an alternative perspective on dyslexia and emancipatory intervention on self-concept
.PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC
Name of Publisher, Distributor, etc.
University of Birmingham
Date of Publication, Distribution, etc.
2017
DISSERTATION (THESIS) NOTE
Dissertation or thesis details and type of degree
Ph.D.
Body granting the degree
University of Birmingham
Text preceding or following the note
2017
SUMMARY OR ABSTRACT
Text of Note
This study postulates that there are currently four main dyslexia paradigms. These paradigms are: a) the Positivist-Intrinsic-Dyslexia-Paradigm, which reflects positivist studies on dyslexia that hold the etiological view that dyslexia exists intrinsically to the individual (of constitutional origin), b) the Interpretivist-Intrinsic-Dyslexia-Paradigm, which holds the etiological view that dyslexia exists intrinsically to the individual c) the Positivist-Extrinsic-Dyslexia-Paradigm, which reflects studies on dyslexia that hold the etiological view that dyslexia exists extrinsically to the individual (not of constitutional origin), and, d) the Interpretivist-Extrinsic-Dyslexia-Paradigm, which reflects studies on dyslexia that also hold the etiological view that dyslexia exists extrinsically to the individual. This study moves beyond the four main dyslexia paradigms by combining the I-E-D-Paradigm with elements of Burrell and Morgan's (1979) sociological Radical Humanist Paradigm, thus creating a Radical I-E-D-Paradigm from which to conduct the present study. From the position of a Radical I-E-D-Paradigm this study develops an alternative perspective on dyslexia, i.e., a non-constitutional perspective on dyslexia (N-C-PoD), and, emancipatory intervention aimed at assisting 'dyslexic' students to explore their perceptions of dyslexia. This study explores the influence that the N-C-PoD and emancipatory intervention has on the descriptions of dyslexia, in relation to self-concept, of two 'dyslexic' students studying in tertiary education.