THE EFFECTS OF PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS'

KNOWLEDGE TOWARDS THEIR PERCEPTION IN

MANAGING DYSLEXIC STUDENTS AT SELANGOR

BACHELOR OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY (HONS.)

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
HPY570
 1

TABLE OF CONTENT

Tittle Pages

1.0 Abstract 2

2.0 Introduction 3

3.0 Problem Statements 4

4.0 Research Questions 5

5.0 Objectives 5

6.0 Definition of Terms 6-7

7.0 Background & Literature Review

7.1 Background 8
7.2 Literature Review 8 - 10

8.0 Methodology
8.1 Study Design 11
8.2 Study Setting 11
8.3 Sampling Method
8.3.1 Sampling Design 11
8.3.2 Sample Size 11 - 12
8.3.3 Inclusion and exclusion criteria 12
8.4 Data Measurement 12
8.5 Main Data Collection
8.5.1 Method 12
8.5.2 Materials/Tools 12 - 13
8.5.3 Flow Chart for Data Collection 13
8.6 Analysis Data 13

9.0 Ethical Issues 14

10.0 Limitations 14

11.0 Proposed Time Frame 15

12.0 Budget 16

13.0 References 17 - 19

14.0 Appendix
14.1 Appendix A :Research Gap Table 20 - 27
14.2 Appendix B : Questionnaire 28 - 36
 2

1.0 ABSTRACT

Background : Dyslexia has been described as the most common specific learning
disabilities in Malaysia. However, the effect of primary school teachers’ knowledge on
dyslexia towards their perception in managing dyslexic students is still undiscoverable.
Problem : The problem here is that the teachers have a lack of awareness and
knowledge of dyslexia. Thus, they have trouble in detecting and managing dyslexic
students. Hence, another problem arises where the dyslexic students feel left out and
encounter negative experiences. In tackling this problem, the depth of knowledge of the
teachers towards dyslexia is needed to be known first.
Objective : Main objectives are to determine primary school teachers’ knowledge on
dyslexia and to identify their perception in managing dyslexic students.
Sampling & Respondents : This study will be conducted at selected 9 primary schools
in Selangor, Malaysia. The link for the online questionnaire will be distributed in October
2020 through online platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook and Email and will be
closed once the respondents have reached the target which is 385.
Data collection & Analysis : To discover better on this topic, a cross sectional survey
will be used to gather data that is needed in this study. Data will be analysed using
Descriptive Statistics and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) such as
Kruskal-Wallis test of variance.
Expected Outcome : Primary teachers’ perception in managing dyslexic students is still
lacking.
Variables measured : In this study, primary school teachers' knowledge on dyslexia will
be chosen as an independent variable while primary school teachers’ perception in
managing dyslexic students will be a dependent variable.
Keywords : Dyslexia, knowledge, primary school teachers, Selangor
 3

2.0 INTRODUCTION

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth

Edition (DSM 5), dyslexia is categorized under specific learning disorder. What is
dyslexia? Initially known as “word blindness”, dyslexia is from a Greek word, dys means
difficulty and lexia means language. It is a language-based disability and
neurobiological, which can run in the family (Roitsch & Watson, 2019). It is estimated
between 3% and 11% for children and adolescents respectively of having dyslexia in the
world (Zare, Amani & Sadooghi, 2019).
Dyslexia affects one of the most fundamental core skills which is ability to read
and write that contribute to academic achievement hence later on work performance. It
can lead for dylexic person in having low self esteem and motivation, social and
emotional problems and even some of them are having psychiatric problem (Leseyane
et al., 2018). Dyslexia can vary from one person to another but the most common
characteristics seen among the dyslexic is inadequate phonological processing
abilities, low accuracy and fluency of reading, poor spelling, and rapid visual-verbal
responding. It is not a sign of low intelligence and laziness, instead it occurs over the
range of intellectual abilities (Roitsch & Watson, 2019).
 4

3.0 PROBLEM STATEMENTS

There are several problem statements regarding this research proposal.

According to Knight (2018), a shortness of understanding of the nature of dyslexia
guides to unhelpful and detrimental comments. It was supported by a study conducted
in Malaysia by Bailey, Nomanbhoy and Tubpun (2015) where it points out that Literacy
and Numeracy Strategy (LINUS) teachers have negative views towards disabled
families and believe that disabled pupils have attitude problems. Also, studies centering
on teachers’ knowledge about dyslexia are quite scant. Both pre-service and in-service
teachers had demonstrated some accurate understanding, as well as notable
misperceptions and a lack of awareness regarding dyslexia (Soriano, Echegaray, &
Joshi, 2015).

In addition, there is no correlation found between preschool teachers’ knowledge

in dyslexia with their academic qualification (Ramli et al., 2019). However, in a study
conducted by Knight (2018) found there was a correlation between teachers with
experiences more than 10 years with their confidence in teaching dyslexic pupils.
Beside, an interview with 3 English Second Language (ESL) Teachers, who were
exposed with dyslexic pupils shows the teachers can handle dyslexic students by using
teaching strategies such as drilling, peer coaching, differentiation activities and pay
more attention towards them (Ahmad, Ali & Salehuddin, 2018). It shows us that
sufficient knowledge towards dyslexia is the main key in managing dyslexic pupils.

Plus, social attitudes and behaviours towards a person with dyslexia also become
an issue. Majority of the learners who encounter learning difficulties have negative
experiences within the school environment such as they are being laughed at by their
peers and being labelled. In addition, they are also being rejected in peer-group tasks
and activities allocated in the classroom (Leseyane et al., 2018). So, the teacher's role
in identifying dyslexic learners among the students is important as proactive strategies
can immediately be taken for improvement in overall academic achievement.
So, we can conclude that the problem here is the teachers have a lack of
awareness and knowledge on dyslexia. Thus, they have trouble in detecting and
managing dyslexic students. Hence, another problem arises where the dyslexic students
feel left out and encounter negative experiences. In tackling this problem, the depth of
knowledge of the teachers towards dyslexia is needed to be known first.
 5

4.0 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What is the level of knowledge for primary school teachers on dyslexia?

2. What is the primary school teachers' perception in managing dyslexic students?
3. What is the primary school teachers' perception in identifying dyslexic students?
4. What is the primary school teachers' perception towards exploration of dyslexia
that they received in pre service and in service training ?

5.0 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To determine primary school teachers’ knowledge on dyslexia.

2. To identify primary school teachers’ perception in managing dyslexic students.
3. To identify primary school teachers’ perception in identifying dyslexic students.
4. To identify primary school teachers' perception towards exploration of dyslexia
that they received in pre-service and in-service training.
 6

6.0 DEFINITION OF TERMS

Dyslexia: Dyslexia is a condition that struggles with decoding, in contrast to, listening
comprehension is usually more intact (Peterson & Pennington, 2015). According to
Manilla and Braga (2017), dyslexia is often considered as a language disorder with both
single word decoding and phonological abnormalities. The phonological theory of
dyslexic people implicies an impairment both of the retrieval and storage of speech
sounds. Reading in an alphabetic language system needs understanding in the
relationship of sound to letters. This grapheme to phoneme, which is reading to sound
relationship is a basic belief of the phonological deficit theory. Phonemes are the
smallest sound entities that differentiate closely similar words. Dyslexics display
phoneme unawareness.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM): According to
American Psychiatric Association (APA), DSM is a handbook used by health care
professionals in the United States (US) and most of the professionals in the world as the
reliable guide in identifying mental disorders. It accommodates descriptions, symptoms,
and other criteria to identify mental disorders. It comes up with a common language for
clinicians to speak about their patients and set up consistent and reliable diagnoses for
the research of mental disorders. Besides, it also provides a common language for
researchers to study the criteria for possible upcoming revisions and to aid in the
development of medications and other interventions.
Literacy and numeracy screening (LINUS): LINUS is a program administered by the
Malaysia Ministry of Education in primary schools nationwide to improve literacy skills of
students in year 1–3 (Chew, 2018). According to an article written by Bungga (2018),
LINUS programme was introduced in August, 2009 as a division of the National Key
Result Area for Education under the Government Transformation programme to make
sure all Primary 3 pupils master the three basic skills which are reading, arithmetic and
writing skills.
Occupational Therapy (OT): According to American Occupational Therapy Association
(AOTA), occupational therapy is barely a profession that assists people across the
lifetime to do the things they desire and want via the therapeutic use of daily activities
which is occupation. Occupational therapy practitioners permit people of various ages to
live life to its fullest by helping them promote health, and prevent them or live with a
better life with the injury, illness, or disability. While according to Robbert et al. (2020),
OT is a practice that focuses on accomplishing health, well being, and participation in
life throughout engagement in an occupation.
Central processes: The central process also known as planning process involves how
we recoup orthographic codes in the mental lexicon via lexical or sublexical routes and
their storage in working memory (Zhang & Feng, 2017).
Peripheral processes: Peripheral process involves the selection of allographs, the
planning the sequences of letters and the implementation of motor programmes.
Peripheral process also known as execution process (Zhang & Feng, 2017).
 7
Multisensory Approach: Multisensory approach known as applying visual, auditory
and kinaesthetic modalities, occasionally at the same time. These strategies enclose
human’s senses including what we see (visual), what we hear (auditory), what we do
(kinaesthetic) and what we feel (tactile) to enhance learning. All of these strategies can
assist to engage information in learners’ brain for the long term in its real sense by
seeing, hearing, touching and feeling. This approach excites learners to learn from their
experiences by using more than one sense (Sarudin, Hashim & Yunus, 2019).
Phonics instruction: Phonic instruction is an attempt to provide the ideas and teaching
by learning how an alphabetic writing system works. It instructs the spellings of words
that encode the phonemes within them via the virtue of systematic links between letters
or groups of letters and phonemes. This is important for alphabetic writing systems.
(Treiman, 2018). In addition, according to Schaars, Segers, and Verhoeven (2017), in
systematic phonics instruction there are pre-specified sets of phonic elements. For
example, grapheme–phoneme correspondences which are accretively being taught and
synchronously applied in reading words and text. Thus, phonics instruction guides
children to evolve their reading skills.
Phonemic awareness: Phonemic awareness is a specific component of phonological
awareness that captures the children's sensitivity and awareness of oral language at the
level of the individual phoneme (Martinussen et., al., 2015). It requires the children to
examine and break complete word forms into integral parts. The children cannot start to
enlist a sound-grapheme mappings in the service of reading, until they are capable to
recognize individual phonemes and the part-whole relation between phonemes and
words. Consequently, even though all five of the aforementioned skills are affiliated to
early reading, phonemic awareness has consistently been found to be the strongest
precursor to, and predictor of the reading accomplishment (Kenner et., al., 2017).
 8

7.0 BACKGROUND & LITERATURE REVIEW

7.1 Background
The prevalence of dyslexia in Malaysia is estimated to be 10%-15% in primary
school children that have symptoms of dyslexia reported by Harmonic Social
Association (PSHM). According to the statistics of the Department of Special Education,
Ministry of Education Malaysia, around 314,000 children in Malaysia are dyslexic
(Yuzaidey et., al., 2018). Somehow not many people do have enough knowledge about
it, moreover how to handle dyslexic children. Plus, primary teachers are crucial in
discovering and managing the potential students who are having dyslexia problems at
school.

7.2 Literature Review

The topic that we choose to do research is the effects of primary school teachers’
knowledge towards their perception in managing dyslexic students at Selangor. The
reason why we choose this topic is it is known to us that dyslexia is one of the most
common specific learning disabilities in Malaysia. So, we have done a literature review
to help us understand more on dyslexia, the dyslexics students’ perspective, the
teachers’ perspective and the intervention in helping dyslexic students that has been
done in a few parts of the world, including Malaysia. The literature review is done by
browsing for articles through various mediums such as Google Scholar, PubMed, Wiley
Library and Scopus.
An article written by Troeva (2015) found that all of it’s study samples believe that
each student needs personalized teaching methods that suit their strengths and
limitations. Especially for dyslexics students, memory supportive techniques and
phonics are effective to help them academically. However, the majority of the teachers
consider that they are not required to do the diagnosis of dyslexia as they thought that
other kids with poor or beginner skills of reading also experienced the same difficulties
as the dyslexics. Yet, this study sample is too small to be taken representatively.
Misconceptions about dyslexia also occur a lot to the education practitioner
including in-service teachers and pre-service teachers. A study by Gonzalez and Brow
(2019) states that the early childhood educators have a misconception of dyslexia where
they thought that dyslexia is a visual processing problem. They also lack knowledge in
phonological and phonemic awareness besides their misconception occurs from societal
belief and not from their training in becoming a teacher. So, there is another study that
makes use of conceptual change theory to correct those misconceptions. The results
show that it helps in changing the misconceptions of dyslexia to a correct one (Peltier,
Heddy & Peltier, 2020).
There appears to be fairly strong evidence that the teachers’ experience in
handling dyslexics children can help in having a better overall knowledge of dyslexia.
This is supported by a study by Soriano-Ferrer, Echegaray-Bengoa & Joshi (2015)
where they compare between in-service teachers and pre-service teachers, where it
covers the general knowledge, genetic causes and how to handle dyslexics students. A
 9
study by Knight (2018) also agrees with this, where the shortage of training with
dyslexics causes them to also have inadequate knowledge on the biological and
cognitive aspect of dyslexia. This is also recognized by another study where the
teachers lack knowledge, experience of dyslexia and how to handle them. But, the study
sample for this study involves female teachers only (Nascimento, Rosal & Queiroga,
2018). A result from an article that is co-written by an OT in Malaysia shows that even
though teachers are the most crucial in detecting dyslexia, most of the teachers only
have general knowledge about dyslexia since they did not learn about it during their
diploma (Ramli, et., al., 2019). Another article analyses the university instructor
perspective on dyslexia based on their knowledge, the support that they would need to
help the students and the aid they currently gave to the students. It is shown that almost
half reported that they do not have enough knowledge on dyslexia, only a few have
worked and supported dyslexic students before. The effect of dyslexia students’ writing
and reading problems also have been underestimated by the instructor. Even so, this
study only conducted at one university (Schabmann et., al., 2019).
Results of a study in the United States that involves university students among
education major and non education major students discover that most of them perceive
that special education teachers are the most responsible in supporting dyslexics
students. But, it is also found that the education majors did not have a greater
knowledge on dyslexia than those who are non education major students, though it may
be due to them not finishing their studies yet (White, Mather & Kirkpatrick, 2019).
As dyslexia is a part of special education needs students, the concept of inclusion
is a must for them to ensure that they have the same chances as the mainstream
students. A study found out that although teachers agree to use the concept of
inclusion, majority of them still lack skills on how to implement it (Bailey, Nomanbhoy &
Tubpun, 2015). Another study that includes dyslexics and mainstream students
investigates the teacher’s experience in teaching them english as a second language. It
is found that they still lack the knowledge on how to teach dyslexics students effectively
and the teachers themselves feel that they need more training to teach the students.
But, this study sample is too small as it only involves 3 teachers (Ahmad, Ali &
Salehuddin, 2018).
Other than that, an intervention study to help writing difficulties of dyslexics has
been done. The intervention includes instructional strategies, using technology to
develop handwriting skills and compensation and remediation strategies and it is said to
be effective. However, the child tested is only one person (Hebert, et., al., 2018). There
are a few intervention studies that are done to dyslexics in Malaysia. One includes the
multisensory, phonological and cognitive training. These are only for literacy, cognitive
and not for other mental functions that are affected by dyslexia. But, it is not stated who
carried out the intervention (Yuzaidey et. al., 2018). One of the studies focuses on
teachers' perception of suitable features and criteria of text that can be used to improve
dyslexia students' readability for their online learning materials, like digital presentations.
This includes font type, font size, highlighting a text, text and background colour and text
spacing criteria that is suitable to improve dyslexia students readability. Though the
teachers' perceptions on this are great with a high level of agreement, the guidelines for
the best text features and criteria are not studied (Ismail & Jaafar, 2015).
 10
Lastly, a study that examines the dyslexic students' experience and feeling
towards their peers and teachers discover that the dyslexics students often felt
abandoned and alone with them. Though they do feel acknowledged when in special
schools rather than in public schools (Leesyane et., al., 2018).
In conclusion, this literature review is done by keeping in mind dyslexia, the
teachers views and knowledge on dyslexia, and the intervention that has been done to
dyslexics. It is found that most teachers, which are crucial in detecting dyslexia, do not
have enough knowledge on dyslexia and are affected by the society instead of training
as a teacher. Furthermore, dyslexia is less observable in behaviour unlike other learning
disabilities thus dyslexic in Malaysia are commonly mistaken as slow learners, lazy and
lacking focus (Alias & Dahlan, 2015). It is found that not many articles preach on
intervention towards dyslexics students. Plus, the sample size is often too small for it to
be representative for dyslexics in Malaysia. There is research in Selangor done by
Ramli et., al. (2019) of preschool teachers' knowledge on dyslexia on the general
knowledge, diagnosis, symptoms and treatments. So we want to know further about
primary teachers’ knowledge and awareness towards dyslexia in Selangor as a
continuation and digging deeper than the research done on preschool teachers. Thus, it
leads us in choosing a topic of research on the effects of primary school teachers'
knowledge towards their perception in managing dyslexic students at Selangor.
 11

8.0 METHODOLOGY

8.1 Study Design

This study uses cross-sectional design to obtain the data on knowledge of
dyslexia among primary teachers in Selangor, Malaysia. This design is chosen because
it is simple and cheap to conduct (Kumar, 2011). This research will be using a
questionnaire to obtain knowledge of dyslexia among primary teachers. The
questionnaire will later be transferred to Google Form and distributed through online
platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and email. Then, the data will be analysed by
Descriptive Statistics and Kruskal-Wallis with the help of a statistician.

8.2 Study Setting

The study will be conducted in Selangor, Malaysia where online questionnaires
will be distributed to respondents that work as teachers in primary schools.

8.3 Sampling Method

8.3.1 Sampling Design

Non-probability sampling will be used to collect the data. One of the
categories in non-probability sampling is purposive sampling where the
researchers will approach those who meet their research’s criteria
(Skillsyouneed, n.d.). Purposive sampling is chosen because the respondents are
selected based on occupation as primary teacher in Selangor, Malaysia with age
range of 25 to 60 years old. The online questionnaire will be distributed to 9
chosen primary schools in Selangor. The target respondents are 50 teachers
from 9 primary schools in Selangor which brings the total of 450 respondents.

8.3.2 Sample size

Sample size calculation formula (Daniel, 1999 in Naing et., al., 2006)

Z 2 P (1−P)
n=
d2

Where;
n = sample size,
Z = Z statistic for confidence level
P = expected prevalence or proportion
d = precision
2 ❑
n = 1.96 (0.5)(1−0.5)
¿¿

= 384.16
 12
The level of confidence will be 95% as it assumed to be conventional, thus the Z
value will be 1.96 (Naing et.al, 2006). P value will be 0.5 and the precision will be
0.05. Sample size for the infinity population will be 384.16.

Then, as our target population is 450 the sample size will be adjusted to suit the
study.

n
Adjusted n = ( ) + [(n-1)/ population] (Mr Easy Statistic, 2017)
1
384.16
= ( ) +[(384.16-1)/450]
1
= 385.01
= 385

Adjusted sample size will be 385. Thus the online questionnaire will be distributed
to 385 respondents.

8.3.3 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The inclusion criteria for this study are teachers in primary school at
Selangor who are a Malaysian and aged between 25 to 60 years old.

Exclusion criteria for this study are Special Education teachers, teachers
who have dyslexic children and dyslexic teachers.

8.4 Data Measurement

The data will be measured by nominal and ordinal scale. Nominal scale is the
simplest scale that provides classification based on common characteristics (Kumar,
2013). The examples of the questions that use this scale are in Section A (Question 1, 2
and 3) that inquire of gender, age range and home language. Meanwhile ordinal scale
is a scale that categorises the subgroup according to order (Kumar, 2013). The
questionnaire will be using a 5 point Likert Scale such as in Section C (Question 39, 40,
41). The Likert Scale consists of Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Unsure, Agree and
Strongly Agree where the scores are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 respectively (Thompson, 2013).

8.5 Main Data Collection

8.5.1 Method
The method used to get the data is transferring the questions to Google
Form and after getting permissions from the schools, the link to the online
questionnaire will be distributed through WhatsApp, Facebook and Email. This is
because by using questionnaires it is less expensive and it also offers greater
anonymity (Kumar, 2011). Moreover, large data can be collected in a short period
of time by using questionnaires. (Mulumba, 2008 in Thompson, 2013).

8.5.2 Materials/Tools
The questionnaire chosen is ‘Teacher Awareness of Dyslexia’
Questionnaire. The reason to choose this questionnaire is because the questions
are suitable and the objective of this study can be reached. Most of the
 13
questions are close-ended questions to obtain specific answers from
respondents. This questionnaire consists of 6 sections which are demographic
data, teacher’s knowledge on dyslexia, teacher’s perception on identifying
dyslexic student in classroom, teacher’s perception on management for dyslexic
student, pre-training serviced given by training institutions and lastly measuring
in-service dyslexia training by schools. For Section A, which is the demographic
data, the questions are altered to adapt with Malaysian culture such as home
language. The questionnaire also consists of Likert scale of five points for Section
C to Section F (Thompson, 2013). The questionnaire will be attached in Appendix
B.

8.5.3 Flow chart for data collection

After getting
permissions from the Analyse the
After reaching
Questionnaire schools, link of result from
desired
will be questionnaire will be Google Form
respondents,
transferred into distributed to the by using
Google Form
Google Form schools through online descriptive
submission will
platforms such as statistic and
be closed
WhatsApp, Facebook Kruskal-Wallis.
and email.
Figure 1 : Flow chart of data collection for Research

8.6 Analysis Data

To analyse the data, we will be hiring a statistician to help us analyse the data
and create the tables and graphs to measure the variables. The method that will be
used to analyse the data is by using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics.
Descriptive statistics consists of summarizing the description by single variable or
univariate analysis and the survey sample used (Guest, 2016). Descriptive statistic has
two categories which are measures of central tendency and measures of variability.
Measures of central tendency consists of median, mean and mode. Measures of
variability consist of standard deviation, variance, minimum and maximum variables,
and skewness and the kurtosis (Kenton,2019). We will be presenting the medians and
interquartile range by using tables and box plots.

To obtain broader conclusions, this study also used inferential statistics to make
generalisation to a larger population (Thompson, 2013). Data will be coded using IBM
SPSS Statistics Software (version 22) for Section A that consists of demographic
questions. Then, to analyse the data, Kruskal-Wallis will be used. Kruskal-Wallis is a
non-parametric test that is used to compare median scores from different groups
(Thompson, 2013). To test differences in mean ranks, a chi-square test will be used.
 14

9.0 ETHICAL ISSUES

Ethical consideration is an important part in research. One of the importance of

ethical issues is free from harm and discomfort. Hence, this study does not involve the
use of animals or resulting psychological or physical danger to the participants. Next,
the participants’ consent in participating in this study is asked before answering the
questionnaire. This is to ensure that the respondent voluntarily participates in this study.
To protect confidentiality and anonymity of the participants, their names will not be
taken. Furthermore, the answers given by the respondents will also be kept in private
and used for research purposes only. Thus, the questionnaire used needs approval from
UiTM’s Research Ethic and Ministry of Health.

10.0 LIMITATIONS

This study has potential limitations. The first is the questionnaires may not reach
the desired respondent. It also may be answered by someone who is not a teacher. The
second limitation is response bias. The respondent may have response bias as they
might answer the questionnaire in a way they believed the researcher wanted them to
respond. Thus, this will create the difference between the outcome data collection and
from literature review. Next, the disadvantage of using Likert scale. The respondent may
be swayed by how they react to previous items and continue to respond in the same
manner. Hence, the use of positive and negative statements can break the pattern.
Lastly, in certain cases, the principals give the teachers a short time to complete the
questionnaire. It may mean that teachers did not complete the questionnaire correctly
and truthfully, since they were hurried. The findings may have been adversely affected
by the situation (Thompson, 2013).
 15

11.0 PROPOSED TIME FRAME

Year 2020 2021

Task Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

Proposal writing

Writing a
literature
reviews

Data collection

Data analysis

Report
writing/final

Milestones
Proposal 4th week of Aug
approval

Literature 4th week of Apr

completed

Data collection
completed 4th week of Jan

Data analysis
done 4th week of Apr

Report writing End

finalised of
May

Table 1 : The Proposed Time Frame for Research

 16

12.0 BUDGET

No. Materials Quantity Cost/unit (RM) Total (RM)

1. Statistician allowance 3 months 1500 4,500

2. Certification and souvenirs 1 50 50

for statistician

3. Internet 5 x 12 months 50 3,000

4. Printing and photocopies 12 months 50 600

5. Stationery 5 x 12 months 50 3,000

TOTAL: 11,150

Table 1 : Budget for Research

 17

13.0 REFERENCES

Ahmad, S., Ali, M. M., & Salehuddin, K. (2018). ESL Teachers’ Experience in Teaching
Pupils with Dyslexia in Mainstream Classrooms. Creative Education, 09(14), 2171-
2182. doi:10.4236/ce.2018.914158.
Alias, N. A., & Dahlan, A. (2015). Enduring difficulties: the challenges of mothers in rais-
ing children with dyslexia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 202, 107-114.
Bailey, L., Nomanbhoy, A., & Tubpun, T. (2015). Inclusive education: teacher
perspectiv- es from Malaysia. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(5),
547–559. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2014.957739.
Bungga, F. (2018, November 30). School education's LINUS programme to end next ye-
ar. New Straits Times.
Chew, F. P. (2018). Evaluation of the Literacy and Numeracy Screening Program in Thr-
ee Types of National Primary Schools in Malaysia. Journal of Contemporary
Educat- ional Research, 2(5). doi:10.26689/jcer.v2i5.432.
DSM–5: Frequently Asked Questions. American Psychiatric Association (APA) (n.d.). R-
etrieved June 28, 2020, from https://www.psychiatry.org/ psychiatrists/practice/dsm/
feedback-and-questions/frequently-asked-questions.
Gonzalez, M., & Brown, T. B. (2019). Early Childhood Educators’ Perceptions of Dyslex-
ia and Ability to Identify Students At-Risk. Journal of Education and Learning, 8(3),1.
doi:10.5539/jel.v8n3p1.
Guest, C. (2016). Survey Data Analysis: Descriptive vs. Inferential Statistics. Retrieved
from https://www.cvent.com/en/blog/events/survey-data-analysis-descriptive-vs-
infe- rential-statistics.
Hebert, M., Kearns, D. M., Hayes, J. B., Bazis, P., & Cooper, S. (2018). Why Children
With Dyslexia Struggle With Writing and How to Help Them. Language, Speech,and
Hearing Services in Schools, 49(4), 843–863. doi: 10.1044/2018_lshss-dyslc-18-002
4.
Ismail, R., & Jaafar, A. (2015). Interface Design for Dyslexia: Teachers’ Perception On
T- ext Presentation. Jurnal Teknologi, 77(19). doi:10.11113/jt.v77.6505.
Kenner, B. B., Terry, N. P., Friehling, A. H., & Namy, L. L. (2017). Phonemic awareness
development in 2.5- and 3.5-year-old children: an examination of emergent, recepti-
ve, knowledge and skills. Reading and Writing, 30(7), 1575–1594. doi:10.1007/s111
45-017-9738-0.
Kenton, W. (2019). Descriptive Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/t
-erms/d/descriptive_statistics.asp.
Knight C. (2018). What is dyslexia? An exploration of the relationship between teachers'
understanding of dyslexia and their training experiences. Dyslexia (Chichester,
Engl- and), 24(3), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1593.
Kumar, R. (2011). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide For Beginners. Singa-
pore. SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd.
Leseyane, M., Mandende, P., Makgato, M. & Cekiso, M., (2018). ‘Dyslexic learners’ ex-
periences with their peers and teachers in special and mainstream primary schools
in North-West Province’, African Journal of Disability 7(0), a363.
https://doi.org/10.41 02/ajod.v7i0.363.
Manilla, G. T., & Braga, J. D. (2017). A New Dyslexia Reading Method and Visual Corr-
ection Position Method. Global Pediatric Health, 4. doi:10.1177/2333794x17734096.
 18
Martinussen, R., Ferrari, J., Aitken, M., & Willows, D. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ kno-
wledge of phonemic awareness: relationship to perceived knowledge, self-efficacy
beliefs, and exposure to a multimedia-enhanced lecture. Annals of Dyslexia, 65(3),1
42–158. doi:10.1007/s11881-015-0104-0.
Mr Easy Statistics. (2017, August 19). How To Determine the Sample Size? [Video]. Yo-
utube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51NS0cGjBIk&feature=youtu.be.
Naing, L., Winn, T., Rusli, B.N. (2006).Practical Issues in Calculating the Sample Size f-
or Prevalence Studies. Archives of Orofacial Sciences.1: 9-14.
Nascimento, I. S., Rosal, A. G., & Queiroga, B. A. (2018). Elementary school teachers’
knowledge on dyslexia. Revista CEFAC, 20(1), 87-94. Doi:10.1590/1982-
021620182 019117.
Peterson, R. L., & Pennington, B. F. (2015). Developmental Dyslexia. Annual Review of
Clinical Psychology, 11(1), 283-307. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032814-112842.
Peltier, T. K., Heddy, B. C., & Peltier, C. (2020). Using conceptual change theory to help
preservice teachers understand dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia. Doi:10.1007/s11881-0
20-00192-z.
Ramli, S., Idris, I.,B., Omar, K., Harun, D., Surat, S., Yusop, Y. M., & Zainudin, Z. N.
(201 9). Preschool Teachers’ Knowledge on Dyslexia: A Malaysian Experience.
Malaysi- an Journal of Medicine and Health Sciences (eISSN 2636-9346). Retrieved
from htt- ps://medic.upm.edu.my/upload/dokumen/2019042916021820_0373(Final)
20.pdf.
Roberts, P., Robinson, M., Furniss, J., & Metzler, C. (2020). Occupational Therapy’s Va-
lue in Provision of Quality Care to Prevent Readmissions. American Journal of Occ-
upational Therapy, 74(3). doi:10.5014/ajot.2020.743002.
Roitsch, J., & Watson, S. (2019). An Overview of Dyslexia: Definition, Characteristics, A-
ssessment, Identification, and Intervention. Science Journal of Education, 7(4), 81-8
6. doi:10.11648/j.sjedu.20190704.11.
Sarudin, N. A., Hashim, H., & Yunus, M. M. (2019). Multi-Sensory Approach: How It Hel-
ps in Improving Words Recognition? Creative Education, 10(12), 3186-3194. doi:10.
4236/ce.2019.1012242.
Schaars, M. M., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2017). Word decoding development in inc-
remental phonics instruction in a transparent orthography. Reading and Writing, 30
(7), 1529-1550. doi:10.1007/s11145-017-9735-3.
Schabmann, A., Eichert, H.-C., Schmidt, B. M., Hennes, A.-K., & Ramacher-Faasen, N.
(2019). Knowledge, awareness of problems, and support: university instructors’ pe-
rspectives on dyslexia in higher education. European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 1–10. doi:10.1080/08856257.2019.1628339.
Skillsyouneed (n.d.). Sampling and Sample Design. Retrieved from https://www.skillsyo-
uneed.com/learn/sampling-sample-design.html.
Soriano-Ferrer, M., Echegaray-Bengoa, J., & Joshi, R. M. (2015). Knowledge and belief-
s about developmental dyslexia in pre-service and in-service Spanish-speaking tea-
chers. Annals of Dyslexia, 66(1), 91–110. doi:10.1007/s11881-015- 0111-1.
Thompson, L., S. (2013). Dyslexia: An Investigation of Teacher Awareness in Mainstre-
am High Schools. (Master Thesis, University of South Africa). Retrieved from http://
uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/13373/Thompson_LS.pdf?sequence=.
Treiman, R. (2018). What Research Tells Us About Reading Instruction. Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 1-4. doi:10.1177/1529100618772272.
 19
Troeva, B. (2015). Teachers' perception of the differences in the reading profiles of stud-
ents with dyslexia and the role of dyslexia assessment for an appropriate choice of
teaching strategy. English Studies at NBU, 1(2), 27-40. Doi:10.33919/esnbu. 15.2.2.
What is Occupational Therapy? American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA).
(n.d.). Retrieved June 28, 2020, from https://www.aota.org/Conference-Events /OT-
Month/what-is-OT.aspx.
White, J., Mather, N., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2020). Pre Service educators' and noneducators'
knowledge and perceptions of responsibility about dyslexia. Dyslexia, 26(2), 220-24
2. doi:10.1002/dys.1653.
Yuzaidey, N.A.M., Din, N. C., Ahmad, M., Ibrahim, N., Razak R. A. & Harun, D. (2018).I-
nterventions for children with dyslexia: A review on current intervention methods. M-
edical Journal Malaysia, 73(5), 311-320. Retrieved from http://www.e-mjm.org/2018/
-v73n5/children-with-dyslexia.pdf.
Zare, M., Amani, M., & Sadooghi, M. (2019). The role of Persian ‐language word exercis-
e games in improving spelling of students with dyslexia: Word exercise games in im-
proving spelling. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.
Zhang, Q., & Feng, C. (2017). The Interaction between Central and Peripheral Processi-
ng in Chinese Handwritten Production: Evidence from the Effect of Lexicality and R -
adical Complexity. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.0033 4.
 20

14.0 APPENDIX

14.1 APPENDIX A : RESEARCH GAP TABLE

No Title Author / Objective Sample size / Method Finding Limitation
Year study design

1. n=6 Semi-structured - Personalized Small size

Teachers' Troeva To explore Qualitative interviews teaching to suit sample
perceptio (2015) how teachers study design Part 1 : individual
teach Differences in weakness and
n of the dyslexic strength is
difference pupils with Setting : 4 Reading Profiles
needed
reading skills institutions in Part 2 : - Memory
s in the
in English the Greater Diagnosis of supporting
reading London Dyslexia
speaking techniques and
profiles of context phonics
students effective for
with dyslexic pupils
dyslexia - Teachers belief
that diagnosis
and the for dyslexia is
role of not necessary
dyslexia in their practise
assessme
nt for an
appropriat
e choice
of
teaching
strategy

2. n =50 Self-administered - All teachers Small

Interface Ismail & To determine teachers questionnaire agree the right sample size
Design for Jaafar the design of usage of font
text criteria in Setting = Anonymous type, font
Dyslexia: (2015) online sizes,highlight
Teachers’ Primary Questionnaire
materials for text criteria,
dyslexic school Klang text and
Perceptio
children in Valley Questionnaire background
n On Text validated by four
teachers’ colour enhance
Presentati perception experts dyslexic
on from Human readability.
computer - ICT-based
interaction, materials can
Dyslexia improve
Association of engagement of
Malaysia and dyslexic
 21

Ministry of students
Education - Use of
multimedia
courseware is
efficient

3. n = 284 Questionnaire - All teachers Teacher is

Inclusive Bailey, To explore LIteracy and used was an expressed a limited in
education: Nomanb beliefs by NUmeracy adaptation by positive views expressing
Malysian Strategy Swain, on the principle opinion
teacher hoy & primary of inclusion
perspectiv Tubpun teachers who (LINUS) Nordness, and
- Half of the
involved in teachers Leader Janssen teachers belief
es from (2015)
remedial (2012) from disabled
Malaysia Setting : Yates’ (1995)
literacy and children will
numeracy Malaysia Attitude Toward distract teacher
education Inclusion in educate
under the Instrument normal peer
country’s - Disagreement
Literacy and Questionnaire in teachers on
Numeracy malay version benefit
Strategy inclusion to
towards disabled
inclusive 6 categories children
education 1. Overall - 47 % of
attitudes to teachers belief
inclusion. that disabled
2. Perceived students have
effects on attitude
children problems rather
without than a disability
disabilities. issue
- 76 % agrees
3. Perceived
classroom
effects on teachers not
children with expertise in
disabilities. handling
4. Beliefs about disabled
practice. children
5. Beliefs about - 82% shows
teachers’ skill. negative views
6. Views of towards
children with children with
disabilities and
disabilities and
their families
their families.

4. n = 513, Second author - IST scored Sampling

Knowledg Soriano- To explore 246 = PSTs administered remarkably techniques
e and Ferrer, pre-service 267 = ISTs surveys in both greater on the is not done
beliefs Echegar teachers Aged : 19 to countries total scale, systematica
(PST) and in- 61 years old features, lly
 22

Method : general
about ay- service Setting : Knowledge and information and Potential
developm Bengoa teachers Spain and Beliefs about genetic causes bias
ental & Joshi (IST) Spanish Peru Developmental of dyslexia than
speaking Dyslexia Scale PST
dyslexia (2015)
teachers (KBDDS) - 75–80 % of
in pre- towards their both party
service knowledge Validity & know that
and in- and reliability: not struggling in
service misconceptio stated on the reading fluency
Spanish n information research paper are features of
speaking on dyslexia dyslexic
teachers children who
study to read in
a transparent
orthography
such as
Spanish

5. Elementar n = 10 Semi-structured - Teachers lack All

y school Nascim To examine Qualitative interview of experience respondent
teachers’ ento, elementary study design and knowledge s were
Rosal & school 3 categories: of dyslexia female
knowledg teachers’
Queirog Aged : 24 1) Teacher - They have
e on knowledge and 59 training does difficulty with
dyslexia a (2018) on dyslexic’s years-old not address child who does
child dyslexia not learn,
Setting : 2) Feelings and insufficient
Elementary difficulties of educational
public school literacy resources and
in teachers unsupportive
Pernambuco, facing the parents
Brazil challenges of
literacy
3) Understandin
g dyslexia

6. English Ahmad, n=3 Participant Challenges for Small size

Second Ali & To discover Qualitative selected : ESL teachers : sample
Language Salehud teachers’ study design Purposive 1. Large class
experiences sampling size
(ESL) din in teaching Inclusion technique related
Teachers’ (2018) dyslexic criteria dyslexia
Experienc pupils in 1) More Semi-structured 2. Problems
e in three ESL than 3 interview for 45 manage
Teaching primary years minutes behaviour
Pupils teach of dyslexic
 23

with dyslexic Ten guiding pupils

Dyslexia school pupils questions
in 2) Teach Strategies
dyslexic teaching :
Mainstrea
in 1. Drilling
m mainstre 2. Peer
Classroo am coaching
ms classroo 3. Differentiati
ms on activities
4. More
Setting : attention
Primary towards
school in dyslexic
Malaysia

7. Why Hebert Systematic 1. Systematic Problems in : Only one

Children et al. To determine review : a searches over 1. Writing case study
With (2018) the case study 2 databases to 2. Working of dyslexic
challenges explore the memory patient are
Dyslexia faced by effectiveness used
Struggle dyslexic of spelling Intervention :
With children in interventions 1. Instructiona
Writing writing and for students l strategies
and How instructional 2. Examined 2. Technology
to Help strategies in recent meta- in
order to analyses of developing
Them
enhance their writing and handwriting
writing quality conduct skills
forward 3. Compensat
searches ion and
remediatio
n strategies

8. What is Knight n = primary, Online - 16.8% teachers Potential

dyslexia? (2018) To explore secondary, questionnaire belief visual bias as
An views of further factors cause responded
teachers’ education, Anonymous dyslexia deemed
exploratio knowledge and special Questionnaire - 71.8% teachers more
n of the on dyslexia schools said lack of engaged
relationshi and the teachers Validity & dyslexia with
p between impact of it n = 2900 reliability: not knowledge on dyslexia
teachers’ when working stated on the teaching than others
understan with dyslexic Quantitative research paper programme disabilities
students study design - 50.4% teachers
dings of
not get
dyslexia
 24

and their Setting : supplementary

training Schools in training on
experienc England and dyslexia
Wales - Teachers with
es
more than 10
years
experiences
teaching is
confident in
helping
dyslexic pupils

9. Interventi Yuzaide Systematic Articles are Interventions : Participants

ons for y et. al To review literature gained from 1. Phonologic aged 8 to
children (2018) treatments review of online databases al 15 years
used in experimental from 2000 until intervention old in the
with handling design or 2016 that have 2. Multisensor article
dyslexia: literacy and single case intervention y method
A review cognitive study programmes and 3. Cognitive
on abilities for the participants training
current dyslexic must be primary method
interventio children school children
especially in with reading
n
Malaysia disorder
methods
Main theme :
Intervention for
language skills or
cognitive skills

10 Phenomenol - Semi - Peers and Small

. Dyslexic Leseyan To explore ogy research structured teachers made sample size
learners’ e et al. dyslexic design interview dyslexic
experienc (2018) learners’ - One to one learners
experiences n = 9 of interview perceived
es with
in special and dyslexic abandoned and
their public learners that eroded in
peers and schools in studies in public schools
teachers North-West public school - Dyslexic
in special Province of before learners felt
and South Africa comfort and
mainstrea with their Aged 9 to 12 acknowledgem
peers and years old ent in special
m primary
teachers schools but not
schools in
Setting : in public
North- Special schools
West school in
 25

South Africa
Province

11 Preschool Ramli et Cross Knowledge and - Most of the All

. Teachers’ al. To determine sectional Beliefs about respondents respondent
Knowledg (2019) the level of study Developmental misconcept s are
general Dyslexia visual deficit female
e on knowledge, n =138 questionnaire with cause
Dyslexia: symptoms, preschool Part A : dyslexia
A diagnosis teachers Teachers’ - No correlation
Malaysian and Demographics between
Experienc treatment of Aged : 21 to Part B : teachers’
e dyslexia on 60 years old Teachers’ knowledge of
the teachers. Knowledge about dyslexia with
Setting : Dyslexia academic
KEMAS qualifications
preschool Reliability - Insufficiency in
Hulu Langat, questionnaire : teachers’
Selangor 0.84 knowledge of
dyslexia

12 Knowledg Schabm n = 234 Online - 47.6% Sample

. e,awaren ann et To explore university questionnaire instructors size only in
ess of al. status of quo instructors belief they have one
university Anonymous poor university
problems, (2019) instructors, Setting : Questionnaire knowledge of
and UIs’ views on University of dyslexia Low rate of
support: studying with Cologne, Validity & - 30.4 % responses
university dyslexic Germany reliability: not respondents
instructors person stated on the had support
’ research paper dyslexic
perspectiv students in the
5 parts : past
es on
1. socio- - Effect of
dyslexia demograhic reading/spelling
in higher information problems on
education 2. Knowledge other domains
about dyslexia had been
3. Awareness of underestimated
student and by UI
their own
problems
4. Perspectives
on support for
UI
5. Perspectives
 26

about support
for students

13 Gonzale n=4 1. Semi- - Participant Small

. Early z& To find out teachers structured belief dyslexia sample size
Childhood Brown the views of interviews as a visual
Educators (2019) early Setting : 2. Observations processing
childhood Head Start 3. Teacher rating problem
’
educators center in scale - Participant
Perceptio teaching in New Jersey 4. Preschool perceptions
ns of Head Start and Early Literacy influenced by
Dyslexia centers on Pennsylvania Indicator mainstream
and Ability dyslexia (PELI) societal beliefs
to Identify assessment) not by training
Students - Participant lack
At-Risk. Validity & knowledge of
reliability : not phonological
stated in the and phonemic
research awareness

14 Using Peltier, Experimental Pretest and - Misunderstandi Not ideal

. conceptua Heddy To identify design posttest ng on dyslexia sampling
l change & Peltier the effect of conducted at among procedures
refutation text n = 97 same session participants
theory to (2020) on Undergradua while delayed more prevalent No
help conceptual te preservice posttest 4 weeks even though psychometri
preservice change teachers later they have c properties
teachers hence training on of
understan remove Setting : Face to face dyslexia instrument
d dyslexia misperceptio Public meeting : - Respondents except
ns and Institution of 1. Dyslexia with refutation content
adoption of Mid-South Knowledge text have validity by
scientifically USA Questionnaire marked more expert
grounded (DKQ) conceptual
conception 2. Researcher change than
created respondents
refutation with Dyslexia
text / Dyslexia Basics text
Basics - Low pretest
authored by reliability,
experts in the α = 0.45 due to
field of insufficiency
dyslexia respondents’
knowledge on
dyslexia
 27

15 Pre White, n = 243 Self-administered Respondents Sample

. Service Mather To discover university questionnaire lacks in treatment from
educators' & level students knowledge Southweste
knowledges Knowledge and rn
and Kirkpatri of preservice Setting : Insights of The fundamental University
noneduca ck educators' on Southwester Dyslexia Survey component to only
tors' (2020) dyslexia n University (KIDS) teach dyslexic
knowledg in the United students is still not
e and States Validity & fully understand
perceptio reliability : not by the
ns of Survey time : stated in the respondents
20 minutes research
responsibi
lity about
dyslexia
 28

14.2 APPENDIX B : QUESTIONNAIRE

Date: October 2020

To: Participants in ‘Teacher Awareness of Dyslexia’ Questionnaire

We are conducting a study on THE EFFECTS OF PRIMARY SCHOOL

TEACHERS' KNOWLEDGE TOWARDS THEIR PERCEPTION IN MANAGING
DYSLEXIC STUDENTS AT SELANGOR as part of our Degrees programme at
UiTM. The results of this study will determine the levels of teacher knowledge and
management of dyslexia in primary schools. The questionnaire should only take
about 20 minutes to complete. We would greatly appreciate your response to the
enclosed questionnaire. The information you provide will be kept strictly confidential
and anonymity will be ensured. Please respond to the statements below as truthfully
as possible you can. Your participation is greatly appreciated.

__________________________________________________________________________

Please circle the number in the appropriate box. Select only one
option for every question.

SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

1. Gender:

Male Female

1 2

2. Age group:

21-30 years 31-40 years 41-50 years 51 - 60 years 60+ years

1 2 3 4 5

3. What is your home language?

English Malay Mandarin Tamil Others

1 2 3 4 5

4. What is the language in which you mainly teach?

 29

English Malay Mandarin Tamil Others

1 2 3 4 5

5. What is the highest level of education you have achieved?

SPM Skills Diplom Bachel Master Doctora Other

Certificat certificate a ors s te (specify)
e
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. Field/s of study at tertiary level:

7. I received my (initial) teaching qualification in:

Befor 1971 197 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 201
e – 6- – – – – – - 1-
197 197 198 198 199 199 200 200 2010 202
0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

8. I received my teaching qualification at:

Institut Public Private Others

Perguruan University University
Guru (IPG)
1 2 3 4

9. What is the main subject you teach? (Write only one):

 30

10. Professional rank:

Teach Head Of Deputy Princip Other (please

er Department Principal al specify)
1 2 3 4 5

11. Number of years in the teaching profession:

Less than 1 6-10 11- 16- 21 – 25 26- More than 30

1 - 15 20 30
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

12. Number of years at current place of employment:

Less than 1- 6- 11- 16- 21 – 26- 30 More than 30

1 5 10 15 20 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

13. How many pupils do you teach in total?

Less than 51 - 100 101 - 201 - 301 - More than
50 200 300 400 400
1 2 3 4 5 6

14. What is the average number of pupils you teach per class?

Less than 16 – 21 - 31 - 41 – 51 – More than 60

15 20 30 40 50 60
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. Educational district of current school:

Klang Petaling Sepang Kuala Sabak Hulu Kuala Hulu Gombak

Selangor Bernam Langat Langat Selangor

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
 31
SECTION B: LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE OF DYSLEXIA
Please indicate using a cross [x] whether the following statements are
True or False. If you are not sure, please indicate so.

N Statemen True False Unsure

o t [1] [2] [3]
1 Dyslexia is a language-based learning disability.
6
1 Students with dyslexia usually experience
7 difficulties
with spelling.
1 Students with dyslexia usually experience
8 difficulties with writing.
1 Students with dyslexia usually experience
9 difficulties
with pronunciation of words.
2 Dyslexia affects individuals throughout their lives.
0
2 The exact causes of dyslexia are clear.
1
2 About 10% of the school population suffers with
2 dyslexia.
 32

N Statemen True False Unsure

o t [1] [2] [3]
2 Boys are more prone to be sufferers than girls.
3
2 Dyslexics may find it difficult to express themselves
4 orally.
2 Dyslexics may find it difficult to fully comprehend
5 what others mean when they speak.
2 People who are very intelligent can be dyslexic.
6
2 Dyslexia runs in families; dyslexic parents are likely
7 to have children who are dyslexic.
2 Dyslexia can affect a person’s self-image.
8
2 Students with dyslexia often end up feeling “dumb”
9 and less capable than they actually are.
3 A diagnosis of dyslexia can only be provided by a
0 trained specialist.
3 Dyslexics read backwards.
1
3 Students have trouble remembering letter
2 symbols for sounds and forming memories for
words.
3 Formal testing of reading, language, and writing
3 skills is the only way to confirm a diagnosis of
suspected dyslexia
3 Dyslexic pupils can benefit from receiving extra
4 time in tests or exams.
3 Dyslexia can be linked to other learning difficulties,
5 such as ADD or ADHD.
3 Many dyslexics are extremely talented in the arts.
6
3 Dyslexia can impact negatively on the individual’s
7 future job prospects.
3 Dyslexia does not actually exist; it’s just an excuse
8 for laziness.

Please evaluate the statements below using the following codes:

● SD – Strongly Disagree
● D – Disagree
● U – Unsure
● A – Agree
● SA – Strongly Agree
 33

SECTION C: PERCEPTION OF IDENTIFICATION OF DYSLEXIC PUPILS IN THE CLASSROOM

N Statemen S D U A S
o t D A
3 I am able to identify the symptoms/characteristics of 1 2 3 4 5
9 dyslexia.
4 I am able to identify the characteristics of a dyslexic 1 2 3 4 5
0 pupil as opposed to that of a slow learner.
4 I am able to identify a learner who is in need of a 1 2 3 4 5
1 diagnostic assessment with regards to dyslexia.

SECTION D: PERCEPTION OF MANAGEMENT OF DYSLEXIC PUPILS IN THE CLASSROOM

42. Are you aware of any dyslexic pupils in your class?

Yes No

1 2

Answer the questions below ONLY if you indicated “yes” to questions 42.

N Statement S D U A S
o D A
METHODOLOGY

4 I believe that I limit the number of instructions given at 1 2 3 4 5

3 one time.
4 I allow dyslexic students to sit close to the instructional 1 2 3 4 5
4 focal point in my classroom.
4 In my opinion, I try to repeat a sequence of instructions 1 2 3 4 5
5 at
appropriate points during practical activities.
MEASURING PROGRESS

4 I believe that I add positive comments to assessed 1 2 3 4 5

6 work.
4 I believe that I focus on the dyslexic’s individual 1 2 3 4 5
7 progress without comparing them to the rest of the
class.
WORKING WITH PARENTS

4 In my opinion, I use the homework diary as a tool for 1 2 3 4 5

8 communicating with parents.
4 I believe that I keep parents informed of their child’s 1 2 3 4 5
9 progress.
 34
CLASSROOM BEHAVIOUR

5 I am aware that dyslexics may have an inability to 1 2 3 4 5

0 remember spoken instructions and this can lead to
inattentiveness or apparent laziness.
5 I am aware that dyslexics may have an inability to 1 2 3 4 5
1 process
written directions.
5 I believe that group work is detrimental to the dyslexic 1 2 3 4 5
2 pupil’s progress on a set class activity.
5 I check that my instructions are clear and fully 1 2 3 4 5
3 understood by asking pupils to repeat them.
5 I believe that I vary activities so that pupils become less 1 2 3 4 5
4 fatigued.
DIFFERENT LEARNING STYLES

5 In my opinion, I use a variety of different teaching 1 2 3 4 5

5 methods.
5 I believe pupil discussion in class is counter-productive 1 2 3 4 5
6 as it only fosters a noisy classroom environment.
5 I allow extra time in tests. 1 2 3 4 5
7
ORGANISATION

5 I believe I provide copies of class notes so that dyslexic 1 2 3 4 5

8 pupils
may simply listen to the lesson.
5 I do not accept homework scribed by parents or other 1 2 3 4 5
9 adults.
6 I accept homework that is computer-aided. 1 2 3 4 5
0
COMBATING THE EFFECTS OF FATIGUE

6 I am aware that a huge effort is required by many 1 2 3 4 5

1 dyslexic
pupils to complete an ordinary task.
6 I believe that I set short, well-defined tasks. 1 2 3 4 5
2
6 I think that I vary the types of tasks set. 1 2 3 4 5
3
6 I believe that I set time limits for the duration of tasks. 1 2 3 4 5
4
6 I understand the importance of creating an opportunity 1 2 3 4 5
5 for
purposeful movement within the classroom.
6 I believe that I give out homework well before the end of 1 2 3 4 5
6 the
lesson.
 35
6 I ensure that homework is written down correctly. 1 2 3 4 5
7
RAISING PUPILS' SELF-ESTEEM

6 I believe that I praise effort as well as work well done. 1 2 3 4 5

8
6 I insist that dyslexics read aloud in class. 1 2 3 4 5
9

SECTION E: PRE-SERVICE TRAINING IN DYSLEXIA PROVIDED BY INSTITUTIONS

70. Have you had pre-service training (training provided by your training
institution) in the field of dyslexia?

Answer this question ONLY if you indicated “yes” to question 70.

Yes No

1 2

N Stateme S D U A S
o nt D A
7 I believe that the pre-service training I received in the 1 2 3 4 5
1 field of dyslexia was detailed and sufficiently in depth
7 I believe that the pre-service training I received in the 1 2 3 4 5
2 field of dyslexia made me confident in my ability to
identify dyslexic indicators
7 I am confident that the pre-service training I received in 1 2 3 4 5
3 the field of dyslexia gave me adequate tools and/or
strategies to manage dyslexia in my classroom
 36
SECTION F: IN-SERVICE TRAINING PROVIDED BY SCHOOL

74. Have you had in-service training (training provided by your current/previous
school) in the field of dyslexia?

Answer this question ONLY if you indicated “yes” to question 74.

Yes No

1 2

N Statement S D U A S
o D A
7 I think that the in-service training I received/receive in 1 2 3 4 5
5 the field of dyslexia was/is detailed and sufficiently in
depth
7 The in-service training I received/receive in the field of 1 2 3 4 5
6 dyslexia made/makes me confident in my ability to
identify dyslexic indicators
7 The in-service training I received/receive in the field of 1 2 3 4 5
7 dyslexia gave/gives me adequate tools and/or strategies
to manage dyslexia in my classroom

END OF QUESTIONNAIRE – THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORT