Labour MP : Dyslexia is "cruel fiction"

[8ball]

Some people probably would say the same about you.

Awwww, is the little thicky upset?

 

[rocketman]

Well, dystopian says democracy is 'cruel fiction' doesn't have the same headline-grabbing appeal, do it?

 

[_angel_]

Awwww, is the little thicky upset?

I'm not dyslexic. Or stupid enough to think people unable to do sums are automatically 'thick'.

 

[In Bloom]

You're right about how maths is taught -- or not taught to a lot of people.. however, there are some people who are just not good at it, the same as you cannot be good at anything... this is all.

Of course some people aren't good at maths, but I'm of the opinion that not being naturally inclined towards maths merely makes it more difficult for somebody to learn quadratics (f'rinstance), not impossible.

 

[8ball]

I'm not dyslexic. Or stupid enough to think people unable to do sums are automatically 'thick'.

Long division as well.

People who can't do long division should be bulldozed into mass graves.

 

[In Bloom]

People who think that jokes about genocide and mass graves are funny should be forced to explain their views to a room full of Holocaust survivors and their grandchildren.

 

[kyser_soze]

Bring 'em on.

 

[8ball]

People who think that jokes about genocide and mass graves are funny should be forced to explain their views to a room full of Holocaust survivors and their grandchildren.

Can I test them on quadratics and long division while I'm at it?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I don't think that any attempt has ever been made to address the "root cause" of dyslexia.

Having actually worked with kids with learning diff, it's certainly not the case that having the same label leads to exactly the same kind of support. Schools are pretty good these days at tailoring support to individual needs.

From what I've been able to work out from reading bits and pieces on the problem, there are so many "variants" on the dyslexia spectrum that neurologists and educational psychs haven't even been able to "map" all the problems to the part of the brain that might cause the problem yet, let alone addressing the root cause.

 

[kabbes]

angel, you seem very sure that it is impossible for a large group of people to learn something, given that you apparently don't know what it is that you are writing off as impossible. What evidence do you have that, taught properly and appropriately, it is not the case that everybody of average intelligence could learn to do quadratic equations? I'll need a lot more than your gut feel on the issue if I'm to be convinced.

 

[_angel_]

angel, you seem very sure that it is impossible for a large group of people to learn something, given that you apparently don't know what it is that you are writing off as impossible. What evidence do you have that, taught properly and appropriately, it is not the case that everybody of average intelligence could learn to do quadratic equations? I'll need a lot more than your gut feel on the issue if I'm to be convinced.

I didn't say " a large group of people" and I think most people's problems with Maths is being down to confidence, usually because someone has labelled them as "thick" for not understanding.

The thing is, however, some people do have massive problems with Maths and numbers and I don't think this makes them "thick".

 

[kyser_soze]

Can we please make sure we're talking about maths and not arithmatic, of which I don't think quadratics are a part of.

I've met peeps who have 'problems' with numbers and sometimes have to work at arithmatic, but are great at maths finding calculus and algebra relatively easy (both of which are the reason I gave up studying maths).

 

[_angel_]

Can we please make sure we're talking about maths and not arithmatic, of which I don't think quadratics are a part of.

I've met peeps who have 'problems' with numbers and sometimes have to work at arithmatic, but are great at maths finding calculus and algebra relatively easy (both of which are the reason I gave up studying maths).

Yes they're different. But yes, also some people have problems with the both. I wouldn't write someone off for not being able to do a sum ffs!

 

[kabbes]

I didn't say " a large group of people" and I think most people's problems with Maths is being down to confidence, usually because someone has labelled them as "thick" for not understanding.

The thing is, however, some people do have massive problems with Maths and numbers and I don't think this makes them "thick".

That's not the issue though. The issue is the following chain:

while everyone can learn to ... do quadratic equations

Not everyone can 'learn' how to do quadratic equations, no matter how easy they may seem to you.

I didn't say I found quadratic equations 'easy', that was the whole point, I didn't. But I did eventually learn how to do them. Some people only need to be shown once and never have a problem again.

Some people never learn how to do quadratic equations, either, that doesn't make them 'thick', just not good at quadratic equations.

Aye, but that doesn't mean that they couldn't learn, given enough time and practice.

Do you get what is being said here? The point isn't to label people as "stupid" if they haven't learned how to solve quadratics in our current, flawed system of teaching. The point isn't to say that they should have learned it in our current, flawed system of teaching. The point is purely and simply that, taught properly, anyone (of at least moderate intelligence) could learn how to do it. So do you agree or disagree with that statement? And if you disagree with it, can you provide some evidence?

 

[In Bloom]

I didn't say " a large group of people" and I think most people's problems with Maths is being down to confidence, usually because someone has labelled them as "thick" for not understanding.

The thing is, however, some people do have massive problems with Maths and numbers and I don't think this makes them "thick".

I agree, and it's not a matter of intelligence one way or the other, I just object to the idea that large numbers of people are incapable of learning this stuff. Often it is, as you say, a matter of not being naturally inclined towards maths, lack of confidence and/or poor teaching, sometimes it's also linked to certain learning difficulties.

 

[In Bloom]

Can we please make sure we're talking about maths and not arithmatic, of which I don't think quadratics are a part of.

I've met peeps who have 'problems' with numbers and sometimes have to work at arithmatic, but are great at maths finding calculus and algebra relatively easy (both of which are the reason I gave up studying maths).

Very true, and it's a real shame that so many people who struggle with arithmatic end up being labelled as poor at maths and are never introduced to the more interesting bits of algebra and calculus as a result.

 

[_angel_]

I agree, and it's not a matter of intelligence one way or the other, I just object to the idea that large numbers of people are incapable of learning this stuff. Often it is, as you say, a matter of not being naturally inclined towards maths, lack of confidence and/or poor teaching, sometimes it's also linked to certain learning difficulties.

No, I didn't say large numbers of people are incapable but some really do struggle with numbers *and* Maths. A lot of times this is down to lack of confidence and poor teaching, sometimes some people just aren't good at it and I reject the idea that this makes them necessarily not of "moderate intelligence". Just in the same way as the person who's failed their driving test for the ten millionth time necessarily isn't.

 

[kabbes]

No, I didn't say large numbers of people are incapable but some really do struggle with numbers *and* Maths. A lot of times this is down to lack of confidence and poor teaching, sometimes some people just aren't good at it and I reject the idea that this makes them necessarily not of "moderate intelligence". Just in the same way as the person who's failed their driving test for the ten millionth time necessarily isn't.

So, for the avoidance of doubt, you are saying that there are people of moderate intelligence that are actually incapable of learning quadratics?

If so, I'll need more than just your assertion to prove it. Especially because if I am reading you correctly, you don't even know what it is that you are insisting is impossible for this group of people to learn.

 

[_angel_]

So, for the avoidance of doubt, you are saying that there are people of moderate intelligence that are actually incapable of learning quadratics?

If so, I'll need more than just your assertion to prove it. Especially because if I am reading you correctly, you don't even know what it is that you are insisting is impossible for this group of people to learn.

I'd say there are people of high intelligence in plenty of areas who would have a hard time with quadratics --- remembering that these rely on knowing the basics (times tables) to begin with.

Some people are good at numbers/ maths and some aren't. I agree that most people can be taught to manage, though. Far more than think they can.

I do reject the notion of intelligence boiling down to some mathematical ability.

Likewise, you can get people who are very academic being absolute idiots in other ways.

 

[Nigel]

Care Industry Self Perpetuating/Self Sustaining

Cat, meet pigeons....http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/jan/13/1

Although Dyslexia as a medical condition exists, there is a lot of truth in what he says of it being a scam & easy option.

I am suprised that someone has come up with a web page or book:"Teach Yourself Dyslexia": For many people that scam has and would pay off!

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Is anyone else bored of the "IQ is a crap system" rants? They're right but it's so fucking dull.

 

[In Bloom]

No, I didn't say large numbers of people are incapable but some really do struggle with numbers *and* Maths. A lot of times this is down to lack of confidence and poor teaching, sometimes some people just aren't good at it and I reject the idea that this makes them necessarily not of "moderate intelligence". Just in the same way as the person who's failed their driving test for the ten millionth time necessarily isn't.

I agree, which is why I said that it's not a matter of intelligence, I don't even really believe that there really is such a thing as one person being more "intelligent" in general than another.

All I was saying is that just because somebody struggles with something, it doesn't mean that they will never be able to do it.

 

[In Bloom]

From what I've been able to work out from reading bits and pieces on the problem, there are so many "variants" on the dyslexia spectrum that neurologists and educational psychs haven't even been able to "map" all the problems to the part of the brain that might cause the problem yet, let alone addressing the root cause.

I think that part of the problem really is that some people push for their kids to be diagnosed with dyslexia, because it's so hard to get proper support for kids who struggle with certain subjects unless they're classified as having some kind of learning difficulty (hence the recent emergence of the hopelessly vague MLD). I don't think that this accounts for all cases of dyslexia, but it does happen.

 

[_angel_]

I agree, which is why I said that it's not a matter of intelligence, I don't even really believe that there really is such a thing as one person being more "intelligent" in general than another.

All I was saying is that just because somebody struggles with something, it doesn't mean that they will never be able to do it.

Of course. Most people have been made to feel stupid and so given up.

I'm not good at Maths and I got thru mainly because my Dad is a teacher. It would be easy for me to think *everybody* could do it with the right help... however I would say most people probably could, however not everybody is the same.

 

[kyser_soze]

I think that part of the problem really is that some people push for their kids to be diagnosed with dyslexia, (sometimes)because it's so hard to get proper support for kids who struggle with certain subjects unless they're classified as having some kind of learning difficulty (hence the recent emergence of the hopelessly vague MLD), and sometimes because people don't want to accept they're kids are actually a bit thick. I don't think that this accounts for all cases of dyslexia, but it does happen.

You're a truly lovely person IB. I'd have written something along these lines, but with the additional caveat, as added in bold

Don't agree with this bit:

I don't even really believe that there really is such a thing as one person being more "intelligent" in general than another.

Ok, not sure what you mean by 'in general' but IMO&E different people have different limits to the levels of sophistication of any given investigation and analysis they're capable of.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

I think that some people are more intelligent, smarter, quicker, more inquisitive, more intuitive, more capable of working in foreign frames of reference etc. thanks to biology and even more thanks to environment etc. I think there's no useful single measure of intelligence and trying to quantify it is a bit of an iffy realm. I think that it is possible to say that someone is more or less intelligent than another in many cases and that observation is no less valid because we cannot quantify by how much.

 

[In Bloom]

Ok, not sure what you mean by 'in general' but IMO&E different people have different limits to the levels of sophistication of any given investigation and analysis they're capable of.

Basically, I don't accept that there is any such thing as a singular quality called "intelligence" in the sense that we're talking about here. I can solve equations or perform calculus quite happily, but put me in front of an oven and give me the ingredients to a cake and...well, you wouldn't want to eat it, put it that way. Neither task is inherently more complicated than the other, but while I would find one easy, I would find the other incredibly difficult.

That's why I don't buy into the whole idea of person A being more intelligent than person B, because intelligence is such a broad and multi-faceted affair. Was Albert Einstein more intelligent than Jean Paul Satre? Was Isaac Newton more intelligent than Renee Decartes?

I've known people who are absolute geniuses (sp?) when it comes to mathematics, but are absolutely baffled by the simplest of historical analyses. Where does that fit into the idea of people having some kidn of "limit to the levels of sophistication of any given investigation and analysis they're capable of"?

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Basically, I don't accept that there is any such thing as a singular quality called "intelligence" in the sense that we're talking about here. I can solve equations or perform calculus quite happily, but put me in front of an oven and give me the ingredients to a cake and...well, you wouldn't want to eat it, put it that way. Neither task is inherently more complicated than the other, but while I would find one easy, I would find the other incredibly difficult.

And if you were to take lessons in cake baking for a week you'd no doubt be providing delicious deserts in no time. Who knows if it'd take you longer or less time to learn than someone who dropped out of maths at GCSE Just because it's not simple doesn't mean that it's not real. It's in the same category as beauty.

I do dispute your assertion that the two are even in the same region of complexity though.

PS. I've got a great chocolate cake recipie that's dead easy to make.

 

[kyser_soze]

I bet it would take less time to teach you the mechanical steps required to bake an edible cake than it would to teach someone calculus!

 

[In Bloom]

I bet it would take less time to teach you the mechanical steps required to bake an edible cake than it would to teach someone calculus!

I can produce edible food, as in I've never poisoned anybody yet (well, once at Glastonbury, but the conditions weren't exactly ideal), but it's not the same as if a really good cook were to produce the same dish.