Using conceptual change theory to help preservice teachers understand dyslexia

Technical adequacy of measuring teachers' knowledge of dyslexia

Given the rapid growth in educational policies targeting educators' knowledge of dyslexia, this study explored the technical adequacy of a common instrument for measuring that knowledge. The responses of 1141 preservice teachers were scored in three ways: polytomously with the original 4-point Likert scale, dichotomously as true-false, and dichotomously as though the options were multiple choice. An exploratory factor analysis suggested at least one-third of the items needed to be removed. Confirmatory factor analyses suggested a one-factor model with polytomous scoring had the best fit to the data, but only six items loaded. All models demonstrated unacceptable internal consistency reliability (<0.70). Because no technically adequate version of the measure was identified, questions remain about basing policy on scores from these instruments. However, the findings indicated ways this type of measure might be improved.

The nature of misinformation in education

In this opinion piece, we review and characterize the nature of misinformation in education and discuss the implications for corrective efforts. In education, misinformation manifests at three different levels: the individual, the community, and the system. At the individual level, misinformation manifests as naive beliefs or misconceptions students hold before they receive instruction or because of instruction. At the community level, misinformation manifests as shared flawed views or misconceptions about certain topics often around risk factors and treatments of learning disabilities. At the system level, misinformation manifests as state or district educational policies and practices that have no scientific evidence. Thus, corrective efforts in education must be implemented at all three levels and follow best practices.

Relationship between dyslexia awareness and stigma among nursing students in Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study

Background

Dyslexia-a learning disorder characterized by difficulty in word-level reading skills-can negatively impact nursing students' practice, which can, in turn, affect patient safety. Individuals with dyslexia are often stigmatized. There is a need to explore dyslexia awareness among nursing students and its relationship with stigma in Saudi Arabia.

Objective

This study aimed to assess the dyslexia awareness levels among nursing students and its relation to stigma.

Methods

A quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted on 154 nursing students at King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia. Data were collected by asking the students to virtually complete the Knowledge and Beliefs about Developmental Dyslexia Scale (KBDDS) and the Consciousness Questionnaire-Learning Disabilities (SCQ-LD) from February to March 2021. Data were analyzed using chi-square tests to test significance and Cramer's V to determine the strength of the relationships among the categorical variables.

Results

The overall dyslexia awareness level was moderate. Most participants believed that people had negative assumptions about individuals with dyslexia and that they judged and treated them differently. A moderately strong positive association was revealed between knowledge of the stigma surrounding dyslexia and knowledge of dyslexia itself (p <0.001).

Conclusions

Increased dyslexia awareness is correlated with greater anticipation that dyslexic individuals will be stigmatized. Therefore, dyslexia awareness should be raised among nursing students. Students or nurses with dyslexia should also be encouraged to learn appropriate coping strategies to ensure patient safety.

Conceptions and Misconceptions: What Do School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists Think About Dyslexia?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this exploratory study was to evaluate speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') conceptions and misconceptions about dyslexia.

METHOD

Participants were 86 school-based SLPs. They completed an online survey on which they rated their agreement and disagreement with true and false statements related to the scientific evidence about the nature of dyslexia and interventions for dyslexia, as well as common misconceptions about dyslexia.

RESULTS

There was considerable variability among SLPs' agreement and disagreement with the statements. Critically, despite abundant contrary evidence in the literature, many SLPs believe that dyslexia involves a visual processing deficit.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that many school-based SLPs hold misconceptions about dyslexia, especially those related to dyslexia being a visual disorder. The identified misconceptions may contribute to some SLPs' reluctance to incorporate reading and prereading skills into speech-language assessment and intervention. SLPs need greater knowledge of dyslexia to provide more effective evaluations and intervention services.

Speech-Language Pathologists' Endorsement of Speech, Language, and Literacy Myths Reveals Persistent Research-Practice Gap

PURPOSE

We explore the extent to which speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are operating under assumptions about speech, language, and literacy that are not supported by evidence or are contradicted by evidence.

METHOD

SLPs (N = 106) marked the degree to which they endorsed or rejected four true and 11 myth (i.e., false) statements on a visual analog scale via an online survey. We analyzed the degree to which participants agreed or disagreed with these statements related to speech, language, and literacy development and impairment.

RESULTS

Based on results of one-sample t tests, participants as a group correctly rejected seven myth statements and correctly endorsed three true statements. Participants as a group provided equivocal responses to the remaining four myth statements and one true statement. Scores for each statement spanned all or nearly all of the possible range. Even when participants overall showed relatively strong disagreement with a particular myth statement, at least a few participants endorsed the myth statement.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate areas of relative strength for SLPs' knowledge of current evidence for augmentative and alternative communication, bilingualism, and language input that supports language development. Identified areas of relative weakness include knowledge of the expected grammatical and speech production skills of children with typical development and the influence of ear infections in childhood on language impairment. Additional research is needed to evaluate efforts to enhance SLPs' knowledge and use of evidence-based practices.

The School-Based Speech-Language Pathologist and Students With Concussion: An Examination of Evolving Knowledge and Confidence

PURPOSE

This study examines school-based speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') experience, knowledge, and confidence in supporting students as they return to the classroom following concussion, with a particular focus on knowledge of new management guidelines over the last decade.

METHOD

Participants were 74 school-based SLPs who completed an electronic survey about their knowledge and experiences serving students with concussion. We examined participants' accuracy and confidence across knowledge questions using Kruskal-Wallis tests. We also conducted linear regression to explore the relationships between training, work experiences, knowledge, and confidence.

RESULTS

Nearly half of participants who are currently working with students with concussion reported having no clinical or training experiences related to concussion. Participants who had more concussion-related training or working experiences reported higher confidence. Participants were confident about general concussion knowledge but less confident about providing assessment and supporting students with concussion as they returned to school. Participants had the lowest confidence and accuracy for the most recent guidelines around rest and activity, as well as the differential impact of concussion on children as compared to adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Many school-based SLPs have limited training around concussion management and are often not specifically consulted to work with students following concussion. Despite this, SLPs have good awareness of their knowledge about concussion, but show gaps in knowledge surrounding more recent evidence-based guidelines. Additional investigation is needed to determine better ways to move research into clinical practice and to increase the involvement of SLPs in school-based concussion teams.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20361969.

Refutation Text Facilitates Learning: a Meta-Analysis of Between-Subjects Experiments

Scientific misconceptions are ubiquitous, and in our era of near-instant information exchange, this can be problematic for both public health and the public understanding of scientific topics. Refutation text is one instructional tool for addressing misconceptions and is simple to implement at little cost. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of the refutation text structure on learning. Analysis of 44 independent comparisons (n = 3,869) showed that refutation text is associated with a positive, moderate effect (g = 0.41, p < .001) compared to other learning conditions. This effect was consistent and robust across a wide variety of contexts. Our results support the implementation of refutation text to help facilitate scientific understanding in many fields.

Dyslexia knowledge, perceived preparedness, and professional development needs of in-service educators

The purpose of this study was to investigate New Jersey educators' dyslexia knowledge and misconceptions, professional development perceptions and needs, and perceived preparedness regarding teaching students with dyslexia. A second purpose was to investigate what factors predicted New Jersey educators' knowledge about dyslexia. A total of 705 in-service educators completed a survey about their dyslexia knowledge, perceived preparedness, and professional development perceptions. Participants had accurate overall knowledge about dyslexia, but some prevailing misconceptions were still present. The greatest predictor of dyslexia knowledge was years of experience in working with students with dyslexia. Reading specialists, educators with greater perceived preparedness and those educators who had training in multi-sensory approaches to instruction had significantly more dyslexia knowledge than other educators. Approximately half of the participants felt prepared to teach students with dyslexia and that working with students with dyslexia prepared them the most. Participants perceived that multi-sensory approaches were the most effective professional development and their undergraduate education was the least effective. Most participants were in support of further professional development on the topic of dyslexia. Implications for in-service educators' professional development and future research directions are discussed.