Catherine Bennett lambasts the idea of changing examinations to suit dyslexic candidates.
Ms Gadian, who is in her second year at the Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry in Plymouth, is planning a legal challenge to the General Medical Council, arguing that the use of multiple-choice exams discriminates against people with dyslexia. She has explained that these exams ‘don’t let me express my knowledge’ and pointed out that ‘in normal day life, you don’t get given multiple-choice questions to sit. Your patients aren’t going to ask you, “Here’s an option and four answers. Which one is right?”‘
Frankly, I’m appalled that such a high level qualification involves multiple choice in the first place. So, while I share some of Bennett’s irritation at the motivation for this (I’ve got as disability, therefore I’m special), frankly, multiple choice is a poor method of measuring underpinning knowledge. Far better to have an open question that the candidate must answer in their own words. Of course, this might just make it a little more difficult for dyslexics…
Even among dyslexia specialists, definitions and causes and prognoses for this condition vary so wildly that a normally competent reader can find herself wondering, given her sense of disorientation, if it might not be worth paying £200 or so for a postal diagnosis. Is it normal to find the subject of dyslexia so hideously confusing? To struggle with estimates of its prevalence that vary from 5 per cent of the population to 10 to 15 and, recently, a possible 21 per cent?
I recall first coming across dyslexia when one of my classmates was diagnosed with it. Back in the late sixties, it was relatively new and we were bemused by it. I’m not so dismissive as Bennett – it isn’t as simple as illiteracy as she implies. There is a genuine difficulty processing words and my classmate really did struggle. He wasn’t stupid and was perfectly capable of learning; he just couldn’t read well. My nephew suffers similarly.
All of that said – and despite some of the silliness and hyperbole in her article; e.g:
I’d prefer to have a doctor who can tell left from right
The general thrust; that standards should not be reduced to compensate for a disability stand. When I assess candidates for their NVQ qualifications, I make reasonable allowances to ensure that they receive fair access to assessment, but at no time is the standard compromised. They have to achieve exactly the same standards as every other candidate. I suspect that Bennett may be right in her supposition that the medical student in this case is looking for special treatment (i.e. watering down of standards) as opposed to equal access to assessment.
call me old fashioned but I think I would like a doctor who could read my medical notes.
Dyslexia wasn’t invented when nearly all children left school being able to read and write, at fourteen.
haddocks last blog post..not her
It depends on the degree of dyslexia – it doesn’t mean that they can’t read – it means that the brain has difficulty processing the words on the page. Some sufferers can overcome it – in which case, there would be no problem.
As for it being new – no, it isn’t. In previous decades it merely wasn’t recognised as such. Children would be assumed to be illiterate – or stupid. When children left school at fourteen, they were not all literate and numerate – and those that weren’t were not always stupid. By the late sixties, they were beginning to recognise that it is a distinct condition rather than merely laziness or stupidity.
I am a classic example of a failure in learning by rote one’s times tables. I couldn’t get past the two times tables. I still struggle with arithmetic. As such, I hold no love for the learning methods of previous eras – frankly, they could be pretty appalling. We all learn differently and the teaching methods still in use in the sixties did not reflect that – had they done, I might have passed my 11 plus.
What matters is meeting the standard. If someone with dyslexia can consistently meet the standard, then they are competent. And, as such, I would have no qualms about being treated by a doctor who was dyslexic. The issue here is not lowering the standards to meet those who would otherwise not achieve them – then you would have a valid concern.
Haddock,
Having worked in the administrative arm of the NHS, being able to read doctors “notes” while not suffering from dyslexia is hard enough…
Several of my friends have dyslexia; all of them (without exception) have gone on to do some pretty impressive stuff at university: Engineering at Leeds, Earth Sciences at Durham…my sister suffers from the equivalent in mathematics and is studying English at degree level.
Thoms last blog post..Speed Camera Madness
I think you’ll find that the multiple choice questions are fact based rather than requiring an understanding of an indication as to its causes and treatment. There will be examinations requiring essays. We also had viva voce exams every week in anatomy!