Forum: Rethink fairness in exams when accommodating students with dyslexia

I recently wrote to the Ministry of Education to seek clarification on examination accommodations for students with dyslexia, particularly regarding spelling in national examinations. The ministry explained that in subjects such as English, mother tongue and science, spelling accuracy forms part of the assessment criteria. Allowing spell-check tools, it said, would compromise the validity of the assessment.

While I appreciate the need to preserve standards, this position raises an important question: What exactly are we trying to assess?

Dyslexia is a neurodevelopmental condition that primarily affects accuracy and fluency in reading and spelling. It is not a matter of effort or intelligence. Extra time – a common accommodation – may help students process questions more carefully, but it does not fundamentally address spelling difficulties. If a student is neurologically impaired in spelling, additional minutes alone will not remove that barrier.

Children with dyslexia are of normal intellect and often possess strong conceptual understanding and creativity. Their main challenge lies in expressing their ideas accurately in writing. When spelling errors are heavily penalised, their scripts may reflect their disability more than their knowledge.

A word processor with spell-check capability would not grant an unfair advantage. Rather, it would help level the playing field by allowing students to demonstrate their understanding without their disability distorting the outcome.

We already accept this principle in other contexts: Students with motor difficulties may use scribes, and students with visual impairments receive appropriate assistive support. These accommodations are not viewed as lowering standards but as ensuring assessments measure intended learning outcomes rather than the effects of a disability.

Fairness should not mean treating every student identically. It should mean giving each student a fair opportunity to demonstrate what they know.

As our education system strives to be more inclusive, it may be timely to re-examine whether current accommodations address the nature of dyslexia, or whether they inadvertently prioritise procedural consistency over meaningful equity.

Vincent Ho