Is there such a thing as ‘dyslexia’? In this guest blog, Philip Kirby and Maggie Snowling offer a historical perspective on the debate [Photo credit: Béve Hornsby (1915-2004), founder of the Dyslexia Clinic at Barts Hospital, London. Courtesy of the UK Dyslexia Archive. Learn more about Dr Hornsby and her contributions to dyslexia here].
The scientific consensus around dyslexia as an identifiable learning difficulty remains strong. This is supported by the knowledge and experience of thousands of teachers, educational psychologists, SEN coordinators, parents, and people with reading and spelling difficulties themselves. Despite this, arguments that dyslexia is ‘invented’, and/or an unhelpful term, refuse to completely disappear. In this research brief, a list of these arguments is presented. While there is a genuine debate to be had about labelling and how best to describe dyslexia, most arguments against dyslexia rest on a misunderstanding of dyslexia science, and/or how specific learning difficulties like dyslexia are identified and diagnosed. As with any condition, dyslexia’s science changes over time. However, the direction of travel is firmly toward confirming and better understanding dyslexia as a distinct disorder, varying in severity from mild to severe.
Arguments against dyslexia fall into two camps: 1) that dyslexia does not exist at all; and 2) that the term ‘dyslexia’ is not useful. These are different propositions, but are often conflated, making them important to differentiate at the outset. In the first, dyslexia itself is questioned, it being suggested that dyslexia is simply a synonym for low ability or poor educational attainment – in other words, that there is no such thing as dyslexia at all. In the second, the dyslexia label is critiqued, it being suggested that, while the term dyslexia may describe genuine difficulties, it has become so loaded with political baggage and misunderstanding that a new label should be substituted in its place. This brief presents and critiques the key arguments from each of the two camps, showing how they stand against over 100 years of dyslexia research, as well as current scientific understanding. Specifically, it addresses four from the first camp:
- That dyslexia does not exist at all
- That people with dyslexia and general poor readers are the same
- That all poor readers benefit from phonics-based interventions, so the cause of their difficulties must be the same
- That universal scientific consensus has yet to be achieved, so dyslexia should be abandoned
and four from the second camp:
- That dyslexia diverts resources away from others who need help
- That ‘dyslexia’ is a term used for political reasons, rather than scientific reasons
- That dyslexia was invented by ‘worried mothers’ to boost their children’s confidence
- That the terms ‘dyslexia’, ‘dyspraxia’ and ‘ADHD’ are interchangeable
Arguments against dyslexia the reality
1. Dyslexia does not exist at all
In the 1870s, the kinds of difficulties we now call dyslexia were first identified in Germany1. By the 1880s, the term ‘dyslexia’ was coined, meaning ‘difficulty with reading’2. Later, science around the condition developed elsewhere in Europe, in Britain, and in the United States. By the 1960s, the presence of a specific learning difficulty associated with reading and spelling was clear, and organisations like the Word Blind Centre for Dyslexic Children in London were created to explore it further3. Studies of the condition found that the presence of such difficulties was unrelated to educational level, but often clustered in families. That there is a genetic basis for dyslexia, therefore, has been suspected for over 100 years4. Beyond this, the work of organisations like the Word Blind Centre helped to curtail the practice of labelling children with dyslexic difficulties as either stupid or disruptive – common accusations of the time5. [see here for an overview of the history of dyslexia]
Today, we know much more about dyslexia. It is widely-accepted that dyslexia is a specific learning disorder. We know 