Dyslexia policy and practice have been rapidly outpacing research. Due to legislation and media attention, schools are under pressure to attend to dyslexia, but research provides few clear answers about characteristics, identification, or instruction. Most dyslexia research takes place outside literacy education, and teachers’ perspectives are heard only when their knowledge is questioned. Our research addresses these gaps with a qualitative study examining perspectives, understandings, and experiences of 32 Texas public school educators regarding dyslexia. Two major themes were evident: First, teachers felt responsible for meeting the needs of all their students, including those identified as dyslexic. Second, participants named barriers that interfered with attempts to support students, including limited information and confusing policies and procedures. This research provides new information about teacher’s understandings, experiences, and perspectives concerning dyslexia that goes beyond surveys. This study’s literature review provides information about the state of current dyslexia research, including its limitations.
Al OtaibaS.FuchsD. (2002). Characteristics of children who are unresponsive to early literacy intervention: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 300–316.
2.
BakhtinM. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (EmersonC.HolquistM., Eds., & McGeeV., Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
3.
BergerP. L.LuckmannT. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York, NY: Anchor.
4.
BradleyL.BryantP. (1983). Categorising sounds and learning to read: A causal connection. Nature, 301, 419–421.
CampD.AldridgeJ. (2007). Rethinking dyslexia, scripted reading, and federal mandates: The more things change, the more they stay the same. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 34, 3–12.
7.
CassarM.TreimanR.MoatsL.PolloT.KesslerB. (2005). How do the spellings of children with dyslexia compare with those of nondyslexic children?Reading and Writing, 18, 27–49.
Dedoose (Version 6.1.18), Web Application for Managing, Analyzing, and Presenting Qualitative and Mixed Method Research Data (2015). Los Angeles, CA: SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC. Retrieved from http://www.dedoose.com
ElliottJ.GrigorenkoE. (2014). The dyslexia debate. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
12.
FerrerE.ShaywitzB.HolahanJ.MarchioneK.MichaelsR.ShaywitzS. (2015). Achievement gap in reading is present as early as first grade and persists through adolescence. The Journal of Pediatrics, 167, 1121–1125.
13.
FerriB. A.ConnorD. J.SolisS.ValleJ.VolpittaD. (2005). Teachers with LD: Ongoing negotiations with discourses of disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 62–78.
14.
GibbsS.ElliottJ. (2015). The differential effects of labelling: How do ‘dyslexia’ and ‘reading difficulties’ affect teachers’ beliefs. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 30, 323–337.
15.
GillinghamA.StillmanB. W. (2014). Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling, and penmanship. Cambridge, MA: Educators. (Originally published on 1936).
16.
HarrisT.HodgesR. (Eds.). (1981). A dictionary of reading and reading-related terms. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
17.
HarryB.KlingnerJ. (2007). Discarding the deficit model. Educational Leadership, 64, 16–21.
18.
International Dyslexia Society. (2009). Just the facts … information provided by the international dyslexia society. Baltimore, MD: Author.
19.
JohnstonP. (2011). Response to Intervention in literacy: Problems and possibilities. Elementary School Journal, 111, 511–534.
20.
LoflandJ.LoflandL. H. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
21.
LopesJ. (2012). Biologising reading problems: The specific case of dyslexia. Contemporary Social Science, 7, 15–229.
OlsonR.ByrneB. (2005). Genetic and environmental influences on reading and language ability and disability. In CattsH.KamhiA. (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disability (pp. 173–200). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25.
RamusF.SzenkovitsG. (2008). What phonological deficit?Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 129–141.
26.
RedfordJ. (Director). (2012). The big picture: Rethinking dyslexia [Motion picture]. Fairfax, CA: Shadow Creek Films.
27.
RitcheyK. D.GoekeJ. L. (2006). Orton–Gillingham and Orton–Gillingham-based reading instruction: A review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 40, 171–183.
28.
RubinH.RubinI. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29.
ShaywitzS. (2003). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any level. New York, NY: Knopf.
30.
ShaywitzS.EscobarM.ShaywitzB.FletcherJ.MakuchR. (1992). Evidence that dyslexia may represent the lower tail of a normal distribution of reading ability. The New England Journal of Medicine, 326, 145–150.
31.
ShaywitzS.MorrisR.ShaywitzB. (2008). The education of dyslexic children from childhood to young adulthood. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 451–475.
32.
StanovichK. E. (1991). Discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Has intelligence led us astray?Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 7–29.
VarmaS.McCandlissB.SchwartzD. (2008). Scientific and pragmatic challenges for bridging education and neuroscience. Educational Researcher, 37, 140–152.
38.
VellutinoF. R.FletcherJ. M.SnowlingM. J.ScanlonD. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades?Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 2–40.
39.
WadlingtonE.WadlingtonP. (2005). What educators really believe about dyslexia. Reading Improvement, 42, 16–33.
40.
WashburnE.JoshiM.Binks-CantrellE. (2011). Teacher knowledge of basic language concepts and dyslexia. Dyslexia, 17, 165–183.
