Cited by 13Disability Education and EmploymentReading and Literacy DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.

Pilot Study to Investigate the Performance of Dyslexic Students in Written Assessments

Osborne, Polly·1999·Innovations in Education & Training International

Abstract

SUMMARY Dyslexia is a language‐based disorder which is recognized as a learning disability. But in higher education, assessment is largely in written form with time‐constrained examinations frequently an essential element. This suggests that dyslexic students are disadvantaged, especially in examinationswhen the constraints intensify the candidates’ difficulties with written language. In recognition of their disabilities, and the requirement to offer equal opportunities, the examining boards in many institutions allow special arrangements for dyslexic candidates. The author carried out a study to investigate the performance of dyslexic students in two modes of written assessment: coursework and examinations. The students known to be dyslexic had special provision in the examinations: they were allowed additional time and they had been offered the option of using a word processor instead of handwriting. Analysis of assessment marks showed that the dyslexic students obtained lower scores than the control group in both coursework and examinations, but they scored significantly less in examinations. This finding would suggest that the dyslexic students were still disadvantaged in examinations despite the special provision available to them, an implication that should cause concern at a time when efforts are being made to broaden access to higher education.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/1355800990360208

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Crisfield J, 1996, The Dyslexia Handbook
  2. Gilroy D E, 1996, Dyslexia at College,
  3. Paulesu E, 1996, Brain,, 119, 143, 10.1093/brain/119.1.143 · DOI
  4. Runyan M K, 1991, Journal of Learning Disabilities,, 24, 104, 10.1177/002221949102400207 · DOI
  5. Singleton, C. Dyslexia in higher education: policy, provision and practice. British Dyslexia Association International Conference. April21997. University of York.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Osborne, P.
Corresponding author
Osborne, Polly
Venue
Innovations in Education & Training International
Published
1999-05
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
155-160
ISSN
  • 1355-8005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8420
OpenAlex
W2088158431
Cited by
13
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Innovations in Education and Training International (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Disability Education and Employment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
dyslexia, written assessment, examinations, coursework, special provisions, word processing, equal opportunities, higher education, learning disabilities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review