A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak ...

250 

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal 

July 

A Study Of Dyslexia Among Primary School 

Students In Sarawak, Malaysia 

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan 

Education Department 

Batu Lintang Teachers’ Training Institute 

Sarawak Malaysia 

Tel: 082 243501 

Fax: 082 252382 

E-mail: drrosana58@yahoo.com 

Batu Lintang Teachers’ Training Institute 

College Road 

93200 Kuching 

Sarawak, Malaysia 

Abstract 

The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of dyslexic reading problem among primary 

school students and the relationship between the degree of dyslexia and the demographic factors. Eight 

demographics factors, according to gender of age, class, parents’ income, parent education, parents’ 

occupation, students’ position in the family and the number of brothers and sisters in the family are chosen 

for the study. There are 32 characteristics of dyslexic student listed in the questionnaire “ Dyslexia Screening 

Instrument”. 250 dyslexic students from 7 primary schools in Petra Jaya area in Sarawak, who were early 

determined in the pilot study were the sample in the study. The analysis is done by using SPSS Windows 

6.1. The result of the study shows the dyslexic students concerned really facing reading problem because 

58-62% of them exhibit the 32 characteristic of dyslexia. However, the relationship between dyslexia 

and the demographics factors is weak, that is at the correlation of r=0.0 – 0.12 only. This shows that the 

dyslexic problem among the students are of no correlation with the demographic factors. 

School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal - July, 2009 No. 1

2009 A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia 

251 

Intoduction 

Dyslexia is a language disability, affecting 

reading, writing, speaking and listening. It 

is a dysfunction or impairment in the use of 

words. Consequently, relation with others and 

performance in every subject in school can be 

affected by dyslexia. It can be found around the 

world principally among boys. It exists in learners 

of slow, average and superior intelligence. The 

dyslexic child can come from any background or 

any income level and dyslexia may occur in any 

child in a family regardless of order in which he 

is born. 

Like other countries, in Malaysia, reading is 

one of the skills required in the study of language. 

It is the important skill in the hierarchy of the 

Malaysian Education syllabus. It is very essential 

and considered to be one way to evaluate the 

success of students in their learning in schools. In 

the integrated curriculum of Secondary Schools, 

reading ability is of prime importance besides 

the skills in arithmetic and writing. The ability to 

read is not only considered as basis to achieving 

success in other learning processes but including 

this skill this main skill of reading in the Education 

System is proven to be the factor of success from 

primary to higher institutional level. 

Amir Awang (1995) quoted that students ability 

is one of the factors that contribute of their learning 

widely in the other areas of knowledge. Findings 

from research study on reading still persist until 

today that it has great bearing on achievement in 

various areas of acquiring knowledge. It is proven 

that students who are able to read usually have 

great potentiality in their studies. 

According to Bond & Tinker (1987) reading 

ability considered to be of paramount importance 

which ties the bond of interaction which enables 

people to communicate with one another. Smith 

(1973) had dwelled in depth on “psycholinguistic 

communication” in correlation with reading 

process from the view of psycholinguistics. 

In general it has three views which have been 

supported by linguists and cognitive psychologists. 

Their views are: 

a. There need to be only small portion of the 

information that requires understanding 

from printed text. 

b. Understanding must proceed vocabulary 

c. Reading is not to decode written language 

from that of oral. 

Our nation’s educational experts have much 

effort in promoting and developing the skills of 

reading and interpreting, especially in the Malay 

Language subject. However, the adversity in 

reading ability amongst students in the primary and 

lower secondary school still prevails. According 

to Mohd. Fadzil Haji Hassan (1998) the problem 

of student disability in reading in schools has not 

been solved and so far cannot be overcome. 

Students being unable to read and dislike 

reading is a topic of conversation that is often 

brought up by the various communities. Abdul 

Halim Yusuf (1995) quoted: 

Recently questions about the increase in the 

number of students 

who cannot read and dislike reading news 

from the media 

reveals that many students do not have the 

reading skill. 

Lately, the media has reported that students 

are not proficient in reading. Various authorities 

voiced their concern about the phenomenon of 

students having low reading proficiency. The 

Malaysian Ministry of Education, parents and 

teachers have voiced out their concern over the 

newspaper (Sofiah Hamid, 1999). According to the 

report from the Director General of The Malaysian 

Education Ministry, there are about 6,000 of 

primary 6 students who cannot read properly. 

In view of the importance of reading skill 

which necessarily acquired as the basic skill as 

well as the unsolved problems about dyslexia, a 

thorough study needs to be carried. 

According to Kamarudin Hj. Hussin (1980) 

cases on dyslexia are increasing. It happens in the 

primary school and lower secondary schools. To 

address this problem, the Ministry of Education 

has taken steps such as: 

Rosana Bin Awang Bolhasan - A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak, Malaysia

252 


July 

a. Conducting courses on reading for 

primary school teachers. 

b. Introducing special project on remedial and 

incentive studies in 1975 by Centre 

of Advanced Curriculum. 

c. Organizing and conducting workshops and 

seminars ton address the problem. 

d. All projects being planned are in collaboration 

with Faculty of Education 

University Malaya. 

e. Many education offices carry out remedial 

program on the Malay language subject. 

f. Teachers Training College for special 

education successfully organized courses 

on methodology for teacher trainees. 

Although the Education Ministry has taken 

various steps to tackle the problem on dyslexia, it 

has not been able to overcome it successfully. The 

curriculum division has come up with a finding 

that primary six students in the school below have 

received certain percentage of success: 

a. The Chinese National School 50.5% 

b. The Tamale National School 50.8% 

(Hasmah Udin, 1998) 

This phenomenon has a great set back. Due 

to that, the Ministry of Education introduces 

the new Curriculum for primary school, which 

focuses mainly on reading, writing and arithmetic 

(Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 1998:1). 

It is hoped by the end of the primary school 

level, students are able to adapt themselves into 

developing thinking process. 

Following the new primary school curriculum, 

the Cabinet Committee has come up with the new 

Education Policy or System formulated a new 

Curriculum of secondary school to replace the 

previous one. This has come up with the stress on 

speaking, reading and writing proficiently as well 

as being creative in handling situation. 

Musa Jalil (1989) has found out that 40% of 

the primary 6 students in Pulau Pinang cannot 

read well. There are 15,728 students, 2573 cannot 

read, 2,105 can read but without the ability to 

comprehend the text they read. His study has 

come up with a number, 6,668 out of 15,728 who 

cannot master the basic skill of reading and are 

almost illiterate. 

This has been proven through the weaknesses 

of the new primary school curriculum. It has not 

encouraged the student to strive harder and proven 

to have no bearing at all to improve the situation. 

It means the student spend fruitless sessions in 

their schools for the whole 6 years in the primary 

education. 

This situation has raised the level on anxiety 

amongst educationists, parents and the society. 

Being not able to possess a good proficiency in 

reading, students will not be able to refer and 

learn much from text books in order acquire other 

knowledge on other genre. It has been proven that 

students fail in their examinations just because 

they cannot understand or comprehend the 

questions. Due to this problem, in depth study is 

necessary to be carried out so that the real problem 

can be indentified. The details of the problems can 

be looked upon from the following points of view 

and this research objectives are mainly focused 

on the problem of dyslexia amongst students 

in the primary school Sarawak, Malaysia. The 

specification of this study are the highlighting of: 

a. The frequent dyslexia characteristics exhibited 

by the dyslexic students. 

b. The relationship between the degree of 

dyslexia faced by the student and their 

demographics factors. 

c. The significant difference between male and 

female dyslexic. 

All these aspects are the focus of this case 

study with the hope that all can be solved, having 

come up with a guide to remedy the situation with 

systematic well-planned approaches. 

Method 

The data for this research was collected from 

the District of Petra Jaya, in the state of Sarawak, 

Malaysia. The district was selected because it 



253 

meets the requirement of the main focus of the 

study in terms of demographical features. 

Further more, one pilot study had been made 

before the actual research was done. The pilot study 

is to certify the researched subject is being made 

through interview with the principal, the remedial 

teachers and other teachers who are teaching them, 

besides observation of the students who had been 

notified. This study involved 250 dyslexic students 

and this sample has been confirmed through the 

pilot study at the early stage of the research. 

Besides using the students sample, the 

researcher also distributed questionnaire to the 25 

teachers who are in charge of every subject, and 

the class teachers to find out about their perception 

toward the students. The age of those dyslexic 

students range 7 to 12 years and were from 7 

primary schools. 

The pilot study s carried out after interview 

with those teachers who teach them. Students that 

have been analyzed are been observed. In this 

observation, the students characteristic as set in 

Dyslexia Screening Instrument were detected. In 

the pilot study report from teachers and the students’ 

work are also included as criteria to ascertain if the 

students is suffering from dyslexia. 

At first, the researcher distributed questionnaire 

to the dyslexic students and asked them to write their 

name in the questionnaire. Then, the researcher 

distributed the same questionnaire to the class 

teacher and asked them to evaluate the students. 

The teachers’ perception is important because 

according to Abang Ridzuan (1991), “Class 

teacher is one who knows well about the problems 

among the students besides their attitude”. In an 

indirect way, teacher’s perception can be used as a 

control for the students’ opinions. 

The “Dyslexia Screening Instrument” by 

Kathryn B. Choon et al (1994) is a rating scale 

designed to describe the cluster of characteristics 

associated with dyslexia and to discriminate 

between students who display these characteristics 

and students who do not. This scale, for use in the 

school setting, is quick and non intrusive, and 

provides education professionals with a starting 

point for identifying students at risk for dyslexia. 

The Dyslexia Screening Instrument is designed 

to be used with students in grade 1 through 12 

(ages 6 through 21). It can be used to screen entire 

population of students or students who exhibit 

reading, spelling, writing or language-processing 

difficulties. Rating and scoring should take 15 to 

20 minutes per student. 

A classroom teacher who has worked directly 

with the student for at least six weeks should 

complete the Rating Form. This will result in 

a rating that will be more accurate because the 

teacher has observed the student over a lengthy 

period of time and can compare the students’ 

performance to that of the students; classmate. 

For an elementary student, the prefer rater is 

the teacher who instructs the student in a variety 

of subjects. For a middle school or high school 

student, the prefer rater a language teacher who 

generally has more opportunity to observe the 

behavior that is indicative of dyslexia. 

The professional who is in charge of gathering 

information about the student should explain to 

the rater that the purpose of the Rating Form is 

to obtain an accurate picture of current student 

performance related to specific characteristics. 

The professional also should make sure the rater 

understand how to complete the Rating Form and 

what each statement describes. 

The rater should complete the student 

information on the front of the Rating Form. Not 

all of the information is required for scoring, but it 

may be useful for record-keeping purposes. 

a. 

b. 

c. 

d. 

e. 

Never exhibits 

Seldom exhibits 

Sometimes exhibits 

Often exhibits 

Always exhibits 

Besides that, a questionnaire is used to 

recognize especially the Socio-economic status of 

the students family. The items are: 

a. 

b. 

c. 

d. 

e. 

Gender 

Age 

Level of study 

Occupation of Parent/Guardian 

Education of Parent/Guardian 


254 


July 

f. 

g. 

The number of brothers 

Family status 

Questions Management 

The instrument that is used is a questionnaire, 

which was translated from its original instrument 

“Dyslexia Screening Instrument”. Both versions, 

English (original) and Malay Language (Translated 

are attached). The questionnaire is made into two 

groups which contain similar question. The first 

set is for the students and second set is for the 

teachers. 

Evaluation 

Evaluation is made according to evaluation 

procedure, especially the explanation for every 

statement which is written in the questionnaire. 

Both questionnaires need to be completed in 15 to 

20 minutes only. The filling in the demographic 

questionnaire and the questionnaire for students 

who suffer from dyslexia must be carried out 

by the help from the teacher and the researcher. 

Detail explanation about their needs followed by 

the meaning of a statement must be carried out 

and it is students preference to choose their scale 

according to their own valuation. Teachers who 

are involved must have experience in teaching the 

students for at least 6 weeks. It can help the teacher 

to make an observation followed by comparing 

their potential with their friends. It makes two 

months to complete the questionnaire. 

Data Analysis 

The questionnaire that are filled in are collected 

for analysis. Both of the students and teachers 

valuation are put together for every respondent. 

Every respondent is evaluated according to every 

item in the questionnaire and written down in 

both valuation scales. One type of analysis from 

is modified to simplify the analysis. Here is the 

example of simple procedure by using the analysis 

form. 

Table 1 Analysis Data Code 

ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 

A B A B A B 

Respondent 1 2 1 3 4 2 2 



There is data analysis from 250 respondents and 

the items are from 1 to 33. Teacher’s valuations 

are in (A) and the student’s valuations are in 

(B). The demographic questionnaire has been 

accomplished and analyzed. All data has been 

processed for frequency, correlation, regression 

followed by T-test by using SPSS Window 6.1. 

Frequency analysis is a prepared list of 

quantitative data and this is done by listing, in 

rank order from high to low, all the scores to be 

summarized, with tallies to indicate the number of 

subjects receiving each score. The scores in a 

distribution are grouped into intervals. To further 

the understanding and interpretation of data, it will 

be presented in frequency polygon with frequency 

analysis. In this context, frequent act by the 

students who suffer from dyslexia can be detected 

easily and frequent analysis characteristics can be 

also recognized. 

With correlation, researcher seeks to determine 

if relationship exists between two or more variables. 

By comparing the performance of different groups 

is the way to study relationships. Sometimes, 

such relationships are useful in prediction, but 

most often the eventual goal is to say something 

about causation (Jack R. Fraenkel and Norman E. 

Wallen, 1990:158). 

Correlation coefficients can take on values 

from – 1.00 to + 1.00 inclusive; the greater the 

absolute value of the coefficient, the stronger the 

relationship. A correlation coefficient of zero 

indicates no relationship or independence of the 

variables. In the context of this study correlation is 

used to seek relationship between the demographic 

factor and the characteristics which have been 

shown by the dyslexia students. 

Regression analysis allows the researcher to 

work out whether two variables are associated, 

whether people who vary on one variable also 



255 

vary systematically on the offer (D.A.de Vaus, 

1995: 179). The researcher also can determine 

how strongly these variables are associated. It also 

enables the researcher to say how much impact 

each unit change in the independent variable has 

on the dependent variable. 

In summary, the regression coefficient can 

be used to measure the amount of impact or 

change one variable produces in another. They 

are asymmetrical and will be different according 

to which variable id independent. In this study, 

regression will be used to see the most valuable 

changes or the main influence of dyslexia. 

The t-test provides a method by which the 

means of the samples can be compared when it 

is assumed that the samples have been randomly 

selected and the score are obtained from normally 

distributed population (Gajendra K. Verma and 

Kanka Mallick, 1999:205). Use of the test enables 

researcher to say whether the difference obtained 

is quite likely to occur by chance, or whether it is 

significant. In the latter case, the difference may 

be due to some underlying cause which deserves 

further investigation. 

This is case study research. After pilot 

study, with interview and observation done, sets 

of questionnaires are produced for the actual 

research. The whole procedure of the research is 

as in Figure 1 below. 

Figure 1: Research Graphic Procedure 

Pilot Study 

(Interview) 

Pilot Study 

(Observation) 

Pilot Analysis 

Study 

Constructing Instrument 

According to validity and reliability 

Applied in the study 

15 

Product of study 


256 


July 

Result 

The result of the research on dyslexia has 

been experienced by the respondents in the 

primary school level. The question that is going 

to be answered is, ‘Are the demographic factors 

like the economic level of the parents influence all 

dyslexia characteristics. 

The main purpose of describing these variables 

was to provide some insight into the characteristic 

of dyslexia students pertaining to the study. 

All statistical analysis and other analyses on 

relationships between variables and variances 

within variables are also described. 

From the questionnaire ‘Dyslexia Screening 

Instrument’, the researcher makes a decision to have 

a valuation with frequency analysis, correlation 

analysis, regression analysis and t-test. The 

researcher used the test result from every individual 

according to the analysis and finally differentiate 

them. Before the process, the researcher has to 

discuss the dyslexia characteristics openly with 

the students themselves without putting any of the 

influence factors. 

Demographic Characteristics of Respondents 

Age 

Table 2 shows the distribution of respondents 

by age. The data indicates that only 19.2 percent 

of the respondents were 7 years; 68 percent of 

the respondents were between 8 to 11, and 12 

percent wee 12 years of age. The mean age of the 

respondents was 9.24 years with a range of 7 to 12 

years old. 

Table 2 

Distribution of Respondents by Age 

Age 

Number of 

Respondents 

Per Cent 

7 Years 48 19.2 

8 Years 45 18 

9 Years 50 20 

10 Years 42 16.8 

11 Years 35 14 

12 Years 30 12 

Total 250 SD = 1.98 

X = 9.24 SD = 1.98 

(Gender) 

Breakdown of Respondents by Gender 


Respondents 

Per Cent 

Male 145 58 

Female 105 42 

Total 250 100.0 

Parent Income 

Table 3 

The monthly income for all parents of the 

respondent is summarized in table 4. The mean 

income of the parents was RM325.84. However, 

the range of their income varied very widely 

from RM100.00 to RM1280.00. It was generally 

observed by the researcher that most of the parents 

of the respondents had understand their actual 

income. 

Table 4 

Distribution of Parent Income 

Level of income Number of 

Per Cent 

(RM) Respondents 

RM150 and less 70 28 

RM151 – RM300 90 36 

RM151 – RM300 52 20.8 

RM451 – and 

38 15.2 

above 

Total 20 100.0 

X 325.84 

Parents Level of Education 

Level of education referred to the actual number 

of years of formal schooling both secular and 

religious education. The mean number of years of 

education completed for all parents of respondents 

was 4.66 years while the range was from 0 to 11 

years. Table 5 provides the breakdown of the 

sample of years of education completed. The 

data indicates that only 28.4 percent of the parents 

had education beyond the elementary level (6 

years) and 54.4 percent of the parents had formal 

schooling between 1 to 6 years. 



257 

While 17.2 percent had not received any formal 

education. 

Table 5 

Parent Level of Education 

Level of Education 


Respondents 

Per Cent 

No Education 43 17.2 

1-3 51 20.4 

4-6 85 34.0 

7 or more 71 28.4 

Total 250 100.0 

X = 4.66 

Parents Occupation 

As shown in table 6, of the 250 parents of 

respondents, about 8.8 percent did not have 

permanent jobs. 22.4 percent have their permanent 

jobs in the government sector as teachers, clerks, 

police, nurses and office workers. However, about 

34 percent have their jobs in private sector and self 

employed with own small business. There were 

about 34.8 percent of the parents of the respondents 

involved themselves as labours. 

Table 6 

Parent Occupation 

Occupation 


Respondents 

Per cent 

- No Permanent 

Jobs 

22 88.8 

- Private firm 31 12.4 

- Self employed 54 21.6 

- Government 

Service 

56 22.4 

- Labours 87 34.8 

Total 250 100.0 

X = 4.66 

Hierarchy in the Family 

Table 7 shows the distribution of respondents 

by hierarchy in the family. About 20 percent of 

the respondents are from the youngest and oldest 

kids in the family. As revealed from the data, 20 

percent of the respondents are sixth in hierarchy 

of the family, while the second, third, forth and 

seventh hierarchy revealed almost a similar 

percentage which range from 10 to 14 percent. 

The mean for all respondents was 4.56. 

Hierarchy in the 

family 

Table 7 

Hierarchy in the Family 


Respondents 

Per cent 

First 27 10.8 

Second 35 14 

Third 25 10 

Forth 28 11.2 

Firth 32 12.8 

Sixth 50 20.0 

Seventh 27 10.8 

Eight 26 10.4 

Total 250 100.0 

X = 4.56 SD = 0.17 

Number of Siblings 

The distribution of number of siblings in the 

respondents’ family is presented in table 8. The 

data reveals that the dyslexia students are from 

family of 3 to 5 siblings which range the percentage 

of 16.0. 

Table 8 

Number of Siblings in the Family 

No. of 

Siblings 


Respondents 

Per cent 

1 15 6 

2 25 10 

3 42 16.8 

4 40 16 

5 42 16.8 

6 40 16 

7 21 8.4 

8 25 10 

Total 250 100.0 

X = 4.59 SD = 0.7 


258 


July 

Statistical Analyses 

Frequency analysis 

Based on the items in the questionnaire in 

‘Dyslexia Screening Instrument’ there are 32 

items which are the normal characteristics that 

have been shown by the students who suffered the 

dyslexia problem. The research points that the 

students very often show the 32 characteristics. 

Although the dyslexia level and status is different 

from each other, this is the view of the two sides 

which involved the teachers and the students 

themselves. Table 9 will show that 62% of the 

students are frequent and 58% are always showing 

the 32 characteristics. For more discussion, there 

are 8 high characteristics percentages from the 

respondents used in this research. 

Table 9: Frequency / Percentages of the 

Teachers/Students View about the 

Every Time facing the dyslexia problem 

Items 

1. The writing 

vocabulary not stable 

with the oral 

vocabulary. (Item 15) 

2. Not active in oral. 

(item 26) 

3. Weak in arranging the 

important Point in 

writing. (Item 16) 

4. Can remember in a 

short period (Item 8) 

5. Less skill in spelling. 

(Item 17) 

6. Understand while 

in class but Decrease 

in Test. (Item 9) 

7. Not exact in oral 

reading. (Item 10) 

8. No. Planning 

III. View 

Amount/ 

Percentage 

Teachers View 201 ( 80% ) 

Students View 179 ( 71% ) 



Teachers View 200 ( 79.4% ) 

Students View 188 ( 74.6% ) 











Table 9 proves that dyslexia’s students are very 

often showing good response in oral reading. The 

percentage of 49.6% is the proof of validity of 

weakness that exist in the students. 

Besides that, the students have been detected 

that they had shown weakness in their writing 

which may have connection with the oral reading. 

According to the percentage, in item 20, 49.2% 

(Teachers view) and 47.6% (Students View). 

The students are also showing forgettable 

characteristic because they understand or know 

for a short time and could not remember the next 

day. The figures 57.5% student view are the 

proof based on that characteristic. Besides that, 

the students are also weak in arranging words. 

Accordingly that weakness can be detected from 

item 14 that shows both view, the teacher’s view 

50.8% and the students’ view 11.6% 

The students also showed doubts in writing and 

oral, and it causes the students having problems 

in both writing skill and oral skill which has been 

explained in item 10 and 20. this unstable existence 

has been detected by item 15 that produces the 

percentage of 61.9% and 57.9% from the teachers 

and students respectively. Item 17 proves that the 

students have less skill in spelling at that level, 

which is supposed to be. This means that the 

student are really having a problem in spelling 

skills compared to normal students at the same 

level. The highest percentage is between 51.6% 

and 51.2% from the both views which is the proof 

of the situation. 

The students also illustrated the weakness and 

being slow in making prediction. It may have 

originated from other weakness, in them. By item 

27, this weakness is proved with the percentage 

of the teachers view (60.7%) and the students 

view (57.5%) which is quite high. The delay 

in making the prediction can cause difficulty 

in making plans. This problem can cause less 

creativity, ability and can cause problems in 

studying if there is no action taken to solve the 

problem. Concerning item 8, regarding students 

that always forget, this characteristic is supported 

by item 30. By item 30, the students always show 

their weakness in repeating the explanation, which 

have been explained to them. They are weak in 



259 

saying something that has been said to them. The 

views percentages from both sides on this matter 

are 57.5% and 56.3%. 

There must be a possibility that the students 

understand what they been taught, but always 

show their weakness in the test. This matter has 

been proven because they can easily forget and 

could not repeat the fact or explanation, which has 

been given to them like it was stated in item 8 and 

item 31. The fall in this test id dominated by the 

percentage, of 56.3% and 57.6% from the view 

of both sides by item 9 in the questionnaire. The 

students also show their noisy emotion in making 

activities or work especially in pressured and 

limited time. This matter can be proven by item 6 

with the percentage of 50.4% and 46.8%. Noisy 

emotion may be the cause of their less capability 

in planning their work properly. These students 

always could not plan their work that shows by the 

percentage 58.7% and 56%, which is high by item 

7 in the questionnaire. The percentage of 47.6% 

and 51.2% the characteristics are easily disturbed 

and this is the factor that the students are weak in 

some aspect. 

Item 16, proved that the students are weak 

in arranging the essay content. The percentage 

of 51.6% (the teachers view) and 59.1% (the 

students view) prove the presence of the weakness 

in the students themselves. This matter may have 

it’s connection with item 7, which says that the 

students always could not plan their work. 

The correlation and domination is in item 8 and 

item 30 being interpreted above. Item 19 is also 

connected. The students are specified as a group 

that needs repeated explanation because they can 

easily forget and are already weak in repeating 

the explanation that has been given to them. By 

this item 19, the view of 54.0% from the teachers 

and 51.6% from the student themselves, prove the 

strong statement that the students need a repetition 

explanation or ‘drilling’ system. 

It is clear that the students often and every 

time show the 32 characteristics, which an already 

analyzed by the ‘Dyslexia Screening Instrument’. 

The dyslexia level and status is detected by the 

research correlation, that is the percentage of 

views which have been collected. From the 

analysis above, it can be proved that the students 

are in critical difficulties. In certain situation, 

their problem is not serious especially for items 

no. 3,4,5,13,28 and 31 which shows the frequency 

and every time it is lower than 50%. This shows 

that we do not agree about them being 

o Disappointed very easily (item 3) 

o Down to earth (item 4) 

o Lower down their status (item 5) 

o Weak in direction concept (item 13) 

o Misplace / lost their personal thing (item 

28) 

o Very quick in thinking (item 31) 

Correlation Analysis 

By the correlation analysis, there are a few 

obvious relation between the independent variable 

with the dyslexia characteristics. This was proven 

by the Pearson correlation. This analysis shows 

that there is a relation in weak level only between 

the dyslexia characteristics with the age factor is ( 

r = 0.13; p, 0.041 ). This mean that relation exist 

between the simple disturbed characteristics in the 

students with their age factor. 

Based on the result from the questions 32 and 

question 8, the change factor has been identified 

because of the relation between both in the weak 

stages. That means from the questionnaires that 

have been given to the students, their characters 

are weak regarding education, occupation and 

their parents or guardians. Their characteristics 

are not influenced by their parents or guardians 

high education or their high salary. That also for 

the matter of factor-gender, age, the number of 

siblings, and their status in the family. All these 

factors have their own weakness for the dyslexia 

characteristics. 

Because of the high percentage in the weak 

level ( below r – 0.4 ), we have to see how much 

is the amount that r = 0.12 to see the connection. 

From this result, we will divide them into two 

groups that is parents which influence the students 

and the students factor itself, which emerge in the 

dyslexia characteristics in the questionnaire. 


260 


July 

FAC- 

TORS 

ITEM 

Table 10: Parents / Guardian with 

Dyslexia Characteristics 

Disappointed 

Easily 

Feel 

Down 

TO Earth 

Feel 

Down 

TO Earth 

Explanation 

To Be 

Repeated 

Education 0.12 0.08 0.06 0.4 

Income 0.04 0.10 0.04 0.04 

Income 0.02 0.02 0.1 0.07 

Signify p > 0.05 

Based on table 10 above, there is a relation 

between education, income and the student’s 

parent or guardians’ occupation with significant 

relation of being weak in disappointed easily, feel 

down to earth, noisy the pressure and explanation 

have to be repeated which the students have on 

level p< 0.05. For example, the connection of 

parents education factor concerning disappointed 

easily ( r = 0.12 ), down to earth ( r = 0.08 ). Noisy 

with pressure ( r = 0.06 ) and explanation to be 

repeated ( r = 0.04 ) on level p < 0.05. 

The student’s factor that influences the dyslexia 

characteristic also shows a weak significant relation 

in table 11 The students factor is influenced by the 

dyslexia characteristics. 

ITEM 

FACTORS 


siblings 

Table 11: Students factor that influence 

Dyslexia Characteristics 

Status in the 

family 

Forget Easily 

Not right in 

oral reading 

Unrelation 

oral 

vocabulary 

with writing 

vocabulary 

0.02 0.12 0.04 

0.02 0.12 0.1 

Gender 0.05 0.06 0.09 

Age 0.08 0.02 0.09 

Primary Level 0.08 0.02 0.09 

Significance p < 0.05 

From table 11 above, it can be seen that 

student’s factor does not influence the look and 

the characteristics forget easily, not right in oral 

reading and inequality which is in the students. 

The number of siblings factor for example only 

influences the students look which is forget easily 

(0.2), not right in oral reading (0.12) and inequality 

(0.04) on level p < 0.05. 

There is less influence by parents or guidance 

in student’s dyslexia characteristic. This proves 

that with correlation obtained by Pearson which 

shows the it is not beyond 0.4 but only around r = 

0.0 until r = 0.12 only. 

Regression Analysis 

In the regression analysis which has been 

carried out, researcher likes to know the main 

demographic factor, which influences dyslexia. 

For that, researcher has inserted all this which is 

occupation, income, and the parents education in 

the research for the purpose to find one or some 

factors that always influence the students. Also 

included are the five students demographic factors, 

which are age, gender, status in the family, number 

of siblings and the class that the students are in 

while the research is in progress. 

Table 12: The Demographic Factors 

Which Influence Dyslexia 

Mult R 

R2 

R 

F 

R 

Significant 

Occupation .367 .135 .124 .894 P < .001 

Income .307 .094 .083 .894 P < .001 

Education .285 .082 .070 1.298 P < .001 

Age .221 .049 .041 .848 P < .01 


siblings 

.158 .025 .021 .970 P < .05 

Status of the 

family 

.157 .024 .021 .848 P < 0.5 

Primary .386 .149 .135 .889 P < .001 

This research shows that the outside influences 

and the factors in the student only give less effect to 

the students. The researcher found that the socioeconomic 

status of the parents has less influence 

on their child’s dyslexia characteristics. The 

results obtained show that the parent’s occupation 

is one of the factors, which can influence ( R2 = 

.135 ). This means that the parents occupation 

contributes about 13.5% to the dyslexia problem. 



261 

Majority of the student’s parents work as labour. 

Because of that the parents have no time to pay 

attention to their children. The low education 

level, contributes 8.2% to the problem of not 

helping their children in reading. The income 

factor contributes 9.4% 

( r 2 = 0.094 ) to this problem. With low 

income, the parents couldn’t manage to buy books 

for their children to read. 

The researcher believes that the dyslexia is 

associated with the students age factor. Students 

in secondary school have no problem compared 

to those primary school students. This has been 

proved with the high percentage ( R 2 = .149 ) of 

influence on the student’s dyslexia. This means 

the dyslexia problem always happens in the early 

stage or in this context in first school level which is 

primary one, two, three and happens less in second 

stage which is primary four, five and six. This is 

because the first stage, the students understanding 

is less compared with the second stage where they 

learn a lot by revision studies process which are 

carried out by the school from time to time. 

The meaning of comprehension is the student’s 

ability to understand something they read like 

theme, plot and teaching from academic books or 

story books. With less understanding, may be the 

reader gets less information. This results in the 

failure to collect information and to make use of 

the information when it is needed. 

One more thing researcher believes that this 

dyslexia has connection with lack of interest in 

students in what they read. It is because of less 

concentration in their reading process or influence 

of other matters like thinking of playing, even 

negative influences from classmates. Like it was 

explained before, researcher also has an opinion 

that their interest in something that they read is 

important in dyslexia. The interest in a story book 

that is interesting, can bring back the curious feeling 

and high concentration to try and understand all 

the facts. This can improve their understanding 

in what they have read. This can be differentiated 

with the interest in academic books which may be 

less than the interest in story books. Here parents 

need to give motivation to their children to learn 

something that they are not interested in. 

In the context of age and level, even though 

confirmed that the dyslexia characteristics bulge 

in the early stage of schooling which means age at 

a young, we get the different test result that is the 

class factor shows strong influence besides that 

the age factor is R2 = .049 or 4.9% only. This 

may be because of their mature age each student is 

different from the other. The age factor is not the 

main reason that contributes to dyslexia problem 

and it is believed that the dyslexia that the dyslexia 

problem will disappear when they grow older. 

If the researcher touches on the status factor of 

the in the family and the number of siblings that 

is 2.5% and 2.4%. The researcher can view as 

that the factor of the number of the children in 

the family can influence dyslexia. This is because 

when the number of children is too high, the 

parent’s attention to the individual will be less. 

t-Test 

The t-test has been carried out to analysis 

whether there are any differences that are 

significant among the male students and female 

students in dyslexia problem. 

Table 13: The Result of t-test for Gender Factor. 

Item Gender N Min SP t-value 

Significar 

Forget Male 145 3.6 0.9 

Their 1.03 P = 0.01 

duty Female 106 3.4 1.0 

Noisy Male 145 3.6 1.0 

basis 1.14 

Pressure Female 106 3.4 1.1 

Lost Male 145 3.7 0.8 

basic 0.39 

In test Female 106 3.6 1.0 

Weak Male 145 3.7 0.8 

in 0.39 

Writing Female 106 3.6 0.8 

Slow to Male 145 3.8 0.8 

Predict 0.68 

Female 106 3.6 1.0 

Significant p = 0.05 

P = 

0.056 

P = 

0.057 

P = 

0.023 

P = 

0.365 

By this t-test it can be found that there are 5 

characteristics which show different significance 

among the male and female students. These 


262 


July 

five characteristics are in between p = 0.008 to 

p = 0.057. Two characteristics which are very 

significant among the male and female students 

are slow in making prediction with the value of – t 

= 1.14 and p = 0.056. The significance is found in 

the forget easily characteristic with ( value – t = 

1.03 p = 0.01 ) , lost basis in test 9 value – t = 0.39 

p = 0.57 ) and weak in writing ( value – t = 0.39 p 

= 0.023 ). 

The mean value also shows the student’s 

ratio of male and female who suffer from the 

dyslexia problem. All the mean ratio in these five 

characteristics show the male students mean ratio 

is higher than the female mean ratio. This mean 

that there are more male student facing the easily 

forget problem , noisy, and lost basis in test, weak 

in writing and slow in making prediction compared 

to the female students. This may be because of 

the male is not serious and slows and puts less 

concentration in doing thing. 

From the analysis and test which nave been 

carried out, researcher can make an excuse by 

dividing the result into two parts that is socioeconomic 

status of the parents of the students and 

the demographic factor itself. 

The result of the analysis has proved that 

the socio-economic status factor which include 

education, occupation and the parent’s income 

influences the dyslexia characteristic. Parents, who 

have low education and low income can influence 

the students. The students should be given more 

encouragement in education and help them in their 

home work to solve the dyslexia problem. 

About the student’s factor, researcher found 

out that there are two tests have come out with 

outstanding results of age factor, primary, number 

of siblings and status from the family also influence 

the students that suffer from dyslexia. This 

means from the primary one level until primary 

six, they will continue to show the same dyslexia 

characteristics. Besides that, the researcher found 

that the dyslexia characteristics are different in the 

male and female students in the easy forget, noisy 

with pressure, lost basis in test, weak in writing 

and slow in making prediction. 

However, the incidence of dyslexia as reported 

varies a great deal from language to language. 

There has been much speculation as to the reason 

for this variance. One assumption is that answer 

may lie in the inherent linguistic merits and scripts 

of the different languages. However, Macdonald 

Critchley et, al (1970:96) maintains that this is not 

credible and suggests the low incidence of dyslexia 

might be due to genetic reasons. At any rate, at 

the present time, this variance of dyslexia from 

language to language cannot be explained. What 

we do know is that dyslexia is likely to be found 

around the world (Janett W, Lerner, 1989:3) 

There are sex differences in the incidence of 

dyslexia, just as there are in color blindness. The 

dyslexia child is referred to in most books as ‘he” 

for a good reason. While both boys and girls can 

have dyslexia, boys are far more likely to have it. 

As with estimates on the incidence of dyslexia, 

so too, is there a lack of consensus on the ratio of 

dyslexia male to dyslexia females. The estimates 

vary from study to study: 2-to-1 (John Money, 

1962:31), 3.5-to-1 or 4-to-1 (T.R.Miles and Elaine 

Miles, 1983:2), 4-to-1 (Critchley, OP, Cit:9), 5-to-1 

(Sandhya Naidoo, 1972:25). The ratio of dyslexia 

males to dyslexia males to dyslexia females has 

been nearly 6-to-1 and the method of enrollment 

acceptance and pairing sex with like sex is likely 

to have contributed to this higher ratio. 

The difference in the number of male dyslexia 

as compared to females is well founded and 

accepted. The reason has not yet been established, 

although there are numerous hypotheses: a greater 

occurrence of cerebral trauma in males, the 

hemispheric functioning of the sexes, a mutant 

at a single locus whose expression is modified by 

sex, or a polygenic expression that has a lower 

threshold for males than that for females. 

Dyslexia has no favorites in regard to the 

wealthy or the poor, the cultured or the culturally 

disadvantaged. Any child from any background can 

have dyslexia but the socioeconomic backgrounds 

of dyslexia are varied. 

Any child in the family can have dyslexia, 

whether he be the oldest, the youngest, or the inbetween 

child. Research on birth order is sparse. 

In a study of five hundred dyslexia, 24.6 percent 

were the oldest in their families, while 36 percent 

were the youngest (Edith Klasen, 1950(60). There 



263 

is no difference in birth order in the incidence of 

dyslexia among brother and sisters were found in 

families with dyslexics. 

Discussion 

Through observation on the aspect of writing, 

students with dyslexia have great difficulties 

in writing. On the whole they are very poor in 

writing, having poor skill of spelling poor in 

oral and written vocabulary as well as poor in 

arranging content of compositions. The reliability 

of this observation had been proven by a few other 

researchers of the past. Henshelwood (1959) in 

Lerner (1985) quoted that the inability in reading 

of students with dyslexia is caused by the noncorresponding 

visualization of the right hemisphere 

with the collaboration area (angular gyrus) of the 

left hemisphere. The loss in this collaboration 

did not only cause gradual diminishing ability in 

reading but also the ability in writing as well as 

spelling (ographia). Orton (1980) had also agreed 

but with consideration of looking at the aspect 

of functional approach. According to him the 

relationship between the two hemispheres is very 

important concerning writing and reading skills. 

Besides that students with dyslexia are usually 

poor in learning. They usually fall apart under 

time limits and pressure, often losing ground 

on achievement tests, having poor handwriting, 

inaccurate oral reading as well as having delay in 

verbal response. 

With these criteria it had been proven from 

research made by Hinshelwood (1959) in Lerner 

(1985) with its structural and Orton (1980) with 

its functional. There had been other researchers 

such as Slobin (1991), Menyuk Wiig et. Al (1973) 

and Leong (1974). These researchers had stressed 

on the importance of the parts of the brain which 

are for remembering visually perceptions of letters 

and words. These researchers highlighted the 

Important of a balance coordination between the 

hemispheres of brain which clearly demonstrated 

the weakness of the left hemisphere that caused 

alexia, graphia, aphasia, apraxia, slip of the 

tongues and poor listening skill. 

In the aspect of correlation, students with 

dyslexia with educational and socio-economic 

factors, number in a family, class and gender had 

the correlated significance of r-0.4, P

264 


July 

b. 

should be used. In that case samples can be 

given continuous attention for a long period 

of time. 

Due to the in imbalance of the written and 

oral vocabulary it portrays the main criteria 

shown by the pupils. It is hoped that teaching 

can be more focused on interaction which 

is very open to teacher and pupils. That 

will encourage pupils to talk more openly. 

It also helps to built up their confidence 

in reading. However, writing can also be 

stressed in order to create a balanced skills 

in both oral and abnormally, it may be that 

sometime in the future CT scans will reveal 

will more specific finding in regard to 

dyslexia. (Martha B. Denckla: 1985) 

helping dyslexics. Society recognizes the need 

to provide the dyslexic with opportunities for 

remediation opportunities to learn and to develop 

normally, and opportunities to become what he is 

capable of becoming. 

The challenge of dyslexia must be met by all: 

all parents, schools, researchers, teachers-training 

institutions, the federal government, society as 

a whole – and the dyslexic himself. For it will 

take all of us working together to accomplish what 

must be accomplished – what can be done. We 

must make this challenge the focus of our efforts. 

Acknowledgement 

The future is promising for the dyslexic, 

although progress toward fulfillment of the promise 

is slow. It will not be realized soon enough to help 

some already out there in the Dyslexia World of 

Frustration. But we are finding out more about 

the condition. We know that there is a genetic 

factor in the cause of dyslexia, and therefore we 

can be alert to the occurrence in some families 

and provide the immediate help as needed. We 

now know how to diagnose dyslexia accurately; 

the problem lies in disseminating and using this 

knowledge. Unfortunately, some people seem to 

be unwilling to give up pet theories or special tests 

that they have devised (which also bring a certain 

profit). We know that, because of maturational 

factors, an accurate diagnosis of dyslexia at the 

present time ordinarily cannot be made before a 

child has reached about the age of eight. 

We know that dyslexia can be alleviated, and 

that the most appropriate time to begin remediation 

for a child is at about the age of eight. It is far 

easier to remediate the condition at this early age 

than at an older age, when certain behaviors and 

attitudes have been internalized. Of course the 

severity of the dyslexia condition will affect the 

success and length of remediation, (as will other 

factors). 

More information is being distributed about 

dyslexia; and thus more people are aware of the 

condition and are becoming concerned about 

The author wishes to express his sincere 

appreciation to the following individuals on the 

involvement in preparation of this manuscript: 

Director of Malaysia Education Planning and 

Research Section, and the State Education Director 

Of Sarawak, Malaysia for their sympathy and 

cooperation that made this manuscript a success. 

Director of Batu Lintang Teachers’ Training 

College, headmasters and teachers of the schools 

for being helpful and concern over the research 

made. 

Reference 

1. Abang Ahmad Ridzuan (1991), Factors Relating 

to Achievement of High School Students in 

Kuching City, Malaysia. Unpublished PhD. 

Thesis University of Hull, England. 

2. Abdul Halim Yusuf (1995), “Sukatan 

Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Menengah”, Kuala 

Lumpur: Pusat Perancangan Kurikulum. 

3. Amir Awang (1995), “Trenda Baru dalam 

Bidang Pendidikan Bahasa”, Kuala Lumpur. 

Utusan Publication and Distributor Sdn. Bhd. 



265 

4. Bertil Hallgren (1950) Specific Dyslexia 

(“Congenital Word-Blindness”); A Clinical 

and Genetic Study (Copenhagen : Ejnar 

Munksgaard, 1950); trans. By Erica Odelberg 

(Stockholm : Esselte Aktiebolag) 

5. Bonds and Tinker. (1987), “Reading 

Difficulties.” The Diagnosis and Correction 

New York : Appleton-Century-Croft. 

6. D.A. de Vaus (1991). Surveys In Social 

Research, London: Allen & Unwin. 

7. Edith Klasen (19720) The syndrome of Specific 

Dyslexia (Baltimore: Unviersity Park. 

8. Gajendra K. Verma and Kanka Mallick (1999) 

Researching Education, London: Falmer 

Press. 

9. Hinshelwood J. (1959) Congenital Wordblindness. 

H.K. Lewis, London. 

10. John Money (1962) “Dyslexia: A Post 

conference Review,” Reading Disability, 

Progress and Research Needs in Dyslexia, John 

Money, ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 

11. Kamarudin Hj. Husin, (1980). “Pedagogi 

Bahasa. Petaling Jaya : Longman Malaysia 

Sdn. Bhd. 

12. Kathry B. Coon et al. (1994) Dyslexia Screening 

Instrument. United State of America: Harcourt 

Brace & Company. 

13. Lerner, W. Janet (1985) Learning Disabilities. 

London: Open Book Publishing Ltd. 

14. Macdonald Critchley (1970) The Dyslexia 

Child, Springfield, III: Charles C. Thomas. 

15. Mohd. Fadzil Hj. Hassan. (1998). “Isu-Isu 

Perancangan Bahasa. Kuala Lumpur : Dewan 

Bahasa dan Pustaka. 

16. Musa Jalili. (1989). “Falsafah Pendidikan 

negara” Kuala Lumpur : Pusat Perkembangan 

Kurikulum. 

17. Sandhya Naidoo (1972). The Research Report 

of the ICAA Word Blind Centrenfor Dyslexia 

Children. New York : John Wiley. 

18. Smith, D. Shelley (1986) Genetics and 

Correcting Reading Disabilities. London: 

Taylor and Francis. 

19. Sofiah Hamid. (1991). “Pendidikan dalam 

Politik Di Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur : Dewan 

Bahasa dan Pustaka. 

20. T.R. Miles and Elaine Miles (1983), Help for 

Dyslexia Children, London: Methuen. 


266 


Appendix 1 

July 

DYSLEXIA 

SCREENING 

INSTRUMENT 

Kathryn B. Coon, Melissa M. Waguespack, Mary Jo Polk 

Respondent Name: ________________________________________________ 

Date of Birth: 

________________________________________________ 

Age: 

________________________________________________ 

Gender: 

________________________________________________ 

Standard: 

________________________________________________ 

School: 

________________________________________________ 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Rater’s Name: 

________________________________________________ 

Rater’s Signature: ________________________________________________ 

Date of Rating: ________________________________________________ 

RATER: To what extent does the students exhibit these characteristics 

1 – never exhibits 2 – seldom exhibits 3 – sometimes exhibits 4–often exhibits 

5 – always exhibits (Please rate all statements) 

__________ 1. Easily distracted 

__________ 2. Forgets assignment and/or loses papers 

__________ 3. Easily frustrated 

__________ 4. Low self-esteem 

__________ 5. Puts himself/herself down 

__________ 6. Falls apart under time limits and pressure 

__________ 7. Disorganized 

__________ 8. Knows material one day; doesn’t know it the next day 

__________ 9. Knows class material but tests poorly 

__________ 10. Oral reading inaccurate 

__________ 11. Reverses letters and/or numbers 

__________ 12. Losing ground on achievement tests 

__________ 13. Poor directionally (up/down, left/right, over/under) 

__________ 14. Poor sequencing skills 

__________ 15. Vocabulary of written composition in NOT equal to student’s spoken vocabulary 

__________ 16. Poor organization of composition (Events are not in chronological order or any discipline 

order organization 

__________ 17. Inadequate spelling for grade level 

__________ 18. Trouble following a series of directions 

__________ 19. Needs information repeated 

__________ 20. Poor handwriting 

__________ 21. Has trouble copying 

__________ 22. Unable to tell time, days of the week, months of the year 

__________ 23. Unable to tell time, days of the week, months of the year 

__________ 24. Cannot recall words, especially names 

__________ 25. Production of smudged papers (erasures, mark-over) 

__________ 26. Delay in verbal response 

__________ 27. Doesn’t anticipate consequence of behavior 

__________ 28. Misplaces and loses personal items 

__________ 29. Can’t stay on task 

__________ 30. Can’t repeat information 

__________ 31. Has trouble with the alphabet (learning and/or saying) 

__________ 32. Is very literal/concrete in thinking 

Rater’s Signiture _________________________________________________________ 



267 

Appendix 2 

Frequence/Percentage of the Teachers/Students View about the Frequent and Every Time facing the 

Dyslexia Problem 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

ITEM 

Easily distracted 

Forgets assignments and/ 

Or loses papers 

Easily frustrated 

Low self-esteem 

Puts himself/herself 

down 

Falls apart under time 

Limits and pressure 

Disorganized 

Knows material one day: 

8. 

doesn’t know it the next 

day 

Knows class material but 

9. 

Tests poorly 

Oral reading inaccurate 

10. 

Reverses letters 

11. 

Losing ground on 

12. 

achievement tests 

Poor directionally (up/ 

13. 

down 

Left/right, over/under) 

Poor sequencing skills 

14. 

Vocabulary of written 

15. 

Composition is NOT 

equal 

To student’s spoken 

TEACHER’S AND 

STUDENT’S VIEW 

NEVER SELDOM SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS 

EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS 

Teacher’s 18 (7.1%) 22 (8.7) 58 (23.0%) 120 (47.6%) 34 (13.5%) 

Student’s 30 (11.9%) 17 (6.7) 49 (19.4%) 129 (51.2%) 27 (10.7%) 

Teacher’s 2 (8.0%) 18 (7.1%) 54 (21.4%) 139 (55.2% 39 (15.5%) 

Student’s 9 (3.6%) 21 (8.3%) 72 (28.6%) 120 (47.6%) 30 (11.9%) 

Teacher’s 13 (5.2%) 35 (13.9%) 109 (43.3%) 78 (31.0%) 16 (6.3%) 

Student’s 12 (4.8%) 20 (7.9%) 113 (44.8%) 89 (35.3%) 18 (7.1%) 

Teacher’s 7 (2.8%) 42 (16.7%) 98 (38.9%) 81 (32.1%) 24 (9.4%) 

Student’s 17 (6.7%) 30 (11.9%) 104 (41.3%) 83 (32.9%) 18 (7.1%) 

Teacher’s 10 (4.0%) 38 (15.1%) 93 (36.9%) 92 (36.5%) 19 (7.5%) 

Student’s 7 (2.8%) 25 (9.9%) 100 (39.7%) 102 (40.5%) 18 (7.1%) 

Teacher’s 4 (1.6%) 12 (4.8%) 76 (30.2%) 127 (50.4%) 33 (13.1%) 

Student’s 13 (5.2%) 27 (10.7%) 62 (24.6%) 118 (46.8%) 32 (12.7%) 

Teacher’s 2 (0.8%) 16 (6.3%) 45 (17.9%) 148 (58.7%) 41 (16.3%) 

Student’s 8 (3.2%) 17 (6.7%) 57 (22.6%) 141 (56.0%) 29 (11.5%) 

Teacher’s 3 (1.2%) 18 (7.1%) 40 (15.9%) 145 (57.5%) 46 (18.3%) 

Student’s 7 (2.8%) 21 (8.3%) 48 (19.0%) 144 (57.1%) 32 (12.7%) 

Teacher’s 4 (1.6%) 18 (7.1%) 41 (16.3%) 142 (56.3%) 46 (18.3%) 

Student’s 7 (2.8%) 22 (8.7%) 46 (18.3%) 145 (57.5%) 32 (12.7%) 

Teacher’s 8 (3.2%) 20 (7.9%) 41 (16.3%) 125 (49.6%) 58 (23.0%) 

Student’s 10 (4.0%) 23 (9.1%) 51 (20.2%) 115 (45.6%) 52 (20.6%) 

Teacher’s 14 (5.6%) 29 (11.5%) 85 (25.8%) 117 (46.4%) 27 (10.7%) 

Student’s 22 (8.7%) 24 (9.5%) 79 (31.3%) 102 (40.5%) 25 (9.9%) 

Teacher’s 6 (2.4%) 19 (7.5%) 41 (16.3%) 149 (59.11%) 37 (14.7%) 

Student’s 5 (2.0%) 22 (8.7%) 65 (26.8%) 128 (50.8%) 32 (12.7%) 

Teacher’s 22 (8.7%) 40 (15.9%) 78 (31.0%) 86 (34.1%) 25 (9.9%) 

Student’s 23 (9.1%) 33 (13.1%) 86 (34.1%) 88 (34.9%) 22 (8.7%) 

Teacher’s 7 (2.8%) 20 (7.9%) 48 (19.0%) 128 (50.8%) 49 (19.4%) 

Student’s 11 (4.4%) 25 (9.9%) 65 (25.8%) 122 (48.4%) 29 (11.5%) 

Teacher’s 4 (1.6%) 11 (4.4%) 36 (14.3%) 156 (61.9%) 45 (17.9%) 

Student’s 7 (2.8%) 20 (7.9%) 46 (18.3%) 146 (57.9%) 33 (13.1%) 

16. 

17. 

vocabulary 

Poor organization of 

Composition (Events 

are not 

in chronological order 

or any discipline order of 

organization 

Inadequate spelling for 

grade level 

Teacher’s 3 (1.2%) 11 (4.4%) 38 (15.1%) 130 (51.6%) 70 (27.8%) 

Student’s 12 (4.8%) 10 (4.0%) 42 (16.7%) 149 (59.1%) 39 (15.5%) 

Teacher’s 7 (2.8%) 12 (4.8%) 43 (17.1%) 130 (51.6%) 60 (23.8%) 

Student’s 9 (3.6%) 20 (7.9%) 65 (25.8%0 129 (51.2%) 29 (11.5%) 


268 


July 

ITEM 

Trouble following a 

18. 

series 

of directions 

19. 

Needs information 

repeated 

Poor handwriting 

20. 

Has trouble copying 

21. 

Unable to tell time, 

22. 

days of 

the week, months of 

the year 

Unable to keep place on 

23. 

page when reading 

Cannot recall word 

24. 

Especially names 

Production of smudged 

25. 

Paper (erasures, markover) 

Delay in verbal response 

26. 

Doesn’t anticipate 

27. 

Consequence of behavior 

Misplaces and loses 

28. 

Personal items 

Can’t stay on task 

29. 

Can’t repeat information 

30. 

Has trouble with the 

31. 

alphabet 

(learning and/or saying) 

Is very literal/concrete in 

32. 

thinking 

TEACHER’S AND 

STUDENT’S VIEW 

NEVER SELDOM SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS 

EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS EXHIBITS 

Teacher’s 6 (2.4%) 20 (7.9%) 55 (21.8%) 135 (53.6%) 36 (14.3%) 

Student’s 4 (1.6%) 22 (8.7%) 80 (31.7%) 120 (47.6%) 26 (10.3%) 

Teacher’s 4 (1.6%) 18 (7.1%) 38 (15.1%) 136 (54.0%) 56 (22.2%) 

Student’s 13 (5.2%) 13 (5.2%) 59 (23.4%) 130 (51.6%) 37 (22.2%) 

Teacher’s 5 (2.0%) 22 (8.7%) 53 (21.0%) 124 (49.2%) 48 (19.0%) 

Student’s 8 (3.2%) 21 (8.3%) 71 (28.2%0 120 (47.2%) 32 (12.7%) 

Teacher’s 9 (3.6%) 24 (9.5%) 70 (27.8%) 113 (44.8%) 36(14.3%) 

Student’s 9 (3.6%) 20 (7.9%) 94 (37.3%) 111 (44.0%) 18 (7.1%) 

Teacher’s 18 (7.1%) 33 (13.1%) 54 (21.4%) 118 (46.8%) 29 (11.5%) 

Student’s 14 (5.6%0 23 (9.1%) 65 (25.8%) 126 (50.0%) 24 (9.5%) 

Teacher’s 15 (6.0%) 35 (13.9%) 62 (24.6%) 110 (43.7%) 30 (11.9%) 

Student’s 16 (6.3%) 28 (11.1%) 73 (29.0%) 116 (46.0%) 19 (7.5%) 

Teacher’s 8 (3.2%) 27 (10.7%) 65 (25.8%) 131 (52.0%) 21 (8.3%) 

Student’s 9 (3.6%) 28 (11.1%) 85 (33.7%) 114 (45.2%) 16 (6.3%) 

Teacher’s 5 (2.0%) 33 (13.1%) 85 (33.7%) 108 (42.9%) 21 (8.3%) 

Student’s 9 (3.6%) 21 (8.3%) 70 (27.8%) 124 (43.2%) 28 (11.1%) 

Teacher’s 4 (1.6%) 15 (6.0%) 32 (12.7%) 157 (62.3%) 44 917.5%) 

Student’s 10 (4.0%) 32 (12.7%) 45 (17.9%) 144 (57.1%) 21 (8.3%) 

Teacher’s 1 (0.4%) 8 (3.2%) 42 (16.7%) 153 (60.7%) 48 (19.0%) 

Student’s 7 (2.0%) 16 (6.3%) 55 (21.8%) 145 (57.5%) 28 (11.1%) 

Teacher’s 5 (2.0%) 45 (17.0%) 112 (44.4%) 66 (26.2%) 23 (9.1%) 

Student’s 14 (5.6%) 28 (11.1%) 114 (45.2%) 79 (31.3%) 17 (6.7%) 

Teacher’s 5 (2.0%) 13 (5.2%) 55 (21.8%) 137 (54.4%) 42 (16.7%) 

Student’s 5 (2.0%) 24 (9.5%) 60 (23.8%) 134 (56.7%) 20 (7.9%) 

Teacher’s 4 (1.6%) 15 (6.0%) 47 (18.7%) 145 (57.5%) 41 (16.3%) 

Student’s 9 (3.6%) 19 (7.5%) 55 (21.8%) 142 (56.3%) 27 (10.7%) 

Teacher’s 6 (2.4%) 13 (5.2%) 50 (19.8%) 136 (54.0%) 47 (18.7%) 

Student’s 10 (4.0%) 23 (9.1%) 69 (27.4%) 129 (51.2%) 21 (8.3%) 

Teacher’s 61 (24.2%) 57 (22.6%) 62 (24.6%) 54 (21.4%) 18 (7.1%) 

Student’s 73 (29.0%) 32 (12.7%) 62 (24.6%) 62 (24.6%) 23 (9.1%)

A Study of Dyslexia among Primary School Students in Sarawak ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?