LEADER 03897nam 22006131 450 001 9910798127203321 005 20200514202323.0 010 $a1-4742-3376-7 010 $a1-4742-3374-0 024 7 $a10.5040/9781474233767 035 $a(CKB)3710000000648942 035 $a(EBL)4512050 035 $a(SSID)ssj0001654830 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)16435339 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001654830 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)14983794 035 $a(PQKB)11479499 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC4512050 035 $a(OCoLC)947837819 035 $a(UtOrBLW)bpp09259819 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000000648942 100 $a20160427d2016 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aDyslexia $edeveloping the debate /$fJulian Elliott and Roderick I. Nicolson ; edited by Andrew Davis 210 1$aLondon ;$aNew York :$cBloomsbury Academic,$d2016. 215 $a1 online resource (218 p.) 225 0 $aKey debates in educational policy 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a1-4742-3375-9 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aMachine generated contents note: Series Editor's Preface -- Key Debates in Educational Policy, Christopher Winch -- Notes on Contributors -- Introduction, Andrew Davis -- Part One Developmental Dyslexia: The Bigger Picture, Roderick I. Nicolson -- Part Two Dyslexia: Beyond the Debate, Julian Elliott -- Part Three Response to Julian Elliott, Roderick I. Nicolson -- Part Four Response to Roderick I. Nicolson, Julian Elliott -- Afterword: Some Philosophical Reflections, Andrew Davis -- Bibliography -- Index. 330 $a"Dyslexia is often presented as a clearly delineated condition that can be diagnosed on the basis of appropriate cognitive tests with corresponding forms on intervention. However, this approachable text explores the issues behind this assertion in bringing together leading figures in the field to debate dyslexia. Julian Elliott shows that understandings and usage of the dyslexia label vary substantially with little consensus or agreement and in putting forward his critique draws upon research in several disciplinary fields to demonstrate the irrationality of these arguments. Roderick I. Nicolson demonstrates that current approaches to understanding, identification and support of dyslexia are catastrophically flawed in terms of their failure to consider the developmental nature of dyslexia. He develops two themes: first that the underlying cause of dyslexia is 'delayed neural commitment' for skills and neural circuits, and second that the cause of the reading disability is the introduction of formal instruction before the dyslexic child's neural circuits for executive function are sufficiently developed. He argues that a more effective and cost-effective approach to identification and support involves 'assessment for dyslexia' rather than 'of dyslexia'. Elliott and Nicolson respond to the points each other raise before Andrew Davis investigates how far the key claims of Elliott and Nicolson can withstand close conceptual investigation, and explores the inherent limitations of scientific research on this topic, given the value and conceptual issues concerned."--$cProvided by publisher. 410 0$aKey debates in educational policy. 606 $aDyslexia$xDiagnosis 606 $aDyslexia$xTreatment 606 $aDyslexia 606 $2Education 615 0$aDyslexia$xDiagnosis. 615 0$aDyslexia$xTreatment. 615 0$aDyslexia. 676 $a616.85/53 700 $aElliott$b Julian$f1955-$0897842 702 $aNicolson$b Rod 801 0$bUtOrBLW 801 1$bUtOrBLW 801 2$bUkLoBP 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910798127203321 996 $aDyslexia$93688126 997 $aUNINA