Dyslexic students have different difficulties with foreign language learning than non-dyslexic students. The study found that dyslexic students struggle most with learning new words and pronunciation, while non-dyslexic students struggle least with these areas. Dyslexic students also reported greater difficulties with reading and writing in a foreign language compared to other skills. Additionally, dyslexic students felt they received less support for learning than non-dyslexic students. Both dyslexic and non-dyslexic students expressed interest in using e-learning to assist with foreign language acquisition.

1. Dyslexic Students and the Second Language Learning
A study on the learning needs - European review
by Eva Gyarmathy, Chris Mahlerbe, Paula Pichel,
Borislav Stoyanov, Tiziana Tartari, Giovanni Torrisi
A) Developing the research material
B) Questionnaires
C) Students’ view
D) Trainers’ view
E) Learning needs of the dyslexic students
F) Suggestions for an internet based language learning programme
November, 2009

2. A) Developing the research material
In preparing for the study, the project partners familiarized themselves with the fields of
dyslexia and foreign language learning. In this, we used materials developed in several other
projects, namely: Include, Adytrain, CallDysc.
The partners synchronised their understanding of the concepts of the field and their
professional points of view. These steps constituted the preparatory phase of the whole of
the project, itself.
The point of the present study was to explore in each country the foreign language learning
conditions of dyslexic students in tertiary education, their views, as well as their foreign
language trainers’ knowledge of and views on this topic.
Topics studied:
• Knowledge about dyslexia in different countries
• Existing methods in teaching dyslexics / Existing learning methods for dyslexics
• Difficulties in training dyslexics / in learning for dyslexics
• Difficulties for dyslexics in using foreign languages
• Methodological and tangible resources needed in teaching dyslexics / in learning for
dyslexics
• The use of and the need for the e-learning method
We collected data in the above topics using questionnaires. We drew up separate
questionnaires for trainers and students, but roughly the same questions were asked in
both, so that we could compare their views.
The test groups were formed by selecting English trainers and dyslexic and non-dyslexic
students. We found the participants for the questionnaire through centres for dyslexia and
professionals dealing with dyslexics.
We did not assess dyslexia, but simply asked the students to indicate on the questionnaire
whether they were dyslexic on a 1–3 score scale (not dyslexic, mildly dyslexic and severely
dyslexic). Other international projects (Include, Adystrain) provided questionnaires to assess
dyslexia, identifying the signs of dyslexia, with the help of which the students had the
possibility of self-assessment.
The study was carried out in five countries:
• Bulgaria
• Germany
• Hungary
• Italy
• Spain
Given that we sought to gain information from students with difficulties in reading and
writing, we had to plan the means of collecting the data very carefully. The partners came to
an agreement on the criteria that the questionnaires would definitely have to meet:

3. 1. As much information as possible should be gained from as few questions as
possible.
2. The questionnaires should be easy to fill in.
3. The results should provide numerical data as well as textual information.
4. The questionnaires should be easy to understand an fill in for dyslexics, as
well.
The questionnaires were prepared in agreement with all project partners. We constantly
updated the preliminary versions until they finally complied with everyone’s requirements.
B) Questionnaires
Both the questionnaire for trainers and that for students could be filled in electronically, as
well as with paper and pen. The partners collected the data in their home countries
according to the local opportunities. The data were then unified in a spreadsheet file. In
processing the information, we made no distinction according to the local differences in the
way the questionnaires were filled in, as these did not affect the content seriously.
To guarantee accurate data collection and processing, a questionnaire comprising a data
collection guide was compiled for both the trainers’ and the students’ questionnaire. This
warranted that the partners entered the data into the spreadsheet file correctly, and based
on the same rule.
Attached to this report are the questionnaires and the spreadsheet files for unifying the
data:
1. Questions for trainers
2. Questions for students
3. Questions for trainers - template
4. Questions for students - template
5. Trainer - Blank form
6. Student - Blank form
C) Students’ view
One of the most important questions in processing the data obtained by the questionnaires
was whether the dyslexic students differed from the non-dyslexic students in their views on
language learning. According to the results, dyslexic students have somewhat different
difficulties in language learning as do non-dyslexic students. The views of mildly and severely
dyslexic students, however, do not differ significantly in this respect. This means that the
group of dyslexics can be regarded as homogeneous with respect to the areas under
investigation, independently of how severe their dyslexia is. In the analysis, therefore, we
compared the groups of dyslexic and that of non-dyslexic students.

4. Table 1 shows that the greatest difficulty for dyslexics is learning new words. In this, they
differ significantly from non-dyslexic students, for whom this constitutes the least difficulty
in language learning. Learning the pronunciation comes second for dyslexics. This is also only
one of the minor problems for non-dyslexics.
The results indicate that language learning is significantly different in the case of dyslexics,
as compared to non-dyslexics.
Table 1 Difficulties in foreign language learning, ranked from 1 to 5, where 1 is the most
difficult task.
Average ranks of difficulties in second language learning
Students Pronunc. New words Gram underst Gram use Understand
Ndys (55) score: 1.00 3,62 4,02 2,11 2,20 2,85
Dys (64) score: 2.00 2,76 2,57 3,38 3,16 2,76
Sdys (20) score: 3.00 3,15 2,80 2,85 2,45 3,85
Sdys+Dys (84) score: 2.24 2,86 2,63 3,25 2,99 3,02
Ttest Dys:NDys 0,0010 0,0000 0,0000 0,0001 0,7371
Ttest Dys:SDys 0,3134 0,4917 0,1056 0,0411 0,0088
Ttest (Dys+Sdys):NDys 0,0020 0,0000 0,0000 0,0004 0,5291
One of the Italian dyslexic students wrote: "I have problems in remembering how words are
written and I forgot also soon what I just studied." A number of dyslexics reported similar
problems, but they agree that learning foreign languages is important: "Foreign languages
are difficult for dyslexics but correct methods can help learning them quickier."
Table 2 Difficulties in using a foreign language, ranked from 1 to 5, where 1 is the most
difficult task.
Average ranks of difficulties of aspects of foreign language use
Students Reading Writing Understanding Speaking Grammar
Ndys (55) score: 1.00 4,29 3,09 2,98 2,35 1,95
Dys (64) score: 2.00 3,11 2,27 2,92 2,92 2,98
Sdys (20) score: 3.00 2,37 2,30 4,26 3,75 2,80
Sdys+Dys (84) score: 2.24 2,94 2,28 3,23 3,12 2,94
Ttest Dys:NDys 0,0000 0,0001 0,8235 0,0227 0,0000
Ttest Dys:SDys 0,0268 0,9222 0,0009 0,0243 0,6157
Ttest (Dys+Sdys):NDys 0,0000 0,0001 0,3445 0,0012 0,0000
Table 2 shows what difficulties dyslexics have in using foreign languages. Students were
required to rank from 1 to 5 the five aspects of language use listed, where 1 constitutes the

5. greatest and 5 the least difficulty. The most difficult task for dyslexics is writing and reading
in a foreign language. In this, too, they differ from non-dyslexic students, for whom the
greatest problem is the proper use of grammar.
The results indicate that dyslexics have significantly different problems than non-dyslexics
in using a foreign language.
According to the results in Table 3, it is the severely dyslexics who least feel that they get the
support they need for learning. Non-dyslexics feel most that they get enough support. The
differences are not significant, but the tendency is evident. Whether this is because the
dyslexics need more support, or because they feel they do not receieve enough support, or
perhaps because they indeed do not get suitable support in learning, provision is clearly
unsatisfactory.
Table 3 The support they got (Most=1, None=4) and the wish to learn a second language
through e-learning (Yes=1, No=3)
Students Support E-learning
Ndys (55) score: 1.00 1,04 1,42
Dys (64) score: 2.00 2,30 1,38
Sdys (20) score: 3.00 2,35 1,28
Sdys+Dys (84) score: 2.24 2,31 1,35
Ttest Dys:NDys 0,0000 0,7480
Ttest Dys:SDys 0,8878 0,4950
Ttest (Dys+Sdys):NDys 0,0000 0,5993
Those who received support enumerated several kinds thereof. Some of the examples:
• exercise and individual lessons with a professional
• a supporting teacher
• PC with automatic correction turned on
• teacher explains it more thoroughly when I do not understand something
• Maps and Despeak
• tutor and more time in in-class work / exams
• a teacher beside me
• on-line dictionary with help from teacher and parents
• e-book and pc
• help from parents at home
Typically, dyslexics get support in the primary school, but later they are left alone, as it
transpires from this remark:
"When I was at the primary school, someone read me the text and helped me understanding
and writing; now that I'm at the university I don't know how to do.
Personal trainer both for Italian and foreign languages, multimedia and CDs can help."

6. A Hungarian dyslexic, who went through several foreign language teachers remarked:
"Teachers who teach English have methods, but do not fit them to the individual. What is
needed is a method with which one can learn in their own way and at their own pace."
The answers show that all groups of students would be glad to use e-learning in foreign
language learning (Table 3), and as the remarks indicate, they are already searching for a
learning opportunity like this.
The results indicate that the dyslexics do not receive appropriate support in foreign
language learning and that the students would willingly use e-learning to help them
master a foreign language.
Nevertheless, e-learning is not the most preferred mode of learning. It is, instead, personal
contact.
The examples of support they gave reveal that students do not think exclusively of trainers
as support:
• "low cost travels to interact with mother tongue people"
• "exchange staying with other mothertongue guys";
Students rank e-learning and CD’s as learning methods right after personal contact, but at
this point, differences start to emerge (see Table 4).
Table 4 Ranks of different learning tools, ranked from 1 to 6, where 1 is the most preferred
method.
SL learning preferences
Students Book CD E-learning E-mail Forum Personal
Ndys (55) score: 1.00 3,27 3,11 3,45 4,20 5,40 1,64
Dys (64) score: 2.00 4,23 2,70 2,98 4,34 4,50 1,89
Sdys (20) score: 3.00 4,89 2,58 2,05 4,32 4,79 2,47
Sdys+Dys (84) score: 2.24 4,38 2,67 2,77 4,33 4,57 2,02
Ttest Dys:NDys 0,0029 0,0901 0,1003 0,5700 0,0002 0,2755
Ttest Dys:SDys 0,1152 0,7445 0,0256 0,9485 0,4600 0,1237
Ttest (Dys+Sdys):NDys 0,0002 0,0558 0,0119 0,5550 0,0003 0,0950
Dyslexics like e-learning more than non-dyslexics do, and using books comes at the end for
them significantly, while it is ranked second best in the case of non-dyslexics (Table 4).
However, even among dyslexics, not everyone dislikes books: "I am 21 years old and
personally I feel at my ease using books; I experienced CD (not for dyslexics) but did not liked
them."

7. The results show that e-learning is by more important as a method for foreign language
learning for dyslexics than it is for non-dyslexics. Non-dyslexics feel they can learn well
from books, which is not true for dyslexics.
The results do not differ significantly by country. The small differences that do appear are
due to the fact that the ratio of dyslexics was different in the test group in different
countries.
In the analyses that follow, we will only be using the results of the dyslexic students, because
it is their way of learning we aim to study.
D) Trainer's view
We asked teachers of English as a foreign language in all five countries about dyslexics and
their language learning. Most of the teachers had experiences with dyslexic students. From
123 teachers only 11 stated that had no experiences with dyslexic student. It is the tenth of
the teachers who had no dyslexic student or could not identify the dyslexia. While awarness
of dyslexia is more and more evident in young children age, teachers don't know about
dyslexia in higher education. It is not widely know that dyslexia is a special way of thinking,
which is the base of a lot strengths and weaknesses for the dyslexic person trough the whole
life span.
We examined whether teachers who had already taught dyslexic students had different
views than those who so far had not, or who did not know for sure if they had taught
dyslexics. The results indicate that the trainers’ views on dyslexics and their foreign language
learning are independent of whether they have already had some experience with dyslexic
students.
The point at which significant differences emerged was that trainers who had already taught
dyslexic students were familiar with more teaching methods and could, consequently, name
more of them. Independently of previous experience with dyslexics, teachers regard e-
learning as a useful tool in foreign language learning (see Table 5).
Table 5 Experience with dyslexic students and methods used (Yes=1)
Experience with
dyslexic students
(1–3)
Has methods
(1–4)
Number of
methods listed
Preference for e-
learning (1–3)
Average 1,32 2,36 1,49 1,20
Has had dyslexic student
(N=112)
1,15 2,20 1,64 1,17
Hasn't had dyslexic student
(N=11)
3,00 3,91 0,00 1,44
Ttest 0,0000 0,0000 0,0001 0,0806

8. We examined the relevant differences across countries, but we found no significant
differences between countries. The majority of trainers from Hungary and Spain indicated
that they had already had dyslexic students. Significant difference only showed in the case of
Bulgarian trainers in comparison to others. They had much less experience with dyslexic
students and they also have less tools and methods for teaching them. The latter, however,
is characteristic of most of the other teachers, as well. The German trainers proved to be the
most experienced in the sample, and statistically, they differ significantly from the others
having more methods than the teachers from the other countries. (see Table 6.)
Table 6 Differences in the trainers' experiences accross the four countries
TRAINERS
(87)
Experience with
dyslexic students
(Yes=1, No=3)
Has methods
(Yes=1, No=4)
BG 2,05 3,09
GER 1,13 1,40
HUN 1,09 2,03
ITALY 1,32 3,24
SPAIN 1,22 2,70
Average 1,32 2,36
The trainers’ view did not differ significantly accross countries. Although there were some
differences, these were most probably due to the differences in teaching experience.
The Bulgarian trainers use lots of useful methods, like audio and visual aids, native speaker
sessions, role-play games, group work, multisensory teaching, music, interactive methods,
multimedia. However there are many trainers who make remarks like the following:
• There is not enough information about dyslexia available
• I’m afraid that I have not met dyslexic cases
• Not very well acquainted with the dyslexic problem
• Don’t have first hand experience with dyslexic students
In Italy most of the teachers use images and voice recordings. Another poupular method is
listening and repeating. Very few of the trainers use pc and internet, dialogues and
explanations.
The Hungarian teachers also try to use a variety of solutions, some of them even utilizing the
Mind Map method.

9. The German teachers have the most experience with dyslexic students and most of the
teachers have special methods to treat the special students. They can name methods like
• phonemic awareness
• sitting the students in the front
• interactive whiteboards
• multi-sensory teaching
• spell-check programs
• Davis Dyslexia Correction method
• giving them special attention
• word-building and writing strategies
• learning strategies
• Stevenson language program
Table 7 Trainers' views on the difficulties in second language learning, ranked from 1 to 5,
where 1 is the most difficult task.
TRAINER (N=87) Difficulties in SL learning
Average ranks Pronunc. New words Gram. underst Gram. use Undrstand
BG 2,82 1,36 3,27 3,68 3,18
GER 3,93 4,03 1,83 1,67 3,53
HUN 3,87 2,55 2,56 2,48 3,48
ITALY 4,56 3,72 1,56 1,52 3,64
SPAIN 2,00 2,56 3,00 3,44 3,78
SUM 3,69 2,96 2,33 2,37 3,50
Ranks Pronunc. New words Gram. underst Gram. use Undrstand
BG 2 1 4 5 3
GER 5 3 1 2 4
HUN 5 2 3 1 4
ITALY 5 4 2 1 3
SPAIN 1 2 3 4 5
SUM 5 3 1 2 4
Apparently, there is an increasing call for the use of methods efficient for dyslexics. The
trainers’ familiarity with dyslexia is, however, rather contingent. It is mostly through
experience that they gain knowledge about the problems of dyslexics and they generally also
only enrich their methodological repertoire through practice and experience. There is thus
no principled training behind their knowledge to supply them with a firm basis for teaching
dyslexics. During our research, we found that most of the trainers do not even understand
properly exactly what problems these students face.
The results of the present study show that trainers in general believe that the greatest
problems for dyslexic students are understanding grammar, learning new words and using
grammar rules (see Table 7), but it will turn out that the students themselves are of a

10. different opinion. In other words, trainers do not focus their support on aspects of teaching
where it would truly be needed.
Table 8 shows that trainers fairly consistently regard writing and reading as the most difficult
for dyslexic students. It is especially writing which many of them think of as the number one
problem. It scores under 2 even in average ranking. This fits in with the fact that dyslexics in
general have poor literacy skills.
Table 8 Difficulties in using a second language - trainers' view, ranked from 1 to 5, where 1 is
the most difficult task.
TRAINER (N=87) SL usage
Average ranks Reading Writing Understanding Speaking Grammar
BG 2,82 2,14 3,50 2,18 3,68
GER 1,77 1,70 4,23 4,07 3,23
HUN 2,87 1,90 3,65 3,84 2,74
ITALY 2,20 1,88 3,88 4,88 2,16
SPAIN 2,38 1,44 4,13 3,75 3,88
SUM 2,40 1,85 3,85 3,80 3,00
Ranks Reading Writing Understanding Speaking Grammar
BG 3 1 4 2 5
GER 2 1 5 4 3
HUN 3 1 4 5 2
ITALY 3 1 4 5 2
SPAIN 2 1 5 3 4
SUM 2 1 5 4 3
Table 9 Tools for second language learning - trainers' view, ranked from 1 to 6, where 1 is
the most preferred method.
TRAINER (N=87) SL teaching
Averages Book CD E-learning E-mail Forum Personal
BG 3,77 3,50 3,55 3,86 4,32 1,05
GER 4,93 4,47 3,73 3,30 4,83 1,07
HUN 5,45 3,58 2,69 3,57 3,75 1,38
ITALY 5,24 2,56 2,92 4,16 3,88 2,16
SPAIN 4,00 4,38 3,63 4,00 2,38 2,56
SUM 4,84 3,63 3,25 3,72 4,08 1,49
Ranks Book CD E-learning E-mail Forum Personal
BG 4 2 3 5 6 1
GER 6 4 3 2 5 1
HUN 6 4 2 3 5 1
ITALY 6 2 3 5 4 1
SPAIN 5 6 3 4 1 2
SUM 6 3 2 4 5 1

11. As regards teaching methods, as it has already become apparent, trainers tend to have a
preference for technical tools. They are also aware that language learning is essentially a
form of communication and the most important aspect thereof is personal contact. All other
methods come far below personal contact, including e-learning. Crucially, however, trainers
rank electronic tools and solutions utilizing audiovisual representations higher than books
(Table 9).
E) Learning needs of the dyslexic students
According to the results of our study on the English language learning of dyslexic students,
the trainers and the dyslexic students have somewhat different views on the difficulties
therein. The greatest difficulty for students is learning new words. Trainers rank this as
second most difficult. For trainers, understanding grammar rules comes first among the
difficulties dyslexics face. The students, however, regard not so much the understanding, but
the use of grammar as difficult. Again, trainers do not regard memorizing the correct
pronunciation as difficult, while students rank this difficulty very high. The averages of the
ranks of the difficulties do not differ substantially, which means that all of the problems are
real and existing; it is merely the focus that is different (see Table 10).
Table 10 Comparison of the students’ and the trainers’ view of second language learning,
where 1 is the most and 5 the least difficult task.
Difficulties in SL learning Pronunc. New words Gram. unders. Gram. use Understand
Average – dyslexic student 2,86 2,63 3,25 2,99 3,02
Ranks - dyslexic student 2 1 5 3 4
Average – trainer 4,84 3,63 3,25 3,72 4,08
Ranks – trainer 5 2 1 3 4
The biggest problem for dyslexic students is learning words and the correct pronunciation.
The trainers are not aware of the latter as a problem, and rank understanding grammar
higher as a difficulty.
Table 11 Comparision of the students’ and the teachers’ view of second language usage,
where 1 is the most and 5 the least difficult task.
SL usage Reading Writing Understanding Speaking Grammar
Average - dyslexic student 2,93 2,28 3,23 3,12 2,94
Ranks - dyslexic student 2 1 5 4 3
Average - trainer 2,40 1,85 3,85 3,80 3,00
Ranks – trainer 2 1 5 4 3

12. As regards difficulties in using a foreign language, trainers and students set up a fairly similar
ranking. The results differed only by a few decimals at most in the areas constituting the
greatest difficulties (see Table 11).
The greatest difficulty for dyslexics in using a foreign language is writing. The trainers see
this correctly, as well.
Regarding the best methods in foreign language learning, dyslexic students and trainers,
again, set up a fairly similar ranking. Personal contact is ranked far above any other solution
by all two groups (see Table 12). This does not only mean personal contact between the
trainer and the student, but also, as the comments to this question reveal, it is of immense
help to spend a longer time in a foreign language speaking area and to use the language to
communicate with friends and acquaintances. CD and e-learning also rank high as useful
tools. All other methods, including learning from a book, are ranked far below these.
Table 12 Comparison of the students' and the trainers' view of second language learning
tools, where 1 is the most and 6 the least preferred method.
SL tools Book CD E-learning E-mail Forum Personal
Average - dyslexic student 4,38 2,67 2,77 4,33 4,57 2,02
Ranks - dyslexic student 5 2 3 4 6 1
Average - trainer 4,84 3,63 3,25 3,72 4,08 1,49
Ranks - trainer 6 3 2 4 5 1
Learning language through personal contact is considered the most efficient method by
both the students and the trainers. E-learning and CD’s also appear to be popular tools.
Teachers and students agrees that after the personal relationship these are the most
usable tools.
F) Suggestions for an internet based language learning programme
In light of the results of the study, e-learning appears to be a suitable method in foreign
language learning for dyslexic students. Few have had the opportunity to try this form of
learning, but both the students and the trainers are open to such a solution.
The programme should primarily lay stress on writing and the use of grammar rules.
Grammar should not simply be taught. Instead, students should get help in how to use
grammar through appropriate examples and exercises.
The e-learning method provides an opportunity for dyslexic students to receive support in
learning new words and the correct pronunciation. Multichannel learning is the basis for
efficient learning, and in the case of dyslexics, it is, in fact, a basic obligation to provide a
learning material that can be processed in a multichannel way.

13. Seeing that personal contact is extremely important for students, it is worth using materials
that facilitate and incite communication. Indeed, this is a basic rule in language learning.
It is vital that dyslexics always receive ample help in spelling and correct pronunciation.
These are their weak points, and they need plenty of practice in these areas.
Summary of methodological recommendations:
• on-line dictionary with audible pronunciation
• using automatic correction
• assistive technology, like http://imtranslator.com/ and http://www.readplease.com/
• mind mapping
• exercise and individual lesson
• interactive tasks
• role-play games
• repetitions
• multisensory teaching
• music.
Acknowledgement
Special thanks for their contributions to:
Bulgaria
Езиков Център "Орхидея", Пловдив
Пламена Михайлова
Румяна Ангелова
(Language Centre Orhidea, Plovdiv
Plamena Mihajlova
Rumiana Angelova)
Germany
Dachverband Legasthenie Deutschland e.V.
German Dyslexia Association
Hungary
Dyslexia Centre of the Sun Circle Mental Health Foundation,
Eotvos Lorand Univerrsity,
University of Debrecen,
University of Szeged,
Budapest Technical Collage (now University of Óbuda)
Italy
Sonia Piangerelli, Researcher in Didactics of Foreign Languages, with specialisation in

14. Learning Difficulties
AID (Italian Dyslexia Association) - Ascoli Piceno
Regional Centre for Language and Learning Disabilities - Local Health Unit of Bologna
University of Bologna - Dyslexics Students Service
Spain
Dna. Manuela Escobar Montero
Department of English at the University the Sevilla