- cross-posted to:
- positive_news@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- positive_news@lemmy.ca
You must log in or register to comment.
Yeah, no, about 20% of population don’t read enough.
Non-USA large studies suggests the rate is about 3%. And that’s generous given how badly dyslexia is defined and tested for.
It’s usually tested for by checking if you read worse 1-2 standard deviations than the mean.
What the heck. That’s lumping actual issues with inexperienced reader.
Might still be helpful to diagnose inexperienced readers in the first 3 years of education
If a person gets an excuse (diagnose) then isn’t it more likely they will just stop reading - and teachers won’t be able to force them to read, thus making the kids stuck with the lack of skill? It’s how you’ll get even higher practical illiteracy rates.
Testing kids and grading their reading skills is fine, but dyslexia is massively overdiagnosed. To be honest it might make sense to drop any special treatment for “dyslexic” kids.
The intention here is that diagnosing people earlier will help dyslexic children learn different strategies for reading and that will help them read more, which seems to be supported by research.
My point is that dyslexia rate is much lower than 15-20% (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8183124/) and different strategies for dyslexic people might not be a) suitable and b) necessary for vast majority of misdiagnosed kids.
They are also very costly.
I’m all for grading kids skills, but I don’t see how with the current misdiagnosis trend this will end well.
If you have hope that yes, it will be better that way, let’s try it. I just don’t trust the quality solution (like Structured Literacy or OG) wil be deliverwd.
