You are on page 1of 19

250 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

A Study Of Dyslexia Among Primary School


Students In Sarawak, Malaysia

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan


Education Department
Batu Lintang Teachers Training Institute
Sarawak Malaysia
Tel: 082 243501
Fax: 082 252382
E-mail: drrosana58@yahoo.com

Batu Lintang Teachers Training Institute


College Road
93200 Kuching
Sarawak, Malaysia

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of dyslexic reading problem among primary
school students and the relationship between the degree of dyslexia and the demographic factors. Eight
demographics factors, according to gender of age, class, parents income, parent education, parents
occupation, students position in the family and the number of brothers and sisters in the family are chosen
for the study. There are 32 characteristics of dyslexic student listed in the questionnaire Dyslexia Screening
Instrument. 250 dyslexic students from 7 primary schools in Petra Jaya area in Sarawak, who were early
determined in the pilot study were the sample in the study. The analysis is done by using SPSS Windows
6.1. The result of the study shows the dyslexic students concerned really facing reading problem because
58-62% of them exhibit the 32 characteristic of dyslexia. However, the relationship between dyslexia
and the demographics factors is weak, that is at the correlation of r=0.0 0.12 only. This shows that the
dyslexic problem among the students are of no correlation with the demographic factors.

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 251

Intoduction a. There need to be only small portion of the


information that requires understanding
from printed text.
Dyslexia is a language disability, affecting b. Understanding must proceed vocabulary
reading, writing, speaking and listening. It c. Reading is not to decode written language
is a dysfunction or impairment in the use of from that of oral.
words. Consequently, relation with others and
performance in every subject in school can be Our nations educational experts have much
affected by dyslexia. It can be found around the effort in promoting and developing the skills of
world principally among boys. It exists in learners reading and interpreting, especially in the Malay
of slow, average and superior intelligence. The Language subject. However, the adversity in
dyslexic child can come from any background or reading ability amongst students in the primary and
any income level and dyslexia may occur in any lower secondary school still prevails. According
child in a family regardless of order in which he to Mohd. Fadzil Haji Hassan (1998) the problem
is born. of student disability in reading in schools has not
Like other countries, in Malaysia, reading is been solved and so far cannot be overcome.
one of the skills required in the study of language. Students being unable to read and dislike
It is the important skill in the hierarchy of the reading is a topic of conversation that is often
Malaysian Education syllabus. It is very essential brought up by the various communities. Abdul
and considered to be one way to evaluate the Halim Yusuf (1995) quoted:
success of students in their learning in schools. In
the integrated curriculum of Secondary Schools, Recently questions about the increase in the
reading ability is of prime importance besides number of students
the skills in arithmetic and writing. The ability to who cannot read and dislike reading news
read is not only considered as basis to achieving from the media
success in other learning processes but including reveals that many students do not have the
this skill this main skill of reading in the Education reading skill.
System is proven to be the factor of success from
primary to higher institutional level. Lately, the media has reported that students
Amir Awang (1995) quoted that students ability are not proficient in reading. Various authorities
is one of the factors that contribute of their learning voiced their concern about the phenomenon of
widely in the other areas of knowledge. Findings students having low reading proficiency. The
from research study on reading still persist until Malaysian Ministry of Education, parents and
today that it has great bearing on achievement in teachers have voiced out their concern over the
various areas of acquiring knowledge. It is proven newspaper (Sofiah Hamid, 1999). According to the
that students who are able to read usually have report from the Director General of The Malaysian
great potentiality in their studies. Education Ministry, there are about 6,000 of
According to Bond & Tinker (1987) reading primary 6 students who cannot read properly.
ability considered to be of paramount importance In view of the importance of reading skill
which ties the bond of interaction which enables which necessarily acquired as the basic skill as
people to communicate with one another. Smith well as the unsolved problems about dyslexia, a
(1973) had dwelled in depth on psycholinguistic thorough study needs to be carried.
communication in correlation with reading According to Kamarudin Hj. Hussin (1980)
process from the view of psycholinguistics. cases on dyslexia are increasing. It happens in the
In general it has three views which have been primary school and lower secondary schools. To
supported by linguists and cognitive psychologists. address this problem, the Ministry of Education
Their views are: has taken steps such as:

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
252 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

a. Conducting courses on reading for comprehend the text they read. His study has
primary school teachers. come up with a number, 6,668 out of 15,728 who
b. Introducing special project on remedial and cannot master the basic skill of reading and are
incentive studies in 1975 by Centre almost illiterate.
of Advanced Curriculum. This has been proven through the weaknesses
c. Organizing and conducting workshops and of the new primary school curriculum. It has not
seminars ton address the problem. encouraged the student to strive harder and proven
d. All projects being planned are in collaboration to have no bearing at all to improve the situation.
with Faculty of Education It means the student spend fruitless sessions in
University Malaya. their schools for the whole 6 years in the primary
e. Many education offices carry out remedial education.
program on the Malay language subject. This situation has raised the level on anxiety
f. Teachers Training College for special amongst educationists, parents and the society.
education successfully organized courses Being not able to possess a good proficiency in
on methodology for teacher trainees. reading, students will not be able to refer and
learn much from text books in order acquire other
Although the Education Ministry has taken knowledge on other genre. It has been proven that
various steps to tackle the problem on dyslexia, it students fail in their examinations just because
has not been able to overcome it successfully. The they cannot understand or comprehend the
curriculum division has come up with a finding questions. Due to this problem, in depth study is
that primary six students in the school below have necessary to be carried out so that the real problem
received certain percentage of success: can be indentified. The details of the problems can
be looked upon from the following points of view
a. The Chinese National School 50.5% and this research objectives are mainly focused
b. The Tamale National School 50.8% on the problem of dyslexia amongst students
in the primary school Sarawak, Malaysia. The
(Hasmah Udin, 1998) specification of this study are the highlighting of:

This phenomenon has a great set back. Due a. The frequent dyslexia characteristics exhibited
to that, the Ministry of Education introduces by the dyslexic students.
the new Curriculum for primary school, which b. The relationship between the degree of
focuses mainly on reading, writing and arithmetic dyslexia faced by the student and their
(Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 1998:1). demographics factors.
It is hoped by the end of the primary school c. The significant difference between male and
level, students are able to adapt themselves into female dyslexic.
developing thinking process.
Following the new primary school curriculum, All these aspects are the focus of this case
the Cabinet Committee has come up with the new study with the hope that all can be solved, having
Education Policy or System formulated a new come up with a guide to remedy the situation with
Curriculum of secondary school to replace the systematic well-planned approaches.
previous one. This has come up with the stress on
speaking, reading and writing proficiently as well
as being creative in handling situation. Method
Musa Jalil (1989) has found out that 40% of
the primary 6 students in Pulau Pinang cannot The data for this research was collected from
read well. There are 15,728 students, 2573 cannot the District of Petra Jaya, in the state of Sarawak,
read, 2,105 can read but without the ability to Malaysia. The district was selected because it

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 253

meets the requirement of the main focus of the to be used with students in grade 1 through 12
study in terms of demographical features. (ages 6 through 21). It can be used to screen entire
Further more, one pilot study had been made population of students or students who exhibit
before the actual research was done. The pilot study reading, spelling, writing or language-processing
is to certify the researched subject is being made difficulties. Rating and scoring should take 15 to
through interview with the principal, the remedial 20 minutes per student.
teachers and other teachers who are teaching them, A classroom teacher who has worked directly
besides observation of the students who had been with the student for at least six weeks should
notified. This study involved 250 dyslexic students complete the Rating Form. This will result in
and this sample has been confirmed through the a rating that will be more accurate because the
pilot study at the early stage of the research. teacher has observed the student over a lengthy
Besides using the students sample, the period of time and can compare the students
researcher also distributed questionnaire to the 25 performance to that of the students; classmate.
teachers who are in charge of every subject, and For an elementary student, the prefer rater is
the class teachers to find out about their perception the teacher who instructs the student in a variety
toward the students. The age of those dyslexic of subjects. For a middle school or high school
students range 7 to 12 years and were from 7 student, the prefer rater a language teacher who
primary schools. generally has more opportunity to observe the
The pilot study s carried out after interview behavior that is indicative of dyslexia.
with those teachers who teach them. Students that The professional who is in charge of gathering
have been analyzed are been observed. In this information about the student should explain to
observation, the students characteristic as set in the rater that the purpose of the Rating Form is
Dyslexia Screening Instrument were detected. In to obtain an accurate picture of current student
the pilot study report from teachers and the students performance related to specific characteristics.
work are also included as criteria to ascertain if the The professional also should make sure the rater
students is suffering from dyslexia. understand how to complete the Rating Form and
At first, the researcher distributed questionnaire what each statement describes.
to the dyslexic students and asked them to write their The rater should complete the student
name in the questionnaire. Then, the researcher information on the front of the Rating Form. Not
distributed the same questionnaire to the class all of the information is required for scoring, but it
teacher and asked them to evaluate the students. may be useful for record-keeping purposes.
The teachers perception is important because
according to Abang Ridzuan (1991), Class a. Never exhibits
teacher is one who knows well about the problems b. Seldom exhibits
among the students besides their attitude. In an c. Sometimes exhibits
indirect way, teachers perception can be used as a d. Often exhibits
control for the students opinions. e. Always exhibits
The Dyslexia Screening Instrument by
Kathryn B. Choon et al (1994) is a rating scale Besides that, a questionnaire is used to
designed to describe the cluster of characteristics recognize especially the Socio-economic status of
associated with dyslexia and to discriminate the students family. The items are:
between students who display these characteristics
and students who do not. This scale, for use in the a. Gender
school setting, is quick and non intrusive, and b. Age
provides education professionals with a starting c. Level of study
point for identifying students at risk for dyslexia. d. Occupation of Parent/Guardian
The Dyslexia Screening Instrument is designed e. Education of Parent/Guardian

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
254 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

f. The number of brothers Table 1 Analysis Data Code


g. Family status
ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3

Questions Management A B A B A B
Respondent 1 2 1 3 4 2 2
The instrument that is used is a questionnaire, Respondent 2 1 1 2 3 3 4
which was translated from its original instrument Respondent 3 1 2 3 2 2 2

Dyslexia Screening Instrument. Both versions,


English (original) and Malay Language (Translated There is data analysis from 250 respondents and
are attached). The questionnaire is made into two the items are from 1 to 33. Teachers valuations
groups which contain similar question. The first are in (A) and the students valuations are in
set is for the students and second set is for the (B). The demographic questionnaire has been
teachers. accomplished and analyzed. All data has been
processed for frequency, correlation, regression
Evaluation followed by T-test by using SPSS Window 6.1.
Frequency analysis is a prepared list of
Evaluation is made according to evaluation quantitative data and this is done by listing, in
procedure, especially the explanation for every rank order from high to low, all the scores to be
statement which is written in the questionnaire. summarized, with tallies to indicate the number of
Both questionnaires need to be completed in 15 to subjects receiving each score. The scores in a
20 minutes only. The filling in the demographic distribution are grouped into intervals. To further
questionnaire and the questionnaire for students the understanding and interpretation of data, it will
who suffer from dyslexia must be carried out be presented in frequency polygon with frequency
by the help from the teacher and the researcher. analysis. In this context, frequent act by the
Detail explanation about their needs followed by students who suffer from dyslexia can be detected
the meaning of a statement must be carried out easily and frequent analysis characteristics can be
and it is students preference to choose their scale also recognized.
according to their own valuation. Teachers who With correlation, researcher seeks to determine
are involved must have experience in teaching the if relationship exists between two or more variables.
students for at least 6 weeks. It can help the teacher By comparing the performance of different groups
to make an observation followed by comparing is the way to study relationships. Sometimes,
their potential with their friends. It makes two such relationships are useful in prediction, but
months to complete the questionnaire. most often the eventual goal is to say something
about causation (Jack R. Fraenkel and Norman E.
Data Analysis Wallen, 1990:158).
Correlation coefficients can take on values
The questionnaire that are filled in are collected from 1.00 to + 1.00 inclusive; the greater the
for analysis. Both of the students and teachers absolute value of the coefficient, the stronger the
valuation are put together for every respondent. relationship. A correlation coefficient of zero
Every respondent is evaluated according to every indicates no relationship or independence of the
item in the questionnaire and written down in variables. In the context of this study correlation is
both valuation scales. One type of analysis from used to seek relationship between the demographic
is modified to simplify the analysis. Here is the factor and the characteristics which have been
example of simple procedure by using the analysis shown by the dyslexia students.
form. Regression analysis allows the researcher to
work out whether two variables are associated,
whether people who vary on one variable also

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 255

vary systematically on the offer (D.A.de Vaus, is assumed that the samples have been randomly
1995: 179). The researcher also can determine selected and the score are obtained from normally
how strongly these variables are associated. It also distributed population (Gajendra K. Verma and
enables the researcher to say how much impact Kanka Mallick, 1999:205). Use of the test enables
each unit change in the independent variable has researcher to say whether the difference obtained
on the dependent variable. is quite likely to occur by chance, or whether it is
In summary, the regression coefficient can significant. In the latter case, the difference may
be used to measure the amount of impact or be due to some underlying cause which deserves
change one variable produces in another. They further investigation.
are asymmetrical and will be different according This is case study research. After pilot
to which variable id independent. In this study, study, with interview and observation done, sets
regression will be used to see the most valuable of questionnaires are produced for the actual
changes or the main influence of dyslexia. research. The whole procedure of the research is
The t-test provides a method by which the as in Figure 1 below.
means of the samples can be compared when it

Figure 1: Research Graphic Procedure

Pilot Study Pilot Study


(Interview) (Observation)

Pilot Analysis
Study

Constructing Instrument
According to validity and reliability

Applied in the study

15
Product of study

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
256 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

Result Table 3

Breakdown of Respondents by Gender


The result of the research on dyslexia has
been experienced by the respondents in the Number of
(Gender) Per Cent
Respondents
primary school level. The question that is going
Male 145 58
to be answered is, Are the demographic factors
Female 105 42
like the economic level of the parents influence all
dyslexia characteristics?. Total 250 100.0
The main purpose of describing these variables
was to provide some insight into the characteristic
of dyslexia students pertaining to the study. Parent Income
All statistical analysis and other analyses on
relationships between variables and variances The monthly income for all parents of the
within variables are also described. respondent is summarized in table 4. The mean
From the questionnaire Dyslexia Screening income of the parents was RM325.84. However,
Instrument, the researcher makes a decision to have the range of their income varied very widely
a valuation with frequency analysis, correlation from RM100.00 to RM1280.00. It was generally
analysis, regression analysis and t-test. The observed by the researcher that most of the parents
researcher used the test result from every individual of the respondents had understand their actual
according to the analysis and finally differentiate income.
them. Before the process, the researcher has to
discuss the dyslexia characteristics openly with Table 4
the students themselves without putting any of the
Distribution of Parent Income
influence factors. Level of income Number of
Per Cent
(RM) Respondents
RM150 and less 70 28
Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
RM151 RM300 90 36
Age
RM151 RM300 52 20.8
RM451 and
38 15.2
Table 2 shows the distribution of respondents above
by age. The data indicates that only 19.2 percent Total 20 100.0
of the respondents were 7 years; 68 percent of X 325.84
the respondents were between 8 to 11, and 12
percent wee 12 years of age. The mean age of the Parents Level of Education
respondents was 9.24 years with a range of 7 to 12
years old. Level of education referred to the actual number
Table 2 of years of formal schooling both secular and
religious education. The mean number of years of
Distribution of Respondents by Age education completed for all parents of respondents
Age Number of Per Cent was 4.66 years while the range was from 0 to 11
Respondents
7 Years 48 19.2 years. Table 5 provides the breakdown of the
8 Years 45 18
9 Years 50 20 sample of years of education completed. The
10 Years 42 16.8 data indicates that only 28.4 percent of the parents
11 Years 35 14
12 Years 30 12 had education beyond the elementary level (6
Total 250 SD = 1.98 years) and 54.4 percent of the parents had formal
X = 9.24 SD = 1.98 schooling between 1 to 6 years.

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 257

While 17.2 percent had not received any formal seventh hierarchy revealed almost a similar
education. percentage which range from 10 to 14 percent.
The mean for all respondents was 4.56.
Table 5
Table 7
Parent Level of Education
Number of Hierarchy in the Family
Level of Education Per Cent
Respondents
No Education 43 17.2 Hierarchy in the Number of
Per cent
family Respondents
1-3 51 20.4
4-6 85 34.0 First 27 10.8
7 or more 71 28.4 Second 35 14
Total 250 100.0 Third 25 10
X = 4.66
Forth 28 11.2
Firth 32 12.8
Parents Occupation Sixth 50 20.0
Seventh 27 10.8
As shown in table 6, of the 250 parents of Eight 26 10.4
respondents, about 8.8 percent did not have Total 250 100.0
permanent jobs. 22.4 percent have their permanent X = 4.56 SD = 0.17
jobs in the government sector as teachers, clerks,
police, nurses and office workers. However, about
34 percent have their jobs in private sector and self Number of Siblings
employed with own small business. There were
about 34.8 percent of the parents of the respondents The distribution of number of siblings in the
involved themselves as labours. respondents family is presented in table 8. The
data reveals that the dyslexia students are from
Table 6 family of 3 to 5 siblings which range the percentage
of 16.0.
Parent Occupation
Number of Table 8
Occupation Per cent
Respondents
- No Permanent
22 88.8 Number of Siblings in the Family
Jobs
- Private firm 31 12.4
No. of Number of
- Self employed 54 21.6 Per cent
Siblings Respondents
- Government
56 22.4 1 15 6
Service
- Labours 87 34.8
2 25 10
Total 250 100.0
X = 4.66 3 42 16.8
4 40 16
Hierarchy in the Family 5 42 16.8
6 40 16
Table 7 shows the distribution of respondents 7 21 8.4
by hierarchy in the family. About 20 percent of 8 25 10
the respondents are from the youngest and oldest
Total 250 100.0
kids in the family. As revealed from the data, 20
percent of the respondents are sixth in hierarchy X = 4.59 SD = 0.7
of the family, while the second, third, forth and

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
258 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

Statistical Analyses Table 9 proves that dyslexias students are very


often showing good response in oral reading. The
Frequency analysis percentage of 49.6% is the proof of validity of
weakness that exist in the students.
Based on the items in the questionnaire in Besides that, the students have been detected
Dyslexia Screening Instrument there are 32 that they had shown weakness in their writing
items which are the normal characteristics that which may have connection with the oral reading.
have been shown by the students who suffered the According to the percentage, in item 20, 49.2%
dyslexia problem. The research points that the (Teachers view) and 47.6% (Students View).
students very often show the 32 characteristics. The students are also showing forgettable
Although the dyslexia level and status is different characteristic because they understand or know
from each other, this is the view of the two sides for a short time and could not remember the next
which involved the teachers and the students day. The figures 57.5% student view are the
themselves. Table 9 will show that 62% of the proof based on that characteristic. Besides that,
students are frequent and 58% are always showing the students are also weak in arranging words.
the 32 characteristics. For more discussion, there Accordingly that weakness can be detected from
are 8 high characteristics percentages from the item 14 that shows both view, the teachers view
respondents used in this research. 50.8% and the students view 11.6%
The students also showed doubts in writing and
Table 9: Frequency / Percentages of the oral, and it causes the students having problems
Teachers/Students View about the in both writing skill and oral skill which has been
Every Time facing the dyslexia problem explained in item 10 and 20. this unstable existence
has been detected by item 15 that produces the
Amount/
Items III. View percentage of 61.9% and 57.9% from the teachers
Percentage
1. The writing and students respectively. Item 17 proves that the
Teachers View 201 ( 80% )
vocabulary not stable students have less skill in spelling at that level,
with the oral Students View 179 ( 71% ) which is supposed to be. This means that the
vocabulary. (Item 15)
student are really having a problem in spelling
Teachers View 201 ( 80% )
2. Not active in oral. skills compared to normal students at the same
(item 26)
Students View 173 ( 69% ) level. The highest percentage is between 51.6%
3. Weak in arranging the Teachers View 200 ( 79.4% )
and 51.2% from the both views which is the proof
important Point in of the situation.
writing. (Item 16) Students View 188 ( 74.6% ) The students also illustrated the weakness and
Teachers View 190 ( 75.4% ) being slow in making prediction. It may have
4. Can remember in a
short period (Item 8) originated from other weakness, in them. By item
Students View 158 ( 62.7% )
27, this weakness is proved with the percentage
5. Less skill in spelling. Teachers View 158 ( 62.7% ) of the teachers view (60.7%) and the students
(Item 17) view (57.5%) which is quite high. The delay
Students View 176 ( 70% )
in making the prediction can cause difficulty
6. Understand while Teachers View 188 ( 75% ) in making plans. This problem can cause less
in class but Decrease
in Test. (Item 9) Students View 177 ( 70% ) creativity, ability and can cause problems in
studying if there is no action taken to solve the
Teachers View 183 ( 73% )
7. Not exact in oral problem. Concerning item 8, regarding students
reading. (Item 10) Students View 167 ( 66.2% ) that always forget, this characteristic is supported
by item 30. By item 30, the students always show
Teachers View 189 ( 75% )
8. No. Planning their weakness in repeating the explanation, which
Students View 170 ( 68% ) have been explained to them. They are weak in

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 259

saying something that has been said to them. The analysis above, it can be proved that the students
views percentages from both sides on this matter are in critical difficulties. In certain situation,
are 57.5% and 56.3%. their problem is not serious especially for items
There must be a possibility that the students no. 3,4,5,13,28 and 31 which shows the frequency
understand what they been taught, but always and every time it is lower than 50%. This shows
show their weakness in the test. This matter has that we do not agree about them being
been proven because they can easily forget and o Disappointed very easily (item 3)
could not repeat the fact or explanation, which has o Down to earth (item 4)
been given to them like it was stated in item 8 and o Lower down their status (item 5)
item 31. The fall in this test id dominated by the o Weak in direction concept (item 13)
percentage, of 56.3% and 57.6% from the view o Misplace / lost their personal thing (item
of both sides by item 9 in the questionnaire. The 28)
students also show their noisy emotion in making o Very quick in thinking (item 31)
activities or work especially in pressured and
limited time. This matter can be proven by item 6 Correlation Analysis
with the percentage of 50.4% and 46.8%. Noisy
emotion may be the cause of their less capability By the correlation analysis, there are a few
in planning their work properly. These students obvious relation between the independent variable
always could not plan their work that shows by the with the dyslexia characteristics. This was proven
percentage 58.7% and 56%, which is high by item by the Pearson correlation. This analysis shows
7 in the questionnaire. The percentage of 47.6% that there is a relation in weak level only between
and 51.2% the characteristics are easily disturbed the dyslexia characteristics with the age factor is (
and this is the factor that the students are weak in r = 0.13; p, 0.041 ). This mean that relation exist
some aspect. between the simple disturbed characteristics in the
Item 16, proved that the students are weak students with their age factor.
in arranging the essay content. The percentage Based on the result from the questions 32 and
of 51.6% (the teachers view) and 59.1% (the question 8, the change factor has been identified
students view) prove the presence of the weakness because of the relation between both in the weak
in the students themselves. This matter may have stages. That means from the questionnaires that
its connection with item 7, which says that the have been given to the students, their characters
students always could not plan their work. are weak regarding education, occupation and
The correlation and domination is in item 8 and their parents or guardians. Their characteristics
item 30 being interpreted above. Item 19 is also are not influenced by their parents or guardians
connected. The students are specified as a group high education or their high salary. That also for
that needs repeated explanation because they can the matter of factor-gender, age, the number of
easily forget and are already weak in repeating siblings, and their status in the family. All these
the explanation that has been given to them. By factors have their own weakness for the dyslexia
this item 19, the view of 54.0% from the teachers characteristics.
and 51.6% from the student themselves, prove the Because of the high percentage in the weak
strong statement that the students need a repetition level ( below r 0.4 ), we have to see how much
explanation or drilling system. is the amount that r = 0.12 to see the connection.
It is clear that the students often and every From this result, we will divide them into two
time show the 32 characteristics, which an already groups that is parents which influence the students
analyzed by the Dyslexia Screening Instrument. and the students factor itself, which emerge in the
The dyslexia level and status is detected by the dyslexia characteristics in the questionnaire.
research correlation, that is the percentage of
views which have been collected. From the

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
260 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

Table 10: Parents / Guardian with The number of siblings factor for example only
Dyslexia Characteristics influences the students look which is forget easily
(0.2), not right in oral reading (0.12) and inequality
ITEM Explana-
Disap- Feel Feel
tion
(0.04) on level p < 0.05.
pointed Down Down
FAC-
Easily TO Earth TO Earth
To Be There is less influence by parents or guidance
TORS Repeated in students dyslexia characteristic. This proves
Education 0.12 0.08 0.06 0.4 that with correlation obtained by Pearson which
Income 0.04 0.10 0.04 0.04
shows the it is not beyond 0.4 but only around r =
Income 0.02 0.02 0.1 0.07
0.0 until r = 0.12 only.
Signify p > 0.05
Regression Analysis
Based on table 10 above, there is a relation
between education, income and the students In the regression analysis which has been
parent or guardians occupation with significant carried out, researcher likes to know the main
relation of being weak in disappointed easily, feel demographic factor, which influences dyslexia.
down to earth, noisy the pressure and explanation For that, researcher has inserted all this which is
have to be repeated which the students have on occupation, income, and the parents education in
level p< 0.05. For example, the connection of the research for the purpose to find one or some
parents education factor concerning disappointed factors that always influence the students. Also
easily ( r = 0.12 ), down to earth ( r = 0.08 ). Noisy included are the five students demographic factors,
with pressure ( r = 0.06 ) and explanation to be which are age, gender, status in the family, number
repeated ( r = 0.04 ) on level p < 0.05. of siblings and the class that the students are in
The students factor that influences the dyslexia while the research is in progress.
characteristic also shows a weak significant relation
in table 11 The students factor is influenced by the Table 12: The Demographic Factors
dyslexia characteristics. Which Influence Dyslexia

Table 11: Students factor that influence Signifi-


Mult R R2 F R
Dyslexia Characteristics R
cant

ITEM Unrelation
oral Occupation .367 .135 .124 .894 P < .001
Not right in
Forget Easily vocabulary
oral reading Income .307 .094 .083 .894 P < .001
with writing
Education .285 .082 .070 1.298 P < .001
FACTORS vocabulary
Age .221 .049 .041 .848 P < .01
Number of Number of
0.02 0.12 0.04 .158 .025 .021 .970 P < .05
siblings siblings
Status in the Status of the
0.02 0.12 0.1 .157 .024 .021 .848 P < 0.5
family family
Primary .386 .149 .135 .889 P < .001
Gender 0.05 0.06 0.09

Age 0.08 0.02 0.09


This research shows that the outside influences
and the factors in the student only give less effect to
Primary Level 0.08 0.02 0.09 the students. The researcher found that the socio-
economic status of the parents has less influence
Significance p < 0.05 on their childs dyslexia characteristics. The
From table 11 above, it can be seen that results obtained show that the parents occupation
students factor does not influence the look and is one of the factors, which can influence ( R2 =
the characteristics forget easily, not right in oral .135 ). This means that the parents occupation
reading and inequality which is in the students. contributes about 13.5% to the dyslexia problem.

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 261

Majority of the students parents work as labour. In the context of age and level, even though
Because of that the parents have no time to pay confirmed that the dyslexia characteristics bulge
attention to their children. The low education in the early stage of schooling which means age at
level, contributes 8.2% to the problem of not a young, we get the different test result that is the
helping their children in reading. The income class factor shows strong influence besides that
factor contributes 9.4% the age factor is R2 = .049 or 4.9% only. This
( r 2 = 0.094 ) to this problem. With low may be because of their mature age each student is
income, the parents couldnt manage to buy books different from the other. The age factor is not the
for their children to read. main reason that contributes to dyslexia problem
The researcher believes that the dyslexia is and it is believed that the dyslexia that the dyslexia
associated with the students age factor. Students problem will disappear when they grow older.
in secondary school have no problem compared If the researcher touches on the status factor of
to those primary school students. This has been the in the family and the number of siblings that
proved with the high percentage ( R 2 = .149 ) of is 2.5% and 2.4%. The researcher can view as
influence on the students dyslexia. This means that the factor of the number of the children in
the dyslexia problem always happens in the early the family can influence dyslexia. This is because
stage or in this context in first school level which is when the number of children is too high, the
primary one, two, three and happens less in second parents attention to the individual will be less.
stage which is primary four, five and six. This is
because the first stage, the students understanding t-Test
is less compared with the second stage where they
learn a lot by revision studies process which are The t-test has been carried out to analysis
carried out by the school from time to time. whether there are any differences that are
The meaning of comprehension is the students significant among the male students and female
ability to understand something they read like students in dyslexia problem.
theme, plot and teaching from academic books or
story books. With less understanding, may be the Table 13: The Result of t-test for Gender Factor.
reader gets less information. This results in the
Signifi-
failure to collect information and to make use of Item Gender N Min SP t-value
car
the information when it is needed. Forget Male 145 3.6 0.9
Their 1.03 P = 0.01
One more thing researcher believes that this duty Female 106 3.4 1.0
Noisy Male 145 3.6 1.0
dyslexia has connection with lack of interest in P=
basis 1.14
students in what they read. It is because of less 0.056
Pressure Female 106 3.4 1.1
concentration in their reading process or influence Lost Male 145 3.7 0.8
of other matters like thinking of playing, even P=
basic 0.39
0.057
negative influences from classmates. Like it was In test Female 106 3.6 1.0
Weak Male 145 3.7 0.8
explained before, researcher also has an opinion P=
in 0.39
that their interest in something that they read is 0.023
Writing Female 106 3.6 0.8
important in dyslexia. The interest in a story book Slow to Male 145 3.8 0.8
that is interesting, can bring back the curious feeling P=
Predict 0.68
0.365
and high concentration to try and understand all Female 106 3.6 1.0
the facts. This can improve their understanding
in what they have read. This can be differentiated Significant p = 0.05
with the interest in academic books which may be
less than the interest in story books. Here parents By this t-test it can be found that there are 5
need to give motivation to their children to learn characteristics which show different significance
something that they are not interested in. among the male and female students. These

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
262 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

five characteristics are in between p = 0.008 to There has been much speculation as to the reason
p = 0.057. Two characteristics which are very for this variance. One assumption is that answer
significant among the male and female students may lie in the inherent linguistic merits and scripts
are slow in making prediction with the value of t of the different languages. However, Macdonald
= 1.14 and p = 0.056. The significance is found in Critchley et, al (1970:96) maintains that this is not
the forget easily characteristic with ( value t = credible and suggests the low incidence of dyslexia
1.03 p = 0.01 ) , lost basis in test 9 value t = 0.39 might be due to genetic reasons. At any rate, at
p = 0.57 ) and weak in writing ( value t = 0.39 p the present time, this variance of dyslexia from
= 0.023 ). language to language cannot be explained. What
The mean value also shows the students we do know is that dyslexia is likely to be found
ratio of male and female who suffer from the around the world (Janett W, Lerner, 1989:3)
dyslexia problem. All the mean ratio in these five There are sex differences in the incidence of
characteristics show the male students mean ratio dyslexia, just as there are in color blindness. The
is higher than the female mean ratio. This mean dyslexia child is referred to in most books as he
that there are more male student facing the easily for a good reason. While both boys and girls can
forget problem , noisy, and lost basis in test, weak have dyslexia, boys are far more likely to have it.
in writing and slow in making prediction compared As with estimates on the incidence of dyslexia,
to the female students. This may be because of so too, is there a lack of consensus on the ratio of
the male is not serious and slows and puts less dyslexia male to dyslexia females. The estimates
concentration in doing thing. vary from study to study: 2-to-1 (John Money,
From the analysis and test which nave been 1962:31), 3.5-to-1 or 4-to-1 (T.R.Miles and Elaine
carried out, researcher can make an excuse by Miles, 1983:2), 4-to-1 (Critchley, OP, Cit:9), 5-to-1
dividing the result into two parts that is socio- (Sandhya Naidoo, 1972:25). The ratio of dyslexia
economic status of the parents of the students and males to dyslexia males to dyslexia females has
the demographic factor itself. been nearly 6-to-1 and the method of enrollment
The result of the analysis has proved that acceptance and pairing sex with like sex is likely
the socio-economic status factor which include to have contributed to this higher ratio.
education, occupation and the parents income The difference in the number of male dyslexia
influences the dyslexia characteristic. Parents, who as compared to females is well founded and
have low education and low income can influence accepted. The reason has not yet been established,
the students. The students should be given more although there are numerous hypotheses: a greater
encouragement in education and help them in their occurrence of cerebral trauma in males, the
home work to solve the dyslexia problem. hemispheric functioning of the sexes, a mutant
About the students factor, researcher found at a single locus whose expression is modified by
out that there are two tests have come out with sex, or a polygenic expression that has a lower
outstanding results of age factor, primary, number threshold for males than that for females.
of siblings and status from the family also influence Dyslexia has no favorites in regard to the
the students that suffer from dyslexia. This wealthy or the poor, the cultured or the culturally
means from the primary one level until primary disadvantaged. Any child from any background can
six, they will continue to show the same dyslexia have dyslexia but the socioeconomic backgrounds
characteristics. Besides that, the researcher found of dyslexia are varied.
that the dyslexia characteristics are different in the Any child in the family can have dyslexia,
male and female students in the easy forget, noisy whether he be the oldest, the youngest, or the in-
with pressure, lost basis in test, weak in writing between child. Research on birth order is sparse.
and slow in making prediction. In a study of five hundred dyslexia, 24.6 percent
However, the incidence of dyslexia as reported were the oldest in their families, while 36 percent
varies a great deal from language to language. were the youngest (Edith Klasen, 1950(60). There

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 263

is no difference in birth order in the incidence of In the aspect of correlation, students with
dyslexia among brother and sisters were found in dyslexia with educational and socio-economic
families with dyslexics. factors, number in a family, class and gender had
the correlated significance of r-0.4, P<0.05. That
means those factors had the influence on dyslexia.
Discussion It had been assessed from an aspect of regression,
where by how much of the demographic influences
Through observation on the aspect of writing, were in involved in the whole situation. It is also
students with dyslexia have great difficulties found that demographic factor had contributed a
in writing. On the whole they are very poor in little to the problem of dyslexia because it only
writing, having poor skill of spelling poor in reached to R2 = 0.135 i.e 13.5% of its contribution
oral and written vocabulary as well as poor in to the problem.
arranging content of compositions. The reliability The validity according of this scenario cannot
of this observation had been proven by a few other be argued upon for dyslexia does not take into
researchers of the past. Henshelwood (1959) in consideration the background of the socio-economic
Lerner (1985) quoted that the inability in reading background (Huston, 1987:9). According to him
of students with dyslexia is caused by the non- whoever they are and what background they have
corresponding visualization of the right hemisphere can be affected by dyslexia. In a family anyone
with the collaboration area (angular gyrus) of the can be affected whether they be old or young
left hemisphere. The loss in this collaboration and the eldest or the youngest. Gender is of no
did not only cause gradual diminishing ability in exception. That had been stressed by him as The
reading but also the ability in writing as well as dyslexia can come from any background, or any
spelling (ographia). Orton (1980) had also agreed income level; and dyslexia may occur in any child
but with consideration of looking at the aspect in a family regardless of the order in which he or
of functional approach. According to him the she is born. (1987:10).
relationship between the two hemispheres is very The above statement supported the findings
important concerning writing and reading skills. which can associate a weak influence upon criteria
Besides that students with dyslexia are usually that is shown by dyslexic pupils. It is not surprising
poor in learning. They usually fall apart under that the demographic factor has another weak
time limits and pressure, often losing ground significance in both the genders. It is also a one
on achievement tests, having poor handwriting, way finding from the theory mentioned above.
inaccurate oral reading as well as having delay in From the discussion above it is clear enough
verbal response. that pupils with dyslexia have shown all the 32
With these criteria it had been proven from criteria of dyslexia but 8 of the criteria have
research made by Hinshelwood (1959) in Lerner always shown. There has been weak connection
(1985) with its structural and Orton (1980) with and influence among the demographic factors with
its functional. There had been other researchers criteria which are exhibited by pupils od dyslexia
such as Slobin (1991), Menyuk Wiig et. Al (1973) (Huston: 1987).
and Leong (1974). These researchers had stressed This research has identified various finding
on the importance of the parts of the brain which and also elaboration on various questions which
are for remembering visually perceptions of letters are relevant to the case. Therefore, the researcher
and words. These researchers highlighted the wishes to put forward a few recommendations
Important of a balance coordination between the such as:
hemispheres of brain which clearly demonstrated
the weakness of the left hemisphere that caused a. to propose a wide variety of samples to
alexia, graphia, aphasia, apraxia, slip of the be used in the research. Experimental
tongues and poor listening skill. approach which uses the controlled group

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
264 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

should be used. In that case samples can be helping dyslexics. Society recognizes the need
given continuous attention for a long period to provide the dyslexic with opportunities for
of time. remediation opportunities to learn and to develop
b. Due to the in imbalance of the written and normally, and opportunities to become what he is
oral vocabulary it portrays the main criteria capable of becoming.
shown by the pupils. It is hoped that teaching The challenge of dyslexia must be met by all:
can be more focused on interaction which all parents, schools, researchers, teachers-training
is very open to teacher and pupils. That institutions, the federal government, society as
will encourage pupils to talk more openly. a whole and the dyslexic himself. For it will
It also helps to built up their confidence take all of us working together to accomplish what
in reading. However, writing can also be must be accomplished what can be done. We
stressed in order to create a balanced skills must make this challenge the focus of our efforts.
in both oral and abnormally, it may be that
sometime in the future CT scans will reveal
will more specific finding in regard to
dyslexia. (Martha B. Denckla: 1985)
Acknowledgement
The future is promising for the dyslexic, The author wishes to express his sincere
although progress toward fulfillment of the promise appreciation to the following individuals on the
is slow. It will not be realized soon enough to help involvement in preparation of this manuscript:
some already out there in the Dyslexia World of Director of Malaysia Education Planning and
Frustration. But we are finding out more about Research Section, and the State Education Director
the condition. We know that there is a genetic Of Sarawak, Malaysia for their sympathy and
factor in the cause of dyslexia, and therefore we cooperation that made this manuscript a success.
can be alert to the occurrence in some families Director of Batu Lintang Teachers Training
and provide the immediate help as needed. We College, headmasters and teachers of the schools
now know how to diagnose dyslexia accurately; for being helpful and concern over the research
the problem lies in disseminating and using this made.
knowledge. Unfortunately, some people seem to
be unwilling to give up pet theories or special tests
that they have devised (which also bring a certain
profit). We know that, because of maturational
Reference
factors, an accurate diagnosis of dyslexia at the
present time ordinarily cannot be made before a
child has reached about the age of eight. 1. Abang Ahmad Ridzuan (1991), Factors Relating
We know that dyslexia can be alleviated, and to Achievement of High School Students in
that the most appropriate time to begin remediation Kuching City, Malaysia. Unpublished PhD.
for a child is at about the age of eight. It is far Thesis University of Hull, England.
easier to remediate the condition at this early age
than at an older age, when certain behaviors and 2. Abdul Halim Yusuf (1995), Sukatan
attitudes have been internalized. Of course the Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Menengah, Kuala
severity of the dyslexia condition will affect the Lumpur: Pusat Perancangan Kurikulum.
success and length of remediation, (as will other
factors). 3. Amir Awang (1995), Trenda Baru dalam
More information is being distributed about Bidang Pendidikan Bahasa, Kuala Lumpur.
dyslexia; and thus more people are aware of the Utusan Publication and Distributor Sdn. Bhd.
condition and are becoming concerned about

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 265

4. Bertil Hallgren (1950) Specific Dyslexia 12. Kathry B. Coon et al. (1994) Dyslexia Screening
(Congenital Word-Blindness); A Clinical Instrument. United State of America: Harcourt
and Genetic Study (Copenhagen : Ejnar Brace & Company.
Munksgaard, 1950); trans. By Erica Odelberg
(Stockholm : Esselte Aktiebolag) 13. Lerner, W. Janet (1985) Learning Disabilities.
London: Open Book Publishing Ltd.
5. Bonds and Tinker. (1987), Reading
Difficulties. The Diagnosis and Correction 14. Macdonald Critchley (1970) The Dyslexia
New York : Appleton-Century-Croft. Child, Springfield, III: Charles C. Thomas.

6. D.A. de Vaus (1991). Surveys In Social 15. Mohd. Fadzil Hj. Hassan. (1998). Isu-Isu
Research, London: Allen & Unwin. Perancangan Bahasa. Kuala Lumpur : Dewan
Bahasa dan Pustaka.
7. Edith Klasen (19720) The syndrome of Specific
Dyslexia (Baltimore: Unviersity Park. 16. Musa Jalili. (1989). Falsafah Pendidikan
negara Kuala Lumpur : Pusat Perkembangan
8. Gajendra K. Verma and Kanka Mallick (1999) Kurikulum.
Researching Education, London: Falmer
Press. 17. Sandhya Naidoo (1972). The Research Report
of the ICAA Word Blind Centrenfor Dyslexia
9. Hinshelwood J. (1959) Congenital Word- Children. New York : John Wiley.
blindness. H.K. Lewis, London.
18. Smith, D. Shelley (1986) Genetics and
10. John Money (1962) Dyslexia: A Post Correcting Reading Disabilities. London:
conference Review, Reading Disability, Taylor and Francis.
Progress and Research Needs in Dyslexia, John
Money, ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 19. Sofiah Hamid. (1991). Pendidikan dalam
Politik Di Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur : Dewan
11. Kamarudin Hj. Husin, (1980). Pedagogi Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Bahasa. Petaling Jaya : Longman Malaysia
Sdn. Bhd. 20. T.R. Miles and Elaine Miles (1983), Help for
Dyslexia Children, London: Methuen.

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
266 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

Appendix 1
DYSLEXIA
SCREENING
INSTRUMENT
Kathryn B. Coon, Melissa M. Waguespack, Mary Jo Polk
Respondent Name: ________________________________________________
Date of Birth: ________________________________________________
Age: ________________________________________________
Gender: ________________________________________________
Standard: ________________________________________________
School: ________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raters Name: ________________________________________________
Raters Signature: ________________________________________________
Date of Rating: ________________________________________________

RATER: To what extent does the students exhibit these characteristics?


1 never exhibits 2 seldom exhibits 3 sometimes exhibits 4often exhibits
5 always exhibits (Please rate all statements)

__________ 1. Easily distracted


__________ 2. Forgets assignment and/or loses papers
__________ 3. Easily frustrated
__________ 4. Low self-esteem
__________ 5. Puts himself/herself down
__________ 6. Falls apart under time limits and pressure
__________ 7. Disorganized
__________ 8. Knows material one day; doesnt know it the next day
__________ 9. Knows class material but tests poorly
__________ 10. Oral reading inaccurate
__________ 11. Reverses letters and/or numbers
__________ 12. Losing ground on achievement tests
__________ 13. Poor directionally (up/down, left/right, over/under)
__________ 14. Poor sequencing skills
__________ 15. Vocabulary of written composition in NOT equal to students spoken vocabulary
__________ 16. Poor organization of composition (Events are not in chronological order or any discipline
order organization
__________ 17. Inadequate spelling for grade level
__________ 18. Trouble following a series of directions
__________ 19. Needs information repeated
__________ 20. Poor handwriting
__________ 21. Has trouble copying
__________ 22. Unable to tell time, days of the week, months of the year
__________ 23. Unable to tell time, days of the week, months of the year
__________ 24. Cannot recall words, especially names
__________ 25. Production of smudged papers (erasures, mark-over)
__________ 26. Delay in verbal response
__________ 27. Doesnt anticipate consequence of behavior
__________ 28. Misplaces and loses personal items
__________ 29. Cant stay on task
__________ 30. Cant repeat information
__________ 31. Has trouble with the alphabet (learning and/or saying)
__________ 32. Is very literal/concrete in thinking
Raters Signiture _________________________________________________________

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1


2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 267

Appendix 2
Frequence/Percentage of the Teachers/Students View about the Frequent and Every Time facing the
Dyslexia Problem
TEACHERS AND NEVER SELDOM SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS
ITEM STUDENTS VIEW
EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS
1. Easily distracted Teachers 18 (7.1%) 22 (8.7) 58 (23.0%) 120 (47.6%) 34 (13.5%)
Students 30 (11.9%) 17 (6.7) 49 (19.4%) 129 (51.2%) 27 (10.7%)
Forgets assignments and/
2. Teachers 2 (8.0%) 18 (7.1%) 54 (21.4%) 139 (55.2% 39 (15.5%)
Or loses papers
Students 9 (3.6%) 21 (8.3%) 72 (28.6%) 120 (47.6%) 30 (11.9%)
Easily frustrated
3. Teachers 13 (5.2%) 35 (13.9%) 109 (43.3%) 78 (31.0%) 16 (6.3%)
Students 12 (4.8%) 20 (7.9%) 113 (44.8%) 89 (35.3%) 18 (7.1%)
4. Low self-esteem Teachers 7 (2.8%) 42 (16.7%) 98 (38.9%) 81 (32.1%) 24 (9.4%)
Students 17 (6.7%) 30 (11.9%) 104 (41.3%) 83 (32.9%) 18 (7.1%)
Puts himself/herself
5. down Teachers 10 (4.0%) 38 (15.1%) 93 (36.9%) 92 (36.5%) 19 (7.5%)
Students 7 (2.8%) 25 (9.9%) 100 (39.7%) 102 (40.5%) 18 (7.1%)
6. Falls apart under time Teachers 4 (1.6%) 12 (4.8%) 76 (30.2%) 127 (50.4%) 33 (13.1%)
Limits and pressure
Students 13 (5.2%) 27 (10.7%) 62 (24.6%) 118 (46.8%) 32 (12.7%)
Disorganized
7. Teachers 2 (0.8%) 16 (6.3%) 45 (17.9%) 148 (58.7%) 41 (16.3%)
Students 8 (3.2%) 17 (6.7%) 57 (22.6%) 141 (56.0%) 29 (11.5%)
Knows material one day:
8. Teachers 3 (1.2%) 18 (7.1%) 40 (15.9%) 145 (57.5%) 46 (18.3%)
doesnt know it the next
day
Students 7 (2.8%) 21 (8.3%) 48 (19.0%) 144 (57.1%) 32 (12.7%)
Knows class material but
9. Teachers 4 (1.6%) 18 (7.1%) 41 (16.3%) 142 (56.3%) 46 (18.3%)
Tests poorly
Students 7 (2.8%) 22 (8.7%) 46 (18.3%) 145 (57.5%) 32 (12.7%)
Oral reading inaccurate
10. Teachers 8 (3.2%) 20 (7.9%) 41 (16.3%) 125 (49.6%) 58 (23.0%)
Students 10 (4.0%) 23 (9.1%) 51 (20.2%) 115 (45.6%) 52 (20.6%)
11. Reverses letters Teachers 14 (5.6%) 29 (11.5%) 85 (25.8%) 117 (46.4%) 27 (10.7%)
Students 22 (8.7%) 24 (9.5%) 79 (31.3%) 102 (40.5%) 25 (9.9%)
12. Losing ground on Teachers 6 (2.4%) 19 (7.5%) 41 (16.3%) 149 (59.11%) 37 (14.7%)
achievement tests
Students 5 (2.0%) 22 (8.7%) 65 (26.8%) 128 (50.8%) 32 (12.7%)
Poor directionally (up/
13. down Teachers 22 (8.7%) 40 (15.9%) 78 (31.0%) 86 (34.1%) 25 (9.9%)
Left/right, over/under)
Students 23 (9.1%) 33 (13.1%) 86 (34.1%) 88 (34.9%) 22 (8.7%)
Poor sequencing skills
14. Teachers 7 (2.8%) 20 (7.9%) 48 (19.0%) 128 (50.8%) 49 (19.4%)
Students 11 (4.4%) 25 (9.9%) 65 (25.8%) 122 (48.4%) 29 (11.5%)
Vocabulary of written
15. Teachers 4 (1.6%) 11 (4.4%) 36 (14.3%) 156 (61.9%) 45 (17.9%)
Composition is NOT
equal
Students 7 (2.8%) 20 (7.9%) 46 (18.3%) 146 (57.9%) 33 (13.1%)
To students spoken

vocabulary

16. Poor organization of Teachers 3 (1.2%) 11 (4.4%) 38 (15.1%) 130 (51.6%) 70 (27.8%)
Composition (Events
are not
Students 12 (4.8%) 10 (4.0%) 42 (16.7%) 149 (59.1%) 39 (15.5%)
in chronological order

or any discipline order of

organization

17. Inadequate spelling for Teachers 7 (2.8%) 12 (4.8%) 43 (17.1%) 130 (51.6%) 60 (23.8%)
grade level
Students 9 (3.6%) 20 (7.9%) 65 (25.8%0 129 (51.2%) 29 (11.5%)

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia
268 School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal July

TEACHERS AND NEVER SELDOM SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS


ITEM STUDENTS VIEW
EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS
Trouble following a
18. series Teachers 6 (2.4%) 20 (7.9%) 55 (21.8%) 135 (53.6%) 36 (14.3%)
of directions
Students 4 (1.6%) 22 (8.7%) 80 (31.7%) 120 (47.6%) 26 (10.3%)
Needs information
19. repeated Teachers 4 (1.6%) 18 (7.1%) 38 (15.1%) 136 (54.0%) 56 (22.2%)
Students 13 (5.2%) 13 (5.2%) 59 (23.4%) 130 (51.6%) 37 (22.2%)
Poor handwriting
20. Teachers 5 (2.0%) 22 (8.7%) 53 (21.0%) 124 (49.2%) 48 (19.0%)
Students 8 (3.2%) 21 (8.3%) 71 (28.2%0 120 (47.2%) 32 (12.7%)
Has trouble copying
21. Teachers 9 (3.6%) 24 (9.5%) 70 (27.8%) 113 (44.8%) 36(14.3%)
Students 9 (3.6%) 20 (7.9%) 94 (37.3%) 111 (44.0%) 18 (7.1%)
Unable to tell time,
22. days of Teachers 18 (7.1%) 33 (13.1%) 54 (21.4%) 118 (46.8%) 29 (11.5%)
the week, months of
the year
Students 14 (5.6%0 23 (9.1%) 65 (25.8%) 126 (50.0%) 24 (9.5%)
Unable to keep place on
23. Teachers 15 (6.0%) 35 (13.9%) 62 (24.6%) 110 (43.7%) 30 (11.9%)
page when reading
Students 16 (6.3%) 28 (11.1%) 73 (29.0%) 116 (46.0%) 19 (7.5%)
24. Cannot recall word Teachers 8 (3.2%) 27 (10.7%) 65 (25.8%) 131 (52.0%) 21 (8.3%)
Especially names
Students 9 (3.6%) 28 (11.1%) 85 (33.7%) 114 (45.2%) 16 (6.3%)
25. Production of smudged Teachers 5 (2.0%) 33 (13.1%) 85 (33.7%) 108 (42.9%) 21 (8.3%)
Paper (erasures, mark-
over)
Students 9 (3.6%) 21 (8.3%) 70 (27.8%) 124 (43.2%) 28 (11.1%)
Delay in verbal response
26. Teachers 4 (1.6%) 15 (6.0%) 32 (12.7%) 157 (62.3%) 44 917.5%)
Students 10 (4.0%) 32 (12.7%) 45 (17.9%) 144 (57.1%) 21 (8.3%)
Doesnt anticipate
27. Teachers 1 (0.4%) 8 (3.2%) 42 (16.7%) 153 (60.7%) 48 (19.0%)
Consequence of behavior
Students 7 (2.0%) 16 (6.3%) 55 (21.8%) 145 (57.5%) 28 (11.1%)
Misplaces and loses
28. Teachers 5 (2.0%) 45 (17.0%) 112 (44.4%) 66 (26.2%) 23 (9.1%)
Personal items
Students 14 (5.6%) 28 (11.1%) 114 (45.2%) 79 (31.3%) 17 (6.7%)
Cant stay on task
29. Teachers 5 (2.0%) 13 (5.2%) 55 (21.8%) 137 (54.4%) 42 (16.7%)
Students 5 (2.0%) 24 (9.5%) 60 (23.8%) 134 (56.7%) 20 (7.9%)
30. Cant repeat information Teachers 4 (1.6%) 15 (6.0%) 47 (18.7%) 145 (57.5%) 41 (16.3%)
Students 9 (3.6%) 19 (7.5%) 55 (21.8%) 142 (56.3%) 27 (10.7%)
Has trouble with the
31. alphabet Teachers 6 (2.4%) 13 (5.2%) 50 (19.8%) 136 (54.0%) 47 (18.7%)
(learning and/or saying)
Students 10 (4.0%) 23 (9.1%) 69 (27.4%) 129 (51.2%) 21 (8.3%)
32. Is very literal/concrete in Teachers 61 (24.2%) 57 (22.6%) 62 (24.6%) 54 (21.4%) 18 (7.1%)
thinking
Students 73 (29.0%) 32 (12.7%) 62 (24.6%) 62 (24.6%) 23 (9.1%)

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1

You might also like