The Demise of the Discrepancy Definition of Dyslexia: Commentary on Snowling, Hulme, and Nation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.28987/ijrld.5.2.49Keywords:
Dyslexia, IQ, assessment, dyslexia, definition, discrepancy definitionAbstract
In this article, we review the proposal of Snowling, Hulme, and Nation (2020) to reinstate the discrepancy definition of dyslexia. Presenting logical reasons and empirical evidence that this definition is not valid, we suggest that there is no need to distinguish between individuals with dyslexia as identified through an IQ-achievement discrepancy framework and nondiscrepant poor readers.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Linda S. Siegel , David P. Hurford , Jamie Metsala , Timothy N. Odegard
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
for any purpose, even commercially.
This license is acceptable for Free Cultural Works.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.