Gender ratios for reading disability: Are there really more boys than girls who are low-progress readers?

Lisa Limbrick, Kevin Wheldall, Alison Madelaine

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Extensive research over the past decade has indicated that there are more boys than girls who are struggling readers, but the degree to which there are more boys remains a point of contention. The focus of this article is to review the various definitions of reading disability, to examine how these different definitions translate into different methods of identifying reading disability and to determine the effects on observed gender ratios for reading disability. The most frequently used methods of identifying reading disability are discrepancy formulae, Response-To-Intervention (RTI) and low achievement methods. Gender ratios clearly fluctuate among, and even within, these methods. Inconsistencies in reported gender ratios of reading disability are a result of inconsistencies in the definition and measurement of reading disability, sampling issues and the overall distributions of reading scores for boys and girls. Future research might consider reporting gender ratios for reading disability based on consistent measures of reading performance in population samples, using consistent cut off points, over a significant period of time.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)161-179
Number of pages19
JournalAustralian Journal of Learning Difficulties
Volume13
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Gender ratios for reading disability: Are there really more boys than girls who are low-progress readers?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this