Note: I will be working soon with folks at Dyslexic Advantage on
research -- and I am reminded of a section I wrote for second edition of In
the Minds Eye. I thought some of you might be interested in seeing an excerpt
-- see below (without quotation marks).
I am not arguing, of course, that all dyslexics have great
talents -- nor that all non- dyslexics are blind to the talents of dyslexics.
But I believe we do need to consider that the kinds of talents they do have,
great or small, may be just the kinds of talents that are invisible to
conventional teachers and conventional tests and conventional measures of
academic ability. This is why I feel that developing a whole new family of
tests and measurement instruments is so critical.
In the ways of the world, it is a simple truth that one
cannot be considered to be really bright unless there exists some test on which
you can get a top score. And, as we have been trying to show throughout this
book, there are many talents and abilities that are important in life and work
that are never measured by conventional psychological and academic tests. This
needs to change.
To do this properly, we will probably have to get highly
successful dyslexics involved in the process because many conventional
educators and test designers may be quite unable to see what needs to be
measured, how it can be measured and why it is important. Old habits of thought
are hard to break. But perhaps, once again, we will need to rely on dyslexics
to “see what others do not see or cannot see.”
Clearly, it is time to develop new ways of assessing the
strengths and weaknesses of students as early as possible. Sometimes great
abilities can be hidden beneath striking difficulties. Sometimes, we are
beginning to see, the kid who is having a lot of trouble with reading or
spelling or arithmetic may turn out to do very well indeed with astrophysics or
advanced mathematics or molecular biology or computer information visualization
-- areas where visual thinking and image manipulation are more highly valued
than rapid recall of memorized names or math facts or large quantities of data.
Sometimes, when the conceptual context and the technologies change in dramatic
ways, the high talents that were once marginalized or considered of low value
in the old era may suddenly move to center stage, providing the exact set of
skills required in the new era.
Somehow, we need to be able to observe these changes with an
open mind -- alert to seeing potential and opportunity rather than only failure
and restriction. Sometimes, we might discover, the kids who are having the most
trouble should not be held back. Rather, perhaps, sometimes, they should be
pushed a long way forward -- if the right area can be identified by some new
and innovative screening device or testing method. As we have seen, those who
are most gifted in higher mathematics can have persistent problems with
arithmetic; some great writers can never learn to spell.
Identifying the right topic for each specific student is
important. It would help to hold their attention. But more important, perhaps
it will allow them to use talents never recognized before. Perhaps it will
allow them to learn in ways that are quite different from conventional
schooling (and out of conventional educational sequence). Perhaps it will allow
them to gain respect from others (and for themselves) for being able to do
things that are challenging for other students--or even challenging for their
teachers.
Of course, not all will be able to move ahead quickly -- but
even the most limited student may have islands of strength that no one knew
existed. We must make it our business to help them find these islands.
Sometimes, almost anything will do to start. But in the end, it is really
important for them to be able to say “I have a lot of trouble with this but I
am the best in my class (or my school) at doing that.” Sometimes, a whole life
hangs in the balance.
In many cases, of course, such an approach could be an
administrative nightmare. How can the system cope with such extremes of
diversity, with so many different measurement scales? Life is so much easier
when there is one scale -- conveniently showing those who are the top in
everything and those who are at the bottom of everything. With some new system,
with so many scoring high on at least one or two subtests, how do you know
which ones are really bright and which ones are really not so bright? However,
it is clearly not beyond our capacity to make it work if we are convinced that
it must be made to work -- if we are convinced of the real value of diversity
in brains and abilities.
We now have many new and sophisticated tools at hand. And
the need is great. It is high time to give up the illusion of uniformity and
begin to take advantage -- for the sake of these individuals as well as the
needs of society at large -- of vast differences in abilities in many diverse
fields. When we all are having to compete with many millions of others globally
(in an increasingly uncertain and changing economy; with fast transportation
and cheap light-speed communication), it is suddenly essential that all of us
quickly find whatever special talents we have, and develop these to a very high
level -- whether or not it is part of the conventional academic curriculum.
True, it is not yet perfectly clear how this can be done.
But it is clear enough that it will need to be done -- and in ways that are
very different from traditional educational pathways -- and most likely there
will be extensive use of the newest information visualization technologies.
Sometimes just listening to the improbable life stories of highly successful
dyslexics is enough to give us a few really new ideas about how to move forward
in this direction.
End of excerpt. Comments are welcome.
