Skip to content

Information & Advice

...for Students

...for Staff

 

The Dyslexic Adult in a Non-Dyslexic Institution:
Making HE more Dyslexia-Friendly

 

Ellen Morgan

 

Introduction

In recent years, there has been considerable concern about the need to encourage schools to be more ‘dyslexia-friendly’ so that dyslexic pupils can succeed.  Similarly, the importance of developing a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ environment exists in the post-16 sector, where institutions must also address the needs of their dyslexic students in order to create an atmosphere which exploits their strengths rather than emphasises their weaknesses.

This paper will concentrate on Higher Education (HE), first defining what is meant by ‘dyslexia-friendly’ and then examining the need for staff development to ensure that the appropriate climate is created.  It will explore the changes that have transpired in relation to the provision for dyslexic students in HE since the early 1990s, particularly in relation to legislation.  Finally, it will consider the potential impact of a new professional association in the hopes of suggesting a way forward for the HE sector to ensure that all dyslexic students are assured of

receiving the support they require to succeed.

BACK TO TOP

For the purposes of this discussion, several conditions must be met for an institution to be considered ‘dyslexia-friendly.’  Firstly, students must feel free to disclose their dyslexia without fear of reprisals, either from academic staff or other students.  Secondly, students must be confident that any adjustments necessary for them to compete equally with their non-dyslexic peers will be put in place, and that these adjustments are viewed as appropriate and not as an imposition or as a provision of special ‘favours.’  Finally, the contributions of dyslexic students to the academic environment must be both recognised and valued.

The British Dyslexia Association (BDA) has produced a useful resource pack entitled ‘Achieving Dyslexia Friendly Schools.’ Most of the principles outlined in this pack are easily transferable to the HE environment.   One of the powerful points is that recent legislation (DRC 2002) makes it incumbent on schools to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate the needs of children with dyslexia and other specific learning difficulties, as well as children with other disabilities.  In the light of legal underpinning, it is no longer a question of whether schools are willing to accommodate the diverse needs of a range of students, but rather how they can implement the necessary changes.  Fortunately, the law does not stop with secondary school; Further and Higher Education institutions must also comply.  This gives a powerful impetus to instigate the kind of change that many people in HE have been fighting for.

A second principle worthy of consideration is that all students benefit from ‘dyslexia friendly’ approaches, so it is not the case that institutions or lecturers have to make particular changes solely for their dyslexic students. In fact, many of the adjustments that benefit dyslexic students reflect good teaching practice for all students.  Many dyslexic students have reported that their non-dyslexic peers ask them to explain what they are doing when they use mind-maps, coloured pens, post-its, and other multi-sensory learning strategies. They find that their fellow students often adopt the very techniques that they are using.  The main difference is that non-dyslexic students will get by with their traditional study techniques; dyslexic students, on the other hand, must use multi-sensory approaches to be successful.

The BDA further stresses that dyslexia must be seen to have status and teachers must overcome their scepticism about whether dyslexia is ‘real.’  Many adults still report experiences in which their lecturers have little, if any awareness of what dyslexia is. Questions like ‘is it catching?’ or  ‘will you get over it?’ may seem outmoded, but there is still a long way to go to ensure that all teachers are aware of the issues which affect the learning of their students, including those dyslexic students who might have different learning needs.  In the HE sector, this means that it is not sufficient to employ a single dyslexia tutor and expect that this will suffice to meet the institution’s obligations. The culture of teaching and learning must change to reflect an increased understanding of the importance of learning styles and teaching styles.  Dyslexia units must not be hidden away in a secret place, but rather should have a prominence within the institution and be given dedicated space with appropriate resources to support student learning. It is essential that Senior Managers recognise the work of dyslexia units, and don’t marginalise dyslexia tutors, who often work in isolation.  The post of dyslexia tutor must not be seen as a token gesture to demonstrate that the institution is ‘meeting the needs of dyslexic students’.

BACK TO TOP

Another point emphasised by the BDA document is the need to overcome staff scepticism, and ensure that teachers take responsibility for adjusting their teaching to their pupils' needs.  To ensure this aim is met, teachers should be given training to demystify dyslexia. Staff training must take place so that all teaching staff have an awareness of the needs of dyslexic students, as well as an understanding of how their own teaching styles impact on the diverse learning styles of students in their classes. There is clear evidence of transferability here—the fact is that, until recently, most HE lecturers were not trained to teach.  We still find many traditionalists in our midst; lecturers who stand at the podium and spout knowledge for their humble students to absorb and note down, in anticipation of the exam at the end.  Perhaps the time has come to challenge that model; indeed most universities now offer courses to new members of teaching staff to ensure that they are educated beyond their subject matter and are taught about means of delivery.  Such courses are a powerful vehicle of staff development; dyslexia specialists should have an input where it is possible to stress the importance of multi-sensory teaching techniques as a benefit to all students.

Finally, the BDA document argues that marking and assessment methods must be fair.  They should allow sufficient flexibility to ensure that dyslexic students are offered every opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge in ways that maximise their strengths and minimise their weaknesses. This is an area which has huge implications at all educational levels. As a result of rigid marking systems, dyslexic students may fail to reach their potential, since marking is usually focused on the very areas that impinge on their weaknesses, rather than their strengths.  In HE, Guidance Notes for Marking are essential to give staff some insights into thinking about how they measure their learning outcomes. Interestingly, teaching staff are usually more than happy to provide blind students with exam questions on tape (or in Braille) but baulk when asked to give dyslexic students taped questions, since they feel that the students should be able to ‘read.’! There needs to be an awareness of the fact that stress exacerbates dyslexic weaknesses and this might result in the dyslexic student misreading or misinterpreting a question.  The area of examination adjustments should also be addressed in staff development and training.

Obviously, the above principles are likely to be implemented only in institutions where staff have adequate insights and understanding of the issues.  Due to the mobility of staff, it is necessary to offer on-going training which ensures that all new members of staff are made aware of the issues which can affect dyslexic learners.  Since it is often difficult to attract staff to staff development programmes, there should be sufficient written information available to keep the issues ‘alive’ and ‘on the agenda’.  This might include policy statements, leaflets advertising available services, and booklets addressing underlying scepticism about the existence of dyslexia.  Additionally, staff training sessions should be made available for targeted groups such as particular academic departments, new teachers’ courses, library staff, assessment officers and admissions officers.

One way to encourage reluctant staff to attend training sessions is to incorporate student voices in the training (Morgan, 2001). It is much harder for teaching staff to tell their own students that they are ‘too busy’ to attend training than it is for them to respond to an invitation from the Human Resources department or from the Dyslexia Support Service.   Moreover, students often welcome the opportunity to explain personally to staff members what it is like to study in an environment when their learning needs are not being recognised or met.

BACK TO TOP

However, even if the training is left to the dyslexia expert within the institution, it is useful to include anecdotal evidence to support the training.  For example, the following email serves as a more powerful reminder of the importance of implementing examination arrangements than simply pointing out what might be offered.  It was written by a Greek student who was diagnosed as dyslexic in the final year of her degree.  She spoke 3 languages (Greek, English and French) and had struggled all her life with reading and written expression in all 3 languages.  She had an extremely slow processing speed, and had never completed an exam in her life.  In this case, even the standard extra time offering of 15 minutes per hour was insufficient to overcome this problem.  However, the diagnosis was in itself an enormous relief and helped her to make sense of her previous experiences, as did the support of a specialist who understood her struggle:

Having the questions on tape was an additional help.  As I could read and listen to them at the same time, I was able to understand them and also underline the key words without getting stuck to each word, thus missing the point.

The extra time was good, but I still didn’t manage to finish any of my exams.  However, I came very close in one of them!  I must say that you were right about the room. It is better to sit the exams in a separate room, not only because of the extra time I had…but also because I found the atmosphere less tense and stressful…the fact that there are less students…and less supervisors…let me feel more comfortable and concentrate on my paper.

You have been most helpful through the whole thing.  I only wish that I found more people like you in my life (and I certainly wish I had found you….earlier.  Thank you!”

BACK TO TOP

Reflections on a Decade:

What changes have occurred in relation to provision for dyslexic students during the last ten years?  Have institutions become more aware of the issues raised by widening participation policies, particularly in relation to the support needs of dyslexic students?  A conference at Liverpool University in 1990 was perhaps the first attempt to explore provision across the HE sector.  The majority of the approximately 100 delegates attending were seeking inspiration and direction relating to what sort of service should be implemented and how it could be set up.  The work taking place at Bangor University and the (then) Polytechnic of North London appeared to be in the vanguard of national activity. In fact, there were very few other universities that had instituted provision for dyslexic students by 1990.

In that same year, in the USA, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became law.   According to this Act, a disability is ‘a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.’  This Act granted learning disabled students legal entitlement to support within all educational institutions. (Brinckerhoff, Shaw and McGuire, 1993) (The US term ‘learning disabilities’ is equivalent to the UK term 'Specific Learning Difficulties,’ hereafter SpLDs.)

In the area of disability legislation, the US had a twelve year lead on Britain, where Part IV of the DDA, the Special Educational Needs Disability Act (SENDA) did not take effect until September, 2002.  The implications of this legislation will be discussed shortly.

In 1993, I visited a range of HE institutions in the NY area to explore how they had implemented the ADA. The seven institutions visited included those both privately and publicly funded, offering a variety of services to LD students.  Three years after the implementation of the ADA, all institutions visited had complied with the minimum requirements of the legislation, and several had extended their provision to meet additional teaching needs of their LD students.  Interestingly, the prevailing ethos at the time was that LD students informed the Support Unit as to the nature of the accommodations they needed. At that time, many children with LDs were identified quite early at school, and proceeded through the school system with Individual Educational Plans (IEPs). By the time they entered college, they had good insights into their own learning needs and they were well trained as self-advocates. The dyslexia support services were mainly agents of implementation whose primary role was to ensure that necessary adjustments were put in place for such students.  Many of these students were empowered by the legislation, and significant lawsuits ensued when individuals within institutions refused to implement student requests (e.g. Dinsmore v. Pugh and the Regents of the University of California, in which a student successfully sued a mathematics professor for refusing to provide extra time on an examination)(Brinckerhoff et al.1993).

BACK TO TOP

The situation in the UK was markedly different in 1993.  Few institutions had addressed the needs of students with disabilities and issues of widening participation were only just beginning to appear on the HE agenda. In recognition of the need to address disability issues in HE, The Higher Education Funding Council in England (HEFCE) allocated £3,000,000 for projects to encourage widening participation of students with disabilities; of the 38 successful applications, 25 related to dyslexic students.

One of these projects was the design and implementation of a programme to train specialist tutors to teach dyslexic undergraduates.  This programme, which was set up at the (then) Polytechnic of North London, was the first of its kind in the country. In addition to training schemes for school teachers, there were existing programmes to train Basic and Further Education tutors to identify, diagnose and teach dyslexic students, but the Mentor Training Scheme was the first programme to target the specific needs of dyslexic students in Higher Education. Its primary aim was to enable tutors to develop appropriate teaching strategies to conform to the learning style of dyslexic students.  However, there was an ulterior motive behind the design of this programme.  The field of dyslexia in HE was like Pandora’s Box.  When I started teaching at the Poly in 1986, I was contracted for 2 hours/week to support 4 dyslexic social work students.  By 1993, I had seventy students on my books, and I no longer felt that I could meet their needs single-handedly.  Although I’d been promoted from a part-time tutor to a full-time lecturer, the demands were becoming unmanageable. I needed help, but there were very few people trained in this field. 

The obvious solution was to increase the pool of trained tutors; I therefore designed a programme in which trainee tutors were supervised to teach dyslexic students on a 1:1 basis at my institution (Morgan, SEDA Paper 94, 1996). The underlying benefit for me was that the dyslexic students could benefit from regular 1:1 teaching, which I clearly could not undertake myself.  The course ran successfully for nine years, until I left the University in 2001.  After a one year ‘rest’ it was reinstated in 2002 and has now been upgraded from an Advanced Diploma to a Postgraduate Certificate at Master’s level, a well-deserved recognition of the level of achievement of the students who complete the course. In addition, successful participants now have the option of proceeding to a Postgraduate Diploma or full Master’s degree. The majority of tutors who have succeeded on the course have remained in the field and are actively supporting students across Britain and as far away as Kenya.  Several graduates of the programme are now themselves Co-ordinators of Dyslexia Support Services, and a few have designed their own training courses.  So, the original concept of an ‘octopus’ model appears to have succeeded. The success of the course can be measured from testimonials received from many of the hundreds of students who have been supported through their degrees over the past ten years as well as from the on-going interest and commitment of the trained tutors (Morgan, E. and Obeng, M., 1997).

BACK TO TOP

There have subsequently been additional HEFCE funds designed specifically to encourage the establishment of programmes to develop provision appropriate for students with a range of disabilities in HE.  We have come a long way in the past 10 years!

In 1993, the notion of seventy students requiring specialist dyslexia support was startling in an institution with a population of over 10,000.  Since that time, the numbers have vastly multiplied.  The current figure for that same institution is over 400 dyslexic students, many of whom require regular, weekly individual support sessions to succeed on their courses.  Demand across the sector has burgeoned and continues to escalate.  There is generally an increased awareness of dyslexia—among students themselves, among schools, and at governmental level. The Disabled Students’ Allowances (DSAs) have substantially increased the amount of funding available to students. (In1990, DSA grants had a ceiling of approximately £700 for equipment; the current figure is £4,460.)  There is considerably more hardware and software available to help dyslexic students now than there was 10 years ago, and the (relative) costs have come down considerably.  (For example, part of the 1993 HEFCE bid included funding to explore the use of Voice Recognition Software (VRS) to enable severely dyslexic students to dictate directly to a computer and have their spoken words converted to text. The cost of the software at that time was £2,500 compared to the current cost starting at approximately £60.)

Governmental efforts to widen participation in HE have ensured that dyslexic students, who previously would have been denied access to HE, have now entered the portals.  The media have taken up the cause with the result that increasing numbers of people, including potential students and their families, have been made aware that being dyslexic does not have to be a barrier to academic success. As a result of awareness campaigns by the BDA and other organisations, more children are identified and statemented at school. With appropriate support these children are increasingly likely to pursue higher education. And, finally, growing numbers of lecturers are aware of dyslexia and a range of other SpLDs (although this awareness may vary enormously both within and between institutions). However, staff familiarity with the issues means that students who were not previously identified may get spotted by academics and referred to appropriate sources of support.

In short, the situation for dyslexic students in HE has greatly improved over the last decade. But is there still a long way to go? Often newcomers to the field despair when they encounter a student who has had a bad experience with a course tutor, on an exam, or with their peers. Although the situation may still not be ideal for all students, we must not lose sight of the fact that enormous progress has been made in the past 10 years.  Dyslexia is definitely on the agenda, at local, institutional levels as well as on a more global, governmental and legislative level. 

BACK TO TOP

The DSA funding for dyslexic students has enabled literally thousands of students over the years to gain access to personal computers, specialist software and specialist dyslexia tuition. Without this support, it is clear that many of these students would not have been able to achieve their potential in HE; indeed many would have dropped out with another badge of failure to add to their already low self-esteem.  There have been many battles fought over the administration of the DSA which has not always been straightforward. Local Education Authorities have interpreted DfEE guidelines on the administration of the DSA differently, and it has not been unusual for students to be disadvantaged in their ability to access funding simply because they lived in the ‘wrong borough’.  Moreover, the range of students eligible for DSAs has grown considerably. Until very recently, part-time students could not apply for the DSA.  This was a great pity since the slow speed of processing which is characteristic of dyslexia means that many students simply cannot complete the demands of a full-time course within the time frame allotted. However, those same students might excel if they were to pursue their course over a longer time period.  This is now possible; part-time students, post-graduate students and students from some previously non-designated courses (such as the Diploma in Nursing) have now all been included on the list of students eligible for the DSA.  This has opened doors to previously disadvantaged students.   There remain a few categories of students who slip through the DSA net, but current legislation requires that institutions themselves provide necessary adjustments, if they are to comply with DDA Part IV legislation.  In the US, “…education programs are obligated to pay the costs of auxiliary aids and services when other outside sources are not available” (Vogel and Reder 1998:35). Whether British HE institutions must offer the equivalent of DSAs to students who do not qualify for this funding may be a matter for the courts to decide.

BACK TO TOP

Implications of the legislation

What are the implications of the DDA Part IV (also known as SENDA—Special Educational Needs and Disability Act)? The US was over ten years ahead of Britain in designing a legislative framework to underpin entitlements for disabled students in education.  Not surprisingly, there have been many court cases in the States to test the law, and there have been huge victories for individuals fighting against institutions.  It would probably be wise for people involved in disability issues to review the judicial decisions in the US, since the experiences there would undoubtedly inform our own situation. However, this discussion will confine itself to exploring the potential impact of the main aspects of the SENDA in relation to supporting dyslexic students.

There are effectively two key points which need to be considered:

1. Definition of disability: the following definition of ‘disability’ is contained in the Act:

“A disabled person is someone who has a physical or mental impairment which has an effect which is: Substantial; and Adverse; and Long term; on his or her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.”

2. Secondly, the Act places a responsibility on the institution to anticipate the needs of disabled students and to make reasonable adjustments 

BACK TO TOP

This legislation clearly has far-reaching implications.  There are questions about whether dyslexia will always constitute a 'disability' under the legislation. For example, in the case of people who are mildly dyslexic and/or who have developed excellent coping strategies, it might be difficult to 'prove' that dyslexia has a 'substantial and adverse' effect on the person's ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. This could become a matter for a court of law to decide (Doll, J. 2003).

The issue of what constitutes a 'reasonable adjustment' may also become contentious.  Many academics will argue that the learning outcomes of their courses demand a particular level of sophistication in literacy attainments and, therefore, they may not consider it 'reasonable' to offer 'sympathetic consideration' for weak spelling, grammar, punctuation or written expression.  Once again, it may require case law to establish precedents in these areas.

However, in a ‘dyslexia-friendly’ institution, dyslexic students should be offered every opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities and their true potential. Appropriate adjustments might include:

It is important to remember that dyslexic and disabled students are entitled to these (and other) adjustments at every stage of their course, including at admissions, where it might, for example, be necessary to put examination arrangements in place if there is a formal assessment offered at this stage.

BACK TO TOP

 

Can we ensure 'dyslexia-friendly' conditions across the sector?

 

Perhaps in anticipation and/or response to the above legislation, many institutions which previously had no designated Dyslexia Units have realised the need to employ specialists. Posts have been designed to respond to the ever-increasing demands created by the rising number of dyslexic students in HE.  This is an exciting outcome of the government’s commitment to sponsoring projects to address the needs of students with a range of disabilities.  Without a doubt, across all institutions, the majority of 'disabled' students are those with dyslexia. Many newly appointed dyslexia co-ordinators or dyslexia tutors have found themselves operating in isolation.  This makes it extremely difficult to fulfil the expectations that they should be able to recommend policy, support dyslexic students, conduct staff training, and perform a host of other responsibilities.  Understandably, in an effort to avoid reinventing the wheel, newcomers to the field have tried to explore good practice by asking existing post holders how best to address a range of issues.


In response to the demand, a new organisation (Association of Dyslexia Specialists in Higher Education—ADSHE) was set up to enable dyslexia specialists to meet and discuss common concerns and to share ideas and experiences.  The hope is that, by developing, agreeing and publicising good practice guidelines, all institutions will become ‘dyslexia friendly’ and dyslexic students will be guaranteed to receive a minimum level of support regardless of where they study.

The first meeting (which took place in London in October 2001) had 25 participants, all of whom were eager to contribute their ideas and their concerns.  The enthusiastic response to on-going meetings resulted in the formation of a group which met regularly on an informal basis.  It soon became clear that there was a desire to do more than meet and chat; by May 2002, the group began discussions of formalising itself as an Association with a view to members sharing the benefit of their expertise with others in the sector. Moreover, word began to spread, and several people from other areas of the country asked if they could attend meetings. The informality gave way to the birth of ADSHE. The objectives of the association are:

BACK TO TOP

Although ADSHE has only just begun to move on from its embryonic stage, it is clear that there is considerable interest across the HE sector and, perhaps most importantly, there is considerable expertise represented in the many specialists who have entered the field in the last 10 years.  It is exciting to harness the enthusiasm and experience of many committed people, most of whom have been operating in isolation in their respective institutions.

Current provision varies greatly between institutions, and therefore students have to select carefully to ensure that they receive the support they need.  ADSHE is trying to address this variability and to ensure that a baseline provision, as guaranteed by law, is available at all institutions.  Moreover, by developing good practice guidelines, institutions will be able to measure their provision against standards set by a group of professionals.  The experiences of dyslexic students in HE should be positive and supportive; their needs should be met wherever they go, and the offer of a range of support services should be taken for granted, not seen as an enticement influencing the choice of university.  Dyslexic students should select their universities on the same basis as any other student, namely, in response to the courses on offer, and not because they will receive better support at a particular place.

BACK TO TOP

 

Conclusions:

In reflecting on the last ten years, it is clear that there has been significant progress in the provision available for dyslexic students in HE. For a start, many more dyslexic students are gaining access to higher education. The increase in numbers of dyslexic students can be explained by several factors: a response to government initiatives to widen participation, media attention to raising the profile of dyslexia and increased numbers of students being identified at school, largely as a result of the work done by the BDA and other organisations.

However, it is crucial to stress that entry to university is only the first step; what is far more relevant is to look at the number of students who succeed in higher education.  Although it is difficult to cite specific figures, The National Working Party on Dyslexia in HE estimated that “ …the true incidence of dyslexia in higher education in the UK at the present time is somewhere between 1.2% and 1.5% of all students, i.e. about 20,400-25,500 students in total” (Singleton et al.1999:42). That figure was subsequently revised; a follow-up survey (Singleton and Aisbitt 2001) found 1.9%.

It is clear that increasing numbers of dyslexic students are succeeding at university, most probably in response to the establishment of support mechanisms.  One area of support is the financial commitment made by the government to allocate individual funding in the form of Disabled Students’ Allowances. More students are receiving the DSA than ever before, and the eligibility requirements for DSA incorporate a broader range of students than previously.

The legislative underpinning of provision for students with disabilities has ensured that institutions cannot discriminate against students on the grounds of a disability and provides a framework for ensuring that students are granted ‘reasonable adjustments.’

In response to growing demands, more training programmes are available for teachers, resulting in more specialists entering the arena who are available to provide specialist dyslexia support appropriate to the needs of adult learners.  Finally, dyslexia specialists have begun to take a unified stance and are working together to establish parity of provision so that all dyslexic students can access the support they need in HE.

Progress often appears slow to dyslexia specialists who act as advocates in individual cases, especially when academics and university personnel may appear hostile.  However, we must look at the bigger picture—dyslexia, as well as a range of other SpLDs , is very much in the forefront of disability issues and the increasing number of successful dyslexic graduates will fuel the argument that, given appropriate support, society can benefit from the creative input of many adults who previously were denied access to HE.

BACK TO TOP

REFERENCES

Brinckerhoff, L.C., Shaw, S.F., McGuire, J.M. (1993) Promoting Postsecondary Education for Students with Learning Disabilities, Texas: Pro-Ed, Inc.

Doll, J. (2003) “The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001” in The Dyslexia Handbook, 2003 (Johnson, M and Peer, L. eds), pg. 185-188.

DRC (Disability Rights Commission) (2002) Disability Discrimination Act 1995:Part 4: Codes of Practice for schools, and for providers of Post 16 education and related services. Available as links from http://www.drc-gb.org/law/codes.asp  (Accessed 19th August 2003)

'Dyslexia Friendly Schools Resource Pack' (2002) Reading, British Dyslexia Association.

Jenkinson. P.”Reasonable adjustments: data protection and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995” in The Skill Journal, No. 75, March 2003, pg. 29-33

McLoughlin, D. Leather, C. Stringer, P. (2002) The Adult Dyslexic: Interventions and Outcomes, London: Whurr. 

Morgan, E. (2001) “Staff development in higher education: a student-centred approach” in Hunter-Carsch, M. & Herrington, M. (eds) Dyslexia & effective learning in secondary & tertiary education London: Whurr Publishers, pg. 237-247.

 

Morgan, E. and Klein, C. (2000) The Dyslexic Adult in a non-dyslexic world, London: Whurr.

Morgan, E. and Obeng, M. (1997) “Training mentors to teach dyslexic undergraduates: reflections and developments”,  in The Skill Journal, No. 50, December 1997, pg. 17-20.

Singleton, C. (chair) (1999) Dyslexia in higher education: policy, provision and practice. Report of the National Working Party on Dyslexia in HE. Hull: HEFCE and University of Hull.

Singleton C & Aisbitt J (2001)  A follow-up of the National Working Party survey of dyslexia provision in UK universities. Paper presented at the 5th British Dyslexia Association international conference, University of York.

Vogel, S.A. and Reder, S. (eds)  (1998) Learning Disabilities, Literacy, and Adult Education.  Maryland: Paul Brooks Publishing Co.

BACK TO TOP