At least 40 states now mandate dyslexia screening for students as early as kindergarten. That’s a big step forward, because early intervention is the key to better outcomes for students with reading difficulties (Fletcher et al., 2021).  

But dyslexia screening—even when screeners are accurate and easy to use—are just step one. Thorough dyslexia evaluations are notoriously complex, largely because so many skills must meld to make a good reader, and because dyslexia can be caused by a variety of developmental differences (Sanfilippo et al., 2020).  

Once a screener identifies an at-risk student, the hard work really begins. Here’s what studies show are some of the most common shortfalls educators experience when assessing for dyslexia. 

Five Shortcomings of Dyslexia Assessments and How to Address Them

Shortfall #1:  Universal screeners aren’t always given at the right stage.

Early screeners can catch delays or deficits in foundational skills as early as kindergarten or first grade. Pediatricians may even screen for dyslexia risk before children enter school (Sanfilippo et al., 2020). But some researchers think these screeners may not predict risk for reading difficulties as well as those that are given once the instructor has begun teaching the child to read and monitoring their progress. 

What you can do: If you practice in a state that mandates screening in kindergarten, you may want to pay special attention to phonological awareness and letter–sound naming tasks. Researchers say that, in kindergarten, these two skill areas seem to be the best predictors of reading difficulties (Fletcher et al., 2021). 

Shortfall #2:  Piecing together numerous assessments is complicated. 

Dyslexia is a specific learning disorder that results in reading difficulties. It’s developmental, which means it is associated with brain differences that emerge as a child grows and develops. Those structural and functional brain differences mean that people with dyslexia often have language issues before reading difficulties become clear.  

For that reason, dyslexia evaluations often involve language assessments in addition to comprehensive reading assessments. It can take a lot of time to compare the results of these assessments—and then you must balance these scores with what you know about the child’s family history, prior exposure to language, academic performance, co-occurring conditions like ADHD and autism (both of which are associated with higher dyslexia risk) and other factors (Sawyer & Jones, n.d.). It’s a very tall order. 

What you can do:  Make sure all stakeholders, including parents, caregivers, administrators, and other members of your team, understand and share in the planning process. It’s a good idea to spend some time educating people about  

• what dyslexia is and isn’t, 
• the risks involved in rushing the process, 
• the likely timeline, 
• the importance of each person’s contribution, 
• the reason for gathering each kind of data, and 
• the services and supports available to them. 

When families, caregivers, and readers are well-educated about the process, tensions are likely to be lower (Sahu et al., 2018). While that won’t add hours to your day or days to your deadline, it may cut down on some of your stress. 

Want to know more? Download the WPS Dyslexia Assessment Tool Kit. 

Shortfall #3:  Designing interventions to suit each reader can be overwhelming.

During an evaluation, the clock is loudly ticking. Anxious parents await a diagnosis. Students need to begin effective instruction. And deadlines for drafting IEPs, 504 plans, and other documentation can create stress for educators and clinicians.  

What you can do:  Look for assessments that provide or describe differentiated interventions. Five decades of research back up the Science of Reading. To make planning simpler, use interventions that are proven to work and that are aligned with both the Science of Reading and the assessments you conduct. 

Shortfall #4: It’s hard to feel confident that an assessment lines up with the Science of Reading.

There’s no shortage of reading assessments on the market—and, as a practitioner, you are aware how little time there is to waste on redundant or ineffective assessments in an already packed school year.  

Right now, many educators and practitioners are finding out that there is a sizeable gap between the Science of Reading and the reading instruction that has taken place over the last several decades. It’s vital that the assessments and interventions you choose reflect current research.  

What you can do:  If you’re not certain what skills should be measured in a reading assessment, or what postassessment instruction should look like, explore the Science of Reading. Evaluate the assessments in use where you are. Do they line up with what research shows about dyslexia? If not, it’s a good opportunity to advocate for change. 

Shortfall #5:  A comprehensive dyslexia assessment is costly.

A full battery of assessments to verify a dyslexia diagnosis can come with a significant price tag. Add assessments to determine whether a student is experiencing anxiety or depression, which often accompany learning disorders, and the cost ticks upward.  

What you can do: To lower costs, you may want to choose individual assessments that are as comprehensive as possible and which can reliably predict dyslexia.

Key Messages

Identifying dyslexia is a multistep process that often takes place under pressure. Practitioners must collaborate with students, caregivers, educators, and other health professionals. It can take time to conduct assessments, consider the results, draft interventions, and communicate with everyone involved. When there are inefficiencies, the process can frustrate those at the center of the evaluation. 

If your dyslexia evaluations seem to be coming up short, it may help to select assessments that give you the information you need in a practical timeframe. Using reliable, comprehensive assessments that also integrate screeners, diagnostic measures, and interventions can help simplify the process—leaving you a little more time to interact with the students and families affected by dyslexia.

WPS has released the Tests of Dyslexia (TOD), a comprehensive assessment that includes: 

• TOD-S, a quick dyslexia screener to help you identify students at risk for the condition; 
• TOD-E, a comprehensive diagnostic assessment you can use to identify dyslexia in students in kindergarten through Grade 2;  
• TOD-C, a comprehensive diagnostic assessment for identifying dyslexia in students Grade 1 through adulthood; and 
• an evidence-based intervention planner to help you build reading skills and prevent loss of learning and self-esteem in students with dyslexia. 

Aligned with the Science of Reading, the TOD’s broad focus encompasses the full range of language, pre-reading, and reading skills that can be affected by dyslexia. And the intervention component can save you time and money, making it easier to complete IEPs, 504 plans, and other intervention documents on time.  

Find out more about the TOD in this free webinar.

DYSLEXIA RESOURCES

Further Reading on Dyslexia 

• Challenges in Testing for Dyslexia
• What to Know About Dyslexia’s Comorbidities
• Discover the Most Effective Way to Identify Dyslexia
• How Do You Choose the Right Dyslexia Assessment for Your Student?
• Is Pandemic Fallout Still Affecting Assessments?

Webinars on Dyslexia

• Best Practices in Dyslexia Assessment 
• Dyslexia 101: Understanding Dyslexia and Its Impact on Reading, Spelling, and Self-Esteem
• Challenges in Assessing Dyslexia 

Research and Resources:

Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Foorman, B. R., & Schatschneider, C. (2021). Early detection of dyslexia risk: Development of brief, teacher-administered screens. Learning Disability Quarterly, 44(3), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948720931870 

Sahu, A., Bhargava, R., Sagar, R., & Mehta, M. (2018). Perception of families of children with specific learning disorder: An exploratory study. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 40(5), 406–413. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPSYM.IJPSYM_148_18 

Sanfilippo, J., Ness, M., Petscher, Y., Rappaport, L., Zuckerman, B., & Gaab, N. (2020). Reintroducing dyslexia: Early identification and implications for pediatric practice. Pediatrics, 146(1), e20193046. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-3046 

Sawyer, D. J., & Jones, K. M. (n.d.) Testing and evaluation fact sheet. https://dyslexiaida.org/testing-and-evaluation/