Characteristics of Students Identified With Dyslexia Within the Context of State Legislation

Abstract

All but seven U.S. states have laws that govern some aspects of dyslexia screening, intervention, or teacher training in public schools. However, in the three states that mandate child-level reporting, data indicate lower than expected rates of dyslexia identification when compared with commonly accepted dyslexia prevalence rates. To better understand this apparent mismatch, this study explores factors that might predict the school-assigned identification of individuals with dyslexia. Deidentified data on 7,947 second-grade students in 126 schools from one U.S. state included a universal screening measure of literacy skills indicative of dyslexia (i.e., reading and spelling), school-assigned dyslexia classification, and demographic characteristics. As expected, behavioral characteristics of dyslexia from universal screening were associated with school-assigned dyslexia classification. However, dyslexia classification was less likely for minority students and individuals attending schools with a higher percentage of minority students. Students who showed behavioral characteristics of dyslexia and attended schools with a higher proportion of other students with similar poor literacy skills were more likely not to receive a school-assigned dyslexia classification. The findings suggest systematic demographic differences in whether a student is identified with dyslexia by schools even when using universal screening.

Unmeasured Confounding and Racial or Ethnic Disparities in Disability Identification

“…Because findings of disability under-identification have been repeatedly replicated (e.g., Farkas et al, 2020; Morgan et al, 2015, 2017; Odegard et al, 2020) and, as indicated here, are largely robust to the possibility of unmeasured confounding, federal law and regulation may need to be redirected to instead monitor for systemic bias resulting in disability under-identification for students who are Black or Hispanic (Morgan et al, 2015, 2017). A recently proposed way to do so would for U.S. school districts to adjust the reported RRs for achievement gaps (Farkas et al, 2020; Morgan et al, 2017).…”

“…Measured confounds included the district’s Black- or Hispanic-White achievement gaps, enrollment size, percentage of students receiving free or reduced-price lunch, and the percentage of Black or Hispanic students as well as state fixed effects. Study 3 (i.e., Odegard et al, 2020) reported ORs for learning disabilities in reading based on analyses of student-level data from 7,947 second graders from a U.S. state. Measured confounds included student-level reading achievement, biological sex, and eligibility for free or reduced-price lunch as well as school-level factors including racial, ethnic, or economic composition.…”

It’s Time to Be Scientific About Dyslexia

“…Some have suggested that unexpectedness might be signaled by economic or environmental factors (Hammill & Allen, 2020). There are serious risks for equity here, of course, as the subjectivity involved in any decision making that is conditioned by perceptions of students’ home and neighborhood environments will work against the interests of those who are socially and economically disadvantaged or from minority backgrounds (Chapman & Tunmer, 2019; Odegard, Farris, Middleton, Oslund, & Rimrodt‐Frierson, 2020; Rutter, 1978).…”

“…A dyslexia 3 (persistent intractability to high‐quality intervention) conception brings its own problems of measurement and operationalization (Odegard et al, 2020). Having identified such students, it is unclear how extensive a period of failure to improve one’s reading skills would be necessary before a diagnosis could be made.…”

Advancing School Professionals’ Dyslexia Knowledge Through Neuroscience: Bridging the Science-Education Gap Through Developmental Psychology

“…To date, 43 U.S. states have dyslexia laws, and a growing number of states have initiatives and resolutions to promote dyslexia awareness in K12 settings (National Center on Improving Literacy, 2019), including dyslexia screening (Youman and Mather, 2018). Most U.S. states have laws governing dyslexia screening, intervention, or professional development; however, no research exists on connections between these initiatives and improved dyslexia identification or intervention outcomes (Phillips and Odegard, 2017;Odegard et al, 2020).…”