Explain something to me...

Chuchoter

I was having this big discussion with my dad yesterday about my friend and the spelling and grammar waiver. She has very mild dyslexia but gets the spelling and grammar waiver on everything. She got an A in her foreign language in the JC, but told me if I put down what she wrote letter for letter I might get a C or something. Same with Irish, and I've seen her Irish and its not great (considering 80% of your mark is spelling and grammar). So my question is, how does the spelling and grammar waiver work for languages? Surely if you can't speak it, you can't speak it. I mean if she went writing into a German newspaper, they won't be able to understand her and it won't matter if she has dyslexia. I don't mean to sound really offensive, but how do they make this fair?

**Timbuk2**

Usually they apportion the marks elsewhere, as far as I know!

For example, if a letter is 30% content, 30% grammar/spelling, 20% clarity, 20% communication (just making those up) then it might be apportioned something like 40% content, 30% communication, 30% clarity.

But I'm only guessing, I'm not sure - and all those percentages are made up, I'm not sure of the actual method or breakdown.

Lawliet

crayolastereo wrote: »

She got an A in her foreign language in the JC, but told me if I put down what she wrote letter for letter I might get a C or something.

I think your friend is exaggerating there, while they do mark spelling and grammar easier for dyslexics I somehow doubt it would make two grades worth of a difference. I don't know anything about it though, that just seems suspect.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

What Timbuk2 said.
They mark it as if there were no marks going for spelling. So it would be marked on content, coherence etc.

Chuchoter

But what about grammar, I mean German has really hard grammar and is incomprehensible without it. Doesn't matter how good your content, ie what you're trying to say is if you can't read it because its all in the wrong tense and the words are in the wrong order.

I think people are using it to get extra points

The report, seen by the Irish Independent, shows what it calls "dramatic" increases in the numbers seeking exemptions:

> Junior Cert -- up from 976 in 2001 to 4,552 this year.

> Leaving Cert -- up from 264 in 2001 to 2,136 this year.

http://www.independent.ie/education/latest-news/exam-chiefs-urged-to-axe--concessions-on-spelling-1552743.html

Like I think its fine for people with bad dyslexia, but most people have it so mildly it doesn't constitute giving them half the exam based on what most people would call the easier part: vocabulary and content.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

crayolastereo wrote: »

I think people are using it to get extra points

There is surely some system in place to counter this, otherwise it would be too easy to ace your language exams. I never knew dyslexia affected a person's grammar though?

EDIT: You are aware that you need a psychological report and confirmation from an occupational therapist before you're given that though, right?

Lawliet

Leland Scruffy Package wrote: »

EDIT: You are aware that you need a psychological report and confirmation from an occupational therapist before you're given that though, right?

The appointments for those tests are pretty expensive and it's incredibly
difficult to fake dyslexia.

I don't think it's a case of people faking dyslexia so much as people with milder forms of dyslexia looking for concessions they don't really need.

gaeilgegrinds1

There is no way in Irish it would go from an A to a C, I can explain how the marks work indepth but it's essentially the higher the mark you get for written sections, the higher the extra mark added to it. You'd be lucky if it would bring you up much at all really. As for saying dyslexia has increased, that's a bit of a controversial comment really in that knowledge and awareness has increased so much that that is probably more the reason. It's over-used as an excuse by many of my students, many people have had and still have dyslexia and don't let it stop them getting anywhere in life, it doesn't in anyway equate to lack of intelligence, the opposite usually infact.

DavidKelly1

There is absolutley no way anyone could fake having dyslexisa, my sister is currently studying Occupational Therapy and she said the results of the tests taken are processed in such a way that a misread diagonis is very uncommon.

The thing about people seeking exemptions is also very true. I know my friend had a mild hand eye co-ordination problem known as dyspraxia, his writing was very leigible and it did not effect his overall intellect in any way, but in his exams he is exempt from 3 subjects I think?. Not languages but I think any subject to do with measurement or prolonged calcuations. Not too sure why or how the system works but I believe it should be renewed.

Basically the guy I am talking about is slightly clumsy but that's the height of the disorder, he does not consider it a big deal however the SEC treat it with the upmost importance

Chuchoter

I don't think anyone is faking dyslexia, but the extent of this girls dyslexia was that she couldn't do spelling tests very well in 6th class,everything else was fine. Its not like she was never able to read or something. I think they should change the exam so that anyone asking for this exemption should have their oral and aural be much harder marked and worth more. Or only give the exemption to people with bad dyslexia.

**Timbuk2**

I don't think the increase in dyslexia cases is a bad thing. Having those spelling/grammar waivers makes things fair!

My mother's brother, when he was in school (years and years ago), had difficulty reading and had a stutter/stammer, and although he was extremely intelligent, he used to be beaten by the teacher for not getting it quick enough. While not entirely relevant, he may have had dyslexia or some similar learning disorder, which today would have been recognised and accomodations made for him in order to give him as much chance as any other student.

unknown13

Spelling and Grammar waiver means that the 10% you get for spelling and grammar is waved off and added onto the context. The problem with the spelling and grammar waiver is that it will appear on your results sheet, in the form of "Wasn't tested for spelling and grammar" or something similar.

unknown13

For those who think faking Dyslexia is possible. It is NOT because there are some mild physical aspects of the Dyslexia test that get checked.

rainbowtrout

crayolastereo wrote: »

I don't think anyone is faking dyslexia, but the extent of this girls dyslexia was that she couldn't do spelling tests very well in 6th class,everything else was fine. Its not like she was never able to read or something. I think they should change the exam so that anyone asking for this exemption should have their oral and aural be much harder marked and worth more. Or only give the exemption to people with bad dyslexia.

But why should they have to sit a harder speech/listening exam just because their spelling is crap? Because that's what you're essentially saying. Your friend is over exaggerating the marks. As far as I know in LC English, eg for the essay, 10% of the marks go for spelling and grammar. So if they have a spelling waiver, those marks will be redistributed or they'll be marked out of a lower total.

The other thing, if a person has a waiver of any type it's noted on their certificate of results.

Also if I was dyslexic and had terrible problems with spelling, grammar, word order or anything else like that, the last thing I would want to do is go into a job where those skills would be required. I doubt very much a newspaper would want to hire someone with dyslexia when they can hire someone without it.

On the other hand crayolastereo, would you want your oral/aural marked differently to the rest of the country if you broke your arm the day before the leaving cert was due to start and you had to record all your answers orally on to a tape and be assessed that way? Because you couldn't be assessed on spelling either if this happened to you, or if you had a scribe for the same reason, because they would be writing the answers, so unless you were to spell every single word they wrote, which really isn't feasible, it's their spellings that are going on paper not yours.

To be honest, I've supervised in special centres in a number of capacities, reader, scribe etc and it's never the 6A1s type students that are in there. While some might disagree with me, those that are in those centres have found school tough a lot of the time because of their dyslexia or whatever reason they have for being there.

Must be a bit hard labelling the urinary system in a biology exam and remembering which part is the ureter and which is the urethra without having to worry about getting the spelling close enough that it will be accepted as well, because in science when there are so many terms that are similar you do have to be precise to get the marks. Chemistry - nitrates or nitrites? Sulphates or sulphites? Only one letter change but it's a completely different chemical.

If spellings weren't overlooked for students without dyslexia there would be a huge drop in grades overnight. I regularly correct ag science work with the following : Sharley/Charlie (Charolais), Freshan (Friesian), Limoseen (Limousin). I do however understand what they are saying and it's agriculture I'm examining not spelling. Even with your example of German, you are showing your ability to understand and communicate in a foreign language. Spelling is only a small part of that.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Lawliet wrote: »

I don't think it's a case of people faking dyslexia so much as people with milder forms of dyslexia looking for concessions they don't really need.

That's where the occupational therapist somes in, he/she decides whether or not the case is severe enough to warrant a waiver on the marking scheme.

unknown13

Leland Scruffy Package wrote: »

That's where the occupational therapist somes in, he/she decides whether or not the case is severe enough to warrant a waiver on the marking scheme.

The DOE / SEC decide that not the occupational therapist.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

unknown13 wrote: »

The DOE / SEC decide that not the occupational therapist.

If the OT decides that the person's disability is not severe enough to affect their schoolwork/exam results, the SEC will not even consider the application.

unknown13

Leland Scruffy Package wrote: »

If the OT decides that the person's disability is not severe enough to affect their schoolwork/exam results, the SEC will not even consider the application.

The SEC / DOE receives actual evidence of the person's disability. In my case I had to write as fast as I could for a few minutes and then submit that piece of writing into the SEC / DOE.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

unknown13 wrote: »

The SEC / DOE receives actual evidence of the person's disability. In my case I had to write as fast as I could for a few minutes and then submit that piece of writing into the SEC / DOE.

Yes but again, if the OT decides it's not bad enough, there's no contact at all with the SEC about getting assistance. It's a straight up no.
Really? I had to send pages of writing from throughout 5th and 6th year. Getting you to write a piece on the spot makes it a little easy to fake...

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

I dont see why everyone is making a fuss. Firstly, its only 10%, and that gets added to different part of the marking scheme, which, IMO would be harder to get those marks. Secondly, the majority of people score higher than 7/10 in mechanics which is, when you think about it, soft marks. If anything, the waiver puts them at more of a disadvantage so please, stop making up BS stories about how your 'friend' got an A with C material over mechanics.

unknown13

crayolastereo wrote: »

I don't think anyone is faking dyslexia, but the extent of this girls dyslexia was that she couldn't do spelling tests very well in 6th class,everything else was fine. Its not like she was never able to read or something. I think they should change the exam so that anyone asking for this exemption should have their oral and aural be much harder marked and worth more. Or only give the exemption to people with bad dyslexia.

No they shouldn't. People seen with Dyslexia are seen as people who have a disadvantage in the exams compared to mainstream people sitting the exam. Thats is why you have the exemption from Irish, spelling and grammar waiver and possible extra exam time, reader and scribe. Also there is the DARE program and special needs marking scheme.

I had to be in a separate centre for my exam and no way should my exams be marked harder than any one else's.

dan_d

Interesting.

I've a friend I met in college who called herself "dyslexic". The reason I put it like that is because she was tested coming up to the LC for dyslexia, but was told it wasn't severe enough to allow her any exemptions.

Fast forward into an maths based course in college and everything appeared fine. Until we had a class one year on writing reports/CVs/business letters etc, and she did very badly. She proceeded to get really, really annoyed about this. The lecturer told her that it was because her spelling was very poor, and the standard of her english was bad - as in, her sentence make-up was poor, and at a standard of a teenager.

She's now working abroad and recently was told she is not going to be moved up a grade in her job because her report writing needs a lot of work, and the language is just not up to standard. Needless to say, she's very annoyed about it.

The reason I mention this is because all along she was telling us that, while her written english was very bad, it was okay because her dad was the same but they were both really good at maths and since they were both engineers, english didn't matter. This attitude was drilled into her for her entire life...which led me to believe that while she was weaker at languages than at maths, nobody had bothered to put any extra work into it with her. They had simply said "oh you're good at maths, you'll be fine". Which in turn leads me to question the "dyslexic" claim.

I know there are a lot of people out there who genuinely are dyslexic/ADHD etc and a lot of parents who work hard to help their kids - but I equally wonder how many parents there are out there who couldn't be bothered doing their child's homework and a bit of extra work with them for the first 3 or 4 years of school, and then putting the child in for every test under the sun when the child is struggling a bit with something, in order to label them with a disorder. And a child will believe whatever you tell them - if they are told from the age of 8 or so that they have a disorder, they will believe that.

It's a difficult topic, and at LC level, I would imagine it's difficult to prove the shades of grey one way or another.

Lawliet

dan_d wrote: »

I equally wonder how many parents there are out there who couldn't be bothered doing their child's homework and a bit of extra work with them for the first 3 or 4 years of school, and then putting the child in for every test under the sun when the child is struggling a bit with something

What? How an earth does that make someone better at school work? I would have thought the opposite would be true.

unknown13

dan_d wrote: »

Interesting.

I've a friend I met in college who called herself "dyslexic". The reason I put it like that is because she was tested coming up to the LC for dyslexia, but was told it wasn't severe enough to allow her any exemptions.

Fast forward into an maths based course in college and everything appeared fine. Until we had a class one year on writing reports/CVs/business letters etc, and she did very badly. She proceeded to get really, really annoyed about this. The lecturer told her that it was because her spelling was very poor, and the standard of her english was bad - as in, her sentence make-up was poor, and at a standard of a teenager.

She's now working abroad and recently was told she is not going to be moved up a grade in her job because her report writing needs a lot of work, and the language is just not up to standard. Needless to say, she's very annoyed about it.

The reason I mention this is because all along she was telling us that, while her written english was very bad, it was okay because her dad was the same but they were both really good at maths and since they were both engineers, english didn't matter. This attitude was drilled into her for her entire life...which led me to believe that while she was weaker at languages than at maths, nobody had bothered to put any extra work into it with her. They had simply said "oh you're good at maths, you'll be fine". Which in turn leads me to question the "dyslexic" claim.

I know there are a lot of people out there who genuinely are dyslexic/ADHD etc and a lot of parents who work hard to help their kids - but I equally wonder how many parents there are out there who couldn't be bothered doing their child's homework and a bit of extra work with them for the first 3 or 4 years of school, and then putting the child in for every test under the sun when the child is struggling a bit with something, in order to label them with a disorder. And a child will believe whatever you tell them - if they are told from the age of 8 or so that they have a disorder, they will believe that.

It's a difficult topic, and at LC level, I would imagine it's difficult to prove the shades of grey one way or another.

I find it disgraceful that that girl's father didn't do what was best for his own daughter and force seek help in English. I guess the daughter is paying for the father's mistake now.

rainbowtrout

unknown13 wrote: »

I find it disgraceful that that girl's father didn't do what was best for his own daughter and force seek help in English. I guess the daughter is paying for the father's mistake now.

It's a shame but a lot of people have the attitude 'i was never able to spell/read/write/do maths etc etc., and it didn't do me any harm' and they figure if they got on fine without it then their kids will as well, despite the fact that the way jobs are done changes over time.