Dyslexia as a Specific Learning Disability: Law & Practice
This paper examines dyslexia as a specific learning disability with a neurobiological basis, distinguishing it from other reading disabilities and exploring its impact on academic performance. It reviews programs designed for students, parents, and educators — including Orton-Gillingham-based approaches — and analyzes Virginia's legislative framework, particularly the 2017 updates mandating teacher awareness training and the creation of a Dyslexia Advisor role. The paper surveys the national legislative landscape, highlighting early intervention strategies, universal screening programs, and the ongoing gaps in policy clarity and implementation. Drawing on neurobiological and multiple intelligences theories, it concludes with an assessment of the programs' impact on student outcomes and the continued need for collaborative, evidence-based practice.
- Dyslexia as a Specific Learning Disability: Definition, characteristics, and academic impact of dyslexia
- Programs for Students with Dyslexia: Orton-Gillingham programs and Virginia's legislative framework
- Problem Statement and Theoretical Perspectives: Neurobiological and multiple intelligences theories applied to dyslexia
- The Legislative Landscape: Past, Present, and Future: National dyslexia laws, screening mandates, and policy gaps
- Impact of the Problem and Program: Effects of dyslexia legislation on teachers and administrators
- Impact on Students: Student outcomes and the need for continued collaboration
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds the analysis in a clear neurobiological theoretical framework while also integrating Gardner's multiple intelligences theory, showing awareness that a single lens is insufficient.
- Moves logically from disability definition and characteristics to program description, then to policy analysis — giving the argument a coherent scaffolding from micro to macro.
- Uses concrete legislative examples (Virginia's 2017 code update, Oregon Senate Bill 1003, Texas's 1985 dyslexia law) to anchor policy claims in real evidence rather than vague generalizations.
- Acknowledges gaps and limitations throughout — including what current legislation fails to address — demonstrating critical engagement rather than simple advocacy.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective policy analysis through a literature-informed lens: it synthesizes empirical research on dyslexia's cognitive and neurobiological dimensions and then applies that knowledge to evaluate real legislative frameworks. By comparing Virginia's program against those of other states, it moves beyond description into evaluation, assessing sufficiency and identifying actionable gaps — a standard graduate-level policy-review technique.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a definition and characteristics section that establishes what dyslexia is and why it matters. It then surveys existing programs before articulating a problem statement. A theoretical perspectives section anchors the analysis in neurobiological and multiple intelligences theories. The legislative landscape section traces historical and current law at the state and national level. The paper closes with two impact sections addressing programs broadly and students specifically, ending with a call for continued collaboration.
Dyslexia as a Specific Learning Disability
Classified under the broader rubric of specific learning disabilities, dyslexia is a severe reading disability known to have a neurological basis (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009, p. 92). Because reading and literacy are so crucial in every area of educational curricula and instructional design, students with reading disabilities like dyslexia may struggle more globally in their academics even though they do not have specific learning disabilities in other areas. Therefore, it is important that dyslexia is identified as early as possible in order to provide critical interventions for this student population.
Not all reading disabilities are dyslexia. Only one percent of all learning disabilities are correctly identified as dyslexia (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009, p. 92). Whereas the "vast majority of reading problems can be effectively remediated," dyslexia is difficult to remediate when it manifests in its so-called "pure" or most extreme form (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009, p. 92). Identifying children with dyslexia involves paying close attention to how they perform on general literacy in early childhood, particularly in areas like phonological awareness, reading recognition, rapid automatic naming, and reading comprehension (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Phonological awareness refers to the ability to recognize that words are formed of smaller components known as phonemes and syllables. The brains of children with dyslexia prevent them from effectively recognizing phonemes, which then significantly impacts their ability to code and decode, read and write.
Children with dyslexia also have trouble with rapid automatic naming, which is entirely different from phonological awareness and therefore reveals the complex series of cognitive functions involved in literacy. With rapid automatic naming, the student becomes able to quickly recite strings of letters — such as saying the alphabet or spelling a word — as well as strings of numbers, such as a phone number. Rapid automatic naming ability is linked with the ability to improve reading skills (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Children with dyslexia also exhibit problems with general word identification and recognition. They may add or substitute words, skip or omit other words, and mispronounce words as well. Word recognition problems can manifest both when the child is reading and when hearing words. The inability to effectively understand, recognize, and process words — associating those words with their underlying meaning — also leads to reading comprehension problems within this population cohort (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009).
Students with dyslexia can therefore struggle in a number of different classroom environments in which content delivery depends heavily on language. Many students with dyslexia score high on intelligence assessments and are "gifted" in areas other than reading (O'Brien, 2017, p. 1). Teachers need to understand that there are other methods of conveying content than relying exclusively on words.
Unfortunately, research has shown consistently that students with reading disabilities and dyslexia specifically "rarely catch up" and can have lifelong problems with reading and literacy (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009, p. 93). Teachers need to be empowered with the knowledge of how to apply best practices at every stage of a child's development, focusing especially on early childhood education. The Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA) specifically mentions dyslexia under the general rubric of learning disabilities, liberating funds that help educators and administrators meet the needs of this special population. Educators need to learn more about how to identify dyslexia as early as possible, preferably in the preschool environment. Parents also need to recognize early warning signs and participate in their child's intervention programs. Administrators need to remain cognizant of what resources are available to them in their communities, so that they can devote and allocate the funding and resources necessary for helping students with dyslexia and the educators who support them. Special educators are in the position of providing administrators and general education teachers, as well as parents, students, and counselors, with access to evidence-based best practice treatment interventions for students with dyslexia.
References
Morin, A. (n.d.). Programs that are influenced by an Orton-Gillingham approach.
O'Brien, K. (2017). Even with new dyslexia law, many schools still missing the mark. ABC8 News.
"Reading, Spelling, and Writing Programs." (n.d.). Dyslexia Help: Regents of the University of Michigan. http://dyslexiahelp.umich.edu/tools/reading-programs
Taylor, R. L., Smiley, L. R., & Richards, S. (2009). Exceptional Students. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Virginia Department of Education. (2018a). Dyslexia. http://www.doe.virginia.gov/special_ed/disabilities/learning_disability/dyslexia.shtml
Virginia Department of Education. (2018b). Dyslexia training. http://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching/licensure/dyslexia-training/index.shtml
Worthy, J., Salmeron, C., Long, S. L., et al. (2018). "Wrestling with the politics and ideology": Teacher educators' responses to dyslexia discourse and legislation. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 67(1), 377–393.
Youman, M., & Mather, N. (2018). Dyslexia laws in the USA: A 2018 update. https://www.dyslexicadvantage.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/2018-Youman-Mather.pdf
Zygouris, N. C., Avramidis, E., Karapetsas, A. V., et al. (2017). Differences in dyslexic students before and after a remediation program: A clinical neuropsychological and event related potential study. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 7(3), 235–244.
Already a member? Log in
Unlock the rest of this paper
135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection
7-Day Pass
Does not renew
Get 7-Day PassMonthly
Renews at $12.99/month until canceled
Start MonthlyAnnual
Renews at $99/year until canceled
Start Annual- Unlimited AI writing tools
- Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Plan details
Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.
TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.
Prices exclude applicable tax.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.