Assessing Dyslexia in EAL Learners
In the modern educational landscape, diversity is our greatest strength—but it also presents unique challenges for educators and assessors. Assessing an individual for Dyslexia becomes inherently more complex when that person has English as an Additional Language (EAL) or a complex linguistic history.
The EAL Context: A Snapshot of the UK
The linguistic landscape of the UK is more vibrant than ever. While English (or Welsh in Wales) remains the primary language for the majority, the 2011 census highlighted that 7.7% of the population reported another main language.
The Top Languages Spoken in the UK:
- Polish (The most common after English/Welsh)
- Panjabi, Urdu, Bengali, and Gujerati
- Arabic, French, Chinese, Portuguese, and Spanish
This diversity isn’t just limited to global languages; regional tongues like Scots, Scottish Gaelic, Irish Celtic, and British Sign Language also play a role. In UK-maintained schools, over 1.5 million learners have EAL, representing 21% of primary students and 17% of secondary students. With nearly half a million non-UK students in universities, the need for specialized assessment approaches has never been more urgent.
Enhancing Dyslexia Assessment Practice for EAL Learners
Assessing EAL learners requires an “extra gear” beyond standard good practice. Assessors must have a deep understanding of how a first language (L1) impacts performance in English literacy and cognitive processing (L2).
Professional Development is Key
To provide a fair assessment, professionals should:
- Attend specialized training on cross-cultural SpLD manifestations.
- Collaborate with experienced colleagues.
- Familiarize themselves with the phonetic and grammatical structures of the learner’s native language.
The “Seven-Year” Rule
A crucial component is taking a meticulous background history. Research suggests that the impact on test performance is often proportional to the years spent learning English:
- Less than 7 years of English: Expect impacts on syntax, vocabulary, and comprehension.
- First exposure after age 7: Expect impacts on phonology and pronunciation.
Note: The quality of exposure matters. If English was spoken at home, these linguistic effects might be less pronounced regardless of the timeframe.
Building a Linguistic Profile: Key Questions
To distinguish between an SpLD and EAL-related challenges, assessors must compile a comprehensive linguistic profile. Consider the following:
- Language History: What was the first language? What was spoken at home during early childhood?
- English Acquisition: How old was the person when they started learning English? Was it in a nursery or school setting?
- Educational Medium: Was their education delivered in English or another language?
- Dominant Language: Which language do they think in? Which do they use with friends?
- L1 Literacy: Can they read and write in their native language?
- Disruption: Has their education been interrupted (e.g., relocation, refugee experience)?
- SpLD History: Did they struggle to read or write in their first language? Generally, if an SpLD exists, it will manifest across all languages.
Challenges in Test Administration
Most educational and psychological tests are standardized on English-speaking populations. This can create “invisible barriers” for EAL learners.
1. Cultural and Linguistic Biases
Tests often use images or wording that assume Western cultural familiarity. For example, a “non-verbal” matrix test might still rely on cultural constructs that are not universal.
2. Language Complexity
The instructions themselves can be the hurdle. If a student doesn’t understand the task because of complex phrasing, the resulting score reflects a language barrier, not a cognitive deficit.
3. Student Factors
EAL students often experience higher levels of anxiety during testing. They may also have limited experience with timed environments, which can artificially lower scores.
Relevance to Dyslexia Screening
When screening for dyslexia in EAL learners, the process shifts from looking for “low scores” to looking for “patterns of processing.”
Orthographic Differences
Dyslexia manifests differently depending on the language. In languages with regular orthography (like Spanish or Italian), a dyslexic learner might read accurately but very slowly. In English—which has highly irregular orthography—they may struggle significantly with both accuracy and speed. Consequently, a student might not have been flagged for dyslexia in their home country because their native language was “easier” to decode.
Phonological Processing
Screening for dyslexia in EAL learners focuses heavily on phonological awareness. However, assessors must be careful: if a student is “covertly translating” (processing the task in L1 and then translating to English), their working memory will appear taxed. This could be mistaken for a sign of dyslexia when it is actually a linguistic processing load.
Interpreting the Results: Weighing the Evidence
Assessors must weigh “Risk Factors” against “Confounding Factors” to reach a valid conclusion.
| Key ‘Risk’ Factors (Suggesting SpLD) | Key ‘Confounding’ Factors (Suggesting EAL/Other) |
| History of difficulty in first language(s). | English not learned until age 5+. |
| Slow/inaccurate reading, spelling, or writing. | Less than 7 years learning English. |
| Underlying difficulties in processing speed or memory. | A very complex linguistic history. |
| Persistent difficulties after 7+ years of exposure. | Errors clearly attributable to L1 ‘interference’. |
| Good oral fluency but poor written fluency. | Disrupted education/refugee experience. |
Conclusion: The Path Forward
Reaching a diagnostic conclusion for an EAL individual is rarely straightforward. The assessor must be a detective, looking for converging evidence.
When writing the final report, it is vital to state clearly why the impact of an SpLD outweighs linguistic factors. Recommendations should not just focus on the disability, but on providing culturally and linguistically sensitive support. By understanding the nuance of the EAL experience, we can ensure that labels are accurate and that every student has the tools they need to thrive.
