links with primary schoolsand many had evaluated their transition links in thisrespect. However, planning at the post-sixteentransition stage was an area of relative weakness.Many parents were unaware of post-sixteenassessment arrangements and the implications forpupils entering further and higher education.Schools needed to provide parents with moreinformation and at an earlier stage. Importantapproaches encouraged by senior managers indeveloping a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ ethos included:

• a strong emphasis on early intervention andsolution-focused approaches;

• high quality learning support accommodationincluding ICT provision and a range ofappropriate resources;

• staged intervention processes which ensured thatpupils were identified at an early stage;

• taking good account of the needs of pupilsneeding more choices and more chances;

• regular monitoring and tracking of pupils’progress at reviews;

• effective links with partner agencies, whereappropriate, to support pupils and families asrequired; and

• a culture of inclusion.

Leadership and quality assurance in specialschools including residential special schoolsand secure care accommodationMost special schools had senior managers whowere very knowledgeable about support strategies

for young people experiencing difficulties with theirlearning. Very few had specific policies or guidelineson meeting the needs of pupils with dyslexia. Manyhad designed their curriculum and learning andteaching approaches to support all children whoexperienced literacy and numeracy difficultiesincluding those with dyslexia. For example,language was often taught within helpful andmeaningful contexts using the local communityand often linked to the development of life skills.Pupils’ IEP targets were monitored frequently andpupils benefited from the individualised supportoffered through class team approaches tosupporting pupils. In independent residentialspecial schools, the range of resources oftendepended on the finances available. The majority ofheadteachers experienced difficulty in retaining andacquiring staff with specialist qualifications.Although care staff were committed to helpingchildren and young people in school careaccommodation, very few had training andenhanced knowledge about support strategies foryoung people with dyslexia.

Key strengths• Steps taken by many senior managers to

promote a culture of inclusion.

• When working well, staged interventionprocesses which ensure that pupils’ needs areidentified at an early stage.

Areas for development• Sharing creative and innovative practices across

authorities and schools.

• Managing approaches to identifying pupils withdyslexia and providing support to them.

• Planning to meet the needs of young people atthe post-sixteen transition stage in local authorityand independent secondary schools.

• Awareness of appropriate support strategies forchildren and young people with dyslexia acrosseducation and care in residential special schools.


20

AN OVERVIEW OF PROVISION FOR STUDENTS IN SCOTLAND’S COLLEGES

8. AN OVERVIEW OF PROVISION FOR STUDENTS IN SCOTLAND’S COLLEGES

Of the colleges sampled, there were many strongfeatures of provision for students with dyslexia.Colleges adopted a similar approach to schools inmeeting individual learners’ needs through acombination of specialist support and collaborationwith subject lecturers. Almost all colleges used theterm ‘dyslexia’, mainly because it was widelyrecognised. Some had previously used the term‘specific learning difficulties’ because it was, in theiropinion, a more accurate description of this type ofdifficulty. Subject lecturers welcomed the additionalsupport and advice of the specialist departmentsand consulted regularly with them aboutappropriate resources and strategies to supportlearners.

Overall, there was adequate funding to supportlearners in those colleges which participated in theevaluation, including a good range of resources andtechnology. However, there were differencesamong colleges in approaches to fundingassessments. A few would only provide funding ifthe learner was studying at Higher NationalCertificate level and wanted to apply for a studentdisability allowance. Learners undertakingnon-advanced programmes received support whichcould include borrowing ICT equipment asrequired.

Assessing and supporting learners withdyslexiaSupport for learning or learner developmentservices or departments took responsibility forassessing and supporting learners with dyslexia andarranged, where appropriate for an assessment.Students with dyslexia were then assisted bysupport for learning staff, in collaboration withcurriculum staff. Most colleges encourageddisclosure on application, at the interview stageand during enrolment and induction. LearnerServices staff also gave presentations to all classgroups at induction to ensure all learners wereaware of the support systems in place to help themreach their potential. In one college that was

particularly effective, an extended learning supportteam screened students for dyslexia on arrival.Learners were then encouraged to self-refer at anypoint throughout the programme. In the bestpractices, all staff took responsibility for meetingthe needs of these learners. Most departments hadidentified teaching staff who acted as a link withsupport for learning staff. In all colleges sampled,students had good information on support servicesthrough a range of facilities including ‘one stopshops’. These arrangements were effective inreducing or eliminating stigmatisation. Across thecolleges, support for learning staff met regularly todiscuss resources, the use of ICT software,marketing of the service both internally andexternally and best practice in learning andteaching across college programmes and subjectareas. Students and staff highly commended theservice. Staff made good use of these meetings todiscuss feedback and evaluate the effectiveness ofits support

All colleges reported concern at the number oflearners with dyslexia who had not been assessedprior to going to college. Initial assessmentgenerally involved discussions with learners abouttheir previous experience of learning, health andany relevant information or reports. When collegestaff suspected that learners had additional supportneeds, they arranged for an assessment to becarried out. All colleges had good access toequipment and technology to support learnersboth internally and through the BRITE Centre.24

If a learner wished to apply for the DisabledStudents Allowance and/or alternative assessmentarrangements, relevant support staff providedevidence over and above any assessment made bycollege staff. Not all colleges paid for thisassessment and some expressed concerns aboutdelays in providing allowances to students on shortcourses. Colleges compensated by lendingequipment and making recommendations tocurriculum staff.

21

24 The main aim of the BRITE Initiative (Beattie Resources for Inclusiveness in Technology and Education) is to encourage inclusive practice in learning andteaching in colleges by offering a wide range of resources including accredited professional training, themed seminars, online resources, assistive technologyuser guides and equipment loan.

The range of support available for learnerswith dyslexiaMost colleges offered students individual supportand help in small groups and/or in a class situation.Almost all students with dyslexia benefited from awide range of ICT. Students also receivedalternative assessment arrangements whereappropriate. Support for learning services providedstudents with readers, scribes and note-takers ifnecessary. In the best practices, they liaised withprogramme teams to keep them informed ofprogress and to request course information.

Other forms of support offered to students atcolleges included:

• literacy, numeracy and profiling;

• arranging assessment by an educationalpsychologist;

• tuition in spelling for students with morecomplex difficulties;

• tuition in study skills appropriate to students withdyslexia, for example, recognition of whatpunctuation represents, visual note-taking, visualessay planning and time management;

• access to, and tuition in, specialised software textto speech, speech to text and mind mapping;

• an equipment-lending service for spellcheckers,dictaphones and laptops with software installed;

• adaptation of class notes and assessments;

• one-to-one feedback for students on their writtenwork;

• a quiet area for working and studying;

• application to SQA and other accreditationbodies for special assessment arrangements;

• awareness sessions and self-help strategies;

• study skill and core skill workshops;

• technology assessments;

• training for lecturers related to differentiatedteaching styles; and

• regular contact between learners and supportservices to review the support in place to ensureit is effective.

Staff development and awareness of dyslexiaHowever, arrangements for subject staff to accesscontinuing professional development on dyslexiavaried. A variety of courses aimed at lecturerswhose specific remit was support for learning wasavailable. A few support for learning staff offeredin-house awareness sessions on dyslexia throughoutthe year. In the best practice, all new members ofstaff received an induction session covering thesupport available for learners and staff. Staff wereintroduced to all the support systems in place andmade aware of the technology available. Thecontent of such sessions included raisingawareness of:

• students’ learning styles;

• technology;

• general awareness of dyslexia and effects onlearning; and

• awareness of other specific learning difficultieswhich may co-occur with dyslexia.

In some colleges, staff had produced high qualitylearning and teaching materials that were inclusiveand accessible. These included recommendationsfor appropriate font style, size and colour. Thesecurriculum materials were adapted to suit individualneeds and available in a variety of formats.Evaluation included the following key questionsrelated to dyslexia to, assist the group to improvetheir ability to meet learners’ needs.

• How accessible is the curriculum for learners witha range of impairments?

• How might the curriculum be made moreaccessible for learners with a range ofimpairments?

• What steps would need to be taken toimplement the ways identified to enhance accessto the curriculum?

• What barriers are there to achieving the changesidentified and what can be done about them?

• How can the ways in which the curriculum isparticularly accessible or inaccessible be madeknown to learners with a range of impairments?


22

AN OVERVIEW OF PROVISION FOR STUDENTS IN SCOTLAND’S COLLEGES

Most lecturers in the sample of colleges visited,responded very positively to recommendations forinclusive learning and teaching strategies. The bestpractices offered awareness sessions to help stafffeel more confident and better equipped to supportlearners within subject areas. In a small number ofcolleges, joint professional development sessionswith university staff had taken place. A few collegesreported that they would benefit from joint trainingwith schools.

Key strengths• The impact of the BRITE Initiative in providing a

range of appropriate resources and continuingprofessional development.

• Procedures for self-referral and identification oflearning difficulties.

• The range of support available in collegesincluding ICT and assistive technology.

• Involvement of all staff in meeting learners’needs.

• Processes for self-evaluation of support services.

Areas for development• Variations in funding, particularly in relation to

assessment for dyslexia.

• Transition arrangements.

23

University staff placed a strong emphasis onteaching students that as teachers they wereresponsible for the learning of all children andproviding them with the skills to access appropriateinformation and support at all levels for all pupilswith additional support needs. However, theyexpressed concern about the limited time in theircourses to address specific issues such as dyslexiaand additional support needs in general effectively.Preparation of teachers to meet the needs of suchchildren appropriately was a continuous processwhich, in particular, could not be covered efficientlyin a one-year course.

Almost all university staff were clear that teachersneeded to know what dyslexia is, how to identifychildren, which strategies to use to support themand whom to turn to for specialist advice. Studentteachers and newly qualified teachers also neededto be aware of the general responsibilities set out inthe ‘Standard for Initial Teacher Education inScotland’25 to employ strategies, set expectationsand maintain a pace of work to make appropriatedemands and meet the needs of all pupils. To helpthem to plan courses more effectively, universitieshad set up formal partnership committees toconsult with local authorities, teachers and recentgraduates.

Perspectives on dyslexiaStaff indicated that faculties of education vieweddyslexia differently and not all faculties had anagreed view. Two located dyslexia within adiagnostic approach along with a group of otherbarriers to learning such as dyscalculia, dyspraxia,specific language impairment and attention deficitand hyperactivity disorder, but not Asperger’ssyndrome. Those universities which did not have anagreed view used a range of views. One regardedthe British Psychological Service view as not specificenough while another faculty of education hadrecently adopted this view.

Courses, including post graduate courseswhich featured dyslexia in teacher educationuniversitiesCourses related to dyslexia and additional supportneeds were usually delivered by support forlearning specialists within education faculties. Therole of these lecturers was to advise on appropriateprogrammes of study within courses by providingexpertise related to additional support needs andinclusion. Co-ordination between additionalsupport needs lecturers, and lecturers deliveringprogrammes on primary and secondary education,resulted in cross-fertilisation of expertise betweendepartments. These five universities regarded suchpractice as crucial in assisting student teachers tounderstand inclusive education. Most specialistlecturers were integrated to some degree within afaculty, usually education. Within the educationfaculty, students were taught about dyslexia andother additional support needs by the Support forLearning team.

Professional Graduate Diploma in Education (PGDE)and Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) courses covereddyslexia within the context of teaching literacy andthe difficulties which different groups of childrenexperienced in learning to read. In these courses,dyslexia was usually addressed within a moregeneral approach to inclusion, additional supportfor learning and effective learning and teaching.

Most specialist lecturers aimed to develop the skillsof student teachers in supporting all additionalsupport needs rather than focus on one particulararea such as dyslexia. They did this throughincreasing the awareness of student teachers ofhow to access support within schools, identifyonline support and distance learning courses,collaborate with partner agencies and accesstraining within local authorities. A group ofuniversities had collaborated with each other andwith voluntary agencies on developingwell-received support material for schools includinga DVD about transitions.


9. ISSUES ARISING FROM DISCUSSIONS WITH TEACHER EDUCATIONUNIVERSITIES

24

25 ‘The Standard for Initial Teacher Education in Scotland’ GTC, 2006 is a statement for initial teacher education. It specifies what is expected of a studentteacher at the end of initial teacher education, seeking provisional registration with the General Teaching Council for Scotland. It is the first of a suite ofstandards which provide a framework for the professional development of teachers throughout their career.

ISSUES ARISING FROM DISCUSSIONS WITH TEACHER EDUCATION UNIVERSITIES

Most university staff noted that limited dedicatedteaching time could be given to literacy andadditional support. B.Ed courses offered moreopportunities for building incrementally on studentknowledge. Time was more limited on one-yearcourses where students spent eighteen of thethirty-six weeks in schools. In one university, up tothree days were devoted to literacy difficulties anddyslexia. However, the most common input inPGDE courses was a one-hour lecture, and beyondthat an optional module and personal research.

Crowded teacher education courses also includedcontent about children’s rights, values, education,health and well-being and pastoral care. To provideadditional experience, students were encouraged tolook in depth at an individual case studies of pupilswith additional support needs in their class throughwork on an assignment. However, this wasoptional, depending on whether the student had aparticular interest in dyslexia. This was not regardedby lecturers as a practical means of providingstudents with the skills required to identify andmeet learners’ needs effectively in schools.

Most specialist lecturers identified the tensionreferred to earlier in this report in local authoritiesbetween identifying children with dyslexia anddiagnosing and labelling children. Most wereunsure of how to address this issue.

Staff views on what teachers need to knowabout dyslexiaMost universities were in agreement about whatteachers needed to know about dyslexia. Thisincluded:

• an awareness of possible co-occurrence ofdyslexia with other additional support needs suchas dyspraxia and specific language impairments;

• understanding that there is a continuum ofdyslexia which has a differential impact onindividuals;

• being able to recognise tell-tale signs such asdecoding difficulties, poor memory and difficultyin understanding and processing information;

• knowing that dyslexia can affect self-esteem;

• an awareness among teachers that difficultiesassociated with dyslexia are not just aboutreading and literacy but also about structure,sequence and time;

• being aware that teachers will not find a singlepackage of materials or strategies helpful forevery pupil but must support each pupil in a wayappropriate to them;

• being aware that children who have dyslexiaand/or other disabilities respond in different waysto the term ‘dyslexia’;

• accepting that teachers have to adopt a positiveapproach to developing each child’s abilities;

• knowing how and where to access informationto help them support a pupil appropriately andto act on this information to improve outcomesfor the pupil; and

• knowing how to use formative assessmentapproaches and be aware of different learningstyles.

The impact of the qualifications and coursesdelivered by their university in schoolsNone of the universities had undertaken extensiveresearch about the impact of their courses andqualifications in schools and on young people’sachievements, but staff felt that it was an importantarea for them to think about in terms ofself-evaluation. Many lecturers consulted informallywith alumni to obtain feedback on the usefulness ofthe university input on practice.

Improvements in teacher educationUniversity staff expressed a range of views on howthey might support new and existing teachers tomore effectively meet the needs of learners withadditional support needs including dyslexia. Theyreiterated the difficulties in explaining dyslexia inany depth due to lack of time. Staff views abouthow the teacher education universities coulddevelop their contribution to preparing teachers tomeet the needs of pupils with dyslexia included thefollowing.

• More time needed to be spent on teachingstudents about how to teach reading. This would

25

improve their skills in identifying individualpupils’ difficulties and provide them with agreater range of intervention strategies.

• Continuing professional development beyondinitial training was essential and currently did notmeet the continuing needs of newly qualifiedteachers. Education authority training often didnot build incrementally on skills but tended toconsist of set lectures with limited impact onfuture learning and teaching.

• Key staff in universities should raise awarenessand equip teachers with transferable skills toaddress the needs of pupils with a range ofneeds, including dyslexia. They should promoteworking with parents and community partners,including the voluntary sector. A few staff linkedthis with reservations about competenciesmodels26 or qualifications because they mightencourage teachers to think about additionalsupport needs in ‘silos’.

• There should be greater emphasis onindependent study and on how to access helpand expertise from specialist professionals.

Future changes to teacher educationThe ongoing issue of what to take out of busypost-graduate teacher education courses was arecurring feature of discussions. While pressure onPGDE courses was an issue, what student teacherslearn in the schools where they spendapproximately half of their course is dependent onthe knowledge and skills of the teachers they workwith when on school placement. Schools need toprovide the necessary knowledge and skills indealing with additional support needs and inclusivepractices. Initial teacher education can only prepareteachers to enter the profession. However, schoolsand local authorities have a key role to play inproviding teachers with appropriate, continuingprofessional development.

Staff in universities were keen to contribute toconsistent, continuous professional development inschools to help practitioners develop enoughspecialist expertise to be of practical help to themin meeting learners’ needs, and to work witheducation authorities to build incrementally onteachers’ skills. The majority reported that supportnetworks were needed for new teachers. Suchnetworks could include a new role for charteredteachers in developing skills and abilities andpassing on expertise within schools and key staff todeliver training in the use of ICT to meet pupils’additional support needs.

Key strengths• Emphasis on meeting learners’ needs as the

responsibility of all teachers.

• Effective collaboration between some universitiesand with voluntary agencies to produce helpfulsupport packages to assist schools in moreeffectively meeting the needs of children withdyslexia.

Areas for development• The lack of consensus across universities about

what dyslexia is.

• Prioritisation of time to effectively addressdyslexia and additional support needs,particularly within Professional Graduate Diplomacourses.

• Evaluation of the impact of university courses andqualifications on teachers’ practice.


26

26 Competencies models are accredited courses for which a teacher must demonstrate an acceptable, basic standard of skills and knowledge about particularadditional support needs.

THE WAY AHEAD

10. THE WAY AHEAD

Scottish education has much good and innovativepractice in meeting the learning needs of childrenand young people with dyslexia. However, thereremained considerable scope for development. Themain areas identified for such development include:providing guidance on dyslexia and how to identifyand meet learning needs alongside other learningneeds; achieving greater consistency within andacross authorities; improving awareness andexpertise in pre-school; and improving services toyoung people and professional development forteachers in primary and secondary schools,including the use of resources such as ICT.

A mix of views as to what dyslexia actually isprevailed. The majority of authorities found theBritish Psychological Society’s view helpful, butschools, colleges and universities held a range ofperspectives. Such a mix of views can causeconfusion for newly qualified and practisingteachers. Teachers and learners should haveupdated, accessible and practical advice on dyslexiaand its impact on young people includingco-occurrence with other additional support needs.HMIE will work with Learning and TeachingScotland, education authorities and Scottishgovernment to produce examples of best practicein dealing with dyslexia.

Schools in authorities which had strategicapproaches to meeting the needs of learners withdyslexia, knew what strategies to use to supportchildren and young people. Some practice wasinnovative. However, few local authoritiescentralised information about how many childrenhad dyslexia. Few had detailed information aboutthe numbers of teachers with appropriateexperience and specialist qualifications in meetingthe needs of learners with dyslexia. Where suchevidence was scarce, this hindered educationauthorities’ capacity to deal with dyslexiastrategically. There was also scope for authorities todevelop their approaches to evaluating theeffectiveness of services to meet the needs oflearners with dyslexia. Such inconsistencies shouldbe reduced and best practice shared.

Assessing children for dyslexia at the nursery stagewas regarded as premature. Nevertheless, staffconsidered that all younger children, includingthose who displayed early indicators of language,motor, and sequential difficulties, were likely tobenefit from early intervention to develop suchskills. It is important that authorities ensure thatstaff at the pre-school stage have appropriateknowledge of early indicators of dyslexia and thekinds of early intervention approaches which mayhelp to lessen the impact for vulnerable children inlater years.

Parents and children identified considerablevariation in provision for dyslexia support. Acrossprimary and secondary schools, there was a needfor more consistency in providing appropriatesupport. In this respect, appropriate professionaldevelopment was vital. Teachers and lecturers withspecialist qualifications showed a sound awarenessof appropriate resources. However, there wasconsiderable scope for all teachers to learn aboutthe full range of ICT available to support childrenand encourage independence. Education authoritiesand universities should co-operate in providingrelevant and effective continuing professionaldevelopment in the range of ICT available.

27

HM Inspectorate of Education is grateful to themany people including, parents, pupils and stafffrom local authorities, pre-school centres, schools,colleges, universities and other organisations whocontributed to this report. We are particularlygrateful to the National Advisory Group and to FranRanaldi, Kinross High School, Perth and KinrossCouncil, who was seconded as NationalDevelopment Officer to support the work of theHMIE team.

MEMBERSHIP OF ADVISORY GROUPProfessor Martyn Rouse, Director of the InclusivePractice Project, University of Aberdeen (chair)

Elizabeth Bingham, parent member of the Cross-Parliamentary Group on Dyslexia

Carol Cutler, Principal Teacher of Learning Support,Barrhead High School, East Renfrewshire Council

Mary Evans, Chair of Council, Dyslexia Scotland

Ian Fraser, Corporate Director of Education andSocial Care, Inverclyde Council

Heather Hughes, Learning Services Manager,Glasgow College of Nautical Studies

Patricia MacDonald, Project Manager, ScottishQualifications Authority

Noreen Phillips, Principal Psychologist, InverclydeCouncil (from August 2007)

Michael Roach, Headteacher, Busby Primary School,East Renfrewshire Council

Yvonne Taylor, Co-ordinator, Kaimhill PrimarySchool Dyslexia Unit, Aberdeen City Council

Dr Charles Weedon, Head of Learning Support,George Watson’s College


APPENDIX 1: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

28

APPENDIX 2: REFERENCES AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT

APPENDIX 2: REFERENCES AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT

Literature Review of Current Approaches to theProvision of Education for Children with Dyslexia,Dely L Elliott, Julia K Davidson and Jon Lewin, HMInspectorate of Education, May 2007. Available onthe HMIE website: www.hmie.gov.uk

British Psychological Society, Division of Educationaland Child Psychology Working party Report, 1999

Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4)pp601-638. Vellutino F. (1996)

DVD and support pack ‘Dyslexia at Transition’,Scottish Executive, 2007

Flavell, J. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problemsolving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature ofintelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum

The Education (Disabilities and Pupils EducationalRecords) (Scotland) Act 2002

Supporting Children’s Learning, Code of Practice,Scottish Executive, Edinburgh 2005

The Standard for Initial Teacher Education inScotland General Teaching Council, 2006

How good is our school? The Journey to Excellence

Part 1 Aiming for Excellence

Part 2 Exploring Excellence, both HMIE, 2006

Part 3 How good is our school?, HMIE 2007

Part 4 Planning for Excellence, HMIE 2007

Part 5 Journeys to Excellence website, launched 2007:www.hmie.gov.uk or www.journeytoexcellence.org.uk.Professional development materials, includingmovies, about the education of pupils with dyslexiato be added during 2008-2009

British Dyslexia Association, www.bda-dyslexia.org.uk

Dyslexia Scotland,http://www.dyslexiascotland.org.uk/

Dyslexia South West

Dyslexia Highlands

Dyslexia Scotwest

The Arts Dyslexia Trust

Dyslexia Institute

National Listening Library, email:[email protected]

Dyslexic Adult Link, www.Dyslexia-adults.com/

Dyslexia Forum,www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/dyslexia.html

29

www.hmie.gov.uk

9 780705 311489

ISBN 978-0-7053-1148-9

© Crown copyright 2008

RR Donnelley B57055 10/08

Further copies are available fromBlackwell’s Bookshop53 South BridgeEdinburghEH1 1YS

Telephone orders and inquiries0131 622 8283 or0131 622 8258

Fax orders0131 557 8149

Email [email protected]

Further Information is available from:

HM Inspectorate of EducationDenholm HouseAlmondvale Business ParkAlmondvale WayLivingstonEH54 6GA

Tel: 01506 600 200Fax: 01506 600 337E-mail: [email protected]

£10.00

Documents

Education for learners with dyslexia · EDUCATION FOR LEARNERS WITH DYSLEXIA iv. FOREWORD I am on record as saying that the most effective schools are those which value each child