Ma Tefl Dissertation

The Dyslexic ESOL Learner
and
The FE Context

JOSEPH BROWN
Middlesex University, London, England

Submitted July 2008

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to take this opportunity to extend a very, very special thank you to my wife for her
patience, steadfastness and encouragement in my times of difficulty and despondency. Never
was a truer word spoken when it was said, behind every successful man is a good woman. She
has always been there for me throughout this dissertation, putting my needs above her own so
that I may realise my goal.

To my brother Abdullah (Ricco) who inspired me to traverse a path of study and from whom I
have always taken inspiration. Thanks for encouraging me never to give up, even when I myself
had given up and for always inspiring me to aim high.

I extend thanks to all my teachers, past and present, from whom I have learned so much. To
Clare ODonoghue I extend a special thank you for her support, encouragement and valuable
feedback throughout all stages of this dissertation and the MA TEFL programme in general.

Finally, I extend thanks to my colleagues, past and present, for their valuable contributions, as
well as their time and effort in completing the questionnaire. Likewise, thanks to the students for
the willingness and the courage to share their experiences by volunteering their time to be
interviewed.

ii

ABSTRACT

The paper is divided into the following chapters: Chapter 1: Introduction - the context from which
the research was born, the scope of the research, the aim & objective of the research and the
terms & abbreviations used in the research. Chapter 2: Literature Review Dyslexia (definition,
characteristics & difficulties and the emotional consequences of dyslexia); L1 Reading (top-down
process, bottom-up process and the visual cognitive process); L2 Reading (associated
difficulties); Dyslexia & L2 Reading (associated difficulties); Introduction to SLA; Disciplines
that preceded SLA and Krashens Monitor Theory. Chapter 3: Research Methodology (collecting
the data, codifying the data, anonymity and literature review sources). Chapter 4:
Results/Discussions (questionnaires, interviews and case-studies). Chapter 5: Raising
Awareness of Dyslexia and The Dyslexic Awareness Programme. Chapter 6: Evaluation.
Chapter 7: Conclusion.

iii

CONTENTS

Chapter 1
Introduction 1

Chapter 2
Literature Review Dyslexia 3
Literature Review L1 Reading 5
Literature Review L2 Reading 7
Literature Review Dyslexia & L2 Reading 10
Literature Review Introduction to SLA 13
Literature Review Disciplines that preceded SLA 14
Literature Review Krashens Monitor Theory 17

Chapter 3
Research Methodology 22

Chapter 4
Results/Discussion (Questionnaires) 24
Results/Discussions (Interviews) 28
Results/Discussions (Case Studies) 32

Chapter 5
Raising Awareness of Dyslexia 34
The Dyslexic Awareness Programme 37

Chapter 6
Evaluation 38

Chapter 7
Conclusion 40
Introduction
1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

If an ESOL tutor in a FE College setting is confronted with a learner they suspect to be dyslexic,
chances are they can refer them to the Learning Support Unit (LSU) where they will undergo a full
dyslexic assessment. Should they be diagnosed as having dyslexia - provisions, in most cases,
will be in place to provide adequate learning support, i.e. 1:1 specialist support, scribes, readers,
laptops or extra time during exams. If an ESOL tutor in a FE Training context is confronted with a
learner they suspect to be dyslexic, the matter may not be so straightforward. Most of the FE
Training institutes that I have worked in do not have adequate provisions in place to identify and
support dyslexic learners. Likewise, many ESOL tutors within this educational context do not
possess a rudimentary level of dyslexic awareness beyond the term dyslexia itself.

Once I was confronted with an ESOL learner who was having great difficulty comprehending the
basic elements of the language, no matter how often or how differently these elements were
taught. It suddenly dawned on me that this learner could be illiterate or dyslexic. Unaware of the
characteristics and manifestations of dyslexia and no institutional procedure to follow, I was
unable to adequately facilitate the needs of this learner. It was while I was working as a Learning
Support Tutor at a FE college, that an opportunity arose to undertake a two day course on
Dyslexia in the Community, which I grabbed with both hands. This furnished me with a basic
understanding of dyslexia, its characteristics and the needs of the dyslexic learner. No language
teacher should be void of this knowledge. The similitude of such a teacher is like a builder who
goes to work on a construction site armed with just a hammer and a screwdriver, only to realise
that what they also need is a pneumatic drill. Thus, the importance of ensuring that those who are
responsible for providing learning in FE are aware of the needs of dyslexic learners - both
academic and vocational, in the workplace and in educational establishments - cannot be over
emphasised. (Reid & Kirk, 2005).

Having worked as an ESOL tutor in both contexts, and as a Learning Support Tutor in a FE
College, what was most conspicuous was the disparity that existed between the two regarding (1)
the level and quality of learning support dyslexic learners were accorded and (2) the disparity
between the two contexts regarding the level of dyslexic awareness ESOL tutors possessed. The
aim of this research is to unearth the principal causes and the scope of this difference and how to
Introduction
2

better identify & support dyslexic learners within the FE training context, as well as to develop
in-house consciousness raising materials and/or workshops to furnish front-line staff, members of
management and anyone interested in dyslexia with a rudimentary level of dyslexic awareness
training. In undertaking this research, I hope to unearth and synthesise a number of good
practices employed by ESOL tutors, dyslexic specialists and other FE institutions, as well as
coping strategies employed by dyslexic learners. These findings will provide the basis for the
development of the in-house consciousness raising materials and/or workshops, to be employed
first in my own FE Training organisation and thereafter to other such like environments.

Throughout the paper, the term dyslexic learner is used with specific reference to the adult
second language (L2) dyslexic learner and not dyslexic learners in general. The terms ESOL
and L2 are used interchangeably and refer to the product. However, when specific reference is
being made to the process of acquiring a L2 the term Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is
used. Where abbreviations are used, i.e. ESOL, ELT, SLA, L1, L2, etc, the complete wording will
be used in the first instance with the abbreviation in brackets, and thereafter, the abbreviation will
be used throughout that particular chapter.

Literature Review Dyslexia
3

CHAPTER 2

DYSLEXIA
Most of us acquire our mother tongue (L1) without much difficulty such that by the time we attain
adulthood we are able to read, write and spell without giving it so much as a second thought.
However, there are those for whom the developmental process is fraught with difficulty, the
effects can last up to and throughout adulthood and often leaves one feeling disaffected with the
educational system, their difficulties and themselves. Disaffection, defiance and depression may
sound negative and gloomy but for some that is the reality of their situation (Reid & Kirk, 2005).
What could be the cause of such a perceived state of hopelessness? Dyslexia.

Definition
The word dyslexia is derived from the Greek word dys, meaning bad or impaired and lexis
meaning vocabulary or the entire stock of words in a language (Encarta English Dictionary 2008).
Due to its complex and subtle nature, dyslexia eludes easy definition and at one point, it was said
that 82 different definitions existed (Sutherland, et al, 1997), but while there appears to be great
difficulty in arriving at a consensus definition, it can be said that dyslexia is essentially a language
processing problem that affects people in various ways and degrees. It is characterized by
difficulties in one or more of the following areas: auditory processing, phonological processing,
visual processing and motor processing, although one usually predominates. Problems may
emerge in reading, spelling, handwriting, speaking, short-term memory, directions, time-keeping,
telling the time, confusion between right and left, and sequencing and organising information
(Morgan & Klein, 2004).

Perceptions
The traditional perception of dyslexia is one of difficulty or deficit. Critchley (1970), for example,
called it a veritable syndrome of language impairments (cited in Morgan & Klein, 2004: 3). The
traditional socio-perception of a person diagnosed with dyslexia is someone who is considered to
be a bit thick. Those who suffer from dyslexia and/or members of their family have argued
against this stigmatic definition, because they see it as labelling the individual as one who is
disabled in their learning, possessing less intelligence than the so called normal individual.
Many dyslexic learners will tell you that they are different as opposed to disabled. They process
information differently as opposed to little or none at all. Learning was hard for me because I was
Literature Review Dyslexia
4

fighting my natural processing, which was very different from the one I was being encouraged to
use... (Morgan & Klein, 2004: 12).

Without simplifying the complexity of the function of the brain, it is generally agreed that the left
hemisphere is responsible for processing language, as well as sequencing our thoughts and
processes information in an analytical step by step manner. The right hemisphere, on the other
hand, is responsible for processing visual-spatial information. Research in psychology has shown
that the non-dyslexic brain tends to have a larger temporal plane in the left hemisphere than in
the right hemisphere, whereas the dyslexic brain tends to have a large temporal plane in both the
left and right hemisphere. It is this side of the brain that most dyslexic learners use to process
information (Morgan & Klein, 2004).

While there is an abundance of research on the weaknesses of dyslexia, there is a dearth of
research regarding its strengths, such as the ability to conceptualise on a broader scale and to
see the whole, often before others do. The traditional view of dyslexia as a problem or deficit is
today being challenged. It is increasingly being recognised as a difference in cognition and
learning rather than a deficit. (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006). Thus we find the International
Dyslexia Association (IDA) defining dyslexia in the following way:

Dyslexia is not a disease; it has no cure. Dyslexia describes a different kind of mind, often
gifted and productive that learns differently. Dyslexia is not the result of low intelligence ...
Dyslexia results from differences in the structure and function of the brain. Dyslexic people
are unique; each having individual strengths and weaknesses... . Dyslexics often show
special talent in areas that require visual, spatial and motor integration (2000).

While many of us, to a degree, are responsible for our own success, success is not entirely in the
hands of the dyslexic learner, rather, it is the product of a combination of their endeavours, the
learning support they receive and the level of dyslexic awareness of those in educational
establishments. Learners with dyslexia deserve high quality support to ensure they achieve their
full learning potential. The requirement for their support in education is now enshrined in
legislation... . The provision of good quality, easily accessible assessment and support, is
therefore, absolutely essential (London Language & Literacy Unit, 2002: 2).

Literature Review L1 Reading
5

L1 READING

The most prominent view of reading in ELT is the psycholinguistic model in which psychologists
have distinguished between two kinds of cognitive processing in reading: top-down and bottom-
up. The top-down process suggest that readers form hypothesis about what they will encounter
and take in just enough visual information, coupled with worldly and cultural knowledge (schema),
to confirm/disconfirm their hypothesis and subsequently guess and/or predict meaning (Paran,
1996). The bottom-up process suggest that readers extract information from the printed page in a
linear fashion - a complete and systematic way. In other words, ...meaning is derived from the
sum of the parts (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006: 58).

At first glance it would appear that the two processes have little in common, but what each one
does is focus on different aspects of the reading process. In fact, they may not be as mutually
exclusive as some would have us believe (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006: 58). In most cases, the
two processes work together in a compensatory role to ensure accurate and rapid processing of
information, i.e. one type of processing will supersede the other if there is a problem with the
other.

Top-down Process
The top-down process suggest that readers do not read every word but instead, sample the text,
make hypotheses about the next word to be encountered, sample the text again to confirm their
hypothesis and so on. They need only see enough of the text to be able to predict meaning
(Paran, 1996). If, for example, a reader has just read, British summer time ends tonight at
midnight. Please remember to put your .... According to the top-down view, the reader will guess
the next word in the sentence as being clocks. They will then test their hypothesis by checking
that the word begins with c. If the hypothesis is correct, they will not take in the remaining letters
of that word and may go on to predict the remainder of the sentence.

Bottom-up Process
The bottom-up process suggest that reading occurs in a linear fashion, from the parts to the
whole, decoding letters and words, working from the bottom levels to the higher levels, i.e.
morphemes, words, sentences, paragraphs and finally the whole text. The reader observes every
letter, organises the perceived letters into words, and then organises the words into sentences
and so on, regardless of predictability. Meaning at any level is accessed only once processing at
previous levels have been completed (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006).
6

Visual Processing
...Understanding the details of the work of the eyes in reading is an invaluable tool for
understanding the process of reading. Eye movements are by far the best tool to understand the
process of normal silent reading, which accounts for well over 90% of the reading adults do
(Rayner & Pollatsek, 1989: 114). The top-down theory suggest that when we read our eyes
sweep continuously across the page until we encounter a difficult word, and at this point, we
pause to consider what we have just read or regress to reread, in order to facilitate
comprehension.

According to Rayner & Pollatsek (1989), the eye does not sweep across a line of text in a
continuous fashion but rest for somewhere between 200-270 milliseconds (msec) in what is
called a fixation
1
. On average we fixate every 1.1 word (Paran, 1996) and between the fixations
are periods where the eye is moving rapidly. These eye movements are called saccades (i.e.
ballistic movements, once started they cannot be altered) after the French word for jump. It is
during the fixation that visual stimulation is taken in. There is little or no useful uptake during a
saccade (Rayner & Pollatsek, 1989: 113).

Research has also found that skilled readers fixate at least once on the majority of words in a
text. They do not skip a large number of words, as the top-down theory suggest but instead
letters and words are processed rather thoroughly. Readers do this, primarily, because their span
of useful vision is fairly small (Rayner & Pollatsek, 1989). For example, a reader who fixates on
the d of midnight will be able to see all of the letters in this word. The reader may be able to see
enough to identify the next word as please, but will most likely not be able to identify the next
word as remember. Eye movement data, thus depicts that reading is more of a bottom-up
process than a top-down process.

My personal experience of L1 reading (English), concurs with the findings of Rayner & Pollatsek
(1989). When I am reading English I find that I read almost every word (bottom-up process) until I
am confronted with a difficult word or sentence, where I will pause to consider what I have just
read, i.e. drawing on cultural and/or worldly knowledge or regressing to reread in order to
facilitate comprehension (top-down process). I also draw on bottom-up clues like morphology and
syntax to assist in comprehending the incomprehensible. In essence, the two processes work
together in a compensatory role.

1
A momentary pause of eye movement in which approximately 7-9 word characters are within our
useful span of vision.

7

L2 READING

Beginner L2 readers attend more to top-down processes than L1 readers because they lack the
linguistic skills that L1 readers employ to decode texts (Eskey, 1988 cited in Paran, 1996). In
other words, they rely a lot on context and guessing, but as they become more proficient in their
reading, they learn to rely less on top-down processes and adopt a bottom-up process. (Paran,
1996). Processing becomes more efficient, reading becomes more fluent as word automaticity,
linguistic and cultural knowledge of the target language (TL) improves.

My experience of L2 reading (Arabic) differs slightly from the above. When I am reading an Arabic
text with which I am not familiar, I find I still attend more to the bottom-up process, but my lack of
linguistic knowledge means I am unable to use morphology and syntax for decoding. In such
instances, I turn to the top-down process; however, my lack of cultural knowledge, in the target
language (TL), means I am unable to use context to make informed guesses and so armed with a
bilingual dictionary I plod along word for word (bottom-up process). Consequently, my reading is
stilted, processing is slow and understanding often skewed. However, when I am reading Arabic
texts with which I am familiar, such as the Quran, I still attend more to the bottom-up process. In
other words, a lack of cultural awareness within the TL, which is the case with most beginner L2
readers, renders competent use of the top-down process futile.

Likewise, my experience of teaching ESOL seems to indicate that skilled L1 and proficient L2
readers rely more on bottom-up processes when reading, as well as their cultural and/or worldly
knowledge for making predictions and informed guesses to facilitate comprehension. The
beginner L2 reader, in most cases, is unable to make accurate predictions or informed guesses
(top-down process) due to their lack of cultural and/or worldly knowledge (in the target language)
and so painstakingly ploughs through every word (bottom-up process), armed with a bilingual
dictionary, trying to make sense of each word, sentence, paragraph and subsequently the text.

Semantic difficulties
One of the difficulties that L2 readers face is the inability to comprehend texts due to their limited
vocabulary and lack of idiomatic understanding, and thus it is extremely difficult for them to
ascertain meaning through context. They may understand some of the surface meaning of a text
but will almost certainly not grasp the nuances of the language or be able to make correct
inferences. Recently, I was teaching a group of Level 1 ESOL learners the use of ellipsis in
newspaper headlines. One headline read, Iraqi head seeks arms and another read, A million

8

Chinese to live on water. During my bouts of laughter, after reading several of the headlines, I
noticed that after each headline the class always remained baffled. I tried to explain the humour
of the headlines but to no avail.

Syntactic difficulties
Another difficulty faced by L2 readers is the inability to decode texts based on syntax. As a result,
accurate prediction of what word collocates with what is greatly reduced due to their lack of
linguistic knowledge. Dyslexics who are unable to order and sequence information efficiently and
accurately will find it difficult to facilitate comprehension using morphological and syntactical
clues. They will have to resort to making informed guesses which will more than likely be wrong
due to their lack of cultural knowledge.

Phonological difficulties
L2 readers who are used to a transparent orthography, i.e. 1:1 sound/letter correlation, like
Arabic, Hebrew, Turkish, Spanish and Italian, will face difficulties when trying to read English
because English is orthographically opaque, i.e. 1:4 sound/letter correlation. For example, the /k/
sound in English has four representations: c as in cat, k as in kick and ck as in back and ch
as in character. In addition to this, L2 readers will encounter letters which represent phonemes
that are not present in their language, like the /p/ sound in English, an Arabic speaker will always
pronounce it as /b/, so they will say Bakistan instead of Pakistan and or Boland instead of Poland.
Recently, one of my Entry Level 2 ESOL students, who is from Saudi Arabia said to me, I want to
go to Pristol University to study Electronic Communication Engineering. I replied Where? He
said, Pristol University in a tone as if to say dont you know Pristol University. Realising what
he meant, I said, Oh Bristol University, emphasising the /b/ sound. He said ecstatically, Yes!
Pristol University. He pronounced the /b/ sound in Bristol as a /p/ sound. I am not sure what kind
of transfer/interference was occurring there as the Arabic language does have an equivalent of
the English /b/ sound which is ba.

To become a proficient L2 reader, one has to able to analyse words according to their syllabic
and phonemic structure, as well as to blend sounds together to form consonant clusters such as
bl, sh, ch, etc. Dyslexics who experience phonological difficulties will find it extremely difficult
distinguishing the syllabic and phonemic structure of words. Phonological processing skills
involve listening to the sounds made in oral language and using knowledge of these in learning to
decode written words (Riddick, 1996: 12).

9

Visual/Graphical difficulties
L2 beginner readers who are unfamiliar with the Roman script will experience difficulty
recognising letters, differentiating between upper and lower case letters and difficulty recognising
whole words and letter patterns like, -ion, -tion and cian at the end of words, all of which is part
and parcel of the visual or graphical clues we use when reading (Kress and Van Leeuwen, 2006).

Fluent reading necessitates that one is able to remember words and produce them quickly and
accurately. Words are stored in an internal lexicon in the mind [and] as the learner reads, these
words are recognised and retrieved at speed... It is the ability to recognise words and access their
meaning rapidly that allows readers to make sense of what they read (Spiegel & Sunderland,
2006: 57). Dyslexics who experience visual difficulties will struggle to retrieve words efficiently
and accurately, as they usually suffer from poor visual short-term memory. They are also likely to
experience difficulty predicting words/meaning when reading, as the top-down process suggest,
since they suffer from poor sequencing where words are often mis-sequenced, for example, bus
may be read as sub and was as saw, etc.

Literature Review Dyslexia and L2 Reading
10

DYSLEXIA AND L2 READING

The process of acquiring a L2 is no doubt fraught with difficulties but for the dyslexic L2 learner
the problem is compounded. The L2 learner whose L1 is Arabic
2
will have to contend with the
following: (1) a different writing script (English: a, b, c, d, e - Arabic: , , , ,). (2) a
different writing order (English: left to right - Arabic: right to left). (3) a different sound/spelling
system (English 1:3 sound/letter correlation - Arabic: 1:1 sound/letter correlation). (4) syntactical
differences, such as: word order (English: SVO, Arabic: VSO). (5) morphological differences such
as:
(a) pluralisation. In English, -s or -ies is added to words to form the plural, e.g. house/houses
and city/cities, whereas, in Arabic, a new word is derived from the root word to express
plurality, e.g.
(baitun) house /
(buyuutun) houses or
(madeenatun) city /

(mudunun) cities.
(b) Possession in English is expressed by adding apostrophe -s to a word, e.g. Muhammads
house, whereas in Arabic possession is expressed by a genitive (possessive) construction,
e.g.
(baitul-laahi) Allahs House.

(c) the 3
rd
p/sing, which is expressed in English by adding -s to the verb, e.g. he/she/it plays,
whereas in Arabic, he/it plays, will be expressed through elements (in bold) of the conjugation
of the verb, e.g.
(yalabu) he/it plays and she plays, through elements (in bold) of the
conjugation of the verb, e.g.
(talabu) she plays.

Over the years, as an ESOL and Learning Support Tutor, L2 learners have, for example,
displayed difficulty grasping (1) the correct use of English prepositions and (2) the dropping of the
plural -s, the 3
rd
p/sing -s and the possessive -s when reading and/or speaking. SLA morpheme
studies conducted by Dulay & Burt (1974) regarding child L2 acquisition and Bailey, Madden &
Krashen (1974) regarding adult L2 acquisition, point to an acquisition and/or difficulty order.
When conducting reading activities with ESOL learners, many of them tend to leave off the plural
s, the 3
rd
p/sing s and the possessive s, even when overtly and covertly corrected, the errors
persist with some learners never quite grasping the concept, until such errors appear to be

2
The Arabic language is used here solely because it is the only other language in which I have some
linguistic and cultural knowledge and feel comfortable enough to make comparisons between it and the
English language.
11

fossilized
3
. If these are some of the difficulties that a L2 learner faces when trying to acquire a L2,
then what about the dyslexic learner. Undoubtedly, the difficulties will be greatly enhanced.

Difficulties
Having worked with adult ESOL learners from the Eastern Bloc, Africa (North & West), Asia and
the Middle East, those who are more likely to accept they have a learning difficulty are those who
have resided in the UK for some time. This could be due to: (1) the level of awareness regarding
Special Educational Needs (SENs) in the UK, not yet realised in their own country (2) cultural
differences regarding the perception and understanding of dyslexia and (3) the fact that provision
of adequate learning support and disability rights are enshrined in UK legislation.

The term dyslexia is used to describe individuals with normal to high intelligence [but] who have
[mild to] severe reading problems (Rayner & Pollatsek, 1989: 393). Skilled L1 readers use
semantic, syntactic, phonological and visual/graphical clues to help them understand texts
(Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006). It is only very advanced L2 readers who are able to read as
proficient as they do in a L1. The L2 reader will generally encounter much difficulty en-route to
becoming a proficient L2 reader, but as for the dyslexic L2 learner, the route will be fraught with
compounding difficulties.

Those who experience auditory processing problems are likely to have difficulty discriminating
sounds and poor auditory memory. They are likely to have problems with sound/symbol
correlation resulting in unusual spelling, difficulty decoding unfamiliar words when reading,
resulting in slow sometimes inarticulate reading, difficulty retrieving words and difficulty
pronouncing multisyllabic words (Sunderland, et al, 1997).

Those who experience phonological processing difficulties will have problems breaking down
words into their syllabic & phonemic components, as well as blending sounds together to form
words or parts of words. They would find it difficult, for example, to insert the phoneme /l/ into the
word pay to form the word play. Each word would have to be learnt anew, and coupled with the
auditory deficit overlap the problem would thus be intensified (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006).

3
Fossilization is a construct first introduced into SLA literature by Selinker(1972)... . *It refers to
language features that] become permanently established in the interlanguage of the L2 learner, in a
form that is deviant from the target language (TL) and that continues to appear in performance
regardless of further exposure to the TL (Doughty & Long, 2006: 488).

12

Those suffering from visual processing difficulties often complain about text being blurred and/or
moving around on the page. They are likely to experience poor visual short-term memory, and as
a result, find copying from the board difficult as words have to be held in the visual short-term
memory before being transferred onto paper. They are also likely to encounter difficulty with
sentence structure and word order because of poor ordering and sequencing skills, as well as
problems with spelling where letters are often mis-sequenced and spelt phonetically (Sunderland,
et al, 1997).

Those who experience motor processing difficulties usually have problems controlling the pen
and consequently are unable to produce even and tidy handwriting. Spelling is also problematic
as it is partly learnt and retained through the motor memory. If such problems exist in
the acquisition of their L1, imagine how difficult it must be to acquire the skill of
spelling/reading/writing in a L2. Undoubtedly, this will bring substantial added difficulties (ibid).

Emotional Consequences of Dyslexia
While there is an abundance of research material available regarding the educational,
psychological and cognitive effects of dyslexia, there is little research material available regarding
its social and emotional consequences. One of the key factors for this is that dyslexia is a
developmental condition which changes in its manifestation over time and so too the social and
emotional experiences of an individual (Riddick, 1996). Many adult dyslexic learners, when
reflecting on their past, place considerable emphasis on the impact of dyslexia on their general
self-esteem, personal and academic development (Morgan & Klein, 2004).

Krashens Affective Filter Hypothesis (SLA research), posits that if a persons emotional state is
less than stable their affective filter will be high and input to the language acquisition device (LAD)
will be constrained. The learner may suffer from low self-esteem, lack of motivation and self-
confidence, as well as high anxiety levels. Consequently, learning is impeded. However, if their
affective filter is low, learning is greatly facilitated (Krashen, 1982).

In order to develop a positive self-concept, an individual needs a sense of acceptance,
competence and worth, which are primarily learnt through social interaction within the family,
school and the wider society (Riddick, 1996). In some cultures, it is not always appropriate to
readily admit that one has a learning problem for fear of losing face. In many cultures, a lack of
basic dyslexic awareness and understanding is replaced by stigmatisation and ostracism (ibid).
Literature Review - Introduction to SLA
13

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (SLA)

To really appreciate the difficulty that second language (L2) learners encounter and the
compounding difficulties that dyslexic L2 face on a day to day basis, one needs to have a basic
understanding of the science of acquiring a L2. Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research
provides a window of opportunity from which we can observe the psychological, sociological,
emotional and pedagogical aspects of acquiring a L2.

Definition
The term L2 refers to the learning of another language after ones mother tongue (L1), whether it
is the second, third, fourth or fifth language being learnt. The term acquisition became commonly
used after Krashen (1982) made a distinction between learning & acquisition
4
. Today, most
scholars use language learning and language acquisition interchangeably unless they are directly
addressing Krahens work. SLA is a complex field of study whose focus is to try and understand
the processes underlying the learning of a L2. It is a multidisciplinary field of study as it draws
from many other areas of study, among them linguistics, psychology, psycholinguistics, sociology,
sociolinguistics, discourse analysis, conversational analysis, and education, to name a few
(Gass & Selinker, 1994: 1).

Concerns of SLA
The central concerns of SLA are 4:
1. What do learners acquire (i.e. the product)? Are L2 learners different from L1 learners?
2. How do learners acquire a L2 (i.e. the process)? Psychological or sociological reasons.
3. Why do learners vary in their acquisition? All L1 learners become proficient but not all L2
learners achieve native-like proficiency Why? Are individual factors like age, gender,
motivation, goals, etc, important?
4. What are the effects of instruction? Do we need formal instruction?
(Notes taken from one of lecturer Paul Fannings SLA sessions at Middlesex University, 2006).

4
Stephen Krashen postulates that learning is a conscious process achieved through formal or explicit
instruction and usually takes place in a classroom setting. Learners are usually aware of the rules (i.e.
grammar) of the second language; however, learned knowledge does not necessarily lead to production.
Acquisition, on the other hand, is a subconscious process achieved through informal or implicit means.
This usually occurs in a natural setting and is akin to a child acquiring its mother tongue (L1). Learners
are only aware they have acquired the language or aspects of it when they are using it for
communication. According to Krashen, learning cannot turn into acquisition and substantiates this by
saying that many speakers are quite fluent without ever having learned the rules of the TL, while other
speakers who have, fail to apply them correctly & appropriately in communication (Krashen, 1982: 10).

Literature Review Disciplines that Preceded SLA
14

Behaviourism
The psychological theory known as Behaviourism was founded by J B Watson (1924) in which
SLA was seen as a process of imitation, practice, reinforcement, feedback and habit formation
(Winkler, 2007: 50). The most rigorous application of this theory to the study of language was
Verbal Behaviour (1957) by B F Skinner, one of Americas leading psychologists of the day and
with whom the theory is commonly associated (Malmkjr, 2002: 59).

Rote learning
5
, an approach most unsuited to accommodate the learning needs of a dyslexic
learner, who learns holistically, i.e. ...needs to see the whole picture and likes to know how the
parts fit into the whole (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006: 142), was the tool with which L2
learning/acquisition was to be achieved. In addition, dyslexic learners conceptualise on a broader
scale than the so called normal learner and as such, find the abstract learning of rules extremely
difficult. The teacher-centred approach was the order of the day and did not take into account the
learning needs of the learner.

Behaviourist psychology also required us to see the interference of L1 habits as problem no. 1.
For example, a L2 learner whose L1 did not explicitly realise the verb to be such as Arabic,
would often omit it when speaking and/or writing English. In my experience as an ESOL tutor, I
observed many Arabic speaking ESOL learners making sentences such as: Where the book? or
Joe a good teacher. Where they are used to placing the adjective after the noun, they would
often say things like: This house big, meaning, This is a big house. Where they were used to
placing a pronoun after the relative clause, they would often say, The man who I saw him was
Muhammad. These so called errors would be seen as negative transfers by behaviourist but
subsequent SLA research found that not all errors could be linked to L1 transfer and that things
could be learnt from errors as well as good language use.

Contrastive Analysis (CA)
One methodological practice based on a belief in interference, much like the behaviourist view,
was the Contrastive Analysis approach (Winkler, 2007: 52). The hypothesis was that L1/L2
similarities would facilitate learning and L1/L2 differences would impede learning. In other words,
L1 structural habits would either facilitate or hinder the development of the L2 (Malmkjr, 2002).
Champions of the theory believed that one way of increasing language success was to contrast
the TL with the L1 to determine where they differed in structure. Once this was determined,

5
Mechanical repetition of something so that it is remembered, often without real understanding of its
meaning or significance (Encarta Dictionary 2007).
15

lesson plans and materials could be constructed. According to Fries, The most effective
materials are those that are based upon a scientific description of the language being learned,
carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner (1945: 9).

Error Analysis (EA)
The EA theory was established in the 1970s by S P Corder in an attempt to better understand
what was complex and unobservable in L2 learning. It was an alternative to CA, an approach
influenced by Behaviourism through which applied linguists sought to use the formal distinctions
between a learners L1 and L2 to predict errors. The advent of EA saw the emphasis on errors
shift from predictability to an analytical or observatory perspective. Proponents of the theory
found that not all errors were the result of L1 interference, which was a big blow to CA (Malmkjr,
2002).

EA sought to provide a typology of errors but it was fraught with the following problems:
Studying errors did not provide all the information needed to understand learners
problems.
Learners used avoidance as a communication strategy and EA did not pick up on
avoidance.
Errors were a snapshot and did not give any indication of development over time.
EA did not really study developmental sequences and there were no longitudinal
studies.
It was often difficult to determine what type of error a learner was making from the
linguistic data alone, and
things could be learnt from correct language use as well as errors.
(Notes taken from one of lecturer Paul Fannings SLA sessions at Middlesex University,
2006).

Interlanguage (IL)
The idea of an interlanguage was first proposed by Nemser (1971) and Briere (1968) but was
brought to prominence in the mid 70s through the work of Larry Selinker (Malmkjr, 2002). The
IL theory proposed an evolving process between the learners L1 and the target language (TL),
with each new stage being slightly closer in form to the TL. It is an approximation to a TL and
contains a mixture of target like and non-target like forms. Previously viewed as an imperfect form
of the TL but now regarded as rule bound like any standard language (Lydia White in Doughty &
16

Long, 2006). Rules emerge through processes such as: transfer, transfer of training, learning
strategies, communicating strategies, hypothesis testing and restructuring & recreation.

The IL Continuum is a process of hypothesis testing, where learners form hypothesises about the
structural property of the TL on the basis of the input data to which they are exposed.
Hypothetical grammars are constructed and tested receptively, as well as productively. If the
learners utterance(s) is accepted without being misunderstood and corrected, the hypothesis is
confirmed, but if the learners utterance(s) is misunderstood, defective and corrected, the
hypothesis is disconfirmed.

Errors were now seen as indicative of a learners stage of development or progress. In other
word, progress [did] not necessarily show up as greater accuracy (Lightbown, 2003: 5).
Development evolved in stages between the learners L1 and the TL and may include stages of
an acquisition order or a developmental sequence (ibid). IL development maybe U-shaped, i.e.
TL forms may suddenly be replaced by IL forms in an apparent regression, only to revert back to
the TL form. Not all IL development is perfected as some features become fossilised
6
(Selinker,
1972). Authentic use of the TL enabled learners to move along the IL continuum, all the while
adjusting their hypothesises in the light of new input (Selinker, 1972).

6
Fossilization is a construct first introduced into SLA literature by Selinker(1972)... . *It refers to
language features that] become permanently established in the interlanguage of the L2 learner, in a
form that is deviant from the target language (TL) and that continues to appear in performance
regardless of further exposure to the TL (Doughty & Long, 2006: 488).
Literature Review Krashens Monitor Theory

17

KRASHENS MONITOR THEORY

One of the most ambitious and influential theories in the field of SLA is Stephen Krashens
Monitor theory... It was the first theory to be developed specifically for SLA and has been
particularly influential among language practitioners. It laid the foundation for important ideas in
contemporary theorizing within SLA - hence an understanding of this theory is fundamental if one
is to understand the field of SLA theory and research as a whole (VanPatten & Williams,
2007: 25).

Krashens Monitor theory rest on the following five hypothesis: (1) Acquisition-Learning
hypothesis (2), Natural Order hypothesis (3), Monitor hypothesis (4), Input hypothesis and (5),
Affective Filter hypothesis.

Acquisition-Learning hypothesis
According to Krashen, there are two ways for an adult to develop knowledge of a L2 acquisition
and learning. Acquisition is said to be a subconscious process akin to a child acquiring its
mother tongue (L1). Learners are only aware they have acquired the language or aspects of it
after they find themselves using it for communication. Learning, on the other hand, is said to be a
conscious process achieved through explicit or formal instruction, usually in classroom settings
and the like. Learners in this environment are usually aware they are learning a language
(Krashen, 1982).

The main difficulty with the learning-acquisition construct is determining whether the process
being used by a given learner at a given time is conscious (as in learning) or subconscious (as in
acquisition). Krashen equates conscious learning with grammaticality judgements based on rule
and subconscious acquisition with judgements based on feel. The problem is being able to
empirically prove whether a learner is actually acting on the basis of rule or on the basis of feel.
When dealing with such inner states of consciousness, it is difficult to provide empirical evidence.
The evidence is more likely to be anecdotal, subjective or introspective.

Likewise, another difficulty with the learning-acquisition hypothesis is the notion that adults have
two distinct ways of learning a second language: consciously as in learning and subconsciously
as in acquisition. However, according to Schmidt & Frota (1986), acquisition involves noticing and
noticing involves a degree of consciousness, therefore, acquisition itself cannot be totally
unconscious and is therefore no different from learning.

18

Natural Order hypothesis
According to Krashen, L2 acquisition occurs in predictable sequences in as much the same way
as L1 acquisition. The Natural Order hypothesis posits that the acquisition of grammatical
structures proceed in predictable sequences. Children acquiring English as a L1 tend to acquire
certain grammatical morphemes, i.e. ing, -ed, -s, earlier than others, i.e. the plural marker s
and the possessive marker -s (Brown, 1973 cited in The Linguistics Encyclopedia). Shortly after
Browns report, Dulay & Burt (1974b) reported that children acquiring English as a L2 also
showed a natural order of acquisition regarding morphemes and function words regardless of
their L1, and following on from Dulay & Burts work, Bailey, Madden and Krashen (1974),
reported a natural order for adults similar to that seen in child SLA.

Most of Krashens evidence for this construct derived from the morpheme studies which was later
criticised because of the generalization of its findings and studies carried out by Dulay and Burt
(1974b) did not measure the acquisition sequence but rather accuracy of use. Also, to establish
what route the acquisition process takes, one has to consider the individual variations of the
learner, e.g. frequency, time of exposure to the target language, learning strategies, learning
difficulties such as dyslexia, etc. Unfortunately, Krashen does not account for these. Instead, he
advances the notion of several streams of development that are taking place at the same time
(McLaughlin 1987:35) and does not define streams of development, neither does he precisely
state how many streams can occur at once.

Monitor Hypothesis
The monitor hypothesis suggests that acquisition and learning are used in very distinct ways. The
acquired system initiates our normal, speech utterances and is responsible for fluency, while the
learned system comes into play only to monitor or edit utterances before or after they have been
produced by the acquired system. He also posits that learning cannot turn into acquisition. To
substantiate this claim, Krashen draws our attention to the fact that many speakers are quite
fluent without ever having learned any rules, while other speakers may know rules but fail to
apply them when focusing on form as opposed to meaning. L2 performers can only monitor
effectively when the following three conditions are met:

1. Time to think about and use conscious rules appropriately and correctly.
2. Focus on Form, i.e. correctness.
3. Knowledge of the rules of the target language.

19

Use of the conscious monitor allows performers to supply items that are learned but not yet or
late acquired
7
. Krashen suggest there may be 3 basic types of language performer.

1. The monitor over-user - constantly monitors and checks their output with their
conscious knowledge, and as a result they speak hesitantly, self correct in the middle
of utterances and lack fluency.
2. The monitor under-user - relies completely on the acquired system. They may lack
confidence in their conscious knowledge, and self-correct by using a feel for the
language.
3. The optimal monitor user - uses the monitor when it is appropriate and does not
interfere with communication. They use their learned competence as a supplement to
their acquired competence.

Krashen sees monitoring as a post-learning process, a tool used only for correcting language use
(output) in certain restrained conditions, but researchers such as Rubin (1975), Naiman et al
(1978) and Reiss (1983), have found through empirical studies that monitoring is not confined to
the periphery of SLA but that L2 learners actually use monitoring as a learning strategy.

Input hypothesis
The Input hypothesis, which is considered to be the most important construct, states that ...we
acquire (not learn) language by understanding input that is a little beyond our current level of
(acquired) competence (Krashen and Terrell 1983:32). That is, i + 1, where i = current
competence and 1 = level. Input itself can be divided into two: finely-tuned and roughly-tuned.
Finely-tuned input is targeted at the learners' present level of acquisition, aiming at one structure
at a time. That is, from a pedagogical perspective, to teach and learn a specific grammatical item
or structure. The moment the structure is learnt, the next structure from the syllabus can be
taught. Roughly-tuned input, in contrast, is used for communication and to make the teacher/the
speaker understood. Examples of roughly-tuned input are: caretaker speech, foreigner talk and
teacher talk.

Caretaker speech is considered to be of great help in the overall process of L1/L2 acquisition and
is (1) simpler in structure and form, (2) roughly tuned to the linguistic level of the learner and (3)
becomes more complex as the learner grows in linguistic maturity (Krashen & Terrell

7
According to Krashen (1982), acquisition occurs only when a learner is able to use a particular language
item accurately and appropriately 90% of the time. Until then, it has only been learnt.

20

1983). Foreigner talk, another form of caretaker speech, is characterized by modifications that
native speakers make when talking to non-native speakers such as slowing down, repeating,
restating [and] changing wh- questions to yes/no questions (Krashen & Terrell, 1983: 34) and
teacher talk, i.e. meta-language of the classroom delivered in the target language, is also used for
communication just like the others and seems to have comparative outcome on adults as it has
on children.

With rough-tuning, we are always assured that i + 1 will be covered (as opposed to finely-tuned
exercises where uncertainty exists as to the learners current level of competence), constant
recycling and review, roughly-tuned input will be good for more than one learner at a time, even
when they are at slightly different levels and roughly-tuned caretaker speech in the form of
teacher talk or foreigner talk, will nearly always be more interesting than exercises that focus
solely on one grammatical point (Krashen & Terrell 1983).

In support of this construct, Krashen uses the notion of the silent period, a span of time in which a
learner grows in linguistic competence, and by being exposed to enough comprehensible input,
starts speaking. However, the phenomenon of the silent period does not serve as sufficient
explanation as to how the language is acquired, as it could well be the result of factors such as
anxiety, motivation, personality, SENs like dyslexia, etc. Moreover, it could also be questioned as
to how it is possible for a learner to understand input containing structures that they have not yet
acquired. Another drawback is the difficulty of defining comprehensible input as it varies from one
learner to another. Thus, the construct in this regard cannot be tested. Likewise, Krashen (1982)
also claims that learners exposed to input containing i +1 will automatically acquire new
structures of that level. However, it is possible for a learner to learn a linguistic structure or
formulaic expression and use it correctly and appropriately without having understood it.

The Affective Filter hypothesis
The affective filter hypothesis states that learners vary with respect to the strength of their
affective filter. If the filter is high, input to the language acquisition device (LAD)
8
will be impeded
and/or blocked, but if the filter is low, input to the LAD will be facilitated. Affective factors are said
to account for the variation of SLA success among adult L2 learners and can be placed into one
of three categories: (1) motivation learners who are highly motivated will do better than those

8
Language Acquisition Device: deposited by Chomsky in the 1960s as a device effectively present in the
minds of children by which a grammar of their native language is constructed (Oxford Concise Dictionary
of Linguistics).

21

who are less so. (2) self-confidence learners who are confident and have good self-esteem will
do better than those who lack confidence and self-esteem and (3), anxiety learners whose
anxiety levels are low will do better than those who are anxious.

Those with ideal or optimal attitudes to SLA will not only seek and obtain more input, they will
also have a lower or weaker filter. They will be more open to the input, and it will strike deeper
(Krashen, 1982: 31). A positive attitude will encourage [learners] to communicate with speakers
of the target language and thereby obtain the necessary input or intake for language acquisition
(Krashen, 1981: 25). Those with low motivation, poor self-image and high anxiety levels will not
only tend to seek less input but they will also have a high or strong affective filter. Even if they
understand the message, input will be of little or no benefit as it will be impeded or blocked en-
route to the LAD.

Those who suffer from dyslexia may also suffer from low self-esteem, lack of motivation and high
anxiety levels. Having the knowledge of the characteristics, difficulties and learning needs of such
a learner, enables the teacher to greatly reduce those factors, creating a leaning environment in
which the learner feels secure, the affective filter is low and learning is enhanced immensely.
None of this can be achieved except with knowledge and understanding of dyslexia, first and
foremost, and teaching practices best suited to accommodate the learning needs of dyslexic
learners. A rudimentary understanding of the science of acquiring a L2 would be useful in
appropriating our expectations of learners per se.

Research Methodology

22

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

There are quite a few aspects or sensitivities that need careful consideration when undertaking
any kind of research. In order to obtain real data, relationships and trust have to be established.
Linked to this is the issue of anonymity. Participants may well want to remain anonymous for a
number of reasons, and hence writing up descriptive research/study can be problematic as the
identification of an individual by virtue of some characteristic, especially if there are few
participants, is always possible (ibid). One has to also take into consideration the best method to
adopt to obtain data, whether it be subject specific literature, questionnaires (fixed/narrative type
questions), interviews (structured/semi-structured/open) or the type of research conducted
(quantitative/ qualitative).

Collecting the Data
Data collected from colleagues (past & present) and non-colleagues (other ESOL professionals
within FE) was obtained by way of an electronic questionnaire compiled of fixed and narrative
type questions (see appendix A). The rationale for choosing to obtain their data by way of an
electronic questionnaire was because of its convenience and efficiency. The questionnaire can be
distributed, completed and returned via the internet, minimising inefficiencies and inconveniences
such as travelling, busy work schedules, family commitments, etc. additionally, the electronic form
makes it a lot easier to add (original & completed ones) appendices, as well as to include extracts
either from the questionnaires/the interviews within the main body of the dissertation.

Data collected from students, personal or otherwise, was obtained by way of a MP3 audio
recorded semi-structured interview (see appendix B). The rationale for choosing to obtain their
data by way of a semi-structured interview was that many of the students will have writing,
reading and/or spelling difficulties and this method will help to alleviate any prevailing
apprehensions and/or reservations. The set questions will provide a framework for the interview
as well as ensure constancy in the topics the respondents are asked. Also, MP3 recording the
interview makes it easier to play-back and transcribe. Recordings can be burned to CD and easily
attached to the dissertation.

Once the data has been collected and analysed, qualitatively, implications will be drawn and
recommendations made in regards to the aims and objectives of the dissertation. That is, what
Research Methodology

23

is/are the principal cause(s) of the disparity between FE colleges and FE Training providers in
respect of the level and quality of learning support dyslexic learners are accorded, as well as to
provide in-house consciousness raising materials to help raise the level of dyslexic awareness
among front-line staff, members of management and other interested parties.

Codifying the Data
Codification of the data is as follows:
Learners Learner 1, Learner 2 and so on.
Interviews Interview 1, Interview 2 and so on.
Practitioners ESOL Tutor A etc, HOD A etc, Line-Manager A and so on.
Institution A, Institution B and so on.

Anonymity
A verbal guarantee in respect of anonymity has been given to all participants.

Sources
Most of the literature (i.e. books, journals, magazines, etc) used in this dissertation was obtained
from the Questia on-line library (www.questia.com). It is the worlds largest on-line library and the
first of its kind to provide 24/7 access to the worlds largest collection of books, journals,
magazines and newspaper articles. Other sources include: personal collection of books on
dyslexia and Second Language Acquisition (SLA), SLA lecture notes, questionnaires, interviews
and various websites.

Results/Discussions (Questionnaires)

24

CHAPTER 4

QUESTIONNAIRES

The following information/data was obtained from colleagues (past and present) via an electronic
questionnaire (see appendix A), either working or having worked in a FE college or FE training
context.

FE College context

Tutor A
Tutor A is a dyslexic specialist, who holds a diploma in Specific Learning Difficulties (SpLD) and
has been working in a FE college, referred to as institute A, for 4 years. Institute A, has a
literacy learning support unit (LSU) where tutors across the college divide (i.e. all subject areas)
can refer learners for a LADS
9
screening test. Institute A also offers dyslexic awareness
sessions to new and existing staff as part of their CPD.

Tutor B
Tutor B is an ESOL tutor and has been working at institute A for 10 years. 5 years as a
permanent member of staff (ESOL tutor) and 5 years as sessional staff (ESOL Learning Support
Tutor). Due to the relatively small number of ESOL learners accessing the colleges mainstream
courses, institute A does not have in place specific provisions to identify ESOL dyslexic learners.
Rather, they are identified by tutor observation and then assessed as other potential dyslexic
learners.

Tutor C
Tutor C is an ESOL tutor and has been working in a FE college, referred to as institute B, for
5 years. He has had minimal dyslexic awareness training in the form of a one day dyslexic
awareness session conducted by Community Education Lewisham (CEL). Institute B has a
dyslexic specialist but she is not present at all enrolment sessions. Further along in the academic
year, it is possible to refer students with potential learning difficulties to the dyslexia support
officer for an assessment. If dyslexia is confirmed, an application is made for an in-class learning
support officer, which may or may not be provided depending on funding. The institute provides
general 1:1 learning support, once a week, at scheduled times.

9
Lucid Adult Dyslexia Screening (LADS): a computerised test designed to screen for dyslexia in persons
16 years and older (www.lucid-research.com).

25

Tutor D
Tutor D is an ESOL tutor/Programme Area Leader (E1 and E2 literacy). She is dyslexia trained
and has been working in a FE college, referred to as institute C, for 8 years. Institute C provides
dyslexia screening, dyslexia diagnosis and dyslexia support as well as dyslexia awareness
training for new and existing staff as part of their CPD.

FE Training context

Tutor A
Tutor A is an ESOL tutor and has been working in a FE Training context for 3 years. She has
never had any dyslexia awareness training. Institute A does not have in place any provisions
either to identify and support dyslexic learners, or any staff development programmes to raise the
awareness of dyslexia among its staff.

Tutor B
Tutor B is a Regional Manager, who works in a FE Training context and has been in her current
post for 7 years. Tutor B has had no dyslexic awareness training but states, that her Basic Skills
staff have received basic dyslexic training. Institute B does not provide any internal dyslexic
learning support but provisions are provided externally at a local FE college.

Tutor C
Tutor C is an ESOL/Basic Skills tutor and has been working in a FE Training context for 7 years.
He has had some Basic Skills dyslexic awareness training but no ESOL dyslexic awareness
training. Tutor Cs organisation (institute A) does not provide any dyslexic learning support,
neither does it provide any staff development programme in respect of dyslexia.


26

The following two graphs represent responses from colleagues (past and present) working within
the FE College or FE Training context.

Graph 1

Graph 2

Question 6 Question 8 Question 2
FE College - Yes 75 100 100
FE College - No 25 0 0
FE Training - Yes 35 75 35
FE Training - No 65 25 65
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e

t
o

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

Q6 - Have you had any basic dyslexic awareness training?
Q8 - Should institutes provide basic dyslexic training as part of staff CPD?
Q2 - Does your institute provide learning support for ESOL dyslexic learners?

Not important Important Very important
No coherent
answer
FE College 0 25 25 50
FE Training 0 100 0 0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e

t
o

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

Q7 - How important is it to have a basic understanding of dyslexia?

27

DISCUSSIONS

33% of the FE colleges involved in the questionnaire provide dyslexic awareness training to new
and existing staff as part of their CPD, while the FE Training providers involved in the
questionnaire provided no dyslexic awareness training as part of staff CPD.

50% of FE college professionals who completed the questionnaire, expressed the importance of
having, at the very least, a rudimentary knowledge/understanding of dyslexia, the remaining 50%
digressed from the question and thus did not give coherent answers. All of the FE training
professionals who completed the questionnaire expressed the same sentiments as the former FE
college professionals.

All of the FE college professionals agreed that institutes should provide dyslexic awareness
training as part of staff CPD, compared to 75% of FE training professionals, with 25% of them
giving no coherent answer (for the same reason as above). However, had those 25% specifically
addressed the question, I believe they would have expressed, to some degree, the importance of
having, at the very last, a basic level of dyslexic awareness training as part of their CPD.

All of the FE colleges involved in the questionnaire provided some level of support for dyslexic
ESOL learners, compared to 65% of FE trainers who provided no learning support for dyslexic
ESOL learners, and 35% referring potential dyslexic learners to their franchise partners (FE
Colleges) for a full dyslexic assessment.

Based on the information obtained from responses to the questionnaire, it seems that FE colleges
generally have dyslexic learning support procedures in place, although this varies from institute to
institute in terms of (1) level and quality of provisions, (2) type of provisions, (3) availability of
provisions and (4) procedures. FE Training providers, on the other hand, seem to provide little or
no dyslexic learning support/dyslexic awareness training for staff CPD.

While the percentages presented in the data is relative to the number of questionnaires
completed and cannot be taken as indicative of the whole FE picture, there does seem to be
some indication that FE Training providers are not providing adequate dyslexic learning support,
as well as dyslexic awareness training as part of staff CPD. The issue of funding seems to
permeate throughout the questionnaires, which suggest to me that the problem may intrinsically
be linked to funding.
Results/Discussions (Interviews)

28

INTERVIEWS

The following extracts are taken from MP3 recorded interviews of dyslexic ESOL learners, who
are either studying or who have previously studied in a UK FE context.

Transcription keys
I = interviewer
L 1 = learner 1
L 2 = learner 2, and so on.

Interview 1 / Learner 1
I: How old are you?
L 1: I am 43 years of age.
I: What is you nationality?
L 1: Im a Nigerian.

I: Do you have difficulty with reading, writing or spelling?
L 1: Yes, er, well reading, I dont have problem wid reading...before I finished my undergrad,
er, one of my lecturers, kind of like send me to a centre for de people wid dyslexic
problem...he found out I had a symptom of dyslexia in my approach to, to learning ... .

I: Are you receiving any learning support at the moment?
L 1: I did [learner meant to say do] but its inadequate... .
I: What kind of support are you receiving?
L 1: Well, is just about how to use the tools. How to use all this dyslexic, er, I mean, er,
professional tools like, er, recording, like how to use some of the application software
and so on and so forth...I believe, er, someone need from time to time, er, assistance,
not just only based on technology alone... .
I: Is there any part of the support that you are happy with?
L 1: Yes, I can say with the technology part.. .
I: Is there anything else that you would like to say?
L 1: Well, what I would just like to say in general, is that...more resources is needed...
especially, er, in de college and universities and these high institution learning place...
they need to give more assistance to people that are having dyslexic problem, not just
only to believe that these are dummies or these are people...that cant really tink for
themself that just want to be dependent on seeking for help by any means or so, its a
real issue, its a real issue... .

Discussions
Learner 1 is currently studying in a UK university. During the interview, learner 1 expressed how
relieved he was but at the same time how upset he was with the educational establishment for
not picking up his condition earlier. He feels that had he been assessed earlier, perhaps he,
quote-unquote, ... could have done better. He also expressed that many of his tutors did not
know how to deal with dyslexic students because they lacked a basic understanding of dyslexia

29

and were neither patient or inclined to give the dyslexic learners in their class extra assistance.
Learner 1 also believes there should be a body that tracks and supports dyslexic learners beyond
the realms of academia (i.e. the work place, etc) because of the difficulties they encounter.

(please see case study 1)

I: Could you please state your name, age and nationality.
L3: ... my age is, I born ... 7/3/1960 and in Algeria.
I: How old are you now?
L3: 48 [years old].

I: In your own language, which is Arabic, do you have any difficulty with reading, writing or
spelling?
L3: Both reading and writing. I can read in Arabic but its a bit slow.
I: What about writing?
L3: Writing, same thing.
I: And spelling?
L3: Same thing. Its a bit slow.
I: Right.
L3: Spelling is not bad.
I: Do you have the same problems in English?
L3: Yes.

I: When did you arrive in the UK?
L3: 1988.
I: Did you take up any type of learning or studies?
L3: Yes, I did.
I: Did you go to school or college?
L3: I went to school [he means here some type of post 16 community schooling initiative].
I: How long was you there for?
L3: bout a year.
I: Did you experience the same problems, with reading, writing and spelling?
L3: No.
I: Why?
L3: I learned a bit... .
I: How did you find the attitude and the approach of the teachers?
L3: They, it was good, it was good...any, like any learning I start, like doing here, all the
teachers...they nice, they teach you proper...

I: Did you go on to any colleges...?
L3: Yeah, I was on and off...not all at once...I went to one college in Bromley, I done there
six months.
I: And how did you find that experience?
L3: ... is one teacher she was there, he wasnt very, very helpful, shes, he, he come to you
like you know, when you basic, basic English or basic any language, you have

30

someone let you understand, er, new words, how you read them how you write
them...and she will...this lady...he come to you he give you something, piece of paper.
OK! Do this one and I come check you later. If I [lots of stuttering] if I cant, cant read it,
how Im going do it?
I: So nobody [I meant here the teacher] would explain what it said or what it meant?
L3: Exactly! But I learned. Its no bad. I dont say is, is you with me? Not every day you got
someone different. Not all the time one teacher. Some of them is, is good, is like you
know...I learned a bit, is better when I was before... .
I: Was you ever tested for dyslexia at that college?
L3: No.
I: But learning was a bit better there?
L3: Yeah! Not bad.
I: Ok.

I: Did you go on to any other college? Have you studied in any other place?
L3: Yeah, when I was er [long pause], what do you call it er, I was signing on [unemployed]
and job centre they send me one college in, in Bromley as well.
I: And how did you find that?
L3: Yeah! That teacher. That one, I learned with her good.
I: Was there something different in her approach that the other teachers?
L3: ....shes the same as you. She let you understand you words. And she trying to give you
something to, to work your brain, to do it yourself. Courage you know, give you
courage.
I: Encouragement.
L3: Encouragement, yeah... .
I: ...you still havent been, how you might say, professionally assessed for dyslexia.
L3: No.

Discussions
During the interview, it transpired that learner 3 left school at the age of 10 after completing only
four years of schooling. Teachers in Algerian culture are accorded the same rights as parents and
can discipline a child, usually by smacking, as if the child were their own. Learner 3 was always
being disciplined, as he put it, for taking too long to grasp things and for not completing his class
work or home work. Eventually, learner 3 could not take being disciplined anymore and decided
to leave school.

He also expressed how he found his teachers in Algeria very impatient and unsympathetic
towards his difficulties and had they been more understanding and patience with him he would
have completed his schooling. He enjoyed going to school but hated the classroom. As far as he
was concerned, the teachers were only there for the money and were not bothered whether he
learned or not. Their primary concern was to put in the hours so that they got paid.


31

However, despite the bad experience and despite his age and personal commitments, learner 3
is determined to improve his reading, writing and speaking skills, so that he may be able to one
day help his children with their homework or simply read a book and understand it without too
much difficulty. With the right guidance, help and support, there is no reason why he should not
go on to realise his dreams.

Results/Discussions (Case-Studies)

32

CASE STUDY 1
Learner 2 is a 41 year old Palestinian whose early educational years were marked with difficulty
in reading, writing and spelling in his native tongue, Arabic. Consequently, at the age of 14, he
dropped out of school. In 1998, he arrived in the UK unable to adequately articulate himself in the
English language and duly enrolled on an English course at a FE college where he was neither
screened or assessed for dyslexia. He remarked how difficult he found it but could not articulate
himself well enough to convey his difficulties. None of his tutors picked up his difficulties and five
months later he left the course feeling frustrated and dismayed. Whatever English language skills
learner 2 now has, he learnt from his wife and picked up from his friends and work colleagues.

Over the years, he has managed to cope with his difficulties due to the unparalleled help of his
wife, and at work, as a gardener/supervisor, he has managed to cope with the help of his
colleagues, when writing up reports or filling out forms. However, learner 2 is frustrated and
saddened that at 41 he is still unable to read, write or spell properly, and in an attempt to try and
address this problem, he joined my ESOL programme that I run during the evenings.

It was while learner 2 was doing the initial assessment that my suspicions were aroused to the
fact that he could be dyslexic. I was able to make this observation because of the basic dyslexic
awareness training that I had previously undertaken. His writing was untidy (which is a
manifestation of someone who has poor motor skills) and he spelt phonetically (see fig 1).
Consequently, I screened
10
him for dyslexia, and as suspected, the results suggested he was
dyslexic and should undergo a full diagnostic assessment
11
.

During my time with him, I discovered that learner 2 suffers from a poor working short-term
memory and has problems processing/transferring information (linguistic input) to the short-term
memory (intake), from the short-term memory to the long-term memory (i.e. the developing
interlanguage system) and subsequently as output in correct and appropriate communicative
language use. Likewise, he also suffers from a poor visual short-term memory and has difficulty
remembering words, i.e. he often forgets the pronunciation and spelling of words that he has read

10
Dyslexic screening is a set of questions (based on the characteristics of dyslexia) which can be carried
out by an informed teacher or other professional and will give some indication as to whether or not a
learner may be dyslexic and should be referred for a full diagnostic assessment (Spiegel & Sunderland,
2006: 137).
11
A full diagnostic assessment is carried out by a trained and qualified dyslexic assessor, who will
conduct an in-depth diagnostic interview and will carry out certain tests. A positive diagnostic
assessment brings certain entitlements such as special considerations during exams, readers, scribes,
laptops and more (ibid).
Results/Discussions (Case-Studies)

33

two lines previously, resulting in his reading being laboriously slow and stilted. Learner 2 also
suffers from poor motor skills which renders his writing untidy and sometimes illegible, all of which
has been mentioned in chapter 2.

At 41 years of age, learner 2 is making an attempt to improve his English language skills. He
recently joined my ESOL programme that I run during the evenings. However, as I am not
qualified to give him the specialist support that he needs, nor am I able to provide him with
entitlements such as a laptop, dyslexic learning computer programmes, etc, I am thus trying to
convince him to join a FE college, where he will get professional help and adequate learning
support.

Raising Awareness of Dyslexia

34

CHAPTER 5

RAISING AWARENESS OF DYSLEXIA

Dyslexia is an information processing problem which can cause difficulty in reading, writing and
spelling, and can affect a person emotionally, as well as socially. It is often hereditary and varies
in degree of severity from person to person. In order to identify and adequately support ESOL
dyslexic learners within FE, every teacher should be armed with a basic understanding of
dyslexia and its associated difficulties, and in my humble opinion, a rudimentary understanding of
the process of acquiring a L2. This understanding will allow for better identification of dyslexics,
better provision of adequate learning support, better facilitation of learning in terms of planning,
differentiation and delivery, as well as realistic expectations regarding learner achievement.

A language teacher who lacks these two basic understandings or has one but not the other, will
be unable to adequately accommodate the learning needs of a dyslexic learner, either in the
planning or delivery stages of a lesson. Consequently, the learners increasing frustration and
despondency will cause their affective filter (Krashen, 1982) to be high, which in turn will
constrain or block input to the LAD (Chomsky, 1959). Positive attitudes towards, learning, the
classroom and the teacher will manifest itself in self-confidence, self-esteem, motivation, low
anxiety levels and enhanced learning & attainment levels.

Stephen Krashens Affective Filter Hypothesis (SLA Theory) states that L2 learners vary in
success according to the strength of their affective filter. The pedagogical implication of the
affective filter hypothesis is that language teaching should take into account factors that
contribute to destabilising the emotional state of a learner (such as dyslexia and its associated
difficulties), so that pedagogical goals do not only include supplying optimal input but also
creating a situation that promotes a low filter (Krashen & Terrell, 1983: 38). The learner who
feels at ease in the classroom is more likely to seek out input and may be more accepting of the
teacher as a source of that input.

According to Ellis (1997), the process of acquiring a L2 is twofold (see fig1). The first stage is
where input becomes intake. This involves a conscious awareness of language features in the
input (i.e. noticing), which is then absorbed and stored in the short-term memory and
subsequently becomes intake. The more salient the input is at the outset the more likely it will
be noticed (Skehan, 1998). If learners who are disengaged during a lesson, pay the least

35

attention to the input (which, according to SLA theory, is central to the process of acquiring a L2)
then how much more so the dyslexic learner who may already be suffering from a catalogue of
compounding difficulties; for example, the cognitive inability to filter out background noise and is
thus easily distracted. The second stage is where the intake is absorbed into the learners long-
term memory (i.e. the developing interlanguage (IL) system), and changes to the IL only occur
once intake (language features) is stored in the long-term memory and subsequently processed
and discharged as output in communicative language use.

fig 1 (Ellis, 1997)

A poor working short-term memory means the dyslexic learner will have difficulty attending to the
input (i.e. noticing it) while at the same time processing it. In other words, s/he will experience
difficulty making the transition from short-term to long-term memory.

A poor visual short-term memory means the dyslexic learner will be unable to process words
efficiently and accurately because they have difficulty storing information in the visual short-term
memory long enough for it to be processed/transferred to the long-term memory. For example, a
dyslexic learner will learn a word in one instance but forget it a few lines later, as I have noticed
with learner 2 in case study 1 above. As a result of this problem, reading is usually a laborious
task and in most cases, you will find their reading to be stilted and slow, as is learner 2s.

Copying from the board is also problematic. Visual information (input) has to be held in the visual
short-term memory before being cognitively processed and transferred to paper as writing
(output). More often than not, sentences are erased from the board before processing is
complete, as non-dyslexic learners would have already completed the task. Consequently, what
the dyslexic learner has in front of them is usually incomprehensible. In order to minimise or

36

eliminate the difficulties associated with copying from the board, the teacher should, where
possible, provide more handouts of a reasonable font size (14pt) and avoid black print on white
paper (i.e. use coloured paper) as those who suffer from visual processing difficulties often
complain about the destabilisation of the print, i.e. the print moving about on the paper.

So what does this all mean pedagogically? It means that teachers need to take into account
these factors and more, in the planning and delivery stages of a lesson, because the dyslexic
learners processing and comprehension skills are much slower than the non-dyslexic learner.
Therefore, the teacher needs to be cognizant of the characteristics and difficulties of dyslexia and
the dyslexic learners learning needs. Likewise, the teacher needs to be extremely patient and
realistic in terms of their expectations re learner achievement. Attending to these factors will help
to facilitate a low affective filter and thus maintain motivation, low anxiety levels and enhanced
learning.
Dyslexia Awareness Programme

37

DYSLEXIC AWARNESS PROGRAMME

While working as a Learning Support tutor at a FE college, staff were given the opportunity to go
on a three day course on Dyslexia in The Community (which was being run by Dyslexia Action
12
)
as part of the colleges staff CPD programme. Prior to going on the course, I had no knowledge of
dyslexia beyond the term dyslexia itself. Subsequently, even though the information/knowledge
was rudimentary, its immense value cannot be denied. It has enabled me to better understand,
differentiate and facilitate the dyslexic learners needs. It is this information/knowledge that has
also enabled me to formulate a basic, cost-effective, dyslexic awareness programme, which FE
institutions who are faced with financial constraints, can deliver as part of their staffs CPD
programme, either in the form of a PowerPoint presentation or a handbook to be used as a
self-study guide (see appendix C).

12
www.dyslexiaaction.org.uk
Evaluation

38

CHAPTER 6

EVALUATION

Personal experience of working within the FE college and FE training context, highlighted a
disparity regarding the provision of adequate learning support that dyslexic learners were
accorded. I found that the FE colleges, in which I had either worked or studied, tended to have in
place dyslexic learning support procedures, while the FE Training organisations tended to have
very little/no provisions. My concern was whether or not the disparity that I had observed was
indicative of a local or nation-wide problem. In order to determine the scope of the situation and
unearth its principal causes, I needed to conduct a comparative analysis of the two contexts.

One of the obstacles I encountered while trying to analyse the two contexts was the dearth of
research information available regarding the FE Training context. This handicapped the
investigation and skewed the results. Furthermore, I was unable to obtain substantial information
from the questionnaires and the interviews because of (1) the small number of questionnaires
that were completed and returned and (2) the small number of learners that were actually
available to be interviewed.

When I undertook this project, I decided to approach it systematically, which is the way I normally
work. However, this proved to be counterproductive, because by the time I arrived at the interview
stage (summer holidays), I no longer had access to several of the learners. I found, to my
detriment, that several of the learners I had earmarked for interviews had gone on holiday, which
narrowed the breadth and the scope of data at my disposal.

Likewise, when I began to transcribe the first interview, I did not realise it would be so tedious and
time-consuming. In order to ascertain specific and relevant information, I had to wade through a
lot of peripheral material, which was largely due to the semi-structured format of the interview.
I retrospectively decided to stick to the pre-formulated questions and curtailed the follow up
questions and answers, so as to reduce the amount of peripheral information obtained. I also
modified the original questionnaire because it failed in its design to ascertain certain information
pertinent to the dissertation objectives, as well as simplifying several of the questions to facilitate
learner comprehension.

Evaluation

39

Conducting this research has made me appreciate the need to be flexible in my working
approach, because the goals at the outset of [a] project often need to be modified to fit the
exigencies of time, place and individuals (Gass & Schachter, 1996: IX). Where questionnaires
and interviews are concerned, these need to be done as early as possible, to avoid any
unanticipated eventuality, such as questionnaires not being returned in good time, or questions
not coherently answered, or interviewees suddenly becoming unavailable. All of which impacted
upon the observation/result of the research.

Conclusion

40

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSION

Those involved in the business of FE, i.e. policy makers, funders, planners, teachers, etc, all have
a responsibility to secure arrangements that help learners with dyslexia succeed. Managers need
to ensure that support for dyslexic learners is part of their institutes policy and that their front-line
staff have undergone, as a bare minimum, a basic level of dyslexic awareness training (London
Language & Literacy Unit, 2002). If an institute shirks these responsibilities, dyslexic learners will
have been done a disservice, and the equal opps policy that they boast will not be worth the
paper it is written on.

While it is the good intention of many FE institutes to provide dyslexic awareness training as part
of staff CPD and adequate dyslexic learning support, we cannot divorce ourselves from the fact
that the issue, like most issues, is intrinsically linked to funds and funding requirements. Many FE
institutes, in particular training providers, are faced with financial constraints which dictate how
budgets are prioritised. Unfortunately, dyslexic training/learning support is not high on the list of
priorities, a fact corroborated by the following statements of professionals working within a FE
Training context:

ESOL learners who are illiterate in their own language, or who may be categorised in this
manner [i.e. dyslexic], receive little help as they are not included in the Learning and Skills
Councils (LSC) funding budget, therefore they are not a target for providers/institutions who are
driven by the funding requirements (Appendix A: Questionnaire, copy 5).

It would appear that there is a cost factor, insofar that not many training providers are willing to
employ qualified practitioners to deal with this particular problem (ibid: Questionnaire, copy 7).

No clear allocation of resources for dyslexia training (ibid: Questionnaire, copy 3).

Focus of provision is not geared enough to learner, e.g. prime concern is to make money
through job outcomes & exam passes [a time-bound funding requirement] (ibid: Questionnaire,
copy 2).

Conclusion

41

What such institutes need is a cost-effective way of providing a basic level of dyslexic awareness
training, in order to furnish their front-line staff with the necessary tools with which to better
identify and support dyslexic learners within the organisation. The main objective of this research
was to (1), unearth the principal causes of the disparity regarding the level and quality of dyslexic
learning support that L2 learners are accorded (2), better identify and support dyslexic learners
within FE training and (3), develop in-house consciousness raising materials and/or workshops to
furnish front-line staff, members of management and anyone interested in dyslexia with a
rudimentary level of dyslexic awareness training.

Objective 1
The data collected suggest that the principal cause of the disparity is intrinsically linked to
funding. Cash starved institutions, mostly FE training institutions, are unable to afford dyslexic
specialist tutors and/or send their staff on dyslexic awareness training programmes as part of
their CPD. These institutes are also constrained by time-bound funding requirements that often
dictate how they prioritise their spending. FE colleges, on the other hand, seem to generally
have in place dyslexic learning support policies, as well as dyslexic awareness training
(internally/externally) as part of their staffs CPD. However, the respective data must be viewed
qualitatively and not quantitatively, because the dearth of information obtained renders the
research incomprehensive and therefore not a true reflection of the situation.

Objective 2
In order to better identify dyslexic learners, one needs to be armed with, at the very least, a
rudimentary level of dyslexic awareness training. To this end, I believe the Teacher Information
Pack has provided some rudimentary information, which will enable any language teacher to
better identify and support dyslexic learners within the classroom, as well as providing a platform
from which to they (the teacher) can embark on further dyslexia studies, if they so wish.

Objective 3
Cash starved FE training institutions, who cannot afford specialist tutors and/or to send their staff
on costly dyslexic awareness training programmes, will be able to provide cost effective in-house
dyslexic awareness training, which will furnish their front-line staff, members of management and
anyone interested in dyslexia, with the necessary tools to better identify and adequately support
dyslexic learners within the institution. Furthermore, the material can be used in a format that best
Conclusion

42

suits the institution, i.e. a PowerPoint presentation, workshops or a staff Dyslexic Awareness
handbook.

Although the research is incomprehensive and cannot be taken as a true reflection of the
situation, it has highlighted the main cause of the disparity between the two FE contexts as that of
funding and its attached requirements and/or a profit driven agenda, as one professional
remarked, The focus of provision[s] is not geared enough to [the] learner, e.g. [the] prime
concern is to make money through job outcomes & exam passes (Appendix A: Copy 2).

While the true scope of the problem cannot be determined from this research, the problem within
the FE training context regarding the level and quality of learning support dyslexic learners are
accorded cannot be denied. In order to determine the true scope of the problem, a more
comprehensive research will have to be conducted, taking into consideration the pitfalls
encountered as mentioned in chapter 6.

Appendix A

Clean Copy

INTRODUCTION

My name is Joseph Brown and I am currently doing a MA TEFL with Applied Linguistics course at
Middlesex University. As an ESOL tutor with experience of both FE colleges and FE training
providers, I have been concerned about the differing level of provision regarding dyslexic ESOL
learners within the two contexts.

In order to try and address this issue, my dissertation entitled The ESOL Dyslexic Learner and The
FE Training Context, will investigate the validity of such concerns and unearth, if validated, (1) its
principal causes, (2) how such learners can be better identified & supported and (3) provide in-house
consciousness raising materials and/or workshops to enhance the level of dyslexic awareness
among ESOL tutors within FE Training organisations.

To undertake this research, I need to collect data from the professionals (i.e. HODs, Line Managers,
Dyslexic Specialists, ESOL and Learning Support tutors) who work or have worked in such
environments and to this end have compiled the following questionnaire. I know many of you will be
inundated with personal and professional commitments, but your assistance, by way of completing
this questionnaire, will be most helpful and very much appreciated.

Not all questions will pertain to you since it depends on your position within your organisation.
However, please answer all relevant questions completely and to the best of your ability. Your name
and the name of your institute will not be mentioned in the dissertation guaranteeing complete
anonymity.

QUESTIONNAIRE

1 What FE educational context do you work in, what is your position in the organisation and
how long have you held that position?

2 What provisions does your institute have in place to identify and support ESOL dyslexic
learners?

3 If the answer is none / very little, what do you think are the principal causes?

4 If you were in a position to implement changes in your institute as regards supporting adults
with dyslexia, what would you change (i.e. policy, practice & procedure) and why?

5 As an ESOL tutor, have you ever encountered an ESOL learner that you have suspected to be
dyslexic, if so, how did you deal with it and what was the outcome?

6 Have you had any basic dyslexic awareness training?

7 How important is it for you to have a basic understanding of dyslexia and why?

8 Should institutes provide dyslexic awareness training for their teaching staff as part of their
(CPD), if so, how could this best be delivered: workshops, information packs, in-house
awareness sessions, teaching resources complete with teachers notes, other please state?

9 Any other comments/observations?

Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire.

Appendix A

Returned Copies

Copy 1

- ESOL
- Programme Area Leader (E1 and E2 literacy)
- 8 years

learners?
- screening
- dyslexia diagnosis
- dyslexia support



- more dyslexia awareness training needed for teachers generally
- more in-depth dyslexia training needed for more teachers (not just for staff who support
dyslexic learners)

5 Have you ever encountered an ESOL learner that you have suspected to be dyslexic, if so,
how did you deal with it and what was the outcome?

- yes
- I do dyslexia screening questionnaire
- I try to use teaching strategies which are appropriate to dyslexic learners
- I arrange suitable support
(I am dyslexia trained)

Yes


Very important - I teach basic ESOL literacy and my students needs are complex an understanding
of how people learn to read and write, and the types of difficulties which learners encounter is very
important if I am to teach effectively


- yes, dyslexia awareness training should be delivered as part of CPD
- how it is delivered may need to be tailored to the needs of the teachers and their previous
knowledge etc


Appendix A

*Copy 2


ESOL tutor / Teacher (Training Provider), 2.5 years.

learners?

None.


Focus of provision not geared enough to learner, e.g. prime concern is to make money through job
outcomes & exam passes.


Training (in-house and external) for staff regarding dyslexia and SEN; improve ILP diagnostic testing
at initial assessment, perhaps, to avoid students going through system unidentified.


I do not know the signs to recognise dyslexia; but came into contact with one student who I noticed
had a particular bad spelling pattern, spoke to her about it and she told me she was dyslexic. The
outcome was that I was of no use to her whatsoever.


Never.


Differentiation is key to teaching and it is our job to do so meet the needs of learners (not the other
way around).


Yes. All [workshops, information packs, in-house awareness sessions, teaching resources complete
with teachers notes] and provide a library of quality books on the subject. Some classroom based
research would take it further (and the sharing results).


Within Basic Skills context we are bound to see higher incidences of learning difficulties. Therefore,
teachers need to have the right methods to accommodate these students.

* Original copy completed by hand (pen).

Appendix A

Copy 3


- ESOL Lecturer
- 5 Years

learners?

MINIMAL TRAINING FOR ALL STAFF, APART FROM TWO OR THREE (OUT OF FORTY-FIVE)
WITH VARYING DEGREES FOR SUBJECT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE. THE COLLEGE HAS A
DYSLEXIA SPECIALIST BUT SHE IS NOT PRESENT AT ALL ENROLMENT SESSIONS.

FURTHER ALONG IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR, IT IS POSSIBLE TO REFER STUDENTS WITH
POTENTIAL LEARNING DIFFICULTIES TO THE DYSLEXIA SUPPORT OFFICER FOR
ASSESSMENT. IF THIS IS CONFIRMED, AN APPLICATION IS MADE FOR A LEARNING
SUPPORT TUTOR TO BE PROVIDED IN CLASS. THIS MAY BE AVAILABLE, DEPENDIGN ON
FUNDING, AND MANY STUDENTS GET ONE-ON-ONE SUPPORT ONCE A WEEK IN THE
COLLEGE LIBRARY DURING SCHEDULED SESSIONS.


1- NO CLEAR ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES FOR DYSLEXIA TRAINING.
2- MANY TEACHERS SEE THE LIT. CLASSES WHERE MOST DYSLEXIC STUDENTS END UP
AS HARDER TO TEACH AND LESS REWARDING IN TERMS OF STUDENT PROGRESS.
3- BASIC TEACHER TRAINING DOES NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF LEARNING DIFFICULTIES
AT ALL.


OFFICIALLY WE ARE COMMITTED TO EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. NOT MUCH TO CHANGE
THERE.

AT THE MOMENT WE ARE A VERY TARGET-DRIVEN DEPARTMENT AND WE CANNOT
AFFORD TO BE PROVIDING MANY OF THE LEARNING AND SOCIAL FUNCTIONS
ASSOCIATED WITH FE IN THE PAST.

I WOULD CHANGE THE LOW LEVEL OF STAFF AWARENESS. I WOULD CHALLENGE THE
NEED TO QUANTIFY LEARNERS PROGRESS PURELY THROUGH EXTERNAL EXAM RATES.


YES. THE LEARNER WAS REFERRED TO LEARNING SUPPORT FOR ASSESSMENT. MY
SUSPICIONS WERE CORRECT AND WEEKLY SUPPORT SESSIONS WERE ALLOCATED.

Appendix A


NOT MUCH.
A ONE DAY SESSION AT CEL (Community Education Lewisham).


LIKE MOST OTHERS, I HAVE BEEN ASSUMING THAT DYSLEXIA GETS PICKED UP AT
ENROLMENT, AND THEN IT BECOMES SOME OTHER TEACHERS PROBLEM. CERTAINLY ON
TEACHER I KNOW WITH SPECIFIC TRAINING IN LITERACY ISSUES FELT PIGEONHOLED AND
RESENTFUL OF BEING IN CHARGE OF A LIT CLASS EVERY YEAR.


AS LONG AS SPECILALIST CLASSES ARE PROVIDED, IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE SEEN AS
SOMEONE ELSES JOB.


Appendix A

Copy 4


FE; 5 years as permanent staff; 5 as sessional staff.

learners?

None specific to ESOL learners; they are identified by observation and then assessed as other
potential dyslexic learners.


Not a large ESOL population across college in mainstream courses.
Dyslexia in ESOL Ss difficult to identify because of e.g. low level of English language acquisition,
Mother tongue/script interference, lack of educational history/documentation.


Re-instate Adult literacy classes in the community; increase awareness amongst teaching staff of
dyslexic problems


Yes, several; talked to dyslexia specialist colleagues to adopt strategies to help with e.g. spelling and
language acquisition, and arrange assessment, and exam concessions.


Yes


It is important to be able to identify dyslexic problems with ESOL students, to adapt teaching
techniques and materials to be better able to support their individual needs, and to understand that
such problems pose additional barriers for the learner in understand their subject and in acquiring
written English skills.


Yes, by all of these methods. Would also be useful for dyslexia specialist support tutors to meet
mainstream tutors with students, at e.g. tutorials, to discuss joint planning.


Appendix A

Copy 5


FE franchise partner, I am a Regional Manager and have been so for 7 years.

learners?

College additional support team, none internally.


Mainstream dyslexia is the key focus point for many colleges/providers. ESOL learners who are
illiterate in their own language, or who maybe categorised in this manner, receive little help as they
are not included in the LSC (learning and skills council) funding budget, therefore they are not a
target for providers/institutions who are driven by the funding requirements.


The IAG, practice would need to reflect dyslexia needs at an early stage, currently some staff have
had the basic dyslexia training, but have not had anything more advanced due to time and cost
implications.


I dont know


The Basic Skills staff have received basic dyslexia training.


It is important for my staff, in order to fulfil the learners needs, and if we cannot do so, then we should
sign post them to an organisation that can.


Yes, through both internal and external workshops, with organisations sharing both their experience
and points for best practice.

9 Any other comments/observations? N/A

Appendix A

* Copy 6


NESCOT (North East Surrey College of Technology), Dyslexia Tutor, 4 years.

learners?

Tutors can refer any learner directly to Learning Support for a screening test (LADS). Also use a
questionnaire to establish further background information, e.g. previous education experiences in
own language, plus short assessment of digit span and [word not clear].


Very difficult to separate dyslexia from unfamiliarity with English language and spelling.


Have some time allocated to research good practice, develop questionnaire further.


N/A


Diploma in SpLD.


I work only with students whose learning difficulties may be due to dyslexia.


Yes. At NESCOT, dyslexia awareness sessions are offered as part of staff development CPD
programme for new staff.


* Original copy completed by hand (pencil).

Appendix A

Copy 7


I work as a Basic Skill/ESOL Tutor for a community based training provider [area of institute removed
to protect institutes identity]. I have held this position with this organisation for six years.

learners?

There are no provisions.


It would appear that there is a cost factor, insofar that not many training providers are willing to
employ qualified practitioners to deal with this particular problem.


I would make it a prerequisite that if dyslexia is suspected during the initial test and interview or
where individual might say that he or she is dyslexic, there would be a referral system whereby the
individual would be seconded to an appropriate organisation for support.


Yes I have encountered such learners during my time as an ESOL teacher. However, with the lack of
organisational support one tries ones best to accommodate the individual. This involved some form
of inclusiveness with the structure of the lesson whereby through the process of the differentiation
the individual can participate.


Yes I have had some basic training but this was to do with Basic Skills learners and not ESOL
learners.


It is important, if as a teacher one is going to at the very least, ensure equality and inclusiveness
within the classroom.


All the above but suffice to say such workshops and training would be at the behest of directors and
managers getting such programme on the way by inviting professional and qualified practitioners to
deliver training.


There need to be an investigation as to whether the DFE has within its budget, any provision that
local authorities can use that meet the needs of dyslexic learners who falls outside the state sector.

Appendix B

APPENDIX B

Q
U
E
S
T
I
O
N
S

(
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l

v
e
r
s
i
o
n
)

NAME: Joseph Brown

STUDENT NO. 2231416

STUDENT SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW

The following set questions will provide a framework for the MP3 audio recorded interview, to
ensure constancy in the topics the respondents are asked. However, many of the follow-up
questions will be formulated during the interview, giving both the interviewer and the interviewee
the flexibility to probe.

1 How old are you and what is your nationality?
2 How would you describe your early learning years?
3 Do you suffer from dyslexia?
5 When was you diagnosed with dyslexia?
6 Do you experience difficulties in one or more of the following areas: reading, writing, spelling,
speaking or listening?
7 Are you studying at the moment, and if so, is it with a training provider, college or university?
8 Were you assessed for dyslexia?
9 Are you receiving learning support at the moment?
10 Are you happy with the support - if yes what things are you happy with?
If no - what things are you unhappy with?
11 what improvements could be made to improve the level and quality of support dyslexic learners
receive?
12 Any other comments?

Appendix B

Q
U
E
S
T
I
O
N
S

(
r
e
v
i
s
e
d

v
e
r
s
i
o
n
)

NAME: Joseph Brown

STUDENT NO. 2231416

COURSE TITLE: MA TEFL with Applied Linguistics

STUDENT SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW

The following set questions will provide a framework for the interview (MP3 audio
recorded) to ensure constancy in the topics the respondents are asked. Follow-up
questions will be formulated during the interview, giving the interviewer and the
interviewee the flexibility to probe.

1 Could you please state your name, age and nationality?
2 Do you have difficulty with reading, writing or spelling either in your own language, in English, or
in both?
3 If yes to either - What kind of problem(s) do you have?
4 How long have you had this/these problem(s)?
5 Has it been difficult coping with this/these problem(s)?
5a If yes - how have you coped?
6 Have you ever been assessed for dyslexia?
6a If yes - where were you assessed?
7 Are you studying at the moment?
7a If no - have you studied in the UK before?
7b If yes - Are you receiving any learning support at the moment?
7c If yes - What kind of support are you receiving?
8 Are you happy with the support?

8a If yes What things are you happy with?

8b If no - What things are you unhappy with?
9 What do you think could be done to improve the quality of support you receive?
10 Is there anything else that you would like to say or ask?

Appendix C
i

DYSLEXIA
Teacher Information Pack

The objective
The objective of the information pack is (1), to understand what dyslexia is (2), to be aware of
possible indicators (3), to be able to better identify and support dyslexic learners and (4), to better
differentiate and facilitate learning within the classroom.

Signs of dyslexia
Recognising that a learner maybe dyslexic is the first port of call. It is from here that initial
screening, relief and acceptance, diagnostic assessment, adequate and appropriate learning
support, motivation, self-confidence and personal achievement all set sail. However, recognising
the unrecognisable is an impossible task. The similitude of any language teacher void of this
rudimentary knowledge is like that of a bird with one wing. The challenge for teachers is summed
up in the now famous saying of Harry Chasty (1981) when he said, If dyslexic [learners] dont
learn the way you teach, can you teach them the way they learn? These are [learners] who can
and do learn, [they just] learn differently (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006: 137).

The following are sign-posts to help us recognise if a learner could be dyslexic.

Reading
complains of glare from black print on white paper.
complains of text moving about on paper, i.e. not stabilised.
re-reads frequently to comprehend text.
loses the middle of multisyllabic words.
loses place, i.e. misses words / lines when reading.
reluctance to read aloud.
ignores punctuation
poor inference
hesitancy or lacks fluency when reading.

Spelling
unusual, bizarre spelling (language / laglege).
right letters - wrong order (blue / belu).
phonetic spelling (village / vilege).
letter reversals (b written as d).
vowel confusion (/a/ in cat pronounced as /u/ in cut).
inconsistencies from day to day.
Appendix C
ii

Writing
poor or confused grammar and punctuation.
confused structure.
difficulties copying accurately and quickly.
writes very little.
untidy, sometimes illegible handwriting (see fig 1).

fig 1

Strengths
good visual thinkers.
good problem solving skills.
ability to process information holistically.
Very creative (i.e. actors, engineers, designers, architects, IT experts, entrepreneurs,
etc).

Generally
bad time-keeping.
bad organisational skills.
often losses things or track of time.
forgets appointments, places, names, dates, etc.
confuses left and right.
poor concentration short attention span.

Appendix C
iii

Associated Difficulties

Motor difficulties
Motor difficulties can make writing extremely tiring for a dyslexic learner; consequently, they are
unable to control the pen for long periods at a time and thus produce untidy and sometimes
illegible handwriting (see fig 2, a students piece of free writing taken from an initial assessment
session).

fig 2

Phonological difficulties
Phonological difficulties manifest themselves in (1), the inability to identify, separate, arrange and
sequence sounds in multisyllabic words (2), the inability to correlate sounds with letters and to
remember the correct form or orientation of the letters (3), the inability to organise and arrange
sounds for spelling and (4), the inability to select the correct pattern of letters to represent each
sound.

Memory difficulties
Dyslexia can affect (1), the short-term working memory, i.e. the inability to hold new information
while thinking about it and processing it (2), the short-term visual memory, i.e. poor word
recognition & retrieval, resulting in poor spelling and hesitant reading (try reading fig 3, an idea
taken from the Dyslexia in the Community course) and (3), the short-term auditory memory, i.e.
Appendix C
iv

the inability to remember oral instructions, poor note-taking, poor comprehension of spoken
language and poor concentration.

fig 3

Sequencing difficulties
Sequencing difficulties manifest themselves in the following ways: (1) the inability to sequence
words and sentences (2), following a sequence of instructions in the correct order (3), copying
down numbers correctly, i.e. 62 may be written as 26, etc and (4), organising information in a
logical order.

Visual difficulties
Visual difficulties manifest themselves in the following ways: (1) text can appear distorted, i.e.
floating & blurry (2), there is a constant glare when reading black print on white paper (3),
difficulty copying from the board and taking notes (try copying fig 4) and (5), losses place when
reading, i.e. misses words or lines making comprehension somewhat haphazard.

fig 4

Spoken language difficulties
A person with dyslexia may (1) be slow to understand spoken language (2), mispronounce words
often and (3), experience difficulty recalling new vocabulary.

Appendix C
v

Information processing difficulties
Dyslexia can affect the speed at which information is processed. Those who exhibit this problem
need (1), more time to comprehend things (2), more time to consolidate and reiterate information
and (3), lots of recycling to facilitate learning.

Reading comprehension difficulties

Weak decoding
skills
Poor sequencing
skills
Short term
memory
weakness
Inadequate
vocabulary
Weak inferential
skills
Lack of reading
practice
Causes of difficulties

Appendix C
vi

Teaching Dyslexic Learners

In an ideal world, every teacher would be dyslexia trained and every learner who appears to be
dyslexic would be referred for expert assessment and support. However, the reality is the
opposite. In order to compensate for this deficiency within FE, in particular the FE Training
context, the following information has been formulated to enable tutors who lack adequate
dyslexic awareness training/knowledge and institutes who cannot afford to employ SENs tutors or
send staff on dyslexic awareness training courses, to better identify and support dyslexic learners
within the ESOL classroom and the institute as a whole.

Dyslexia friendly approach
The term Dyslexia Friendly was first coined by the British Dyslexic Association to refer to
teaching methods that best suit dyslexic learners. These methods are varied and multi-sensory,
as well as meaning-based as opposed to rote in nature (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006).

Multi-sensory approach
Dyslexic learners, as we now know, experience difficulties in a number of different areas. It is
therefore essential to include a range of teaching methods when planning lessons (i.e. visual,
kinaesthetic, auditory, tactile, etc) to optimise learning and retention. A multi-sensory lesson will
create more avenues for the input to be received, thus enhancing the opportunity for learning to
occur.

Holistic top-down approach
Dyslexic learners learn better when they are able to conceptualise the whole before tackling its
parts. It is therefore essential to give a clear overview of the subject matter before delving into the
finer elements of the subject. Based on an analysis of the information regarding dyslexia in the
following works: Teaching Basic Literacy to ESOL Learners (Spiegel & Sunderland, 2006),
information should be broken into small manageable bits and there should be a clear link from
one to bit to the other, with lots of recycling to reinforce memorisation and to facilitate learning.

Appendix C
vii

Meaning-based approach
Dyslexic learners have poor short-term memories but good long-term ones (ibid: 144). When
learning a new word, learning and retention is optimised when the thing being learnt can be
linked/is related to some personal experience or real-life situation, i.e. something concrete,
something tangible.

Lecture notes
Encourage a variety of note-taking methods, i.e. flow charts, mind-maps, etc (see fig 5, a
students mind-map, taken from a learning support/study session).
Encourage use of Dictaphones.
Provide handouts or copies of slides (PowerPoint presentation).
Colour code information for clarity to facilitate the organisation of information.
Leave notes up longer to accommodate slow processing of information and
writing/copying impediments.
Wherever possible, minimise the need to copy or take large quantities of notes.

fig 5

Appendix C
viii

Handouts
Use clear and reasonable size sans serif fonts (i.e. Arial/Comic Sans, point 14).
Use pastel coloured paper (i.e. avoid black print on white paper).
Double space text.
Break up text, i.e. use bullet points, etc.
Use graphics or diagrams where possible.
Highlight and explain new/key vocabulary and formulae.

Assignments
Provide specific, written guidance on what format/level of detail/amount of research is
expected.
Provide examples, where possible.
Provide writing frames where appropriate.
Encourage planning demonstrate how.
Expect to repeat instructions/provide further copies of assignment briefs.
Break complex assignments into smaller sections with clear interim deadlines.
Adapt the method of assessment for severely dyslexic learners.

Allow for slow processing
Provide same information in different ways, i.e. multi-sensory provision.
Make links explicit, review previous material.
Use concrete examples to link learning points.
Make information memorable e.g. via stories, images, songs, etc.
Break up information.

Give precise instructions
Dyslexic learners are not good at inference, so demonstrate instructions where possible.
Provide examples of content and structure.
Signpost key information clearly.

Organisation
Colour coding.
Timetables.
Reminders.
Clear deadlines.

Revision
Make information memorable by using humour, colour, cartoons, images, etc.
Offer strategies for memorising information, i.e. mnemonics, rhythms and/or songs, etc.

Praise
Remember to highlight success and achievement no matter how small.
Add on

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aslanian, Y (1985) Investigating the Reading Problems of ESL Students. ELT Journal Volume 39/1
January 1985. OUP.
Bailey, K, Madden, C & Krashen, S (1974) Is there a "natural sequence" in Adult Second Language
Learning. Language Learning, Volume 24.
Brown, R (1973) A First Language: The Early Stages. Harvard University Press.
Chasty, H (1981) What is dyslexia? A developmental language perspective. In Snowling, M (Ed) (1985).
Childrens written language difficulties. Windsor: NFER Nelson.
Chomsky, N (1959) Review of Verbal Behaviour (B F Skinner, 1957). Language 35: 26-58, 1959.
Critchley, M (1970) The Dyslexic Child. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
Doughty, C & Long, M (2006) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Dulay, H & Burt, M (1974b) Natural Sequences in Child Second Language. Language Learning, Volume
22/1.
Ellis, R. (1997). SLA Research and Language Teaching. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Eskey, D (1988) Holding in the Bottom: an interactive approach to the language problems of second
language learners in Carrel 1, et al (eds).
Fries, C (1945) Teaching and Learning English As a Foreign Language. University of Michigan Press.
Gass, S M & Schachter, J (1996) Second Language Classroom Research: Issues & Opportunities.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah, NJ.
Gass, S M & Selinker, L (1994) Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates. Hillsdale, NJ.
IDA (International Dyslexia Association).
Krashen, S D (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Pergamon.
Krashen, S D (1982) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Prentice Hall International.
Krashen, S D & Terrell, T (1983). The Natural Approach: language acquisition in the classroom.
Pergamon.
Lenneberg, E (1967) Biological Foundations of Language. New York.
Lightbown, P M (2003) SLA Research in/for the Classroom. In Language Learning Journal, No. 28.
London Language & Literacy Unit (2002) Supporting Dyslexic Students in Further Education. South Bank
University, London.
Malmkjr, K (2002) The Linguistics Encyclopedia (2
nd
Ed). London & New York - Routledge.
McLaughlin, B (1987) Theories of Second Language Learning. London, Edward Arnold.
Morgan, E & Klein, C (2004) The Dyslexic Adult in A Non-Dyslexic World. Whurr Publishers, London &
Philadelphia.
Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics, 2Ed (2007). OUP.
Paran, A (1996) Reading in EFL: Facts or Fiction. ELT Journal Volume 50/1 January 1996. OUP.
Rayner, K & Pollatsek, A (1989) The Psychology of Reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.

Appendix C

Reid, G & Kirk, J (2005) Dyslexia in Adults: Education & Employment. University of Edinburgh, UK.
Riddick, B (1996) Living with Dyslexia: The Social & Emotional Consequences of Specific Learning
Difficulties. Routledge, London.
Selinker, L (1972) Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 209-31.
Shah, I (1964) The Sufis. London: Jonathan Cape.
Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Spiegel, M & Sunderland, H (2006) Teaching Basic Literacy to ESOL Learners. LLU+ London South Bank
University. London.
Stanovich, K E (1980) Toward an interactive compensatory model of individual differences in the
development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly Volume 16/1.
Sunderland, H et al (1997) Dyslexia and the Bilingual Learner. LLU+ London South Bank University.
VanPatten, B & Williams, J (2007) Theories in Second Language Acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Watson, J B (1924) Behaviourism. Chicago and NY University of Chicago Press.
White, L (2006) The Nature of Interlanguage Representation: Universal Grammar in SLA. In Doughty, C J
& Long, M H (2006) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, 3
rd
Ed. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Winkler, E G (2007) Understanding Language. Continuum Publishers. London, NY.

WEBSITES

www.interdys.org/index.htm (International Dyslexia Association).
www.lsc.gov.uk (Learning and Skills Council).
www.questia.com (Questia on-line library).

Ma Tefl Dissertation

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Ma Tefl Dissertation

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Dyslexic ESOL Learner

(baitul-laahi) Allahs House.

(talabu) she plays.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi