Bridges and Barriers: The benefits and shortfalls of IT Training and Study Skills.

Information Technology has much to offer students diagnosed as dyslexic learners. In this regard IT, (Enabling or Assistive technology), can be used to assist students with dyslexia in a number of ways e.g. by creating a series of software barriers to spelling and grammar mistakes; by assisting with student’s organisational and time management skills; by assisting reading comprehension and research; etc. The focus of this study is to highlight the benefits of using enabling technology to assist students with dyslexia in producing coursework commensurate with their underlying cognitive ability. This study will confine itself to students in higher education in receipt of Disabled Students Allowance [DSA] and the training policy and procedures being operated that are currently flawed in helping them.

I hope to outline the benefits of being assessed for and awarded IT equipment and the changes it can make for students with dyslexia. In detailing these positive attributes it is also my intention to write and evaluate some inherent problems within the current system of assessment. The second part of the report will focus on the limitations of the existing software programs and whether specific IT solutions and software do enough to help compensate for the difficulties students with dyslexia face in the context of higher education. It will also illustrate the need for research to be undertaken by assessment centres into more assistive and cost-effective software solutions.

In conclusion I hope to finish by highlighting that the future of addressing these flaws lies within the ability of the DSA to carry out investigations on ‘How funds for assistive technology are currently being spent’. I will also argue that partially because of the lack of such research in this area, the disparity between the role of IT trainers and Study Skills Tutors and their inability to fully compliment each other creates a vacuum that needs to be filled. As T Zbutz points out ‘Given funding restraints and Time limits, IT trainers need to train students on all or most of the functions of the software packages’ within a reasonably short time frame. She ask whether, given the 'lack of knowledge IT trainers have towards Dyslexic learning styles, is this the most efficient use of training?’^¹.

There is a desperate lack of research in this area and I hope that this paper may go on to act as a stepping stone for further research to ensure that changes are made within the current procedure that will allow for a marriage between the two roles to a occur. It is only upon such a point can that feedback and reliability of DSA funding be assured. As S Hargreaves^² points out ‘we should be enabling students by anticipating their needs, not responding to legislation’.

Over the last ten years phonological factors have increasingly been acknowledged to be the main causes of dyslexia. The phonological model of dyslexia defines it in terms of difficulties associated with converting phonemes (‘smallest meaningful segment of language) into symbols (letters).^³ [1.5]

However, it is important to note that there are a number of key visual skills required for academic work and conversely there are a number of visual anomalies, which have an association with reading skills.

Research has shown that people with dyslexia have been found to have a number of associated visual anomalies and Meares-Irlen Syndrome has been the source of recent controversy. Some people experience visual perceptual distortions when they look at certain materials, particularly text. The distortions of text include blurring, movement of letters, words doubling, shadowy lines, shapes or colours on the page, and flickering. [2.2] These distortions are characteristic of a condition that is often referred to as Meares-Irlen Syndrome (also known as Scotopic sensitivity syndrome). Meares suggested that some children’s perception of text and reading disabilities ‘are influenced by print characteristics’^⁴. Thus, it is apparent that there is both a visual and a phonological component to dyslexia and both of these seem to stem from an inherited difference in the shape and function of Parvo cells in the Magnocellular region of the brain^⁵.

The findings for this would certainly rest on the nature aspects of any nature/nurture debate surrounding Dyslexia. In essence a more accurate definition would be to site Dyslexia as a complex neurological condition, which is ‘properly described as a syndrome: a collection of associated characteristics that vary in degree from person to person^⁶. [1.5]

Established in 1986, the National Federation of ACCESS Centres [NFAC]^⁷[1] is a nationwide network of specialist Centres offering independent assessment and training facilities in the use of enabling and information technologies for people with learning difficulties and/or disabilities. Over 50% of students in receipt of technology under the DSA scheme received their assessment through the NFAC^⁸. The spirit behind the DSA initiative was to provide recompense to students with disabilities for the additional expenditure that they would incur in a higher education context – aiming towards a ‘mythical level playing field’. As the only country in the world that operates a DSA that empowers students through the use of enabling technologies, the UK is in many ways the pioneer behind a number of progressive changes to the way in which we perceive technology. Students are assessed to determine the most appropriate IT strategies, which should be used for the duration of their degree programme. IT training is seen as the final step in the process and ideally it aims to consolidate the student’s use of the strategies highlighted during their assessment of need.

In evaluating whether providing IT equipment and software is sufficient to help compensate for academic difficulties faced by students with dyslexia in the context of the DSA scheme it is important to look at the strategies recommended in an assessment and the continuity in the process which would allow an IT trainer an in-depth insight into these strategies prior to his/her commencing training. It is important also to realise the limitations of strategies recommended in an assessment and even more importantly, the limitations of the software solutions recommended in a bid to provide cost-effective access to the strategy. We can define the underlying methodology of an assessment as follows: if the need is represented by hunger, then the strategy would be defined as eating and the solution as any foodstuff available. Thus, assessors, whether they are conscious of it or not, invariably offer the following strategies:

Each one of these has a number of possible software solutions and an assessor is required to determine both the most appropriate strategy and solution for each student within the context of the definition of dyslexia as a collection of symptoms that vary from person to person^⁹. A fundamental weakness in the current operation of the system is the lack of consistency in the diagnostic procedures being used nationally which results in assessors being presented with a wide variety of diagnostic report formats and in a number of cases diagnostic assessments for learning difficulties being confused with dyslexia.

However, an immediate and obvious failure in the current operation of the assessment system relates to the training of assessors. Lacking any basic understanding of the strategies to be used to assist students with dyslexia, an assessment report becomes merely a list of software solutions either known or preferred by the assessor/assessment centre concerned. This stems from a lack of any formal training for assessors within the NFAC and the persistent use of peer observation as the sole teaching method being used which results in both good and bad practice being perpetuated. An exception to this rule is exemplified by the CCPD document entitled ‘Induction Material for Prospective Assessors’ ^¹⁰and is used for new assessors only. Thus, the subsequent referral for IT training contained within a typical assessment report provides little or no information on the nature of the student’s learning ability and/or preferred strategies.

An IT trainer may be presented with a student who has been awarded a number of software solutions some of which may be inappropriate and/or some of which are unnecessary. However, I feel the single greatest failing in the current system is the artificial division between the recommendations contained within the DSA award i.e. Specialist Equipment Allowance and Non-Medical Allowance. In the majority of cases students with dyslexia are recommended a number of technological strategies and study skills assistance. However, there appears to be no connection and attempt to connect these two aspects of provision. Thus, a student may find that he is using a software version of mind mapping while simultaneously being taught to ‘brainstorm’ using a pencil during his study skills training with no apparent connection between the two. This duplication of strategies is wastes time which is probably the most precious commodity with respect to students with dyslexia operating within the constraints of tight deadlines.

As IT Trainers, the insight we gain from watching the dramatic improvements ‘AT’ can make on a students is valuable and therefore important to share. For this reason, opportunities to combine IT Training and Study Skills in the future is in many ways vital if we are to ensure the transparency of information sharing.

Part of the role of study skill tutoring is to help Dyslexic learners use their time effectively. IT solutions become paramount to ensure that this is achieved. The reality however is that in many cases Study Skills Tutors do not fully utilise the number of viable software solutions available nor do they all fully engage in the specific changes occurring within the area of assistive technology. Ultimately this will always have a compromising effect on the Dyslexic Students they are tutoring because a knock on effect is that study skills solutions that can be taught quickly and effectively are taught in a more convoluted manner than they need to be.

The incorporation and training of mind mapping software into a study skills training curriculum would in many cases greatly address this problem of unnecessary duplication within the system by allowing the student to systematically edit and change the direction of the mind map without it getting messy. It also allows them to use colours and images to quickly define and present the themes of their argument without being bogged down by large sheets of paper. This is only one example but in many ways is as important as the difficulties dyslexic students experience in making the leap from providing handwritten essay to manipulating them on a Word processor.

In the same vein it is the role of IT trainers to ensure that their dyslexic learners can fully utilise the equipment given to them via the DSA. Yet another vacuum exist within current procedure that prevents them from fully working to the specific individual needs of the dyslexic learner.

As highlighted, whilst IT Trainers play a vital role in helping students learn more about the software they have been given. Little training or information is given to the IT trainer as to the learning strengths of the student they are currently working with, nor is any training given on how to appropriately adjust the teaching method in order to ensure the student is taught utilising their individual learning style. IT training has been persistently seen as a further component of the specialist equipment allowance in that it is seen as a means of ensuring that all the equipment works and the student knows how to use it in the literal sense.

Current Access Centre procedures dictate that each IT trainer receives a copy of the needs assessment report from which the trainer can gauge a brief history of the students difficulties and the specific details of the equipment they have been given. This then allows the Trainer to spend time asking the student what they already know about the software they have been given and the areas where they feel they are weak. From here a lesson plan is formulated. Within the boundaries of IT training this system works reasonably well, however a great deal more can be done to improve the quality of this teaching. This would include having information on the report identifying the student’s individual learning strengths. If this couldn’t be done then IT trainers would need to be trained to incorporate software such as an updated version of Eileen Morgan’s ‘Words Work’ to identify the student’s learning strengths.

Under current training procedures the majority of IT trainers teach their students using Kinaesthetic and Visual teaching techniques. For a vast majority of cases this is an ideal way to teach dyslexic learners especially those with weak auditory learning styles. [1.2] However, as yet there are no safeguards to ensure that the training is always conducted in this way. Likewise the ability the combine Study Skills Tutoring with IT training would allow IT trainers to teach software to be used using actual work that the student is working on. An example being, lessons on Mind Mapping software would teach the student the importance of structure as well as how the software works. The knock on effect of this is that it will allow the student to be able to attach semantic learning to the IT training session which if conducted kinaesthetically (using motor memory) using visual images and colours can greatly improve the student’s ability to store the session into the their long term memory. Ultimately this will improve the likelihood of the equipment being used fully, while at the same time ensuring that the equipment allocated by the DSA and the LEA is not wasted.

The reduction of fatigue [2.6] and reading related stress is a significant yet undervalued contribution that both IT trainer and assessors can make, simply by changing the computer default Settings. With recent research^¹¹ outlining the complementary role of IT trainers in ensuring that students with dyslexia use the correct typeface setting and background colour, IT trainers can ensure that a student with Meares-Irlen Syndrome [2.2] are made aware of the need to increase the spacing between lines while reducing the average spacing between characters. [2.6] Whilst assessors should ensure that the background colour of the student’s computer monitor is set to match the optimal overlay colour recommended for the student, In both cases it is clear that IT Trainers and study skills tutors should be trained to understand the significance that colour change can make in improving reading speed and reducing fatigue for students with visual processing difficulties.

Exam revision is also a key factor point that study skilled tutors / IT trainers can help with. For example, when Dyslexic students are identified with strong visual and verbal skills but short term memory defects, MS Power Point can be employed to allow them to create strong visual presentations on the subjects their trying to revise.[6.3] This can then be presented to a number of different friends and audiences which in itself is a much more active way of learning for the student. The activity involved in this type of learning/teaching is useful in preparing the student for work in oral presentations [5.2] as well as a useful gauge in identifying where are their areas of strength and weakness.

Indeed in many cases a useful technique in IT training is to ensure enough time is allocated in the student’s allowance of training time for a ‘recap lesson’ after the training has been completed.[5.1] This re-cap lesson should ideally allow for a role reversal to occur where the student kinaesthetically teaches the IT trainer how the software and hardware works. This technique employs multi-sensory learning techniques to imbed teaching into the student’s long-term memory as well as feedback areas of strengths and weakness. [1.1]

Speaking from my own experience I would argue that often IT trainers meet students who have been assessed for the DSA yet receive the wrong choice of software or are not given the appropriate hardware. Although fortunately these cases are rare, more often than not they occur in circumstances where the chosen Assessor has not fully come to grips with the equipment available or kept them up to date with the software available. Again for this reason I would reiterate the point that the future of Study Skills and IT Training is dependent on their ability to merge closer with one another as the flaw in not doing so may prevent the concept of multi-sensory training from being fully utilised. This is a price that dyslexic students have already paid for far too long in the past.

Ott argues^¹² that ‘technology has been a lifeline to many dyslexic students. The computer has assisted the dyslexic student to organise his time more effectively. For example, lecture notes can be made on computer, stored on disc and expanded, redrafted and edited later.’ For the most part I would agree with Ott on this and would state that although in many ways technology has been very useful, to call it ‘a lifeline’ would be a dramatic overstatement as it has the potential to negate us from the realisation that the current technology does not do enough to improve Study skills for dyslexics as was noted above.

Further research is therefore required to outline case studies using questionnaire-based research interviews with a number of dyslexic students to examine the effects and the changes the IT equipment has had on them and where they feel more could be done. This data should be collected over a time period of 6 months and investigated at a national level. The result of which should be published and used to provide feedback to both LEAs and DSA.

I have included one short sited example (T Bayllis in my appendix) and would argue that a deeper analysis (one that this current paper does not permit) must be envisage in order procedural shortfalls in teaching and assessing to be highlighted.

A further problem potentially resulting from a lack a research is the possibility that by providing IT equipment and software, academic institutions and LEA’s can in certain cases be abstained from the responsibility of focusing on individual specific needs and requirements. For example, given the technological voice quality limitations of proof reading software such as ‘Read and write / text help software’, can we truly, say that such software compensates and empowers the dyslexic student in proofreading especially in cases were the quality of computerised voice reading remains at times incoherent.

Another example would be the use of mind mapping software such as ‘Inspiration’ or ‘Mind Manager’, which although very useful, were not software packages designed specially with Dyslexics in mind.

For this reason I have devoted the next part of this paper to outlining a number of key software solutions provided by DSA funding and the strengths and weakness that have been highlighted during my teaching sessions.

In using MS Word or other word processing software a clear benefit is the ability to be able to write, delete, redraft and move paragraphs around. In an age when MS is as familiar to people as television this cannot be overrated enough when being used by Dyslexic students. [6.2]The ability to spell check for example is a great improvement from having to write work out by hand, redraft and then rewrite in neat handwriting only to find consistent spelling mistakes have forced yet another redraft. Although MS word will now be something that most students will take for granted, there are I would argue many older Dyslexics students that can still remember the frustration of continuously having to redraft work in order to make it presentable. For this reason alone I would argue that the DSA and the provision of MS Word has greatly helped to reduce the difficulties of easy writing for dyslexic students. Having said this I would also hasten to add that the functionality of word-processing is not without its limitations.

The use of the Grammar Checker is perhaps the most salient limitation as often it leads to confusion rather than help, which can often lead to added frustration. This is because the underlining in green merely highlights for the student that an error has been made but it doesn’t fully explain what the error is. [6.2] For example the misuse of ‘tenses’ in sentence structure can often be highlighted in green and yet ignored. This could be due to a difficulty in understanding the error made and or a disagreement between the flow of argument that the student is trying to present and the grammatical changes that the Grammar Checker is trying to advise. In either case Grammar Checker on MS Word is ignored rather than used as a tool. [6.2] Additionally the lack of homophone checking is also a problem as are visual coding errors, which can often lead to mistakes going unnoticed. Examples, of both would be ‘eye sore and used the spell chequer’ or ‘Writing in my Dairy’ instead of ‘Diary ‘; both of which would be ignored by a Microsoft spell-checker.

As Hutchins points out ‘whatever the individual pattern of difficulties, all dyslexics have persisting problems with spelling’^¹³. Whilst one could argue that the level of this difficulty varies, it is clear that a heavy reliance on a spell checker is necessary for all students studying at FE and HE level. In extreme cases the emotional impact of Dyslexia can create extreme feelings of frustration and embarrassment (especially in the work place) that the flexibility and ease of using the MS word spell checker has become a ‘revolutionary God send’ in allowing that student to take and check simple messages or hand in short notes that they may feel grieved to do by hand.

Having said this it is important to point out that the spellchecker on MS word was designed to pick up typing errors rather than the idiosyncratic spelling of the dyslexic speller. Apart from not being able to cope with homophone errors the Spell checker is incapable of fully picking up words used incorrectly, such as their, there and they’re.

Arguably a heavy reliance on spell checking also prevents students from fully learning how to spell certain words or improve their spelling as the use of a spell checker or word predictor allows the student to simply type a few letters to allow for the word to appear. This argument could however be counter-balanced by arguing that the physical typing and use of muscle motor memory of each individual letter greatly improves the dyslexic learners ability to spell. Combined with Kinaesthetic memory, it may allow IT and touch typing to have a much greater impact in improving spelling for Kinaesthetic and visual learners.

Read and Write Gold and Kerzweil are both examples of text to speech software that have commonly been used by Assessors and IT trainers to help combat against some of the problems I have highlighted above. Read and Write Gold in particular allows students to check for homophones errors and Visual Coding errors and will read back selected text allowing the dyslexic students to listen and then Hear the construction of the sentence or paragraphs in the selected text. This is vital in being able to spot typing errors where, due to poor sequencing, words used to link sentences and arguments have been omitted by the student and not noticed when proof reading. When reading their own work Dyslexic students will often read what it is they think they have written rather than what they’ve actually written and as a result rarely notice the full extent of the number of words they’ve omitted until they listen to someone reading their work out loud.

This I would argue is largely as a result of poor working memories and having to imbed large amounts of information into the long-term memory in order to successfully to study and write the chosen easy. This makes it difficult to clearly picture a ‘well thought out structured argument’ when they are proofreading back to themselves. In certain cases it is only when they themselves proof read their work a few days after they have written the work and had time to forget some of the structure of the sentences do they then start to notice the number of mistakes made.

The frustration issue here is that dyslexic students often take longer to do work. They therefore finish work late and do not have enough time to forget their work in order to proof read it. For these reasons the ability to have Text read back to you again plays a vital role in meeting deadlines and constructing grammar.

Additionally, the need to combat fatigue is also a prevalent issue when looking at Text to Speech software. The ability to scan pages and documents and have them read back to you can be essential when trying to digest large volumes of information without falling asleep all the time.

In essence dramatic improvements are clear when looking at Text to Speech software and its uses can rarely be overstated. Nevertheless it does retain its own limitations and these remain mainly with the Voice Output quality’ which although continuously improving, has proved to be very difficult for many students to comprehend or trust. It is this that can dramatically affect its usage as a useful study aid. Simply put, few students are satisfied with the voices. It is here that I would argue that although this criticism is a subjective one it is still one that demands great improvement if students are to be able to fully trust Text to Speech software. An example of how the DSA could investigate this would be to allow IT trainers or LEA researchers (must be confined within the 1984 Data Protection Act to ensure research is kept within the bounds of the providing Access centre or LEA) to document the number of students using the provided Text to Speech software 5 months after the IT training and Needs assessment had been done. Such surveys should include questions on whether the student is using the software to scan and have books read back to them or whether they are simply using the software to proof read text and essays they had written. Evaluative yet friendly questions also need to be made in cases where the software is not being used at all. In deed I would argue that indiscriminate prescribing of ‘Text to Speech’ by needs assessors without checking on it’s actual usage is a potential abuse of DSA funding which can have damaging ramifications for dyslexic students to be able to draw on such funding in the future.

The use of mind mapping Software such as Inspirations or Mind Manager has proved very useful to a number of dyslexic learners in helping to deal with the trail of essay writing. Often dyslexic students begin with too many thoughts and arguments and as holistic learners have great difficulty in working within defined structures. In the case of essay writing, this process is greatly exacerbated as deadlines and grammar are also thrown into the mix. So, our dyslexic student who has too much to say has to start by getting thoughts down on paper. However when the anxiety of starting with that ‘killer line’ or intro’ creeps in things become evermore difficult which ultimately leads to wasted time and continuous procrastination, which in itself holds it’s own irony.

This is because the one thing dyslexic students don’t have is time to waste when writing essays. For this reason the use of mind mapping software can play a vital role.

In the case of Inspiration (the easier to use of the two), the student can quickly ‘rapid fire’ and formulate a number ideas onto the computer without having to worry about the sequence or spelling and then add visual images and colours to move the ideas around thus creating a linear flow or structure to their argument. This allows the student to remain relaxed in pushing their argument forward without having to stress over the order or spelling which if thought about too much can have dramatic consequences for the creative flow of the student’s argument. The flexibility of being able to holistically [3.2] put down a number of ideas and use graphic images to make them more tangible can be very useful in adding a ‘check and balance type system’ to the dyslexic student’s essay by allowing them to see where certain arguments are unstructured or are jumping around in random directions. Therefore one could argue that mind mapping software such as ‘Inspirations’ is an essential part of study skills training and something that should be taught to and incorporated by study skills tutors at a national level. Coupled with the practical aspects of essay writing it plays a vital role in time management and empowerment by allowing the student to trust and use their own ideas to get something down on paper at an early stage. The end result of this is that it would help build confidence and allow the student’s study skills tutor or course tutor to see the flow and direction of the students essay (via the Outline button) which can be corrected or adjusted much earlier. The significance of this can be enormous as often-Dyslexic learners can be quite baffled by feedback stating their assignment or essay didn’t make sense especially in cases where it made perfect sense to them when they themselves read it. Therefore the benefit of mind mapping software such as Inspiration lies in its ability to use visual images, symbols and colours to help provide ‘structure and definition’.

In the case of ‘Mind Manager,’ which provides the same functionality as ‘Inspirations’, the issue of structure and definitions is also key. The most notable difference between the two is that Mind Manager which, although is more difficult for the students to learn on, allows the student to export their mind-map into a Power point presentation at the touch of one button. The benefit to this is that the visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learner can present their ideas out loud using PowerPoint, verbally explaining and demonstrating their argument, which can easily be understood by the audiences and improved upon by the course tutors. Not only does this help in presenting ideas but also has the potential to play a vital role in exam revision, which would greatly benefit visual learners and compensate Students with high verbal reasoning ability.

The limitations involved here lie not within the software themselves but rather in the structural system of DSA and the lack of pressure from Assessors. It is clear that although both Mind Manger and Inspiration are both useful pieces of technology, neither system was designed specially for dyslexics. As outlined, both play an integral part in improving easy planning skills for writing but both highlight a huge vacuum that exists for mind mapping software to be designed that can specially adjust and co-ordinate itself around dyslexic learning styles. This is an issue on two grounds. Firstly because both systems were originally designed as business tools rather than as technology designed for essay writing and secondly because are geared towards an American market rather than a U.K one.

Although one could argue that it is not vital for such software to be made in the UK, as the only country providing a state-funded DSA it is unfortunate that assistive technology for dyslexic students has not evolved enough to incorporate special mind maps for dyslexics.

An additional observation here is that the market demographics for the producers of Inspirations and Mind Manager in the UK market may well be over 80% dependent on purchases from access centres and needs assessors. Whilst these ‘off the shelf’ solutions have proved itself useful over the 7 years since their introduction, the mass level of purchase alone (every other purchase goes to a dyslexic student qualifying for the DSA) warrants the need for Governing Access centres or needs assessors to meet with Inspirations / Mind Manager agents based in the UK to see if specific Dyslexia-based mind mapping software can be envisioned. For to not do so would be to assume that that the present mind mapping software does more than enough or that future design Input from dyslexic users is superfluous, which as we know is far from the case.

Voice input Software allows students to speak out their ideas through a microphone and have them typed out as they speak. Students with strong verbal language skills will immediately find this useful, as it will allows students to rapidly discuss their ideas, thoughts and ideas and have them ready to print out and read almost immediately. However students with expressive language difficulties [1.4] will face difficulties using Dragon as it functionality in recognising words verbatim will present work in a spoken fashion including slang and poor sentence structure, this combined with poor voice recognition would make it fatal if used by student will expressive language difficulties. [6.2]

One of the difficulties that using Dragon presents is that it requires ten minutes of reading in order for the voice recognition to work. This can occasionally present immediate emotional problems for a few students that have extreme reading difficulties or extreme fears of reading out loud.

An over-dependence on Voice activated software can however lead to poor typing skills, which should be discouraged with all students. Therefore a careful balance must be made on how much voice-activated software is used. Arguably Dragon Naturally Speaking 6 is between 75-85% accurate in it’s typing which many students would be very pleased with. However, there are cases where students with faster, more accurate touch-typing skills may find Dragon cumbersome. This equally applies to students with strong international accents or speech impediments who will also find Dragon difficult to use. Having said this, I feel it that its immediate counterpart IMB via-Voice is extremely difficult to train and use, therefore making Dragon Naturally speaking the preferred choice.

Personal organisation can often prove to be a consistently difficult problem for dyslexic students. For this reason I will begin by explaining the importance of time management and the role of MS Outlook. With the ability to download emails, To-Do-List and notes into a calendar, students can set reminders, pop-up boxes and alarms to go off whenever appointment and deadlines have to be met. This is something that study skills tutors can also incorporate into their teaching as it allows the student to chunk their work into smaller parts and stay on top of given work loads by reminding them within plenty of time to meet set milestones. All of which can be measured throughout.

The use of Palms and PDA’s could also play a useful role in the near future, as can ‘Hot Synching’ into the computer, which allows all the information in the diary to be transferred into the portable palm top. Via a docking station or by infer red (Blue tooth could also support this). This also works in reverse as it allows notes and appointments made during the day to automatically upload into the students Microsoft outlook calendar. These simple devices could play a vital role in improving time management issues for dyslexics without them having to rely on numerous different pieces of paper. However, although these may be useful coping strategies, their overall inclusion in needs assessments is still at the very early stages and may well require further investigation before LEA’s will allow the purchase of such equipment.

The success of future IT training and study skills training lies in combining the two. The current system needs to evolve in a more student-based manner which requires ongoing research to provide continuous feedback to LEA’s and the assessment centres. To not do so will only allow room for poor operating standards and a waste of public money in addition to allowing growing cynicism to flourish. Given the proposed de-regulation of the assessment service by the Quality Assurance Agency, it is difficult to determine from where this research will stem. For this very reason it is hoped that this paper will contribute towards the formation of an IT training unit (ETAT- ‘Electronic Training and Tuition’) that will provide both feedback to the DSA as well as quality assured levels of combined IT/ study skills training. With the boom growth of e-learning this may become essential if current study skills methods are to survive the future onset of Dyslexic students.

1 Tanya Zybutz 08/10/01 Reflection notes Teaching Adults with Dyslexia.

2 S Hargreaves Developing IT for disability support in the UK and the USA with special reference to Specific Learning Difficulties.

3 Shaywitz, S. (1996), ‘Dyslexia’, Scientific American, November 1996

4 Meares, O. (1980), ‘Figure/ground, brightness contrast, and reading disabilities’, Visible language, 14, 13-29.

5 Stein JF & Glickstein M (1992) The role of the cerebellum in the visual guidance of movement. Physiological Reviews, 72, 967-1018.

6 Dyslexia in Higher Education: policy, provision and practice – Report of the National Working Party on Dyslexia in Higher Education, January 1999.

9 Mulcahy, P, 2001, Induction Material for Prospective Assessors,CCPD publication.

10 compiled by Mr Patrick Mulcahy but it should be noted that this was compiled in 2002

11 Mulcahy, P, Optometric Factors in the assessment of the information technology needs of students with dyslexia, SKILL Journal Issue Number 75, March 2003.

12 OTT P ‘How to detect and Manage Dyslexia.

13 Hutchins quoted by OTT P ‘How to detect and Manage dyslexia p245