I wonder if this updated book has been missed amidst all the upheaval  of the last few months. I have put some thoughts together on what has been updated- thought it may be useful. It started off for my own benefit to see what the differences were, then I thought I would share it. 

Chinn has updated the definition of dyscalculia, basing it on the one adopted by SASC and BDA. He has clarified this by saying there is no universal definition but I do like the point he makes that this should not prevent schools from “observing and addressing…problems should not always require a label before they are addressed” (page 3) hence, I think, the need for screeners and a graduated plan-do-review approach. 

Chinn has updated references to reports, such as the 2017 “A new approach to making the UK numerate”, which makes interesting reading and is now using gender neutral language (having moved from using ‘he’ to ‘they’).

I like the new section of co-occurring difficulties (co-morbidity). He refers to a new report on page 12-13 suggesting “dyslexia and dyscalculia and have separable cognitive profiles, namely a phonological deficit in the case of dyslexia and a deficient number module in the case of dyscalculia.” 

The checklists are the same, and the norms data is the same, as the second edition. For the dyscalculia checklist, I feel more may be needed to look specifically at dyscalculia in light of the new definition, but he adds an interesting observation that some items may be best considered as a cluster, which will add more information (for example, the items that involve counting and those that involve memories). He makes the point that his norm-referenced test gives an idea about how big the problem is, rather than being something to use diagnostically.

He clarifies why he does not present all data for every percentile – this is a conscious decision, as he wants us to ask the questions- “can you tell me how you worked that out?” For me it it is a reminder to us all that “tests do not diagnose – people do”. 

Chinn reminds us of the impact of vision and now, in line with SASC guidance, about the need to have this checked by an appropriate professional and to refer onwards. As the SASC guidance tells us: “Assessors should take care to act and reach conclusions within the limits of their knowledge, skills and experience.” I observe that the information about Irlen’s Syndrome has been removed (perhaps taken out due to the SASC guidance?- but this is just speculation on my part).  

The short-term and working-memory tasks are in again due to the importance of the impact of memory on maths activities. Now he suggests doing the test twice – once without distraction and once with distraction as pupils are “rarely using these memories in the quiet conditions”, which I think is a good idea. The TAPS 4 (if you are interested) also has a test of Auditory Figure-Ground- Processing Oral Directions with background noise, which assesses an individual’s ability to process and recall oral directions when presented with competing background noise.

Chinn goes onto say that there is a lack of intervention to improve working memory in maths, but decreasing anxiety helps. There is a good section on anxiety, which is increasingly relevant now that anxiety is included in the definition. It is an important factor when considering a diagnosis of dyscalculia. When looking at possible dyscalculia, perhaps we could look to see if anxiety about maths is in the family, but we should certainly be looking for it in the student. 

Chinn refers to the Abbreviated Mathematics Anxiety Scale (mAMAS, page 77) and I have found a useful summary report of this from Nuffield – it is interesting to note that it concludes: “Our qualitative analysis of structured interviews suggests that children as young as 9 are experts in their own experiences in mathematics and this can be harnessed to further understand the thought processes underlying maths anxiety. This brings us closer to design effective prevention and remediation programs for mathematics anxiety.”

Other anxiety scales I have found are:

• The UK Maths Anxiety Scale

• The Children’s Scale – UK (4-7 years)

Chinn reminds us that we base our conclusions on more than 1 source of evidence and that “accumulated evidence is likely to be most reliable.” This is in line with SASC guidelines that our approach to assessing should be holistic, not just for dyscalculia, and that it is more than just ‘one below average standard score in a maths test’. 

Chinn has provided 2 updated sample reports at the end. They are not written according to SASC guidance but there are some great phrases, explanations and observational comments that reminded me about what I need to be looking for, above and beyond the standard scores. As in the SASC guidance ‘qualitative observation and analysis of strategies and approaches to tasks’ are so important. 

My favourite line, at the end of page 20: “Be better than the test you use.”

Further guidance on Tests for use in Assessments of Dyscalculia and Maths Difficulties is available from SASC.