The Dyslexia Debate

The Dyslexia Debate examines how we use the term 'dyslexia' and questions its efficacy as a diagnosis. While many believe that a diagnosis of dyslexia will shed light on a reader's struggles and help identify the best form of intervention, Julian G. Elliott and Elena L. Grigorenko show that it adds little value. In fact, our problematic interpretation of the term could prove to be a major disservice to many children with difficulties learning to read. This book outlines in detail the diverse ways in which reading problems have been conceptualised and operationalised. Elliott and Grigorenko consider the latest research in cognitive science, genetics, and neuroscience, and the limitations of these fields in terms of professional action. They then provide a more helpful, scientifically rigourous way to describe the various types of reading difficulties and discuss empirically supported forms of intervention.

Key Features:

• Taps into a topic of significant interest to a very large number of people across the world
• Draws upon a complex scientific literature that has often proven to be inaccessible to non-specialists
• Is unique in drawing upon expertise in genetics, neuroscience, cognitive science and education to demonstrate the limitations of the dyslexia construct

Table of Contents

Preface

Foreword

1. What is dyslexia?
2. Explanations at the cognitive level
3. The neurobiological bases of reading disability
4. Assessment and intervention
5. Conclusions and recommendations.