In this study, I analyze written testimony submitted to the state legislature regarding Connecticut’s 2014 Act Concerning Dyslexia and Special Education (PA-14-39), in order to engage with the discourse and rhetoric occasioned by the policy-making process and investigate the phenomenon of dyslexia in contemporary education policy. Drawing on critical discursive psychology, positioning theory, and narrative policy analysis, I examine how dyslexia advocacy discourse forms a cohesive, compelling policy narrative. I argue that this narrative can be understood as a conversion narrative, which drives a privatization agenda in which public schools become mandated consumers for a growing dyslexia industry, and in which the nature of instruction for students with reading difficulties is narrowly prescribed.
An Act Concerning Closing the Academic Achievement Gap. Pub. L. No. 11-85. (2011).
5.
An Act Concerning Dyslexia and Special Education. Pub. L. No. 14-39. (2014).
6.
An Act Concerning Education Reform in Connecticut. Pub. L. No. 10-111. (2010).
7.
An Act Concerning Students With Dyslexia of 2015. Pub. L. No. 15-97. (2015).
8.
AntakiC.HorowitzA. (2000). Using identity ascription to disqualify a rival version of events as “interested.”Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33, 155–177.
9.
AuriniJ. (2008). Educational entrepreneurialism in the private tutoring industry: Balancing profitability with the humanistic face of schooling. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue Canadienne de Sociologie, 41, 475–491.
BardenO. (2016). Challenging dyslexia. In BamberP.MooreJ. (Eds.), Teacher education in challenging times: Lessons for professionalism, partnership and practice (pp. 155–165). New York, NY: Routledge.
BlanchettW. (2010). Telling it like it is: The role of race, class, and culture in the perpetuation of learning disability as a privileged category of the White middle class. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(2). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1233
16.
BoydW. (2007). The politics of privatization in American education. Educational Policy, 21(1), 7–14.
CainC. (1991). Personal stories: Identity acquisition and self-understanding in Alcoholics Anonymous. Ethos, 19, 210–253.
19.
CameronH.BillingtonT. (2015). The discursive construction of dyslexia by students in higher education as a moral and intellectual good. Disability & Society, 30, 1225–1240.
20.
CoburnC. E. (2006). Framing the problem of reading instruction: Using frame analysis to uncover the microprocesses of policy implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 343–379, 343.
GabrielR. (2018a). Dyslexia legislation: A brief history. Journal of Reading Recovery. 17(2) 25–34.
34.
GabrielR. (2018b). Preparing reading professionals: The case of dyslexia. Journal of Literacy Research, 50(2), 3–21.
35.
GabrielR.LesterJ. N. (2013a). The romance quest of education reform: A discourse analysis of The LA Times’ reports on value-added measurement teacher effectiveness. Teacher’s College Record, 115(12), 1–32.
36.
GabrielR.LesterJ. N. (2013b). Sentinels of trust: The discursive construction of value-added measurement in policy conversations. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 20(9). Retrieved from https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1165/1045
37.
GabrielR.WoulfinS. (2017). Reading and dyslexia legislation: The confluence of parallel policies. In LesterJ.LochmillerC.GabrielR. (Eds.), Discursive perspectives on education policy and implementation (pp. 197–218). New York, NY: Palgrave.
38.
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.
39.
GreilA. L.RudyD. R. (1983). Conversion to the worldview of Alcoholics Anonymous: A refinement of conversion theory. Qualitative Sociology, 6, 5–28. Retrieved from http://silkworth.net/downloads/pdf/soc60ocr.pdf
LoebS.FiglioD. (2011). School accountability. In HanushekE. A.MachinS.WoessmannL. (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education (Vol. 3., pp. 383–421). San Diego, CA: North Holland.
49.
LubienskiC. (2006). School choice and privatization in education: An alternative analytical framework. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 4(1), 244–293. Retrieved from http://www.jceps.com/archives/511
50.
LubienskiC. (2016). Sector distinctions and the privatization of public education policymaking. Theory and Research in Education, 14, 192–212. doi:10.1177/1477878516635332
51.
MacMillanK.EdwardsD. (1999). Who killed the princess? Description and blame in the British press. Discourse Studies, 1, 151–174. doi:10.1177/146144569 9001002002
52.
MarunaS.WilsonL.CurranK. (2006). Why god is often found behind bars: Prison conversions and the crisis of self-narrative. Research in Human Development, 3, 161–184.
PallottiD. (2012). “out of their owne mouths”? Conversion narratives and English radical religious practice in the seventeenth century. Journal of Early Modern Studies, 1, 73–95.
57.
PiccianoA.SpringJ. (2013). The Great American education-industrial complex: Ideology, technology, and profit. New York, NY: Routledge.
58.
PomerantzA. (1986). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies, 9, 219–229.
59.
PotterJ.WetherellM. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London, England: Sage.
60.
PughK.McCardleP. (2009). How children learn to read: Current issues and new directions in the integration of cognition, neurobiology and genetics of reading and dyslexia research and practice. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
RitcheyK.GoekeJ. L. (2006). Orton-Gillingham and Orton-Gillingham-based reading instruction: A review of the literature. Journal of Special Education, 40, 171–183.
RoeE. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
65.
SacksH. (1992). Lectures on conversation. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
66.
SadoskiM.WillsonV. (2006). Effects of a theoretically based large-scale reading intervention in a multicultural urban school district. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 137–154.
67.
SavasE. S. (2000). Privatization and public-private partnerships. New York, NY: Chatham House.
SleeterC. E. (1987). Why is there learning disabilities? A critical analysis of the birth of the field with its social context. In PopkewitzT. S. (Ed.), The formation of school subjects: The struggle for creating an American institution (pp. 210–237). London, England: Palmer Press.
70.
Spear-SwerlingL. (2016). Common types of reading problems and how to help children who have them. Reading Teacher, 69, 513–522.
71.
SolvangP. (2007). Developing an ambivalence perspective on medical labelling in education: Case dyslexia. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 17(1–2), 79–94.
72.
StoneD. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (2nd ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
73.
SzpiechR. (2012). Conversion and narrative reading and religious authority in medieval polemic. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
74.
TaylorL. M.HumeI. R.WelshN. (2010). Labelling and self-esteem: The impact of using specific vs. generic labels. Educational Psychology, 30, 191–202.
75.
ThompsonG.SavageG. C.LingardB. (2016). Think tanks, edu-businesses and education policy: Issues of evidence, expertise and influence. The Australian Educational Researcher, 43(1), 1–13. doi:10.1007/s13384-015-0195-y
76.
TileagaC. (2012). Twenty-five years of Discursive Psychology, British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 405–412.
77.
TorfingJ. (1999). New theories of discourses: Laclau, Mouffe and Zizek. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
WoulfinS. L. (2015). Catalysts of change: An examination of coaches’ leadership practices in framing a reading reform. Journal of School Leadership, 25, 526–557.
