Aiding dyslexic students in the EFL classroom.

(1)

Aiding dyslexic students in the EFL classroom.

Tools and methods for helping upper secondary school students with dyslexia reach a passing grade.

Att stötta dyslektiska elever under Engelskundervisningen. Verktyg och metoder för att hjälpa dyslektiska gymnasieelever nå ett godkänt betyg.

Andreas Bragd

Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences English

English III: Degree project 15 credits

Supervisor: Peter Wikström Examiner: Ying Wang Fall 2020

(2)

Title: Aiding dyslexic students in the EFL classroom at upper secondary school level:

Tools and methods for helping dyslexic students to learn English and reach a passing grade.

Titel på svenska: Att stötta elever under Engelskundervisningen på gymnasienivå: Verktyg och metoder för att hjälpa dyslektiska elever lära sig engelska och nå ett godkänt betyg.

Author: Andreas Bragd

Pages: 39

Abstract

Teachers with or without special training encounter dyslexic students daily. As such, these teachers need to have tools for these encounters. One hundred seventy-two teachers took part anonymously in an online survey. This paper looks closely at the following: the multi-sensory approach, extra- classroom groups, the impact of motivation and how to motivate students, and the social implications of dyslexia in a classroom situation and what can be done about them. This paper also includes the so-called special stipulations, a part of the Swedish school ordinance that allows a teacher to omit criteria when grading a student under specific circumstances. The survey showed that there is a myriad of different aids being used and that there are many different views on the special stipulations, some positive and some critical. Finally, one of the most important findings shown by the study is that there is a general lack of knowledge about the impact of the opacity of English orthography.

Keywords: Dyslexia, Special stipulations, Multi-sensory approach, Motivation and EFL teaching.

Sammanfattning på svenska

Lärare med eller utan särskild utbildning möter elever med dyslexi dagligen, och behöver därmed verktyg för dessa bemötanden. Etthundrasjuttiotvå lärare deltog anonymt i en online undersökning.

Den här uppsatsen tittar närmre på följande: det multi-sensoriska tillvägagångssättet, grupper utanför klassrummet, hur bristen på motivation påverkar elevernas inlärning och hur man kan motivera dem. Även möjliga sociala konsekvenser dyslexi kan ha i en klassrumssituation och vad man kan göra åt dem diskuteras. Till sist ingår även undantagsbestämmelsen, även känd som PYS- paragrafen. Den är en del av den svenska skolförordningen och tillåter en lärare att bortse från enstaka kursmål när det kommer till betygssättning under särskilda omständigheter.

Undersökningen visade att det finns ett stort antal hjälpmedel som används, och många olika tankar om undantagsbestämmelsen, en del positiva, andra kritiska. Slutligen så visar min undersökning att det finns en brist på kunskap om den låga transparensen hos den engelska ortografins påverkan.

(3)

Nyckelord: Dyslexi, Undantagsbestämmelsen, PYS-paragrafen, Multi-sensoriska tillvägagångsättet, Motivation och inlärning av Engelska.

(4)

1. Introduction and aims

Learning a foreign language is never easy, and any foreign language student can vouch for the constant struggle in overcoming different problems that arise along the road. Issues are also bound to arise, some of which are due to teaching methods and can as such be solved by taking another approach to teaching. Teaching students with disabilities demands more of the teacher. Dyslexia is a common form of learning disability, with around 5 to 10% of the population being dyslexic (Kere, Finer, 2008, p. 25). This means that most teachers of English as a foreign language will come across students with dyslexia.

Merriam-Webster defines dyslexia as “a variable often familial learning disability involving difficulties in acquiring and processing language that is typically manifested by a lack of proficiency in reading, spelling, and writing” (“Dyslexia”, n.d.). A dyslexic person will experience significant problems when learning how to read and write. This is a study about English teaching as a second language in Sweden at an upper secondary school level, and both skills are, of course, part of course syllabi for English (Skolverket, 2011). This means that despite their disability, dyslexic students have to reach the syllabus goals to pass the course. Helping them pass the course is, of course, a necessity that brings with it challenges for both teacher and student. However, numerous methods can help dyslexic learners develop their writing and reading skills. This paper concerns teachers experiences of such methods and their thoughts on them.

Previous research discusses the same topic but in different ways. A study conducted by Rajala Johansson (2013) also concerns the complications dyslexia brings to Swedish students learning English. However, her study was conducted using interviews and focused on qualitative data, whereas this study is conducted using a survey and focuses on quantitative data. Furthermore, where Rajala Johansson's study focuses on physical resources, this focuses mainly on non-physical aids and methods. Crombie (2000) has written much about what can be done in the classroom to help dyslexic learners learn a foreign language.

However, that research handles how dyslexia affects dyslexic English speakers' learning of French and focuses on the Scottish school system. This paper is built mainly upon quantitative data, gathered from 172 teachers from all over Sweden. This sampling pool is considerably greater than that of other studies concerning this topic, and it does as such present data in a way that previous research has not.

(6)

2

The aim is to examine what teachers in the field do to lessen the adverse effects of dyslexia on their students. In order to do this, the following research questions are posed:

1. What are the teachers’ opinions on, and experiences of, the special stipulations?

2. How do teachers view the outlook for dyslexic students to reach a passing grade?

3. How widespread is the knowledge about how the opaque nature of English orthography impacts learning how to read and write it, especially among dyslexic learners?

4. Do the teachers know about, and make use of the multi-sensory approach?

In what follows, Section 2 presents a background on dyslexia, second language learning, English orthography, and English in Swedish upper secondary education. Section 3 describes the material and methods for this study, including a discussion of ethical concerns and methodological limitations. Section 4 presents the results of the study, and, finally, Section 5 discusses the results and outlines the conclusions of the study.

(7)

3

2. Background

In this section, the concept of dyslexia will be discussed. A discussion of English orthography will also be included. Finally, teaching methods that aim at lessening the difficulties that dyslexia brings to the classroom situation will also be discussed. This section gives a working definition of Dyslexia (Section 2.1), reasons for why English has a particularly difficult writing system (Section 2.2), the alphabetical principle (2.3), and different methods and approaches a teacher can use when working with dyslexic students in a classroom situation (Section 2.4). The section also describes the Swedish educational context in which this study was conducted. A special focus is given to the so-called special stipulations, parts of the Swedish school ordinance that can allow a teacher to exclude course requirements under certain circumstances (Section 2.4).

2.1 Dyslexia

Written language consists of graphemes, or letters, and clusters thereof. On the other hand, spoken language consists of phonemes, or sounds, and clusters thereof. Dyslexia is a learning difficulty that makes it difficult for the learner to translate clusters of graphemes into phonemes, and vice versa (Kere, Finer, 2008. p. 28; see also British dyslexia association, n.d.-b). Reading and writing is, as such, a difficult undertaking for dyslexic learners. The cause for dyslexia has not been fully established, but it is thought to be genetic in nature (Kere, Finer, 2008, p. 102). Dyslexia is, however, not a disease where one can say that you either have it or you do not.

There is a gradient from good through average to very poor reading, and it is largely arbitrary where one draws the line and says that children below this line are candidates for the label ”dyslexic” (Ellis, 2016, p.78)

Ellis goes on to say that this does not invalidate the term and diagnosis of dyslexia (p. 78).

However, it makes it challenging to establish just how high a percentage of the population is dyslexic (Ellis, 2016, pp. 78-79), which means that Kere and Finer’s statement that roughly 5- 10% of the Swedish population is dyslexic might not be entirely accurate (2008, p. 25).

Furthermore, it means that not all dyslexic students are equally affected (Ellis, 2016, pp. 79- 80).

The term specific learning disability is sometimes used when discussing dyslexia. However, as this term also includes ADD and dyspraxia instead of only dyslexia, it does not see as much

(8)

4

use today as it has in the past (Pollock, Waller & Politt, p.xiii). The term will not be used in this paper, and its mention here is solely to explain why.

2.2 The difficulties with reading and writing in a second language

It might be easy to believe that the difficulties a dyslexic person might experience when writing should be the same, regardless of the language being used. However, this is not entirely true, as some languages seem to be more challenging to learn than others (Paulesu, et al., 2001, p.2165; see also Dyslexiföreningen, 2007). The degree of difficulty connected to reading and writing in a specific language depends on the writing system's transparency. An entirely transparent writing system would have a kind of spelling that is thoroughly phonetic in nature, i.e., a system where spelling completely reflects each word's pronunciation.

However, no entirely transparent writing systems exist today, although there are languages whose writing systems are more transparent than those of other languages (Ellis, 2016, pp. 4- 5), such as Greek and the two phonetic alphabets used in Japanese (Recer, 2001).

The English language has quite a long history, during which the language has gone through many changes, amongst them phonetically. The writing system initially adhered to these changes, but has fallen behind and remained almost wholly unchanged since the 16th century (Ellis, 2016, pp. 5- 6; McGuinness, 1998, pp. 81-98). There were many systems, and they were all based on local varieties of the spoken language, and as such, they were very transparent. Local spelling conventions changed over time but remained mostly transparent.

During these times, a standard language was less needed as documents were either written in Latin or were meant only for the region in which they were written. The standardisation of writing led to the written language becoming less transparent, as it could not reflect all regional varieties of the spoken language. Moreover, it did not go through the same changes as the spoken language when it had become set. Consequently, it lost even more transparency over time, and English spelling is no longer a very good indicator of pronunciation (Ellis, 2016, pp. 5-6; McGuinness, 1998, pp. 81-98). In other words, it can be difficult for any learner of writing to guess how a word should be spelt from how it sounds.

Although the English orthography can cause problems for everyone, its non-transparent nature makes things especially difficult for dyslexic students (Defior, Serrano, 2008, p. 82;

Recer, 2001). When looking at English and a language with a more transparent writing system, such as Spanish or Italian, the difference between the level of opacity of the languages and what it brings becomes clearer. Defior and Serrano state that languages with a more transparent orthography are less problematic for dyslexic learners than those with more opaque writing systems, such as Spanish (2008, p. 82), and Recer (2001) states that

(9)

5

people can be dyslexic in one language, but not in others. Helmuth (2001) instead uses Italian as an example. Standard Italian is a relatively young language, as it was not formalised until 1861. (Europass, 2018). The regularity of Italian orthography becomes easily noticeable once one looks at how many sounds there are and how many combinations of graphemes are used to represent them. There are 33 sounds in Italian, and they are represented by only 25 graphemes or clusters of graphemes. English, on the other hand, consists of 40 different sounds. However, it uses more than 1,100 graphemes or clusters of graphemes to represent these (Helmuth, 2001). An example of this is that the phoneme f can be written in four different ways, f, ff, ugh, and ph. Examples include the words find, off, tough, and elephant.

The consequences of this disparity include the fact that Italian dyslexics are better at reading their language than English dyslexics are when it comes to theirs. However, Italian and English dyslexics showed the same difficulties when it comes to the short-term memory of verbal sounds. This means that even though some symptoms of dyslexia are the same, the opacity of English makes it harder for dyslexic learners of English to read and write than those of Italian (Helmuth, 2001).

2.3. The alphabetical principle

Written words consist of graphemes, or clusters thereof, which represent the phonemes, i.e., sounds that make up the spoken word. McGuinness specifies the alphabetical principle as the

“awareness of phonemes in speech and the ability to segment (separate) and blend isolated phonemes back into words” (1998, p. 228). Cracking the alphabetical code consists of two parts: analysis and synthesis (Høien and Lundeberg, 1990, p. 28). In the analysis phase, the learner has to realise how the written language is constructed in order to see that graphemes build up written words while phonemes build up spoken words. There are several ways to practise during this step (Selikowitz, 1998, pp. 49-50). Word games and rhymes can be used to help students realise that words consist of phonemes. Analysing a word by showing how it can be divided into syllables, illustrates that the word consists of smaller parts. Synthesis is the ability to put these parts together to form a word. (Høien, Lundeberg, 1990, pp. 28-30, 103). As different languages have different orthographies, and different levels of transparency, the separation of words into syllables and graphemes and phonemes is not entirely the same, as graphemes designate different sounds in different languages (Paulesu et al., 2001, p. 2165). English is a problematic language in this regard as “the mapping between letters, speech sounds, and whole-word sounds is often highly ambiguous” (Paulesu et al., 2001, p. 2165). Caglar-Ryeng conducted a study in 2010 that compared the morphological and phonological skills of dyslexic and non-dyslexic Norwegian learners of English as a foreign language. The study includes a survey on the students' phonological skills,

(10)

6

morphological skills, and reading comprehension. The study showed that dyslexic students overall performed poorly when it came to phonological and morphological awareness and significantly worse at the reading comprehension test than their non-dyslexic peers (pp. 40–

51).

2.4. Teaching methods and aids for upper secondary school

Even though dyslexic children who do not get help are at risk of being unable to succeed at school (McGuinness, 1998, p. 6), when they do get the right kind of help, they can function at the same level as other students at school (Dyslexia Parent, 2011). To accomplish this, a teacher working with dyslexic students will need to be able to use different methods and aids to help their students (Krzyzak, 2005). The two most commonly mentioned methods in the literature is the multi-sensory approach, including aids designed with it in mind, such as readily available programmes and audiobook versions of textbooks, and the building of self- confidence and motivation. There are others, but these are the most common ones when it comes to methods and aids used by teachers in the everyday classroom. 2.3.1 discusses the alphabetical principle, which handles making it easier to decode graphemes or clusters of them. 2.4.1 covers the multi-sensory approach, wherein senses other than sight are used. The way the building of self-confidence and motivation can be used to help dyslexic students in particular is covered in 2.4.2. The special stipulations, seeing as they are specific to Sweden, is mentioned less. However, the stipulations are designed to help students with disabilities, such as dyslexia, reach a passing grade. As they are, when used, an aid, they are included here, in section 2.4.3. A brief description of the Swedish upper secondary school is also given in this section, to provide context on how to use it.

2.4.1 The multi-sensory approach

An effective way of teaching is the multi-sensory approach. It means that all senses are employed in order to enforce student learning. Alternatively, as Herold (2003) puts it,

“utilising all the senses to relay information to students”. One example of the multi-sensory approach that Robinson-Tait (2003) mentions is about colour coding German nouns, assigning words different colours according to their grammatical gender. This makes it easier for the student to see which gender the word has, and it will also increase the probability that the student will remember the grammatical gender of words (Robinson-Tait, 2003). The multi-sensory approach's point is to give the student more ways of remembering and identifying the things they study. In this way, it also functions as an aid that helps the learner remember facts. Krzyzak (2005) writes that students who have been taught by a teacher using this approach have made “remarkable progress particularly in decoding skills”, i.e.

(11)

7

being able to translate graphemes into phonemes. Using this approach to teaching could serve to lessen the anxiety students might feel, making it easier for them to learn (Herold, 2003).

2.4.2 Building self-confidence and motivation as a way of facilitating learning and reducing anxiety

To learn something, one must naturally spend time working with it. It is crucial to make the student want to read and take in the knowledge within a given text if they are to improve.

However, when the learner realises that they have difficulties, their self-esteem is likely to begin to suffer, as they cannot do what almost everyone else can without too much difficulty (Selikowitz, 1998, pp. 34-35). It is essential that strategies to increase dyslexic learners’

motivation be used, as these learners will have to work harder than their non-dyslexic peers in school (Csizér, Kormos, & Sarkadi, 2010, p. 484). Pollock, Waller and Politt also state that

“the lack of self-confidence, which most dyslexic children experience, needs to be taken into account and to counteract this, it is important for them to enjoy something they are good at”

(2004, p. 185). They later state that positive attitudes will have benefits, and they specifically mention that this is true for dyslexic students (p. 187). As such, building self-confidence and motivation is, while important for every learner, especially useful when it comes to teaching dyslexic students. Crombie states that it is “vitally important that teachers and those who work with young language learners ensure that everything possible is done to promote learning and eliminate failure” when it comes to dyslexic learners (2000, p. 6).

The learner’s motivation for learning a new language is key as it directly affects language intake (Anjomshoa, Sadighi, 2015, p. 136). Motivation can be understood as the desire to reach a given goal and drive to strive towards it. A teacher must understand what motivates their students to help them reach their goals, such as getting a passing grade. People tend to feel motivated when it comes to things they are already good at, which also means that having difficulties with something can lead to a downward spiral where failure leads to less motivation, which in turn leads to more failure and even less motivation (Chilingaryan, Gorbatenko, 2015; Høien, Lundeberg, 1990, p. 77). This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as the “Matthew effect”, for instance, by Høien, Lundeberg (1990, p. 77). The name comes from a quote from the Gospel according to Matthew. “For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath” (Matthew 25:29). Positive reinforcement could break this circle, which can be done by continually encouraging and supporting the learner, especially when they are struggling (Chilingaryan, Gorbatenko). If a learner feels that they have succeeded, their self-

(12)

8

confidence will improve, along with their attitudes and motivation (Csizér, Kormos, &

Sarkadi, 2010, p. 484).

In order to lessen the anxiety of the dyslexic students, it might prove beneficial to the to break down the lesson into smaller parts, which should be written down, preferably on the blackboard, and explained (Herold, 2003). After this, explaining what each part will be about is beneficial. By dividing lessons, the risk of the student feeling overwhelmed is reduced. This information should stay on the blackboard as long as possible so that the student can see what they are to do (Politt, Pollock, & Waller, 2004, pp. 178-179). The importance of a structured environment is stressed by Krzyzak (2005), who explicitly states that it is important for learners with learning difficulties. She writes that a “structured, predictable and ordered educational environment should be ensured by teachers, as youths with learning difficulties work best and respond most favourably in such settings”, as the students have more time and energy to focus solely on the task at hand (Krzyzak).

When providing feedback for a student with dyslexia, it is important to focus on what the work is about. (Herold, 2003). For instance; when providing feedback on an assignment that has to do with punctuation, it is unnecessary to focus on anything else. If the teacher corrects all the errors made in the assignment, the student will most likely be overwhelmed by it.

Suppose the teacher instead focuses solely on what the assignment is about, the student will only see the errors made in that field, and thus be less likely to be overwhelmed and therefore more motivated to continue learning instead of feeling hopeless (Herold, 2003).

Although it might not be considered, the anxiety a teacher might be experiencing directly correlates to that of their students. A teacher with students with any learning difficulties might find it disheartening to see the student fail repeatedly. If a teacher does not fully understand the difficulty and its ramifications, they might see the student failing as their own. Class teachers should be aware that dyslexic children need constant revision and that there will be bad days when everything that seemed to have been learnt the previous week has suddenly evaporated (Politt, Pollock & Waller, 2004, pp. 168-169). The teacher needs to give students with dyslexia special attention, and in order to do this, the teacher must be aware of the problems dyslexia creates. Only then can they start helping the student.

2.4.3 The Swedish school system and upper secondary English

This section describes the content of English in Swedish upper-secondary education and the so-called special stipulations found in the Swedish school ordinance.

(13)

9

Once Swedish students graduate from the compulsory school, i.e., year one through nine, they are expected to enter upper secondary school. Upper secondary school is divided into different programmes, where each programme is tailored to suit different students. Some are practical, and some are theoretical. There are some significant differences in which courses different programmes contain, but some are universal. One of these universal courses is English. The courses given in upper secondary school are English 5 through 7. This paper will only look at the course English 5, as it is the only course mandatory for all upper secondary school students regardless of programme. It builds on knowledge acquired from compulsory school. It is as such the only course that all dyslexic students are obligated to take.

The core content listed for each English course at upper secondary school is divided into three general categories: content of communication, reception, and production and interaction. Each and every knowledge requirement must be fulfilled in order to receive a passing grade. The knowledge requirements for the grade E, which is the lowest passing grade in Sweden is then formulated in different paragraphs. The number of paragraphs depends on the course in question, and English 5 has six different paragraphs, four of which are applicable to reading and writing.

When it comes to writing, it is stated that a student has to be able to express themselves ” clearly and with some fluency and some adaptation to purpose, recipient and situation”, which applies to both formal and informal writing. The student is also required to read and understand written English. Another requirement is that they must be able to choose texts and use them in a relevant way to express themselves in writing, and adapt that writing to suit different genres, e.g. essays, letters, or short stories (Skolverket, 2011). These requirements are all directly affected by dyslexia, in that they concern processing written English. It also means that it might be difficult or even impossible for a dyslexic student to pass English 5. However, there is a part of the Swedish school ordinance that allows for exceptions.

The special stipulations (see appendix 1), state that if a student does not have the ability required for reaching one of the goals stated in the course syllabus, the teacher may ignore it when grading the student, as long as this inability is due to some medical, i.e., physical or mental, condition that has to be of non-temporary nature (Utbildningsdepartementet, 2010).

As dyslexia is permanent (British Dyslexia Association, n.d.-a), use of the special stipulations is allowed. Consequently, the teacher is allowed to spend time working more with other parts of the goals, and a student who fails the written part might still pass. This means that it can be used as an aid by the teacher to help a dyslexic student reach a passing grade in that they

(14)

10

can choose to omit criteria that have to do with reading or writing if they would affect the student’s grades. This is important as it means that if the stipulations are used, the impact of dyslexia when it comes to reaching a passing grade is lessened.

(15)

11

3. Methods

This survey was constructed to collect both qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative data in the form of open-text and quantitative in the form of scales. The analysis of the open text questions was focused on identifying major themes and trends, as well as describing the respondents’ attitudes and perspectives. It also serves as a direct complement to the quantitative analysis. The quantitative data is mostly presented in the form of tables, presenting numbers of respondents, percentages and means.

A web-based questionnaire was chosen, as it has many advantages when it comes to conducting this kind of survey. Advantages included are that web-based surveys save time and money, speed up data processing, allow a wide geographical coverage and are environmentally friendly. Google forms was chosen, as it is free, the company and service are both unlikely to disappear any time soon, and the design features are satisfactory. The service also provides the option to automatically compile the results, which saves time and, as Denscombe puts it, “effectively eliminates the human error factor that inevitably arises when people need to read the responses to a paper questionnaire and then insert the data manually via the computer keyboard” (p. 181). This means that all statements are exactly the same that the respondents provided, including any grammatical mistakes or spelling mistakes.

A pilot was conducted where the researcher and two other people tested the survey to ensure it worked. Seeing that it did work, some formulations and minor grammatical mistakes were corrected before conducting the survey.

The Swedish upper secondary school application website (www.gymnasium.se) was used to collect email addresses to different schools in Sweden. www.gymnasium.se is a site where Swedish students apply for the school they want to attend. The website is a reliable, usable, and verified database. Every upper secondary school in Sweden was looked up, and emails were sent to these schools' headmasters, asking them to forward the survey to as many teachers as possible. The email included a link to the survey. The survey had 172 respondents, though not all respondents answered all questions.

The survey consisted of 21 questions, divided into 4 different categories: general, social considerations, the multi-sensory approach, and the special stipulations. The partakers were provided with a description of the multi-sensory approach and the special stipulations at the

(16)

12

start of the respective categories. The questions were formulated in several different ways, as suggested by Denscombe, who states the following:

Variety has two potential advantages. First, it stops the respondent from becoming bored. Second, it stops the respondent falling into a 'pattern' of answers of all questions where, for example, on a scale of 1-5 he or she begins to put down 4 as the answer to all questions. (2014, p. 177)

Questions about the feelings on a topic take the form of a scale from X to Y, e.g., 1 to 6 where 1 is very useful, and 6 is useless. As the questions concern the thoughts and feelings about a topic and not the degree of agreement, these questions were designed using a semantical differential scale instead of a Likert scale. This design is taken from Denscombe’s examples of different questions (pp. 177-178). Following his examples, only X and Y, e.g. 1 and 6, were defined (p. 178). Even numbers of answers were chosen when possible as it prevents the respondent from choosing a middle ground answer. They could not simply give a neutral answer but had to take at least a moderate stance. The approach of using even numbers has been discussed by Busch (1993), who writes that “an odd number offers a neutral response, whereas an even number would require respondents to choose one direction” (p. 735). He goes on to say that neutrality can lead to indecisive data, and even states that it might “lead to muddled survey result” (p. 735). They were also given the option to elaborate on their answers on certain questions.

Question 14, i.e. “In your opinion, how widespread is the knowledge of the special stipulations among the following groups?”, suffered from an unseen formatting error which did not allow the teachers to see which groups were intended. This was followed up this as soon as it came to attention. The same schools and headmasters as before were once again contacted. However, this time only 63 teachers chose to answer. The survey shown in Appendix 2 is the survey with the formatting error included, and Appendix 3 shows the revised question, which now worked as intended.

3.1 Ethical considerations

The Swedish Research Council emphasises the importance of taking ethics into account when conducting research (2017, pp. 10-11). To this end, the key principles of research ethics as specified by Denscombe (2014, pp. 309-315), and the general rules expressed by the Swedish Research Council (2017, p. 10), were taken into account when designing the survey. The survey was conducted entirely anonymously as links to the online survey were sent to headmasters at schools I could find email addresses to. They then forwarded it to their teachers, and the only data collected was how long they had been working as teachers and whether they had had formal education. Other variables, such as gender and age, were not

(17)

13

included as the researcher did not anticipate them to be a factor. It was conducted in 2016, before the implementation of GDPR (2018). No sensitive information was collected, nothing can be traced back to any given teacher, and contact cannot be re-established, as supported by The Swedish Research Council (p. 40).

3.2 Possible limitations of the study

There were some comments by the respondents that they would have liked to see a middle ground, or neutral position, when it came to the answers, e.g., a scale between 1 and 5 instead of 1 and 6. This criticism is understandable, but not necessarily warranted as a scale lacking a neutral position has its own strengths and merits, as mentioned by Busch (p. 735) in Section 3. A conscious choice was made not always to have 1 be the most negative answer, and the highest number not always the most positive. This was due to wanting the teachers to pay more attention, and it was inspired by Denscombe’s advice to make the survey design varied (2014, p.177). It does, however, come with the limitations that respondents who did not pay much attention might have misunderstood the response scales to some extent. This could in retrospect be seen as a weakness of the study.

(18)

14

4. Analysis and results

This section presents the survey’s findings. The first section, 4.1, discusses the results regarding the teachers' knowledge about, and opinions on, how the English language in and of itself impacts dyslexia. The next section, 4.2, shows how teachers view the likelihood of dyslexic students reaching a passing grade. In Section 4.3, the focus is on the respondents' respondents’ thoughts on special groups. Extra-classroom groups for students with learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, are a common occurrence. It is an aid that does not fit easily into any one category. Instead, it facilitates the use of other methods and aids. This survey looks at how being in such a group might impact the student socially, as social context and possible negative social implications tie directly into self-confidence and motivation (Anjomshoa, Sadighi, 2015, p. 136; Csizér, Kormos, & Sarkadi, 2010, pp. 472-473, 478).

Section 4.4 focuses on the teachers’ experiences of the multi-sensory approach. Finally, 4.5 discusses the experiences and thoughts on the special stipulations of the respondents.

4.1 Knowledge about the impact of English orthography on dyslexia

A majority of the participants (132 respondents, 77%) were of the opinion that the English language is in itself a difficult language to learn. They were also asked if they thought that the effects of dyslexia affected English differently from other school subjects. A total of 59 (34%) answered yes, and 113 (66%) answered no. Among the respondents who believed dyslexia affected English more than other languages, 46 chose to elaborate on the reasons why. The most common elaboration, given by 26 teachers, was that English is, in general, a difficult language to learn in and of itself. They agreed that this was due to the lack of transparency of the English orthography, which means that ”decoding takes much longer than other languages”. One respondent put it this way:

Since English is a bit tricky when it comes to spelling compared to pronunciation, students with dyslexia have a harder time to learn, probably due to the fact that words doesn't always have the same pronunciation as they are spelled. (sic) (Question I, response 10)

Another teacher gave a more narrowed down elaboration:

There are words that are spelt almost the same, but have different meaning and word use, but for a student with dyslexia, as he/she decodes these similar words, it comes out as the same word in the decoding process. Ex: quit, quite, and quiet. (Question I, response 35)

(19)

15

That English orthography poses a significant challenge to dyslexic learners mirrors what is stated in the literature. However, 113 teachers disagreed with the idea that the English subject is especially affected compared to other language subjects. This does not reflect what is stated in the literature, which suggests that there is a lack of understanding among teachers of how the different levels of transparency among different orthographies can mean to the learner, dyslexic or not.

4.2 The teachers' opinions about the impact of dyslexia on the chances of a student to reach a passing grade

Ellis’ discussion about dyslexia being a spectrum supports the distinction between light and severe dyslexia (2016, p. 78). Section 4.2.1 presents the respondents’ view on the outlook of students with light dyslexia when it comes to reaching a passing grade. Section 4.2.2 presents the respondents’ view on the outlook of students with severe dyslexia when it comes to reaching a passing grade. A distinction was made between light and severe dyslexia. This distinction was made with the Matthew effect in mind. A student with severe dyslexia is likely to have faced greater difficulties, and failed more often, and might, therefore, have a greater experience of the Matthew effect.

4.2.1 Light dyslexia

The teachers were asked the question on the outlook for students with light dyslexia to fulfil the course requirements. The scale was from 1 (a lot worse than for other students) to 6 (better than for other students). Overall, the respondents thought the outlook for lightly dyslexic students was about the same or even slightly better than for other students.

Table 1. The outlook for students with light dyslexia to fulfil the course requirements in English.

Answer Number of

respondents

Percentages

1 1 >1%

2 6 3%

3 69 40%

4 57 33%

5 31 18%

6 8 5%

Total 172 100%

When given a chance to elaborate on their answers, 29 teachers chose to do so. The single most mentioned factor was the materials being used by the teacher in question. The materials

(20)

16

factor was alluded to in various ways by 11 teachers out of the 29 who gave elaborations (38%). The special stipulations is the second most common elaboration given (8 respondents, 28%). The idea that spelling should not matter in the overall assessment is something that connects directly to the stipulations. As the stipulations state that the disability must not be temporary in nature, proper documentation might be needed, as mentioned by one respondent. “As long as the student's dyslexia is properly documented, spelling and other related problems can be ignored for the purposes of grading” (Question 6, response 41).

The third most common answer, given by 4 teachers (14%), was the student’s motivation. The respondents agree that motivation is essential for a dyslexic student to get a passing grade.

This might even level the playing field. One teacher puts it this way: “I have noticed that student's with ambitions do well regardless of dyslexia” (sic) (Question 6, response 14).

However, even though motivation is important, many respondents also mention it as being difficult for dyslexic students to find motivation. One teacher says that reaching a passing grade “requires studying, and the students who suffer from dyslexia are often not motivated to put in the time which is needed. Understandable as the subject is difficult. It is a very hard thing to combat, the dyslexia makes English harder so the students studies less which results in English becoming even harder for them” (sic). This is also an example of the Matthew effect mentioned earlier (2.3.3).

4.2.2 Severe dyslexia

The teachers were asked the question on the outlook for students with severe dyslexia to fulfil the course requirements. The scale was from 1 (the same as for other students) to 6 (better than other students). Overall, the respondents thought the outlook for severely dyslexic students was about the same or only slightly worse than for other students. The distribution of answers can be seen below in table 2.

Table 2. The outlook for students with severe dyslexia to fulfil the course requirements in English.

Answer Number of

respondents

Percentages

1 7 4%

2 47 27%

3 50 29%

4 28 16%

5 29 17%

6 12 7%

Total 172 100%

(21)

17

When presented with the opportunity to elaborate on their thoughts about the likelihood of students with severe dyslexia achieving a passing grade, 35 teachers opted to answer.

The most common reason given by 10 respondents (29%) was motivation, which could likely have been an effect of the Matthew effect. If the Matthew effect could be averted or alleviated through the use of motivation boosting means it would make the learners more likely to succeed. That motivation is the most common reason given here might be due to this. The second most common reasons given here are the same as for students with light dyslexia, namely the materials being used and the special stipulations. Both of these were given as elaborations by 8 respondents (23%) each. Most teachers expressed the same opinions on this question as they did on the former (4.2.1), with some even copying their answer from the previous question.

Seven teachers (20%) emphasised the teacher’s role. They state that a teacher’s willingness to adapt and vary their teaching and assignments. One respondent articulated it particularly well.

The dyslexic students' success depends entirely on their teacher's willingness and ability to adapt assignments and activities to the needs of each individual, in addition to assessments and expectations. With the right type of assistance, I find that my dyslexic students excel just as successfully as anyone else. Individual needs are meant to be met, regardless of what they are (Question 5, response 8).

There were no statements resembling these in 4.2.1, which implies that there is a concern that teachers might be less likely to adapt to students with severe dyslexia than students with light dyslexia.

4.3 Perceived effects of special groups for dyslexic students

The effect special groups might have on the participating students' learning were addressed by 41 teachers. Out of these 41 teachers, 24 (59%) thought that special groups for dyslexic students would have a positive impact, 14 (34%) thought that the effect might, in fact, be harmful, and 3 (7%) thought that special groups would have no discernible effect.

(22)

18

Table 3. The effect of special, extra-classroom, groups on learning

Answer Number of

respondents

Percentages

Beneficial effect 20 59%

Negative effect 12 34%

No discernible effect 2 7%

Total 34 100%

If we take a closer look at what reasons the participants who thought such groups would be beneficial gave for this, there are different trends in their answers. The most common thought, given by 5 teachers, is that being included in this kind of group would help the students relax and thus enabling them to perform better. Three teachers responded that such a group would help the students improve when it comes to oral interaction, as the teacher could use the special stipulations to focus more on those parts and less on writing and reading. Other teachers stated that the students would have an easier time helping each other. One thought that there would be less competition when it came to getting the teacher’s attention and help (Question 7, response 87). Two of them focused on the teacher instead of the students and said that it would be easier for them to adapt the material being used and that other kinds of materials could be used. Out of the 34% of teachers commenting on the academic effects were negative towards special groups. Most of them stated that being in such a group would mean less interaction and input. The sentiment was that dyslexic students would, in this case, not get the challenge they needed. Another opinion was that the students might use this special group as an excuse not to work as hard as they could, or even

“give up” as one teacher put it (Question 15, response 82), implying that it could, in fact, lead to less motivation.

The teachers were asked about their experience or opinion on how likely it is for dyslexic students to be bullied or suffer from other social stigmas than other students, and their answers can be seen in Table 5 below. As the table shows, very few respondents thought that dyslexic students were much less or somewhat less likely to suffer from bullying or social stigma (range 1–3 on the scale, 10 respondents). An absolute majority of answers were found in the middle of the scale, 4–5.

(23)

19

Table 5. The respondents’ thoughts on how likely dyslexic students are to suffer socially in comparison to other students on a scale between 1 and 8

respondents

Percentages

1 Much less likely 3 2%

2 0 0%

3 7 4%

4 80 46%

5 41 24%

6 14 8%

7 14 8%

8 Much more likely 13 8%

Total 172 100%

Out of the 172 participants, 61 (35%) chose to comment on the possible social implications of special groups for dyslexic students. Of these 61, 36 (59%) thought that this kind of groups would have negative social consequences such as bullying and ostracisation, 17 (28%) teachers thought that the consequences would be good, and 8 (13%) thought that there would be no specific social consequences stemming from the use of special groups.

This shows that the majority of the partaking teachers thought that dyslexic students are no more likely to suffer socially than their peers, as long as they are not in a special group. Being in such a group is considered to increase the students' likelihood of being victims of social stigma.

4.4 The respondents' views and experiences of using the multi- sensory approach

When asked whether they had made use of multi-sensory aids of some kind, 107 (62%) answered yes, and 65 (38%) no. The teachers who answered yes were presented with two follow-up questions. Did they know about computer programs that could help dyslexic students, and if so – which. Of the teachers who used multi-sensory aids, 15 did not know of any such programs, whereas 92 did.

When it came to the question of which aids were being used by the students and teachers, the purpose was of course not to present and advertise any specific commercial programmes but

(24)

20

to see whether any programs were being widely used or not. This question was a follow-up question to question 9, Have you ever used multi-sensory aids of any kind?. As such, only the teachers who had responded yes on that question would answer this question. As they might use more than one programme, they were given the opportunity to name more than one, resulting in 107 participants giving 176 answers. Of these different examples given, only 5 were used by more than 10 different teachers; two different aids were each used by 14 teachers, another aid was used by 25 teachers, and 38 used the most common one. Finally, 6 stated that they did not know which program or aid their students were using, and one answered that they did not make use of any.

Table 4. Aids used by teachers.

Aid Named by X respondents

Spell Right 38

Speech Synthesis 25

ILT Inläsningstjänst 16

Claro Read 14

Stava Rex 14

Automatic writing from speech 8

Dragon Dictation 6

Legimus 5

ILT 3

Others 37

Unknown 6

None 1

Total 176

The teachers were given a description of the multi-sensory approach, and were given question on how useful it is, or would be on a scale from 1 to 6 where 1 is very useful, and 6 is useless. The results can be seen in Table 5. The majority of teachers answered 2-3 (67%), and none 6. One respondent elaborated on Question 6, and touched upon the multi-sensory approach, saying that “given proper aids, like audio files for longer texts etc, there should not be a big difference at all (Question 6, response 19).”

(25)

21 Table 5. How useful is the multi-sensory approach?

respondents

Percentages

1 Very useful 31 18%

2 65 38%

3 50 29%

4 22 13%

5 4 2%

6 Useless 0 0%

Total 172 100%

The next question was how easily they thought a multi-sensory approach could be included in the classroom on a scale from 1 to 6 where 1 is very easy, and 6 is very difficult. The results can be seen in Table 6 below.

Table 6. How easy is the multi-sensory approach to include in the everyday classroom?

respondents

Percentages

1 Very easy 18 11%

2 43 25%

3 43 25%

4 38 22%

5 26 15%

6 Very difficult 4 2%

Total 172 100%

4.5 The respondents’ views and experiences of the Special stipulations

Due to the formatting error mentioned in 3.1, and Appendix 3, only 63 teachers answered question 14, i.e., how common do the respondents think knowledge about the special stipulations is among the groups teachers (Table 7.1), principals (Table 7.2), students (Table 7.3), and parents or legal guardians (Table 7.4). Table 7.1 shows us that knowledge about the special stipulations is prevalent as 92% stated that it was somewhat or very widespread

(26)

22

among teachers. Only 1 (2%) said that it was not at all widespread. Comparing this to how common the knowledge about the stipulations is perceived to be among principals, as shown in Table 7.2, we see a small difference. Of the respondents, only 87% stated that knowledge about the stipulations is somewhat or very widespread among principals, compared to 79%

among teachers.

Table 7.1 The respondents’ thoughts on how common knowledge about the special stipulations is among teachers

respondents

Percentages

Not at all widespread 1 2%

Not very widespread 12 19%

Somewhat widespread 36 57%

Very widespread 14 22%

Total 63 100%

Table 7.2 The respondents’ thoughts on how common knowledge about the special stipulations is among headmasters

respondents

Percentages

Total 63 100%

One trend that shows is that the most common perception is that knowledge about the stipulations is very widespread in every group. The second most common thought is that knowledge is very widespread among school personnel (22% among teachers and 28%

among principals), and not very widespread among students (37%) and parents or legal guardians (40%). Headmasters were included as a separate category as it was anticipated that at least some teachers would like to see them involved in making the decision on when and how the stipulations should be used. The distribution among students and parents or legal guardians are shown below in Tables 7.3 and 7.4.

(27)

23

Table 7.3 The respondents’ thoughts on how common knowledge about the special stipulations is among students

respondents

Percentages

Total 63 100%

Table 7.4 The respondents’ thoughts on how common knowledge about the special stipulations is among parents and legal guardians

respondents

Percentages

Total 63 100%

The special stipulations are viewed favourably by most teachers, and 82% of the participants had made use of it at some point (Question 12). Only a few wanted more than one person to be involved in the decision making. Seventy teachers said that use of the stipulations should be up to the individual teacher alone, 42 teachers thought that its use should have to be approved by the school’s headmaster, and 3 teachers thought that the teacher should consult with one or more other teachers or the headmaster before making use of the stipulations. The respondents' general perception is that school personnel seems to be very aware of it, but legal guardians and students less so, as shown below in Tables 7.1 through 7.4. Concern was expressed by 82 teachers regarding the stipulations, stating that it could be used as an excuse not to work on specific goals as they can be omitted when grading. The most prevailing thought was that it would be used as an excuse by students (52 teachers) or by teachers (30 teachers). There were 18 teachers who believed that it should be clarified or changed and that there should be official regulations or guidelines that are not interpretable or open to subjectivity. One teacher expressed their concern regarding the stipulations and their applications particularly well. “Well, the paragraph that states you may disregard Spelling etc when grading writing, is too vague” (Question 5, response 1). The same teacher goes on to say

(28)

24

that “Then it's up to the teacher how to interpret the paragraph and then the system becomes unfair.” However, only 9 teachers think it is used too liberally, while 20 think that it does not see nearly enough use. That there are so many contradictory views suggests that teachers as a group disagree on when and how the stipulations should see use. This might be solved by clearer guidelines that could help teachers across the country reach a consensus.

(29)

25

5. Discussion

The lack of transparency of English orthography makes it more difficult for dyslexic learners than other, more transparent systems (McGuinness, 1998, pp. 74, 81). As Krzyzak (2005) states, knowledge of these problems is crucial. However, out of the 132 teachers who thought that English is a difficult language, only 59 thought dyslexia affected English more than other subjects. This shows that there is a lack of knowledge about this phenomenon among teachers, which could cause problems.

Many authors have discussed the multi-sensory approach, such as Herold (2003), Robinson- Tait (2003), and Krzyzak (2005). They call it a most efficient way of teaching dyslexic students. The survey found that teachers in the field do use it, as 107 (62%) participants stated that they had made use of it, and the majority stated that it was very useful.

Furthermore, the majority also stated that it would be easy to integrate into the classroom.

This means that the everyday classroom situation mirrors to some extent what is stated in the literature.

Motivation was the most common answer for why students with severe dyslexia were only slightly less likely to reach a passing grade than non-dyslexic students (29%), and the third most common reason for students with light dyslexia (14%). The perceived difference could be due to the Matthew effect already having been set in motion when it comes to students with severe dyslexia as they are likely to have seen more significant difficulties. That self- confidence and motivation play an integral role was also clearly shown in the literature, especially for dyslexic learners (Anjomshoa, Sadighi, 2015; Chilingaryan, Gorbatenko, 2015;

Csizér, Kormos, & Sarkadi, 2010; Høien, Lundeberg, 1990; Selikowitz, 1998; Pollock, Waller,

& Politt, 2004). Special groups can be used as a way of helping students with their motivation as it would mean they have a more relaxed space with less pressure, something mentioned by Chilingaryan, Gorbatenko (2015), and Karaoglu (2008). Many teachers did, however, state that such a group would likely have negative social implications (Question 7). They stated that dyslexic students, who are no more likely to suffer socially than other students, would be more likely to do so if they were part of a special group (Question 7). Therefore, being in a special group might not be as beneficial as believed, as the possible social stigma might reduce the student’s motivation and therefore make other methods and aids less effective, seeing as self-confidence and motivation is vital for a student to learn.

The special stipulations do not only mean that the student will be more likely to pass the course, but also that they will be more likely to keep their motivation, as the student need not

(30)

26

worry about what would in all respects be a hopeless struggle, thereby averting the Matthew effect mentioned by Chilingaryan and Gorbatenko, (2015) as well as Høien and Lundeberg (1990, p. 77). The Special stipulations apply only to difficulties of a permanent nature, such as dyslexia, and even though it does not solve the problems per se, it does at least offer a solution to the problem with passing a course. The teachers had many different views on the stipulations. Some of them (82) expressed worry regarding its use as they saw it as possibly leading to students and teachers not working to reach specific, omittable, criteria. Whether this is their concerns or if it truly mirrors what goes on is unknown, but the fact that these worries are so prevalent is worrisome. The respondents also disagreed on whether only the teacher grading the student should be deciding on if the stipulations should be used or not, or if more teachers or a headmaster should be involved as well. All this shows that there is a wide range of opinions and experiences, and that reaching a consensus might be needed.

(31)

27

6. Conclusion

Dyslexia is a common kind of learning difficulty, with on average one student per class having it. Dyslexia makes it harder for a learner to turn phonemes into graphemes, and vice versa.

This is called the alphabetical principle. English orthography, being very opaque, only exacerbates these issues. A language with a more transparent orthography would be more straightforward for a dyslexic learner to learn. If learners do not get the help they need, they are unlikely to crack the alphabetical code. Some different methods and aids can be used to help the learner do this. Even though it is essential for everyone, motivation is even more so for dyslexic learners as they will face more difficulties than their peers. The multi-sensory approach is a method that uses aids where the learner uses more than one sense simultaneously to learn. The most common example of this is the use of audiobook versions of textbooks alongside a physical copy. The Swedish school ordinance provides another aid, the special stipulations. They allow the teacher to omit certain criteria when grading a student. There have to be underlying reasons of a non-temporal nature, such as dyslexia, for the teacher to be allowed to make use of them.

In order to find out more about the experiences and opinions of Swedish teachers, a survey was conducted. An anonymous online survey was designed, and a small pilot was conducted.

Minor changes were made to the survey, mainly grammar and spelling, before sending it out.

Links to the survey were sent out to all the headmasters that could be found at gymnasium.se, a database of upper secondary schools in Sweden. These links were then forwarded to teachers by these headmasters, and 172 teachers chose to participate in the study.

The study found several things about how teachers viewed how dyslexia impacts the students’

probability of reaching a passing grade. Only a minority of the teachers that took part in the survey expressed any knowledge about how the lack of transparency in English orthography makes learning it more difficult for dyslexic students than some other languages. The overall views on how likely students with dyslexia, both light and severe, are to fulfil the course requirements were positive. The teachers thought that the dyslexic students had the same, or almost the same chance of succeeding as their peers, especially if the teacher uses the special stipulations. Knowledge about the special stipulations was almost universal among the teachers, and most stated that they had made use of it. The use of the multi-sensory approach and aids was widespread, primarily in the form of audio-assistance while reading, and 176

(32)

28

different programmes were being used by the 172 teachers. The study found that the teachers thought that dyslexic students are no more likely to suffer socially because of their dyslexia, but that special groups could increase the likelihood of social implications. The study shows the need for teachers to learn more about how the lack of transparency in English orthography affects their dyslexic students. If a learner shows no sign of dyslexia in other subjects than English, it might not have been noticed. If so, a teacher might assume that a dyslexic student is, in fact, not dyslexic, and the student might not then get the help they need. Use of the special stipulations, for instance, require that the student’s inability to fulfil a given requirement to reach a passing grade be due to factors of a non-temporal nature, such as a disability like dyslexia. The fact that some teachers are very knowledgeable about this while others are unaware means that a given teacher, and their linguistic knowledge, impacts the student more than much else. This is problematic as some students will encounter difficulties that they would not face in other subjects. If the difficulties are not understood, and there is no diagnosis, the student might not get the help they might have received from a teacher with better linguistic understanding. The special stipulations see much use, and it is probably one of the most important tools for Swedish teachers of English as a foreign language. It is essential to know about it and to use it, but thoughts about when and how differ. This lack of consensus is troubling. One hundred seventy-two respondents do not constitute every English teacher in Sweden. However, if this mirrors the country's situation, many students might be missing out on something that could help them get the grades they need.

This paper looked at the difficulties dyslexic students faced when learning a language with a phonetic alphabet, English. It would be interesting to continue this research but instead look at pictographic systems, such as Chinese, or consonantal alphabets, such as Arabic or Hebrew. The lack of consensus between Swedish teachers on some points makes it interesting to see if these differences in opinion and experiences have anything to do with geographical or socio-economic factors. Therefore, it would be interesting to see if there are any differences between how schools in different socio-economic or geographical areas use the multi-sensory approach, the special stipulations, and the boosting of motivation when it comes to students with dyslexia.

Aiding dyslexic students in the EFL classroom.