Students construct dyslexia primarily through temporal demands. Reading "three or four times" to absorb information creates an invisible barrier. Speed requirements make the invisible disability visible to peers and faculty. Time pressure distinguishes dyslexic students from "normal" students in higher education contexts.

Time as Central Experience

Students use hedges ("just," "only," "a little bit," "maybe") to downplay difficulties. This linguistic pattern normalizes difference within higher education settings. Minimization reflects ambivalence about the dyslexia label. The strategy navigates between claiming accommodation needs and avoiding stigma.

Dyslexia Minimization Strategies

Time demands make invisible disability visible, triggering minimization strategies to maintain normalcy appearance
- Time as Central Experience
- Minimization Strategies

State University of New York at Binghamton

This chapter uses Critical Discursive Psychology to analyze how 19 college students with dyslexia linguistically construct their experiences through interviews. The study identifies two key patterns: students frame dyslexia primarily through temporal demands (needing extra time and repetition makes their "invisible" disability visible), and they position the experience as uniquely individual and isolating rather than communal. The findings reveal that dyslexia in higher education is constructed through context and conditions rather than purely neurological factors, with implications for accommodation policies that should prioritize flexible time, reduced reading volume, and peer support groups.

Chapter 6: It’s About Time - Constructing Dyslexia in Higher Education

Lester, J. N. (Ed.). (2021). Discursive Psychology and Disability. Palgrave Studies in Discursive Psychology. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Reference For: Discursive Psychology and Disability

Lived experiences exceed clinical definitions, fueling ambivalence about diagnostic labels' utility
- Beyond Literacy Boundaries
- Ambivalence About Labels

Dyslexia: Experience-Definition Gap

Emphasis on unique, context-specific experiences reinforces isolation by preventing communal understanding
- Individual Isolation Pattern
- Context-Dependent Manifestation

Dyslexia: Individual-Isolation Loop

Language patterns actively construct dyslexia as temporal and individual, not just describing pre-existing reality
- Time as Central Experience
- Individual Isolation Pattern
- Critical Discursive Disability Methods

Discourse-Reality Construction of Dyslexia

Dyslexia: Temporal-Visibility Nexus

Viewing dyslexia as permanent but context-dependent requires adaptive management rather than universal solutions
- Permanence and Management
- Context-Dependent Manifestation

Dyslexia: Management-Permanence Framework

Kerschbaum uses these studies to illustrate how the material world actively participates in constructing disability. She highlights Wan’s analysis in chapter 7, where hearing assistive devices and cochlear implants fundamentally shape the nature of social interactions, while noting that Gabriel and Kelley demonstrate in chapter 6 how "invisible" disabilities like dyslexia become visible through material factors such as classroom behaviors, time constraints, and affective responses like frustration. Furthermore, she points to Stinesen et al.’s findings in chapter 4, observing that patients distinguish between a "willing mind" and a "disabled body," a separation enforced by the embodied experience of pain preventing physical action.

Evidence from Reviewed Chapters

The discursive construction of disability is deeply influenced by the relationships between interlocutors, noting that these constructions often shift based on who is present in the interaction. Kerschbaum points to Gabriel and Kelley’s study in chapter 6, observing that the student Ethan used his actual relationships with other dyslexic people to support the portrayal of his own experience. Furthermore, she references Wan’s analysis of Xiao-kun in chapter 7, who constructed "abled-ness" and "disabled-ness" differently regarding her hearing aid—which was associated with shame—versus her cochlear implant. However, Kerschbaum emphasizes that this specific construction was not shared uniformly by the other hard-of-hearing women participating in the conversation.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After