MARC record from Internet Archive

LEADER: 03477cam 2200433 i 4500
001 9925259303101661
005 20170218050028.9
008 151203s2016 enka b 001 0 eng
010 $a 2015045595
020 $a9781474233750 (PB)
020 $a1474233759 (PB)
020 $z9781474233743 (ePDF)
020 $z9781474233736 (ePub)
020 $z1474233732
035 $a99970649927
035 $a(OCoLC)915250243
035 $a(OCoLC)ocn915250243
040 $aDLC$beng$erda$cDLC$dNLM$dYDXCP$dBTCTA$dBDX$dOCLCF$dNYP$dCDX$dBKL$dPUL$dCHVBK$dOCLCO
042 $apcc
050 00 $aRC394.W6$bE537 2016
082 00 $a616.85/53$223
100 1 $aElliott, Julian,$d1955-$eauthor.
245 10 $aDyslexia :$bdeveloping the debate /$cJulian Elliott and Roderick Nicolson ; edited by Andrew Davis.
264 1 $aLondon ;$aNew York :$bBloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc,$c2016.
300 $ax, 207 pages :$billustrations ;$c22 cm.
336 $atext$btxt$2rdacontent
337 $aunmediated$bn$2rdamedia
338 $avolume$bnc$2rdacarrier
490 1 $aKey debates in educational policy
520 $a"Dyslexia is often presented as a clearly delineated condition that can be diagnosed on the basis of appropriate cognitive tests with corresponding forms on intervention. However, this approachable text explores the issues behind this assertion in bringing together leading figures in the field to debate dyslexia. Julian Elliott shows that understandings and usage of the dyslexia label vary substantially with little consensus or agreement and in putting forward his critique draws upon research in several disciplinary fields to demonstrate the irrationality of these arguments. Roderick I. Nicolson demonstrates that current approaches to understanding, identification and support of dyslexia are catastrophically flawed in terms of their failure to consider the developmental nature of dyslexia. He develops two themes: first that the underlying cause of dyslexia is 'delayed neural commitment' for skills and neural circuits, and second that the cause of the reading disability is the introduction of formal instruction before the dyslexic child's neural circuits for executive function are sufficiently developed. He argues that a more effective and cost-effective approach to identification and support involves 'assessment for dyslexia' rather than 'of dyslexia'. Elliott and Nicolson respond to the points each other raise before Andrew Davis investigates how far the key claims of Elliott and Nicolson can withstand close conceptual investigation, and explores the inherent limitations of scientific research on this topic, given the value and conceptual issues concerned"--$cProvided by publisher.
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references (pages 171-204) and index.
505 0 $aSeries editor's preface: Key debates in educational policy / Christopher Winch -- Introduction / Andrew Davis -- 1. Developmental dyslexia: The bigger picture / Rod Nicolson -- 2. Dyslexia: beyond the debate / Julian Elliott -- 3. Response to Julian Elliott / Rod Nicolson -- 4. Response to Rod Nicolson / Julian Elliott -- Afterword: some philosophical reflections / Andrew Davis.
650 0 $aDyslexia.
650 0 $aDyslexia$xDiagnosis.
650 0 $aDyslexia$xTreatment.
700 1 $aNicolson, Rod,$eauthor.
830 0 $aKey debates in educational policy.
947 $hCIRCSTACKS$r31786103055932
980 $a99970649927