[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Dyscalculia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tomarto/Tomaito

[edit]

What's the difference between a person who sucks at maths and a person who has dyscalculia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.145.198.172 (talk) 00:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all symptoms described sound suspiciously like "sucking at math". I also wonder how someone diagnosed with both dyscalculia and dyslexia can be "anywhere on an IQ scale" under any possible definition when the subject can't understand a clock, learn words or tell right from left (which happens to be "caused by both dyscalculia AND dyslexia"). The next thing is IQ-ia, people who also are range from extremely bright to plain stupid, but have only this nasty handicap of just performing really bad at IQ tests. This article needs more proof that there is a difference between suffering from dyscalculia and simply being stupid. The absence of a correlation between dyscalculia and dyslexia would do the trick, but unfortunately dyslexia explicitly states they do correlate. My guess is that dysmusica, dislaboria, dischessica, dissuccessfulia and probably even dysgymnastia also have a strong correlation to dyscalculia. (dyslexia does have a controversy section, btw. I would add one here if English was my native language) Joepnl (talk) 01:09, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly, dyscalculia has not been as thoroughly studied as dyslexia. If there is a statistical correlation between the two, I suspect it is because there are a number of people who suffer from both. But there are also large numbers of people who only suffer from one or the other. And apparently, many of these people who find certain basic math tasks difficult nevertheless have normal intelligence in other math areas (and in non-math areas) and can do quite well in those areas of math not affected by dyscalculia (e.g. problems not requiring rapid recall of math facts). Children with dyscalculia do not "suck at math," they only struggle with certain areas of math. These people have normal or even high IQ scores in spite of their difficulties in a few specific areas. I am not an expert, but I believe, for example, that reasoning skills are not affected by dyscalculia. Since IQ tests are based on reasoning skills, and not recall of the multiplication table, IQ scores for dyscalculia sufferers can be quite normal. Is not dyscalculia defined as a condition causing difficulty in certain areas of math in spite of normal IQ? In any case, no one is challenging IQ test validity or suggesting IQ-ia. I know some experts suspect a short-term memory problem as part of the cause of dyscalculia. I wish we knew more. This article still needs a lot of work, but I suspect there are not enough qualified people to contribute to it. This is a reflection of our state of knowledge about this condition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seberle (talk • contribs) 16:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have dyscalculia and pretty much every site that describes it is wrong and simply describes being "dumb at math" which is NOT what dyscalculia is. In my case, it is essentially dyslexia with numbers. I don't lack the ability to "comprehend" math concepts (unless we are talking about ridiculously advanced math that most people don't understand anyway). The problem is that on the page the numbers and sequences are often transposed, distorted, or reversed. As a consequence, when I was in school and I had to work out an algebra / trigonometry / calculus problem I would have to do the problem over at least three times to catch my errors (and I would ALWAYS make an error). That would be difference between an A on an exam and an F. It would take me three times as long as the next student to complete a test, simply because I would transpose things when I actually DID understand the concepts. However the process and application was generally correct. In fact, I had to understand the concepts MORE clearly than other students because I was already at a disadvantage. The problem is that a lot of people with dyscalculia develop a "math phobia" due to people not understanding that they have this problem which makes it appear they can't comprehend the "logic" behind math, when they actually could.
I also have problems reading clocks with roman numerals. Again, not because I'm "dumb with math" but because the numerals transpose and flip when I'm looking at them, which most people can't understand. So, I may see a IV when it is really a VI, etc. I am also do not favor one hand over the other with writing and constantly make left and right orientation errors, though I do "comprehend" the difference between left and right. 184.88.80.1 (talk) 22:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]


I believe neither of you are looking at this from the right angle, although you're both halfway there with complementary standpoints. Number comprehension is one component of the bigger picture of intelligence. Think of intelligence, measured in IQ, as a person's total intellectual ability. If a person with dyscalculia had been IQ-tested withOUT dyscalculia (say, with some artificial - bionic, chemical, etc. - boost to his number comprehension), he would have scored that much higher on the test. However, because it's only one part of total intelligence, the IQ scores of people with dyscalculia will often be normal or high, although, of course, the average score of this group will be slightly lower than that of "normals", because of the deficit.
Now, responding to why dyscalculia is, and will be, correlated with other intellectual deficits like dyslexia: Seberle, correlation does not mean there are coincidentally people with both conditions simply because both conditions exist. Correlation means there is a higher chance for people with dyscalculia to also have another intellectual deficit, compared with people who do not have it. One does not guarantee the other, of course, and many people have a single deficit, but it does happen that deficits tend to run together, for the same reason that performance in any one area of IQ testing has been shown to be predictive of performance in any other area: cognitive ability tends to be fairly uniform across functions. When two or more "learning disabilities" coexist I find it sounder to think of it more as a global cognitive deficit, instead of specific area impairment. However, professionals will continue to diagnose a low-IQ individual with a handful or two of separate deficits because a) there is less stigma attached to specific named deficits than to generalized "dumbness", and b) it is therapeutically more useful to specify deficient areas of cognition whose particular needs can be addressed with treatment and special education.
There are types of reasoning that are affected by dyscalculia. I live with someone afflicted fairly severely with it and have seen firsthand how the inability to process concepts such as relative quantities, probability, exponential growth, etc. causes difficulty with such basic reasoning as "this thing is more likely to be true than this other thing because there is better evidence for the first thing". He tends to think in absolutes because he cannot intuit percentages - if I tell him, "This computer model sold badly because the motherboard tended to fry quickly," he might respond, "That's not true. I owned one of those, and the mobo never crapped out on me." Because math is essentially the language of logic, one might wonder if the inability to speak the language is really the inability to grasp the process it describes. My loved one is incapable of following more than perhaps a two-step line of logic, three if an extremely simple one. Interestingly, though, his IQ is precisely the mean for white non-Hispanic American males. His number problem is a standalone deficit; his performance in other areas of testing is normal to good, which raises his total score.
Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 14:05, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You both are missing the point. Dyscalculia is not 'sucking at math' or 'being stupid'. It actually affects very specific types of reasoning within the broad realm of skills that we call mathematics. I can share my case, since I suffer from mild dyscalculia. I have notorious problems with basic mental arithmetics, which translates in the inability to perform apparently basic tasks as spliting a tab, balancing my checkbook, etc., without the help of an spreadsheet (or without embarrasing myself if I am with other people). My spatial reasoning is pretty poor too (I am unable for all practical purposes to rotate maps, images, etc. in my head), and hell you don't want me to give you directions. Ok, so far you might think 'ok, this guy is just dumb', right? Well, here is when the 'very specific types of reasoning' part is relevant. I happen to excel in abstract reasoning (math included). I went to Engineering school with excellent grades (calculators were allowed), even passing Diff. Calculus with a perfect score (straight A's in all quizes and exams). Afterwards, I went to Business School (the verbal score of the GMAT saved me from the numerical score disaster) and got a concentration in quantitative analysis. I now work doing statistical analysis for marketing research. Yet, if I make a basic multiplication in my head, I will probably get it wrong.


Dyscalculia shows intelligence is more than IQ. Yes Dyscalculia means that you are bad at math. To argue otherwise is useless. 50.121.72.1 (talk) 23:30, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The list of symptoms describes so many of my problems with numbers, math, formulas, reading music, sense of direction. If you tell me your address, I forget the number immediately. At best, I would flip a couple of the numbers in my mind--if I get those two numbers correct at all. Same with phone numbers. I hit the "math wall" my junior year of high school in Algebra 2. Up until then I could compensate for my math shortcomings with memorization (preferably set to music--seems to help), finger-counting, writing notes, using notes to apply formulas to problems. But Algebra 2 was my limit--no matter how hard I focused and studied, I just couldn't process the information or remember how to use the correct formula for each equation or word problem. Frustrating. Yet I learned to read at age three and was reading at a sixth-grade level in grade one. I switched from piano and guitar to drums and was able to keep playing music, but reading music--there's a space of time I need to comprehend what I'm seeing--so I can never sight read, nor can I remember the sequence of notes that make up the melody I just played a second ago. I have no problem remembering drum sequences and I taught myself to play fairly quickly. My sense of direction is the worst--nothing makes me feel stupider than trying to get to a new place without visual markers to help me remember where I just came from. I should carry a compass around at all times. All this is to say, this is real, and I'm glad there's a term for it. --Utilizer (talk) 22:57, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dyscalculia / Acalculia

[edit]

Dyscalculia and acalculia is NOT the same thing. Dyscalculia is like dyslexia - there are ways to learn - while acalculia is caused by serious brain damage like in a car accident. Mette Christoffersen, Feb. 4, 2006.

I disagree with this statement. Neurological terms that use the prefix "a" imply a complete loss of or lack of a cognitive skill or behavior, whereas "dys" refers to an impairment in the subsumed area. Another distinction that has often been claimed is that the disorders which use "a" are generally acquired (e.g., stroke or head injury) whereas those termed "dys" are developmental in nature (i.e., the result of improper neurocognitive development). In point of fact, however, there are virtually no cases of complete loss or absence of cognitive functions as a consequence of brain damage. Therefore, the nosology that uses the "dys" pronoun is to be preferred in my opinion. (By the way, I am a cognitive neuropsychologist by profession and have written extensively on dyscalculia).

With respect to dyscalculia, there is a large literature on such patients, and the distinction between acalculics and dyscalculics is not consistent or frankly all that useful.

I changed the first sentence, removing the reference to acalculia. Theres is some truth in both sides. While the description of dys- and a- calculia is absolutely correct, I have only seen the term acalculia used of brain damaged patients and never for developmental cases. Thus, perhaps, best to stick with Dyscalculia here to avoid long explanations. . . Dyscalulia as a result of brain damage is better understood at present than develomental dyscalulia, about which there is still a great deal of controversy, even about nomenclature. Beth L. Nov 17 2006 __


Please explain what an SpLD is. (LD = Learning Difficulty ?) ---Mpatel (talk) 10:31, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Quick Google search turns up this: Semantic Pragmatic Disorder, except as "semantic pragmatic 'language' disorder" JeramieHicks 22:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my understanding is Specific Learning Difficulty (such as dyslexia etc) as opposed to general learning difficulty/disability (what used to be termed mental handicap)I have no sources only my expereince of working with people with SpLD and general learning difficulties - and this is in the UK might be differnt in the USA Ophelia105 16:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I agree the SpLD refers to specific learning disability which is a term of use in neurology, psychiatry and special education.

Etymology

[edit]

Is this word another of those mixtures of Latin and Greek? Michael Hardy 03:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't appear so:

Semiconscious • talk 08:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Math Phobia

[edit]

"Math-phobia" links to this page, what's it called, as a synonym. So the article about math phobia is automatically the article about dyscalculia. Although many dyscalculics are phobic of math, you can EASILY have math phobia without being dyscalculic. It is wrong to think that the term math phobia should be linked to an article about dyscalculia - especially because it gives the impression that dyscalculia is just "made up", and all you have to do to "overcome" it is to get rid of the fear. Would you say that a DYSLEXIC only had to overcome the fear to learn how to spell? I don't hope so.

Please fix this. Please. :) --Ellyodd 14:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this in a lot of articles, and it's not meant to imply that the terms are synonyms. Generally speaking this sort of thing is done because there is no separate article on the subject (math phobia), other than the small amount of information on it in this one (which isn't enough to be a separate page at this time). When a separate page is made, it will no longer be a redirect. 69.85.181.195 01:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

I'm wondering how specific this condition could be or generally is. Most of the potential symptoms seem to pertain to fairly general mathmatical abilities. Would it be possible for someone with this condition (or a related one you can name) to be able to do basic arithmetic, but be unable to do/having difficulty doing algebraic equations where certain additional types of thought processes/logic become involved? 69.85.181.195 01:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- It is definitely possible to have some mathematical abilities but be hindered in others, e.g. being unable to navigate but able to process basic algebra. There is a large range of "disability" contained within the term dyscalculia; just as a dyslexic may only make certain spelling errors or may be almost completely unable to read. 138.26.166.5 21:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am dyscalculic myself, and while I appreciate it may affect different people in different ways, I have to say that in my understanding, arithmetic and algebra aren't even on the same planet, and might more readily be taught as entirely distinct subjects, as far dyscalculics are concerned.
A piece from the text of the article is of particular note:-
Another common manifestation of the condition emerges when the individual is faced with equation type of problems which contain both integers and letters (3A + 4C). It can be difficult for the person to differentiate between the integers and the letters. Confusion such as reading a '5' for an 'S' or not being able to distinguish between a zero '0' for the letter 'O' can keep algebra from being mastered. This particular form of dyscalculia is often not diagnosed until middle or high school is entered.
This isn't dyscalculia, this describes dyslexia: dyslexia doesn't "become" dyscalculia because the symbols being misinterpreted represent numbers rather than sounds - problems with alphanumeric recognition are dyslexia. Dyscalculia is an inability to compute numbers, pure and simple: for the dyscalculic, 4+7 is as much mental arithmetic as 346÷13.
Nuttyskin (talk) 13:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To Omit

[edit]

"Critics of standards-based mathematics reform such as Mathematically Correct have proposed that replacement of direct-instruction of efficient arithmetic methods with discovery learning, and replacing instruction time and textbook space that was once devoted to instruction and practice with activity-based learning with a large proportion of non-mathematics related content has produced many students who cannot compute. Counting and using manipulatives rather than using efficient algorithms is central point of emphasis for standards based instruction. Some texts such as TERC in their initial editions complete omit instruction of any standard arithmetic method in favor of drawing tally marks, circling groups, and coloring, and devote class time and homework to singing songs such as Happy Birthday and playing card games."

i'm not sure the above paragraph belongs -- it seems to refer to something totally different from a disorder, rather, that many schools don't teach math efficiently. whereas my understanding of dyscalulia is that it has to do more with the individual's innate ability to compute and/or relate to spatial concepts like left/right, north/south, etc. than whether and how well one has been taught arithmetic. just as dyslexia has nothing to do with how well one has been taught to read, but the student's innate inability to parse written language. looking back at my elementary school experience, i know we spent plenty of time doing math-related schoolwork. but i also know i was the last in my class to memorize math facts, still can't tell left from right or read an analog clock, and always have to think long and hard about very simple things like calculating a 20% tip. Geeksquad 3.10.07

if it will help I can probably track down a referenced source. Critics of standards-based math say that it's difficult to tell if the reason students can't calculate is because of an innate inability or simply because they have been taught methods prone to producing some of the listed symptoms, such as counting rather than using arithmetic or using complex strategies rather than standard efficient methods. approaches taken by many textbooks do not teach any traditional methods, and spend a lot of time showing students how do do things like using the plus key to divide 300 by 6 using skip counting, or drawing tallies and circling groups. --Merceris 01:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noting the requirement for an "expert", in the UK a lot of questions from parents get directed to me as I've written a number of books on the subject. However my work in dyscalculia has taken me away from the standardised view, which has generally been imposed on the subject by those who work with dyslexia. We now have the odd situation in which most of the published books on the subject don't follow the view that the most regular commentators put forward.

The view originally put forward in "Tests for Dyscalculia" and "Methods of Teaching Maths to Pupils with Dyscalculia", and which is within all 10 books I've written, is that although dyscalculia is of genetic origin and thus cannot be "cured" a curious effect does allow most dyscalculics to be taught maths to normal standards if a particular approach is adopted.

My colleauges and I observed that almost every dyscalculic person we saw had a significant gap in understand maths at a fairly elementary level - for example with simple division. Because of the logical nature of maths that meant they could not grasp fractions, percentages, shapes - all of which build on division. We argued first that if one goes back and corrects these early problems, much will rapidly fall into place.

To solve this second problem we borrowed an idea from dyslexia (where I worked on the Multi-Sensory Learning project in the 1980s) of making all maths teaching multi-sensory. Thus a child would work with counters, would learn to transfer ten counters of one colour into another, and would simulatenously speak the numbers and write them as words and numeric symbols. The symbol + was then always spoken as one word ("add" for example) and that word and the symbol were used at the same time as the coloured counters were put together.

By tracking back to problem areas and then correcting them through this means we had terrific success - and this resulted in the series of books described on wwww.dyscalculia.me.uk It also resulted in a route to recovery which could be used by parents at home - particularly where the school rejected the notion of changing the approach to maths just for one child.

However the notion prevelant in the UK among teachers of dyslexia that only those who have been trained in dyslexia can help pupils and students has meant that our open approach which involves parents and teachers without special training, has been looked upon as unsatisfactory, and perhaps even underminding the teaching profession.

Tony Attwood BA, Dip Ed., M.Phil (Lond) F.Inst.A.M yes... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.185.51.19 (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Sources

[edit]

This article is in serious need of sources and I'm currently writing a research paper so I've got a whole stack of books here on the subject. What in particular do we most need? -Saruna : February 16, 2009

Synonym

[edit]

The article says that

«Researchers now sometimes use the terms “math dyslexia”.»

This is very dubious and may cause confusion. To cite https://www.webmd.com/add-adhd/childhood-adhd/dyscalculia-facts:

«Research suggests it's as common as dyslexia -- a reading disorder -- but not as well understood. In fact, kids and parents sometimes call it “math dyslexia,” but this can be confusing because dyscalculia is a completely different condition. Your school or doctor may call it a “mathematics learning disability” or a “math disorder.”»

I would rather write that, although it may be referred to as "math dyslaxia" by some people, this use is improper and confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.197.233.33 (talk) 01:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Treatment

[edit]

I do not believe for one second that anyone suggested electroshock therapy for dyscalculia! This needs a reference at least —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idiottom (talk • contribs) 09:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the section treatment it is referred to 'Eastern Mathematics'. This is unfortunately a dead end. Can anyone clarify/specify what is meant by this term? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.147.225.206 (talk) 07:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a mildly pejorative and somewhat comic use of the adjective, i.e., "Eastern" in the sense of Eastern philosophies (imagined as vague, touchy-feely, mumbo-jumbo thinking), rather than to suggest the work of any specific Indian mathematicians.
Nuttyskin (talk) 16:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Mathematics is how eastern countries like in Asia teach mathematics differently than in western countries like Americas or Europe. Eastern Mathematics could refer to the use of abacus where in eastern countries is widely accepted form of calculation instead of the western electronic calculator. I know that abacus is used worldwide by many cultures but in Asia it is still used and it does help people with dyscalculia because it allows them to picture and grasp numbers almost like using fingers to count instead of counting by heart. Also I think the word "Eastern Mathematics" should be more like Eastern "Way of Teaching" Mathematics, it makes more sense that way. (Neoking (talk) 22:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Live Sources

[edit]

Come to Thailand. Try to ask anyone about numbers, digits, or whatever is related to numerics. What is 11+10? -Uh. --media_lib (talk) 15:18, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Failure in differentiating arithmetic and mathematics

[edit]

This article claims that dyscalculia is the inability to learn or comprehend mathematics, where sources such as [1] claim that, among some other symptoms relating to working memory, left from right, and time, that dyscalculia is the inability to perform mental calculations. While mathematics sometimes uses numbers because they have some nice properties, mathematics is not about complicated computations, but logical thinking (see Mathematics, esp. under "Fields"). Higher-level mathematics tends to not even use numbers if it can be helped. While I can see dyslexia inhibiting being able to handle symbol manipulations, I cannot see being unable to calculate being much trouble.

Basically, this article is a mess in that it uses the word "mathematics" for both arithmetic (the techniques of calculation) and mathematics (the abstract science of quantity, space, and structure), causing confusion and false inferences (that the inability to do arithmetic means that there's a similar inability to do abstract mathematics). The symptom "May do fairly well in subjects such as science and geometry, which require logic rather than formulae, until a higher level requiring calculations is obtained," while barely making sense (higher levels aren't obtained, but perhaps attained), presumes high-level math is about performing calculations.

Perhaps the literature is a mess, too. I don't know how Wikipedia is supposed to be consistent with inconsistencies in literature, but this article could use some help. 75.73.179.58 (talk) 08:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe dyscalculia is a deficit in what iq tests call "abstract reasoning" i.e. symbol manipulation. A person can have exceptional analytical ability and spatial sense and still be poor at "abstract reasoning". The kind of person who can think through a complex logical argument or 'intuit' the answers to highschool physics problems but still has severe difficulty with math. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.163.97 (talk) 18:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"...need not be seen as a disability"

[edit]

As someone who is disabled (admitedly not with discalculia), I find the sentence

The condition need not be seen as a disability, there is nothing preventing people who suffer from dyscalculia from succeeding in other academic fields such as history, geography and other social sciences, or in artistic fields such as music or drama.

rather inappropriate. "It's not a disability because you can do other stuff" seems akin to "Blindness isn't a disability because you can still hear". I'm of the opinion that sentence should be removed or altered. Whether you're going with the medical model of disability (You have an impairment that makes you less able to do certain things), or the social model (you are less able to do certain things due to society not being sufficiently adapted to how you are), someone with dyscalculia is disabled regardless of any ability to do something else. 81.152.250.97 (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely. This needs to be changed for the reasons listed above, not to mention the fact that people with dyscalculia sometimes go on to scientific fields requiring math. --seberle (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done This sentence has been removed. Lova Falk talk 11:18, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Yes, I personally know that dyscalculia people tends to be smart in other fields and are more resourceful when it comes to passing math classes by any means necessary even if it constitutes cheating. Like people who are blind they have more acute senses to make up the blindness. Some people with dyscalculia never know they have the condition because it is not like they run this type of test in schools. Neoking (talk) 23:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking nonsense. Just as blind people do NOT have more acute senses to "make up for their blindness" (silly popular myth, disproven time and time again yet people refuse to give it up because they desperately need to believe that everyone is of equal capability and if they lack in one area, surely they must be making up for it somewhere else), people with dyscalculia do NOT have to be gifted in other areas just because they suck at math. The brain has no drive to compensate for missing functions, I assure you. People with dyscalculia are statistically no less likely to be dyslexic, for example, than people without dyscalculia. Nor are they more likely to be gifted in any other given way. A disability is a disability, and a horse is a horse, of course, of course. Deal. Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 16:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the brain can but not always can make up for lack of skills in some areas. It is called Neuroplasticity. Some people do seem to be capable of developing secondary skill traits, as they may use them subconsciously (which wires their brain) to begin with. It is true that not all people with dyscalulia are excellent artists and journalists but it makes sense that there is statistically more if there is a trend. For example, a dyscalculia person who likes science may not find an actual career in science very easy, but they may choose to write science fiction or journalism on the subject. I also read that while certain regions (for arithmetic) have deficits, other regions may actually do better in some skills due to the overall condition. I guess those skills will differs person to person. --Wormulon (talk) 20:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

[edit]

While understanding maths inabilities better is important, I find this whole article quite dubious. The potential symptoms listed are a mixture of sensible, dubious, and nonsensical ones. Some are clearly related to specific problems with numbers, but others are not - unless a reliable source can be found stating that they correlate to such problems. The statement that about 5% may suffer from dyscalculia is vacuous in absense of a clearer definition. Accurate sourcing of each statement is necessary!--Nø (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. Unlike dyslexia, dyscalculia is controversial, even as to its existence, and has not been as thoroughly studied. There have been some studies, however, and the article should draw from those. Please feel free to add "citation needed" tags where needed. This article needs work. --seberle (talk) 15:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Even dyslexia itself is controversial, as stated in its own article. 201.231.81.53 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Pronunciation

[edit]

Could someone please explain how to pronounce "dis-cal-qu-lee-ah" (preferably in IPA)? Thanks. --seberle (talk) 20:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —Toby Bartels (talk) 16:44, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Symptoms

[edit]

The list of symptoms is rather odd. I think nearly all should be deleted, and then re-added only when each "symptom" is sourced. Some of the alleged symptoms may correlate with dyscalculia, but how can something unrelated to numbers, maths and calculations be a "symptom" of dyscalculia?--Nø (talk) 18:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely. I have added a citation tag, but I would agree to deleting the entire symptom list. What is needed is a coherent description with references, preferably in paragraph form. The last addition is downright silly. I'm not sure what the standard waiting time is for someone to add references before deleting, but I would recommend deleting this section very, very soon. --seberle (talk) 14:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deeply and profoundly object to the comment: "Although math learning difficulties occur in children with low IQ[1] dyscalculia occurs in people across the whole IQ range." Unfortunately our culture and society have all but marginalized people who struggle with math. I am the victim of an education system that essentially branded me as a "failure" because I had difficulties with math. Never mind the fact that I excelled in language, spelling and the written word; none of that seemed as important as reminding me on a regular basis of how stupid I was because I couldn't do math. Why is math the benchmark of someone's intelligence? Why does math have to be so important? Not everyone is going to be an engineer, physicist, scientist, etc, etc. So before we go saying someone has "a low IQ" because they don't excel in math, perhaps we should take a step back and say someone who struggles in all areas has a low IQ. I don't believe someone's ability or inability to do math should be the standard by which we gauge their general intelligence; nor do I think someone should be made to feel stupid because they struggle with math; neither should they be made to feel like a "failure" because of this. When people communicate with other people, they do so with words and language, not MATH. As such, I believe literacy and language should take precedence over learning math skills. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.167.221 (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand the preceding anonymous comment. The article would support (not contradict) this person's position. --seberle (talk) 20:46, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

long term projections

[edit]

64.134.170.135 (talk) 15:33, 15 December 2013 (UTC) Like happy and unhappy families, our math difficulties are unique. I never got the concept even when the class moved on. I am 67 and do the newspaper puzzle page; sudoku I learned but I often still write in a number that should not be there. Kakuro is where you fill in a total using numbers. It took me a year to see that 41 in 7 numbers(9to1) doesn't use a certain number. I still add by totaling each additional number, every now and then I can remember 7&8 is 15. I will probably always have this difficulty. I was amazed to see that people actually see numbers in their heads, I don't. They even get turned around 17 to 71 say. I fell out of the moving car when I was about 5. I feel like I was cheated but am good at art and know what is right or wrong in the composition and color. I can say with certainty that repetition does not cure the problem and have great sympathy for children subjected to this in school.[reply]

This article does not give scientifical insight

[edit]

I was expecting the article to talk about something on the lines of "Dyscalculia is caused by the lack of neuron activity in the prefrontal lobe of the left hemisphere of the brain" (I don't know, I made that up). But I expected something like that in the "causes" section, but there was rarely any information. Like another person said, it's dubious and vague.

P.S. someone should REALLY put a tag on this article saying "too vague" or "badly written article", as this article deserves it. NeonHD (talk) 02:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dyscalculia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:09, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes to intro

[edit]

I'd like to propose a change to the introductory section of this article. I'd rather propose the change here than make the edits directly, since the changes are possibly substantive, and I don't have access to all the references that are cited in order to verify all the changes.

Sources

[edit]

Does anyone have access to a more authoritative reference such as the DSM-5? Dyscalculia does appear in the DSM-5 (according to a Google Book search), and that seems to be a more appropriate source than the general English language dictionaries that are currently cited for the first sentence of the intro. For example, see the English Wikipedia content guidelines on reliable sources for medical claims.

Awkward sentence

[edit]

The intro indicates that "Dyscalculia does not reflect a general deficit in cognitive abilities, nor do difficulties with time, measurement, and spatial reasoning." As currently worded, I interpret this to have a meaning that is likely different than the intended meaning.

According to the current wording, the meaning is that "Dyscalculia does not reflect a general deficit in cognitive abilities. Difficulties with time, measurement, and spatial reasoning do not reflect a general deficit in cognitive abilities either."

The purpose of the second assertion is unclear, since the connection between Dyscalculia and the cited difficulties is not established in the preceeding sentences. According to the body of the article, these symptoms are associated with dyscalculia. Even after that is established, the second assertion doesn't seem to fit the article (the subject is Dyscalculia, not these particular three difficulties in isolation), and I'm not sure if it's supported by the references. One of them doesn't seem to mention the telling of time, for example, and I couldn't access the other since it's behind a paywall.

Perhaps the difficulties with time, measurement, and spatial reasoning could be incorporated into the first paragraph as follows (changes are indicated by bold text or strikethrough text):

Dyscalculia (/ˌdɪskælˈkjuːliə/)[1][2][3][4] is a disability resulting in difficulty learning or comprehending arithmetic, such as difficulty in understanding numbers, learning how to manipulate numbers, performing arithmetical calculations and learning arithmetical facts. Other symptoms include difficulties with time, measurement, and spatial reasoning. Discalculia is sometimes informally known as "math dyslexia", though this can be misleading as dyslexia is a different condition from dyscalculia.[5]

Then the sentence in question could simply read "Dyscalculia does not reflect a general deficit in cognitive abilities, nor do difficulties with time, measurement, and spatial reasoning.

Notes:

  1. I eliminated "learning how to manipulate numbers," since it's somewhat vague and does not appear to be directly supported by the cited references (at least not any manipulations beyond arithmetical calculations, which are already mentioned).
  2. I changed "mathematical calculations" to "arithmetical calculations" since mathematical calculations are far more general than arithmetical calculations (for example, in algebraic topology, we can calculate homotopy groups).
  3. I changed "facts in mathematics" to "arithmetical facts" for similar reasons. I think the term "math facts" is used in math education circles to refer to certain sums and products in arithmetic, but "arithmetical facts" is less ambiguous.

If anyone has any thoughts about the DSM-5 or about my proposed changes, that would be great!

--Greg at Higher Math Help (talk) 10:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for the "dysarithmia" synonym

[edit]

The source I used was removed (change log message "predatory journal"), and I'm having trouble finding another, because that Wikipedia entry excerpt got copied to many places. I was still able to find https://thepostmillennial.com/flashback-trudeau-confessed-he-cant-do-simple-math-or-calculations: does that qualify as (enough) reliable evidence for the synonym? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 04:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

understanding how math operations work, but not how to use it to solve problems

[edit]

Dyscalculia may be wrongly used to describe students who lack the ability solve problems that require math operations. When to add, subtract, multiply, or divide. How to set-up an equation to solve a real world problem, such as the notorious "when train A leaves the station at 10 AM going 40 miles per hour to the west, and train B leaves its station at 11 AM going 30 miles per hour to the east, and they are 300 miles apart when they start, what time will they meet?" A student may be thoroughly proficient at adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing. However, being able to analyze the problem step-by-step, and then know which operations to use to find the answer, are not the same as being able to proficiently add, subtract, multiply, and divide numbers. Those are two separate abilities, but in my experience as a student, it was expected that once a student learned how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide, along with manipulating fractions, doing word problems would come naturally and didn't need to be taught because "it was intuitive". Again, from my experience, when a student couldn't solve the train problem, the student had to start over by being sure that adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing skills were okay. I've never come across any courses that teach problem-solving strategies. Not being able to work with numbers in a similar way that dyslexics can't work with letters and words is not the same as not being able to set-up mathematical equations to solve problems. Kind of like there are lots of people who can play musical instruments and sound great, but it takes a little more to compose that music. Don't confuse those two abilities. Linstrum (talk) 06:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Grades"?

[edit]

This page uses (I assume) the US grade system to discuss ability/progress:

Most adults with dyscalculia have a hard time processing math at a 4th-grade level. For 1st–4th grade

I accept this may be a direct quote from a reference but I live in the UK, I have no idea what age this relates to. Should this:

  1. specify exactly whose grade system this is?
  2. state the typical age of a child in said grade?

Having said that, since children don't start school at the same age in every country, maybe age isn't a useful metric anyway. AnsIdgag (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dyscalculia&oldid=1218090705"