Teachers' Perceptions of Dyslexia and Its Implications for Inclusive English Language Teaching in Public Secondary Schools in Panama

Universidad de Panamá

Eje 1: Docencia Universitaria y Transformación Educativa

Núcleo de conversación 4: Diversidad e inclusión como enfoque docente

Clara Mireya Clark

WHY THIS MATTERS

A quiet challenge in every classroom

10–15%

estimated general-population prevalence

5.56%

prevalence in a Panamanian student sample

9,145

students who left Panama’s public system in one year

Panamanian evidence has focused mainly on prevalence and reading/academic outcomes. Much less is known about what English teachers know, believe, and feel prepared to do when teaching students with dyslexia.

Sources: Cubilla-Bonnetier et al. (2021a, 2021b); CCIAP (2023).

THE PROBLEM: THREE RESEARCH GAPS

Each gap supported by scholarly literature

1 LOCAL EVIDENCE GAP

Panamanian studies document prevalence and academic/reading outcomes, but not English teachers’ perceptions and preparedness.

Cubilla-Bonnetier et al., 2021a, 2021b

2 TEACHER-KNOWLEDGE GAP

Teachers may recognize dyslexia while still holding misconceptions or lacking confidence and specialized preparation.

Washburn et al., 2011; Knight, 2018

3 EFL / REGIONAL GAP

EFL-focused research remains limited and identifies needs for training, resources, and inclusive practices.

Kalsoom et al., 2020; Pezo Galdea et al., 2023

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

What this study set out to do

To explore English teachers’ perceptions and knowledge of dyslexia, and examine how these perceptions influence English language teaching in public secondary schools in the San Miguelito region of Panama.

Secondary goal: identify teachers’ real professional-development needs.

METHODOLOGY

Research design and methodological grounding

QUANTITATIVE

diagnostic survey component reported here

EXPLORATORY–

DESCRIPTIVE

systematic description of an under-studied issue

CROSS-

SECTIONAL

data collected at one point in time

Methodological clarification

Creswell & Creswell (2018) support the distinction and integration of quantitative and qualitative evidence. This conference presentation reports the quantitative diagnostic component. Qualitative findings should be reported only after those data are formally collected and analyzed.

Methodological source: Creswell & Creswell (2018), Research Design, 5th ed., SAGE.

METHODOLOGY

Sample, instrument, ethics, and analysis

27

English teachers

3

public secondary schools

15

survey items

8 + 7

yes/no + multiple-choice

• Purposive sampling of actively teaching English instructors in San Miguelito.
• Voluntary and anonymous participation through Google Forms.
• Descriptive statistics: frequencies and percentages in Microsoft Excel.
• The conference dataset contains closed-response items; no qualitative findings are claimed here.

RESULTS

Teacher profile and knowledge of dyslexia

80%+

have 6+ years of teaching experience

89%

say they know what dyslexia is

52%

cannot identify its actual characteristics

55.5%

have taught a student with dyslexia

Teachers know the term, but many do not yet recognize dyslexia accurately in a real classroom context.

RESULTS

Classroom practice, confidence, barriers, and training

51.85%

report using strategies for students with dyslexia

22.22%

feel confident teaching a student with dyslexia

74.07%

report institutional/resource barriers

92.6%

have received no formal dyslexia training

The strongest pattern is the distance between awareness and preparedness: knowing about dyslexia does not automatically translate into confidence or effective classroom practice.

RESULTS

Learning potential and the inclusion paradox

81.48%

believe students with dyslexia can learn English

77.8%

say dyslexia affects motivation and self-esteem

66.7%

say it affects academic performance

Only 33.3% support full inclusion in mainstream classrooms.

• Reported reasons for hesitation: limited specialized resources, insufficient classroom time, and inadequate training.
• This result is interpreted as perceived system constraints, not as evidence of rejection of students.

DISCUSSION

Awareness is not the same as preparation

Teachers recognize dyslexia and students’ learning potential, but limited training, resources, and confidence constrain inclusive classroom practice.

• Washburn et al. (2011): gaps and misconceptions in teachers’ dyslexia-related knowledge.
• Knight (2018): additional dyslexia training associated with stronger teacher knowledge and confidence.
• Kalsoom et al. (2020): awareness alongside practical difficulties at secondary level.
• Pezo Galdea et al. (2023): Latin American evidence on teacher perceptions of dyslexia.
• The San Miguelito data extend this discussion to public secondary English teaching in Panama.

CONCLUSIONS & KEY REFERENCES

From diagnosis to evidence-based support

Recommendations

• Continuous, practical professional development for inclusive EFL teaching.
• Stronger school–university–policy collaboration and access to classroom resources.
• Broader, multi-region research with carefully planned quantitative and qualitative components.

Selected scholarly references

Creswell & Creswell (2018). Research Design (5th ed.). SAGE.

Cubilla-Bonnetier et al. (2021). Investigación y Pensamiento Crítico, 9(1), 22–30.

Knight (2018). Dyslexia, 24(3), 207–219.

Kalsoom, Mujahid, & Zulfqar (2020). Bulletin of Education and Research, 42(1), 155–166.

Pezo Galdea et al. (2023). Ciencia Latina, 7(2), 10689–10705.

Washburn, Joshi, & Binks-Cantrell (2011). Dyslexia, 17(2), 165–183.

THANK YOU

Questions & Discussion Welcome

Clara Mireya Clark

clara.clark-m@up.ac.pa

Faculty of Humanities | University of Panama

ORCID: 0009-0004-7552-165X