I agree, Michael. If there's no SpLD, there's no grounds for special
examination arrangements.
Simon
Michael Woodman wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Can I ask if any of you have had experience of this kind of situation,
> and if so, how you have resolved it?
>
> A student who presented with an old, (pre-16) report which suggested the
> student was still affected by residual dyslexia, went to have an updated
> report in keeping with the need to have a post-16 report for DSA and for
> adjustments at our institution.
>
> Although there was a recommendation that extra time would be beneficial
> to the student, the report concluded that there was no longer any
> evidence of a specific learning disability. Some scores were lower than
> expected, (working memory), but in the average range of an overall
> superior profile - the student had compensated for any difficulties they
> might have experienced.
>
> Now, I am mindful of the fact that dyslexia does not 'go away', and that
> the reasoning behind adjustments is to allow a student to show their
> underlying ability. However, I am also mindful that the general
> population contains people who will achieve slightly lower scores on
> their working memory tests, and that this is not in itself indicative of
> dyslexia. This report suggests that there is insufficient evidence of a
> specific learning disability, and so to allow extra time in an exam
> would surely be setting a huge precedent?
>
> Any thoughts gratefully received.
>
> Regards,
>
--
Simon Jarvis
Head of Disability and Dyslexia Service
Queen Mary University of London
Tel: 020 7882 2765
|