Dissertation by Stanley Furniss

Investigating and discussing a link between dyslexia and creativity amongst architectural design students.

STANLEY FURNISS BA (HONS) ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING T H E U N IV E R S IT Y O F T H E W E S T O F E N G L A N D A P R IL 2 0 1 4

W O R D C O U N T : 9,483

Dissertation Declaration This study was completed as part of the Architecture and Planning undergraduate course at the University of the West of England, Bristol. The work here is my own. Where the work of others is used or drawn upon, it is attributed to the relevant source. S ig n e d : … … … … … … … … … … … … … .

D a te :… … … … … …

Copyright: This dissertation is protected by copyright. Do not copy any part of it for any purpose other than personal academic study without the permission of the author.

Abstract Is dyslexia just a problem to its ‘sufferers’, or can it produce an array of positive attributes? This is a question that has for many years been at the forefront of educational debate showing a recognisable frequency among art and design based subjects. This dissertation explores the concurrent understandings of dyslexia and its almost undeniable link to heightened creative ability in architecture students. It takes its start by setting out the study’s aims and the methodology that is used to create the final discussion. This is followed by a substantial literature review that firstly provides contextual overviews for dyslexia and creativity, before moving forward on to core concepts and theories of this relationship. This section is based on findings from psychologists, academics and finally architectural professionals. Next is the primary experiment that was conducted with a specialist approach towards architecture, considering the effects that dyslexia has on students studying on a degree level architecture course. At the time of writing there have been no studies yet confirmed or even conducted on the conjectures of outstanding creativity and dyslexia within the confines of studying architecture at degree level. This makes the work presented here significant and original within its own boundaries. The self-report methods, combined with the design task used, confirmed a prevalence of advanced creativity amongst dyslexic students of architecture. This has produced interesting discourse relating to the topic that questions a number of areas within creativity, ability and teaching.

Acknowledgements I w o u ld lik e to ta k e th is o p p o rtu n ity to a c k n o w le d g e a n u m b e r o f in d iv id u a ls, w ith o u t w h o m th is p u b lic a tio n w o u ld n o t h a v e b e e n p o ssib le . T o b e g in w ith Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d lik e to th a n k m y d isse rta tio n tu to r E le n a M a rc o w h o sh a re d k n o w le d g e a n d a d v ic e o n h o w to ta c k le m y re se a rc h q u e stio n , a llo w in g m e to c o m p le te th is p ie c e o f re se a rc h . S e c o n d ly , m y m o th e r, S a ra F u rn iss, w h o h a s g iv e n a v a st a m o u n t o f tim e p ro o fre ad in g a n d d isc u ssin g th e to p ic . F in a lly , I w o u ld a lso lik e to th a n k M ik e D e v e re u x fo r g iv in g fe e d b a c k to w a rd s m y re se arch e x p e rim e n t an d co n trib u tio n to th e stu d y co n clu sio n .

4 Â

Table of Contents Abstract

Page 3

Acknowledgements

Page 4

Referred to Terms, Key Words and Abbreviations P a g e 6 1.0 Introduction

Page 7

1.1 Aims 1.2 Methodology

2.0 Literature Review

Page 10

2.1 What is Dyslexia? 2.2 What is Creativity? 2.3 Dyslexia Amongst Art Students 2.4 Dr. Shaywitz, A world Expert on Dyslexia 2.5 CASCADE 2.6 A Professionals Opinion 2.7 Summary of Literature Review

3.0 Primary Study

Page 21

3.1 Results 3.2 Design Task Results 3.3 Limitations, Reliability and Validity

4.0 Discussions and Conclusion

Page 29

5.0 Appendices

Page 31

Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C

6.0 References and Bibliography

Page 34

Referred To Terms Hawthorne Effect: T h e p h e n o m e n o n w h e re b y p articip an ts m o d ify an asp e ct o f th e ir b e h avio r in re sp o n se to th e b e in g o b se rv e d o r k n o w in g th e a im s o f a stu d y (M c C a rn e y , 2 0 0 7 ). Ceiling Effect: A ce ilin g e ffe ct h ap p e n s w h e n m o st o f th e d a ta c o lle c te d is c lu ste re d to w ard th e to p o f scale (C ram e r, 2 0 0 5 ) Parti Diagram: A n id e a ske tch givin g an in itial re sp o n se to a site , p ro gram o r so m e o th e r c o n d itio n s. (P h illip s, 2 0 1 1 )

Key words Dyslexia, Creativity, Design, Architecture, Non-dyslexic.

Abbreviations U W E : U n ive rsity o f th e W e st o f E n glan d B D A : B ritish D y sle x ia A sso c ia tio n H E I : H ig h e r E d u c a tio n In stitu tio n C A S C A D E : C re ativity A cro ss S cie n ce , A rt, D y sle x ia a n d E d u catio n N . D : N o D ate R I B A : R o y a l In stitu te o f B ritish A rc h ite c ts H E S A : H ig h e r E d u c a tio n S ta tistic s A g e n c y O N S : O ffic e F o r N a tio n a l S ta tistic s D f E S : D e p a rtm e n t fo r E d u c a tio n a n d S k ills

6 Â

1.0 Introduction Investigating a link between dyslexia and creativity amongst architectural design students.

“I still d o n ’t d raw as w e ll as m o st arch ite cts. T h e re are a lo t o f arch ite cts w h o a re d y sle x ic , th e q u e stio n is: d o w e h a v e a b e tte r sp a tia l u n d e rsta n d in g a n d c re a tiv e th o u g h ts, w h ic h is w h a t I sa y , o r is it b e c a u se w e c a n ’t d o a n y th in g e lse ? T h e C e n tre P o m p id o u in P a ris, is w h a t I’m b e st k n o w n fo r a n d it d o e s re fle c t m y w a y o f th in k in g .” R ic h a rd R o g e rs, 2 0 1 0 Is there a link between dyslexia and creativity and can it be recognised among architecture students design work? The first part of this question is something that has been asked across a number of disciplines. A short answer would be to say probably, but there is not enough evidence to suggest that it indefinitely offers a distinct advantage. It has allowed some people to excel in creative vocations, such as Richard Rogers, whilst also it has prevented others from succeeding in various similar or other professions. “It is believed that dyslexic people are often highly visual, able to quickly process and integrate high-quality visual and spatial information” (Martin, N.D. p1), but does this mean a link does exist between dyslexia and creativity? Well, throughout the past decade this has been the rapidly growing consensus, a positive link that connects dyslexia with creativity, so that many studies of research have sought to provide empirical evidence of a definitive link between the two. This has led to many theorists proposing a number of explanations, including developmental differences, inherent differences and brain structure differences. However, such theories are still submitted as being based on anecdotal evidence with only non-representative specific cases offering empirical proof (Everatt, 1999). Although there is a vast catalogue of research and an extensive consensus, there has been little focus on the effects that this link may have on dyslexic individuals in terms of ability when tested against non-dyslexic people. In addition to the lack of research, there is also no research known, as of yet, which looks at creative differences between dyslexic and non-dyslexic architecture students within design studio as part of the degree course. It is presumed that these individuals hold a high level of artistic talent due to their admittance into an art and design based degree course. That being said this dissertation will not deny the fact that such individuals could already hold creative

aptitude but will look to identify with those who are dyslexic and display high levels of creativity from a difference in design process and thinking.

1.1 Aims The aim of this dissertation is to look for a commonness of creativity among dyslexic architecture students. This will be demonstrated through an understanding gained by means of a broad literature review and a primary study on architecture students. The primary study consisted of self-report style questionnaire and design task that was used to emphasise whether dyslexic design process differs or doesn’t differ with that of a non-dyslexic student. It will question the theory that people with dyslexia seem to problem-solve in ‘unusual’ ways leading them to create, ‘out of the box’ outcomes, such as that of the Pompidou Centre by Rogers. This approach is presented for the purpose of this paper and will give an insight to this specific area, allowing evidence for scoped discussion, rather than that of formulated answer. That being said, this experiment will give results that are not representative of every dyslexic individual, but be important to forming the final discussion and conclusion.

1.2 Methodology The dissertation will be made up of two main sections that will create an informative discussion about the commonness of dyslexia in architecture students and what this means for the degree and the people embarking on it. In order to do this a literature review and a primary study will be undertaken to provide the information needed for an organised final discussion. The recognition of creativity is largely dependent on the interpretations of the person seeing it. Therefore, the information presented within this dissertation has been based largely on personal opinions, UWE academic design tutors and that of those academics mentioned throughout the literature review. The literature review firstly identifies with current theories held by academics that have been formed and developed through research into the subject. It starts by contextualising dyslexia the ‘learning difficulty’, and provides background information for later understanding and reference. As well as this, further evidence will demonstrate that there is a link existing that shows a high percentage of dyslexic individuals studying degree level or higher creative arts. The next focus of the literature review will take a withdrawal from the facts and figures of the conception of Dyslexia as a basic phonological or literacy deficit in which it is manifested by. It looks at various research studies, articles and journals produced by a range of

academics and dyslexic persons that hold diversity, in opinions and what creativity means for the dyslexic mind. This diverse set of perspectives is important to understand relative issues and typical exhibited behaviors, which has been possible through the wide range of literature used. The key ideas from the literature review have been used to speculate about the outcomes of the second part of this dissertation, the design task and questionnaire. To produce results for discussion the study will be conducted using 20 participants, 10 dyslexic and 10 non-dyslexic, all sourced from the UWE, and studying on an architecture course.

9 Â

2.0 Literature Review This is a thematic literature review of the subject topic of this dissertation that aims to provide a solid foundation of existing information surrounding dyslexia and creativity. This can then be applied and considered within architecture studio. Despite the relationship between dyslexia and creativity being at the forefront of many discussions for decades, there appears to be very limited literature relating directly to the topic of dyslexia and creativity within the design studio of an architecture degree. However, architecture does fall within the broader topic of Art and Design, for which there is a rich library of existing literature. The literature found was used to inform predictions toward the outcomes of the study on dyslexic and non-dyslexic architecture students. Furthermore, these sources of literature will then be used alongside the primary study in order to create a discursive conclusion about dyslexia and creativity in regards to architectural design studio. Each element of the dissertation subject has been fragmented into its finer elements (such as ‘creativity’ and ‘dyslexia’) and themes, allowing for a broader range of evidence to be obtained. The first section of the literature review, 2.1, looks at a contextualisation of dyslexia in order to firstly give an understanding of what the learning difficulty is, how it is defined and what traits it exhibits. Secondly, in 2.2 a similar contextualisation is given, this time to appreciate existing interpretations of creativity that were important in the final results of the design tasks. Next, 2.3 looked at a report by Lundberg and Wolff on dyslexia among art higher education students. Their report has been very informative to this report in terms of the way in which it has conducted a valid experiment, creating abundant discussion relating to existing theories. In 2.4 the work of Dr. Sally Shaywitz is discussed, which contributed to the definition given in 2.1. The research discussed relates to that of the theory linked to a phonological processing deficit and other findings from a variety of studies on dyslexia. Discussed in 2.5 is a book created by the University of Bath called CASCADE (Creativity across science, art, dyslexia and education) for the use of a range of people. It has been a key reading in determining creativity within the context of art and design, and thus has been useful to applying theories and opinions to architecture, which falls under the topic of art and design. Finally, a summary from an article written in the RIBA journal by a dyslexic architect has been mentioned to further expound the opinion of a professional who has found success within architecture and believes the creative personality of a dyslexic individual is a benefit to many offices.

2.1 What is Dyslexia?

It is important to understand Dyslexia as a condition and the difficulties that an individual faces in day-to-day life, work or studies, in order to discuss its impact within the context of Architecture higher education courses. Thus it was vital to read a wide range of literature on the learning difficulty to enable us to have a broader understanding of these difficulties, or advantages, as well as the solutions that individuals use to perform at their best in design work. “Dyslexia is the name given to a specific learning disability that impedes the typical progress in learning to be literate” (BDA, 2012, p2). Although this is quite a narrow image of the ‘disability’, and, in fact, it can be characterised by many different unique traits, each of which can be located on a continuum with a range from mild to severe dyslexia. Therefore, this should not be taken as a definition. The first introduction of the disability was reported in the British Medical Journal 1896, where Dr. W Pringle Morgan described “A brilliant 14-year-old boy who was smart and good at doing everything except for reading. The boy had no visual problem, but he just could not recognize printed or written words. He said that those printed or written word ‘have no meanings to him’ (Shaywitz, 2003, p14). This propagated in following decades, with similar cases being reported worldwide that stemmed a belief suggesting dyslexia will not be outgrown, and that poor readers will remain poor readers unless they receive special instruction. This would therefore demonstrate that it is important to identify whether an individual has dyslexia as early as possible in order to give him or her correct support and treatment (Shaywitz, 2003). A wide range of studies has supported significant contributions to the understanding of Dyslexia across the fields of medicine, neuroscience, psychology, education and arts that have left any definition problematic and wide ranged (BDA, 2012). The problem with defining dyslexia is considered to be rooted in the fact that although it is generally agreed to be a complex neurological condition, there is a lack of agreement about the functional deficits that underlie the condition (Galaburda, 1993). Many of the definitions are focused around it being a manifestation of difficulty in learning to read despite conventional instruction, adequate intelligence and sociocultural opportunity (Critchley, 1975). Sally Shaywitz, is a recognised neurologist and co-director of the Yale centre for Dyslexia and Creativity with over 200 publications about the learning difficulty. She championed the ‘Sea of Strengths’ model of dyslexia, which “emphasizes the strengths of higher critical thinking and creativity surrounding the encapsulated weakness found in children and adults who are dyslexic”

(Shaywitz, 2005). Many recognize this definition from her research that reflects accumulating empirical data, and that is the most irrefutable: Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that neurobiological in origin. It is characterised by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component or language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. (Lyon, Shaywitz & Shaywitz, 2003, p6) The emphasis here is on recognising the deficit in the phonological processing of dyslexic individuals. The definition offers us some reason for why “dyslexics have trouble in becoming literate and perhaps excel in other areas that require this less, such as art and design. This is rather than the assumption that being unable to become proficiently literate is due to cognitive abilities or intelligence of the individual”. (Wolff & Lundberg, 2002, p41). This definition is an alternative to the simplistic interpretation of the relationship between creativity and dyslexia, where failure in academic subjects forces some dyslexic children to look for success in other fields (Wolff & Lundberg 2002, p41), where they may find opportunities for compensatory success within art and design based subjects, such as architecture. This assumption of neurological differences should be interpreted in casual terms. It is aided by laboratory evidence looking at functional brain imagery that detects a disruption of left hemisphere posterior neural systems. This was examined in dyslexic art students and non-dyslexic students of different degrees, and found activation of different areas of the brain. In this sense, then, the relationship between artistic talent and dyslexia could well be a ‘real’ relationship (Wolff and Lundberg, 2002). These neurological discoveries have had a significant implication on the acceptance and validity of dyslexia worldwide. It has proved it to be undeniable as a ‘real’ rather than a ‘hidden’ disability, therefore, allowing accommodations to be made for older children and adults who are attending higher education and graduate programs (Shaywitz, 2002). Recent studies have shown that Dyslexia affects an estimated 4% of the United Kingdom’s population (Smythe, 2005). While this may not sound like a huge amount, within its context of 59,668,000, being the total population in 2005, it would mean 2,386,720 people are living in the United Kingdom with Dyslexia (ONS,2005). Within the two million people declared as dyslexics there are currently a growing number of such students who are attending university in the UK, despite educational difficulties in pre-higher education (Taylor, 2009). In the year 2003-2004 students who declared this disability (of which dyslexia is part of) accounted for 43% of first-year students (HESA, 2008). As a consequence of this high percentage, many students “embark on degree courses, having severe problems in obtaining and employing a range of skills that would in the past been regarded as essential for effective study at this level” (Mortimore & Crozier, 2006).

Furthermore, additional research and surveys suggest that “dyslexia among art, design and creative arts students is notoriously high” (Jackson, 2004, p1), of which architecture design is included. Interestingly, this high number of students is despite methods of strict criterion in gaining admission, reinforcing the idea that students with dyslexia have adequate or heightened abilities in the arts and academia (Wolff, 2002).

2.2 What is Creativity? If you were to ask anybody what types of skills an architect, artist or designer needs it is highly likely they would reply with the answer of ‘creativity’ (along with a few others). It is not, however, a trait locked into these professions; it can be seen in a much wider context too across many different disciplines. In order to apply the term creativity to architectural design studio and create a measurable study it is important to understand what creativity is and the kind of theories it holds in today’s society. This section is to focus on literature and concepts of creativity and understanding them in regards to architectural design studio. This research has informed and influenced a stimulating discussion based on the findings of the study undertaken. Philosophical work on creativity is voluminous, with many great philosophers having much to say on the subject (Gaut, 2010 p2). Although the noun ‘creativity’ is a fairly new and commonly used term, it still remains misunderstood since its first printed appearance in 1875 (Creativity, 2009). The idea is, however, not so new, as it can be dated back centuries, when such philosophers as Kant and Plato saw inspiration as a kind of lunacy, and related creativity to imagination, suggesting that in past times creativity was a commonly recognised attribute. Over the last decade creativity has gained much recognition and interest from academics that will be mentioned in this section. It is important to first emphasise that not all creative people are alike, and, similar to dyslexia, it has many external factors that contribute to its presence. Understandably this inter-linking of multiple factors makes defining creativity a challenge and assessing it a monumental understanding (Kersting, 2003). Furthermore, definition is made even more difficult due to creative individuals mentioning high levels of intuition without being able to explain how it works (Boden, 1996, p75). Many reports have established findings that have supported the high number of definitions of creativity. They have shown a high level of curiosity towards a holistic understanding of creativity and argued that it is more than just an idea, but also the effect that a creative idea has within its context. This holistic approach has allowed for positive aspects of creativity to be more recognised rather than those negative ones associated with drug use and mental illness (Plucker &

Dana 1999). One view that has made its way to the front of discussion is that creativity has become an exhibited attribute admired by many, believed to hold the solution to problems present and future (Kampylis, 2010. p2). It is considered a key skill for future citizens (Craft, Gardener & Claxton. 2008), which is picked up by Ian Whitby later in this literature review. To end this section, we must understand that there is not a fixed definition of creativity yet established, unlike that of dyslexia. There is, nevertheless, a consensus of ideas that form the closest notion to this, that it is the ability to produce work that is novel, intuitive and appropriate to context (Lubart, 1999). The significance of creativity to this study is one suggested by Pile who states, “A key difference between dull or mediocre design work of real excellence is precisely the level of creative thinking that the designer has generated” (Pile, 2003. p134)

2.3 Dyslexia Amongst Art Students One key study, ‘The prevalence of dyslexia amongst art students,’ investigates the mutual acceptance that dyslexia is related to creativity or artistic talents (Wolff and Lundberg, 2002). The investigation of this hypothesis is primarily conducted by studies offering anecdotic and informal observations and case studies of exceptionally talented dyslexics (West, 1997). This report begins by describing a number of theories to do with the link between dyslexia and creativity. For instance, Wolff and Lundberg (2002) suggest a different neurological wiring that results in both original information processing and dyslexic difficulties such as spelling (Geschwind and Galaburda, 1987). The study successfully found that signs of dyslexia occurred more frequently among creative art students than in students on non-art degree courses. One reason given for this finding was that when dyslexic participants were confronted with phonological tasks, they showed evidence of what would suggest different patterns of activity in their brains compared to nondyslexic subjects (Pugh et al., 2000). Wolff and Lundberg suggest different distribution of talents results from this differing brain activity among dyslexics. Although the discoveries found in this paper are largely based on self-report methods and informal observations the findings are still significant and support biological theories. Furthermore, it has been found that “self-reports of dyslexia among adults is proven to be surprisingly reliable and valid procedures” (Lefly and Pennington, 2000). A limitation of these types of studies that Wolff and Lundberg talk about is the comparability of the groups. This can sometimes become problematic as differences irrespective of dyslexia may occur within the parameters of the studies. An example of this is that one of the research studies used art students as well as economic and

commercial law students at the University of Goteberg, Sweden. This means that the outcomes could well be different if the groups used were from different degrees. As a final point, the novelty and creativity of the tasks undertaken have an unknown measureable validity to them, meaning that the outcomes could differ in other similar studies (Wolff and Lundberg, 2002).

2.4 Dr. Shaywitz, A World Expert on Dyslexia Research into the subject area has led towards some key resources, such as that mentioned previously in the contextualization. This is the vast archive of publications by Dr. Sally Shaywitz of the Yale Centre for Dyslexia and Creativity. According to her research, evidence has reinforced the ideas that in many cases people diagnosed with dyslexia are more creative. The conjecture that she makes in her papers is, that dyslexic individuals use areas of the brain that other people use for reading for their creative behaviors (Shaywitz, 2002). This idea has been supported and refined over the past two decades by laboratory studies that have investigated cognitive and neurobiological differences. Through this, the coherent model based on a dyslexic individual’s phonological processing deficit has developed. Shaywitz claims that the findings related to this model are consistent with the proven symptoms of dyslexia, as well as with the discoveries made by neurobiological studies in terms of brain functioning and organisation (Shaywitz, 2002). This phonological model is believed to strengthen what we mean by dyslexia; “an encapsulated deficit often surrounded by significant strengths in reasoning, problem solving, concept formation, critical thinking and vocabulary” (Shaywitz, 1994). The publications and research into dyslexia by Shaywitz are believed to demonstrate that many, but not all, dyslexics have a distinctive advantage over non-dyslexics in their capability to conceptualise and reason with tasks, and the phonological shortfall masks what are often exceptional comprehension skills. An interesting finding, also in papers published by Shaywitz, is that when pressured dyslexic traits appear to be increased with things such as speech becoming littered with hesitancies such as ‘ums’ and ‘ahs’. However, on the other hand when they are under less pressure, without instant response requirements, an individual with dyslexic can convey brilliant verbal presentations (Shaywitz, 1996). This point is an interesting one in relation to design studio that has not been touched upon before. As part of design studio it is essential to be able to not only convey graphic ability, but to also demonstrate verbal presentational strengths to deliver an idea to tutors. This point, however interesting it may be, is not something that needs to be considered in depth here as it relates little to creativity. Extensions of this research looking at teaching strategies for dyslexic architecture students could benefit from picking up on it.

Many argue Shaywitz’ research leaves room for debate. This is due to its limitations and potential bias towards this idea that dyslexic individuals do have exceptional talents in areas away from literature, including art, architecture and pattern finding. In defence of this, Shaywitz points out that “many successful artists, sculptors, radiologists and entrepreneurs have a history of dyslexia” (Shaywitz, 1996). A wide held belief is that these adults and children with dyslexia will often grow up thinking ‘outside the box’ to allow them to overcome the problems they face through being dyslexic, leaving them more predisposed to increased creative skills. In conclusion, Dr. Shaywitz has made some extremely reasonable and well-formed contributions to dyslexia in regards to defining it and reporting evidence. Her research has given strong evidence for a higher incidence of dyslexia amongst creatively talented individuals and a reason as to why. It has provided much of the world with a definition that looks at positives as well as its immediate insufficiencies.

2.5 C.A.S.C.A.D.E Another key resource has been the Cascade (Creativity across science, art, dyslexia, education) book of research papers created by the University of Bath “for the use of dyslexic learning support practitioners, academics and artists who are interested in the relationship between dyslexia and creativity as well as for use for those interested in hearing the voice of dyslexia people” (Kiziewicz, 2007). It highlights the fact that non-dyslexic individuals, and often social psychologists, have answered much of the answers to questions about the effects of dyslexia. It states that these answers have now become rooted in daily practices and sometimes form oppressive resolutions, though many of the papers demonstrate a resistance to this through the use of some dyslexic contributors as well as non-dyslexics (Herrington, 2007) The significance of their views on the subject is something that should not be overstated because this resistance is what echoes the view of multiple definitions about dyslexia and its competing for ‘authenticity’ (Herrington, 2007). The following statement is within Kiziewicz’ introduction and really sets a theme for what is to follow in the papers. “ in our 24x7 driven society can we embrace the time to find moments of stillness where qualities which may not be obvious and which take a long time to emerge can be held, empowered, understood and expressed, sometimes without words. Work of dyslexics takes four times as long to emerge as that of non-dyslexics people, but when it does, it is four times as strong”. (Kiziewicz, 2007, p6)

This is very ‘Pro-dyslexia’ of him to suggest that given time a dyslexic individual can potentially outdo somebody without dyslexia. It is this theme that the papers follow, that dyslexia should be viewed as a positive feature that requires adaption in methods in order to shine through. One contribution to this book comes from Professor Tim Miles, an international dyslexia association award winner for his contributions to research. He discusses Art and Dyslexia within his personal experiences and research, suggesting also that he has witnessed children with “reading and spelling difficulties produce really beautiful art work” (Miles, 2007, p24). Although, like many other findings within this subject area, it remains quite speculative and based on primary observations. He puts forward the idea that the balance of skills being affected by the two hemispheres of the brain gives a dyslexic individual a better well-rounded understanding and suggests this would allow them to visualise things in 3-D or other kinds of ways with an advantage. Again, something that many architects have demonstrated an ability to do to a high level. His input closes on a rather ‘pro-dyslexia’ note again such as that of the contributors so far. Editor of the higher education section is Professor William Gosling, who identifies the differences in brain symmetry between dyslexics and what he calls ‘Modals’ (non-dyslexics) as found in research by Shaywitz et al. (Gosling, 2007, p63). Additionally he re-enforces a similar point to that of many other researchers, that the difference in brain structure creates a collection of different psychological and physiological outcomes, such as dyslexia. Often this includes what this paper is looking at, better than average or heightened visual and spatial abilities (Gosling, 2007, p63). This should not be assumed as something that occurs for all however, as some people with dyslexia do not receive this gift and only experience the negative effects of the disability. Iain Biggs, the joint editor to Kiziewicz, focuses his contribution to the paper on art, dyslexia and creativity from a personal point of view and is of much relevance to this dissertation. His part has been very beneficial reading as it differs slightly from the previous inputs due to Biggs being a dyslexic adult who went un-diagnosed for much of his life. Early on he points out that “there are now good bodies of well-researched evidence that tells us there are links between visual spatial ability associated with dyslexia and the forms of thinking that aid creative work in the arts”(Biggs, 2007, p99). Nevertheless, this evidence comes with its own problems. For example, it does support the constant battle to get dyslexia recognised fully within the academic work, but we should not consider it a fixed outcome of the learning difficulty. “We must not slip towards the assumption that dyslexics have an inherent predisposition to be visually artistic as this may become a way of overlooking their real capabilities within other professions”(Biggs, 2007, p99). Rather an individual’s creativity may often come down to how well they understand and utilise it, or whether it can be applied to their life. What he believes is that what “creativity in the arts and the thinking of dyslexics may have in common is the potential to work imaginatively between and across categories” (Biggs, 2007, p99). This is something that is required within art and design,

drawing on contextual information in order to influence and create pieces of work. Through being a member of academic staff at various art based institutions he found “years of working with art students confirms my sense that many dyslexics arrive on art and design courses, such as architecture, because these offer a worthy form of higher education they can access” (Biggs, 2007, p99) In summary, the Cascade publication (Kiziewicz and Biggs) has delivered a very interesting set of opinions and understandings of dyslexia and creativity within arts as well as more generally within higher education. It has been a very relevant document to the dissertation and provided information, which has influenced a shaped way of thinking of dyslexia within architecture. This accepts the fact that dyslexic individuals “often feel they are part of a minority within a suffocating culture in education and that embracing creativity, imagination and playing with ideas are all part of the learning process” (Brigden, 2007, p113). Nonetheless, it has demonstrated that through the publication of papers such as CASCADE and many others, the view of dyslexia has become less of a hindrance to the dyslexic individual. What this proposes is that dyslexia has started to become observed as an accepted learning difference with positive traits associated to other fields of study. In the closing word this is reinforced by Hennon, a dyslexic artist who has “personally encountered the change in acceptance” and a “tangible growth in the understanding of the subject” (Hennon, 2007, p115). The conclusion of CASCADE recognizes that its contributors and participants have undertaken much of the research in the field of dyslexia over the past three decades "therefore all suggestions and findings within are based on sound knowledge acquired through studies on dyslexia" (Hennon, 2007, p116). It has contributed a great part in the paradigm shift in approaches and the huge growth in awareness of the issues of dyslexia both in education and culture.

2.6 A Professionals Opinion As declared previously, there has been little published based on the creativity found in dyslexic students on a HEI degree or profession of architecture. Certainly there are many self-proclaimed dyslexic or psychologist reported dyslexics, but direct evidence is of little, so assumption must be avoided. One diagnosed dyslexic architect, Mark Whitby of Davis Maguire and Whitby architects, wrote an article on the specialist educational requirements of dyslexics within school and work. He debates the extra requirements of individuals who progress into art and design disciplines, and indicates many individuals often require less time within these study areas as they appear hardwired for them. He states that its likely children who ‘suffer’ from dyslexia counterweigh their weaknesses by ‘developing strong alternative oral, visual and creative skills, and, as a result, it is not surprising to discover that many gravitate towards the design and construction professions”

(Whitby, 2005). Although he goes on to debate his opinion that he doesn’t deem it necessary to give extra benefits to individuals within employment, this phrase does fit in with prior findings such as those by Biggs (2007) and Wolff & Lundberg (2002). Finally, Whitby closes on the note that again looks at not giving dyslexic individuals special arrangements in the work place as “The special spatial skills that many dyslexics develop, together with a fuzzy logic that might be mistaken for lateral thinking, make them valuable additions to any office” (Whitby 2005) Additionally, some would say that society is shifting to bounce back from a time of recession, creating more demand for this type of creative-minded person, rather than mechanically skilled people. This questions whether the words difficulty or disorder should even be considered in the term anymore.

2.7 Summary of Literature Review In conclusion, the existing knowledge makes it apparent that a general consensus can be constructed from the quantity of research that has been conducted on the idea of a relationship between creativity and dyslexia. That being said there is therefore ‘good reason to believe that dyslexics may possess extra talent in the area of visual-spatial capability and have the capacity to see all sides of a problem at the same time” (Carson 2005; Graves, 1999. p36). Although, West (1997) draws attention to many prominent original thinkers and designers that are, or were, dyslexic suggesting it is still vital to not take this as factual evidence. The basis of ones creativity also has many other situational or neurological factors that could lead to increased lateral thinking skills and excellence in visual tasks rather than it being a generic association to an individual’s dyslexia. Moreover, we must appreciate that dyslexia affects people in a variety of different ways and consider that each individual is still unique with their own styles of thinking and learning. It must be acknowledged that theories and opinions presented here still remain hypotheses with limitations. Evidence produced cannot always be generalised due to the complexity and scale that the learning difficulty has. The Department for Education and Schools (DfES) (2004) advocates that more empirical research is needed to prove a consistent link between dyslexia and creativity that can then be understood and supported by institutional bodies. When applying this theory to architecture, and more specifically, architecture studio, this further understanding could allow individuals who struggle to succeed get more out of their creative behaviours, helping to achieve higher accomplishments, which might have been persistently hindered by lack of appropriate material or understanding. Overall, society appears to be reasonably content with these views and in a sort of agreement that the creativity in many dyslexics helps them to achieve successful careers as musicians, artists, actors or designers. But, West (1997) and Turner and Wooden (2003) suggest despite this success dyslexics may still lack in many other fundamental areas.

The literature review has reflected on what is already known about dyslexia and studies that have been undertaken in order to establish theories of dyslexia in relation to creativity in the field of art and design. The above key readings have also been supported by many other publications that have had an influence on this dissertation, giving further evidence and opinions that support the view that most dyslexics experience their symptoms as an alteration in how they think and understand things. Likewise, the reading produces similar conclusions about the link between creativity and dyslexia, especially in the art and design based disciplines. The purpose of this study is to not reach scientific fact but to investigate the effects of dyslexia in terms of heightened creativity and process of design. This will be to recognise differences between the two subject groups that could lead to advantages or disadvantages within design studio as part of an architecture degree.

20 Â

3.0 Primary Study This approach is one of few that have examined a population with enough talent to of gained entry onto a degree level artistic course. As mentioned previously the aim is not to discover methodical facts but demonstrate an experimental understanding of the relationship between dyslexia and creativity within architecture studio as part of an architectural degree course. It should not be taken as an objective truth, but rather as a situational-based finding with interest of this report not creating a state of flux. Participants: For the purpose of this study the participants used are from the UWE to help facilitate ease of access. Two groups of ten participants were used for the report, one group consisting of dyslexic participants, and the other of non-dyslexics. Both groups were studying an Architecture degree at the University of The West of England, Bristol in either their second, third or fourth year of study. All of the invited students agreed to take part in the study and for information to be used in this research. Instruments: The means of identifying dyslexia within the study were based on self-report methods within a structured questionnaire format. In order to examine the hypothetical theory of creativity being an ever-present trait in dyslexic individuals a short design task with a list of outputs was given out alongside the questionnaire. These outputs were to provide some indication of the participant’s process of design and creative thinking in both groups. All questions and instructions were clear and all questions yielded usable responses to help inform the final discussion. The structured questionnaire included 16 questions referring to various matters students of architecture face as part of studying architecture design studio. The questions covered four key areas of these matters, each looking to uncover interesting findings. These included questions about the process of design and use of inspiration, self-reported creative predispositions and dyslexia diagnosis, literature understanding and generic questions requiring age and gender numerical answers. Questions about the process of design and inspiration were given to uncover how final ideas or solutions are reached and whether or not inspiration material is used, indicating creativity in terms of ideas being original or unoriginal. Self-report based questions were essential in identifying trends within each of the groups in terms of strengths, weaknesses and grading achievements. The next type of questions were based on literature understanding which aimed to reveal hurdles where many dyslexic individuals would be expected to fall short and fail to pick out key information that is required. Finally, the generic questions were included to get an idea of the average age and gender of participants, which proved interesting for further sub-categories within the two groups used. The last question referred directly to the topic of the report requiring

participants to answer whether they were dyslexic or not. It was important to place this question at the end of the questionnaire to try and prevent a ‘Hawthorne effect’ from occurring and results being affected due to participants understanding of what is being examined. If they were to know that creativity is being assessed within the design task then it could provide an untrue reflection of a participant’s creativity. The design task that was handed out alongside the questionnaire was to design a new bike shelter for the expanding UWE campus. It consisted of a short introduction to give contextual information, followed by a map and an image of the proposed site (See Appendix B) at the back of the UWE campus by Long Mead Road, a pedestrian cycle gateway for many people. It was important to offer enough information about the site on the hand-out used to avoid participants being required to visit the site. It was also important to do this so as to keep the task small and quick, maintaining a high interest from volunteer participants and therefore help to achieve a more reliable outcome. The hand-out set five key outputs to be completed on a single A4 page, which was aimed at displaying methods of thinking, design process, organisation and representation. Once completed these were then handed over to a UWE senior architecture lecturer for scoring out of 10 in terms of creativity and functionality. The reason for a functionality score was to see whether creative outcomes were practical, thus highlighting whether creativity benefits a student looking to achieve a worthy degree or hides the fundamental importance of function. Prior to handing out the study there were many predictions and assumptions made about differences that were expected to be seen between the two groups. These were based on knowledge acquired throughout the literature review and from what is already known about dyslexia and its link to creativity. The main notion is that of the dyslexic group being more likely to show creative outcomes and a more lateral way of thinking about the task outputs. However, as Biggs points out in the CASCADE report, “We must not slip towards the assumption that dyslexics have an inherent predisposition to be visually artistic” (Biggs, 2007. p.99) and we must also remember that all participants have proven a high level of artistic talent to gain admittance onto an art and design degree level course and progress into the later years of study. Another expectation of this study was to find that dyslexic individuals would show a higher tendency to deviate from the design brief or state that they prefer less strict guidelines of a brief. Typically this would allow them to display more creative outcomes to design tasks, producing more than something that only simply functions. Additionally, it is expected that the dyslexia group of participants would generate fewer ideas throughout their process of design in the order to get to their final design choice. This is highlighted in questions 8 and 12 of the questionnaire and will also be picked up within the design task. Another question that creates a piece of interesting information to discuss is question 13 that requires the participant to give a timescale for how long it takes them to come up with an idea and further, the amount of time it takes to

complete a project. This should produce interesting findings linked to what Kiziewicz (2007) states at the start of the CASCADE book that “Work of dyslexics can take four times as long to emerge as that of non-dyslexics people, but when it does, it is four times as strong”. (Kiziewicz, 2007). However, this is not a factual finding of his and is based more so on speculation and current theories. Finally, a crucial assumption made was that dyslexic participants would indicate that they find it difficult to dissect written information accurately within project briefs. Question six highlights this common and more understood trait associated with dyslexia. This is the inability and difficulty of “accurate fluent word recognition and poor spelling and decoding abilities” as mentioned earlier in Shaywitz’ definition. The questionnaire promotes the differing aspects of dyslexia and the ways in which it may affect people in different ways. It is important to recall what was mentioned earlier about not generalising these traits. Each aspect is unique, influencing, conflicting and complimenting one another in various ways, meaning that even between dyslexic and non-dyslexic participants’ similarities will be seen.

3.1 Results The findings from the study on dyslexic and non-dyslexic architecture students will be presented here as two separate sets, one for the questionnaire data and a second for the design task. Throughout the results similarities between both are mentioned, especially in regards to the assumptions made prior to the experiment and where design outputs have linked in with answers given in the questionnaire. As the majority of the questions were given in an open format the responses were collected, analysed and grouped according to the main points and likenesses. This was done to help create a more general type of response for each question. From these, they were then grouped into the four key themes of ‘generic questions’, ‘self-reported creative predispositions’, ‘Literature understanding’ and finally ‘process of design and use of inspiration’,

Generic Questions The mean age of participants in both groups was 21, which could be seen as a ‘ceiling effect’ that was expected based on the subject group and the way in which self-select sampling was conducted. For this study age of participants did not provide any crucial findings of heightened creativity or spatial ability, and this was made less by the range in age being so close together. Age,

however, could become an interesting finding if this study was to be repeated using a widersourced focus group Out of the 20 participants taking part in the study 6 were female and the remaining 14 male. An addition to this finding was that there appeared to be a higher prevalence of dyslexia amongst male participants with a 5 to 2 difference compared with female participants. As mentioned before with age this has not been a factor that has proven of much importance, but could produce a more interesting finding in a use of a much wider population sample. This supports what earlier research has found, that “dyslexia occurs four times as often in males than in females” (Benton, 1975) however, more recent findings have disputed this with no substantiated sex imbalance being found in recent research (Shaywitz, 1990).

Self-reported creative predispositions Question 3 fashioned interesting and curious results with 80% of dyslexic participants selfreporting they felt that they are creative in comparison to just 60% of the non-dyslexic group. What was interesting is that these findings were also supported partially by results of the design task that will be discussed later. What was curious was that due to the sample group used being UWE architecture students it would not be surprising if all claimed to be creative, however this was not so. Furthermore, a higher number of the dyslexic group suggested their strengths were in graphical representation, design and producing original ideas, both of which can be linked to creative behaviours. They also showed a personal belief of weaknesses in areas such as timemanagement and written work that was almost opposed by the non-dyslexic groups who saw their weaknesses as strengths in some cases. A speculation made before the experiment was reinforced in the results, suggesting having less strict guidelines and deviating from a design brief was more prevalent in the dyslexic group. The results showed only 50% of the dyslexic group, compared with 80% of the non-dyslexics, preferred strict guidelines, and in addition to this, 90% of dyslexics versus 20% of the non-dyslexic group stated they often deviated from a brief. The 10th question asked the participants to give the highest mark they have received for design work since being on their degree course. An even spread of marks was found between the two groups with a mean average of 7 on a scale out of ten. This therefore displayed little significance in terms of ability between groups; however, the highest mark alone was that of a dyslexic individual (9/10). This conversely holds little validity in regards to this dissertation as it appears as a singular finding with no associated trend with other participants.

Literature understanding Another speculation confirmed by the results was a frequency in difficulty understanding a written brief. It revealed that over two thirds of the dyslexic group admitted to difficulty in understanding and picking out key information. Two common trends in the findings were that trouble was encountered due to what participants called ‘unclearness’ and an apparent challenging choice of vocabulary. This could hold a high degree of significance as to why creative behaviours are exhibited which will be mentioned in the following discussion section.

Process of design and use of inspiration A compelling finding was that the majority of the dyslexic group reported a tendency to generate fewer ideas and end up choosing one of the first ideas they come up with to take forward and develop. Thus, indicating a significant difference in design process compared to that of the nondyslexic group who generated multiple ideas to inform their final choice. An expectation put forward prior to the study suggested the dyslexic group would produce answers linked to the use of precedents less in the process of design and the opposite produced by the non-dyslexic group. This outcome was suspected to be due to the fact that throughout the architectural course all students are greatly encouraged to make use of precedents and academic writings to help shape their projects. The findings did reinforce this, with 70% of all participants signifying they do find it useful to use precedents and inspiration to help them with early stages of tackling a brief. If a follow up study was to be conducted it could be insightful to require participants to disclose at what stages of the design process they use precedents more or less, and what for. This would therefore give a more appropriate finding towards an indication of creating original ideas or using those of others.

3.2 Design Task Results To recap, the design task set was to design a small bike shelter on the UWE campus to follow green travel targets set by the council and university. The task had a clear site with dimensions, location information and a narrative being suggested on the hand-out. It therefore allowed for individual interpretation and deviation to take place at the participants’ discretion. Furthermore, the brief closed with a statement reading “This list is a rough guide for tackling the brief, anything

you wish to include/ not include is up to you”, which was aimed to allow for speculated behaviours to be witnessed or not. The design tasks were marked on a scale out of ten for creativity, and after a revision, functionality by a senior lecturer at UWE with an unbiased and anonymous view on the task. This section will evaluate the range of findings, and issues such as the ones mentioned will be addressed. The design task produced some very interesting results that in some cases have supported speculation and in other cases rejected them. The primary assumption made was firstly to find a higher score for creative responses to the brief from the dyslexic group against that of the nondyslexic group. Here a supportive finding was reached with 6 dyslexic participants scoring above 5/10 in the design task opposed to that of just 4 non-dyslexic students. Furthermore, like with question 10 of the questionnaire, the highest mark overall for creativity was that of a dyslexic participant. Validity and limitations of this finding can be seen in the next section, but here it is worth mentioning that its ability to be generalised to a much wider population could see a vast difference in results. Moreover, a fascinating result ended up coming from the late choice to also score participants on the functionality of their scheme. This questioning whether creativity could be linked to a drift away from a fundamental need of a design to function. An opposite finding to that of creative tendencies was discovered with an average score of 4 amongst the dyslexic group compared to an average of 7 amongst the non-dyslexic group. Other results that produced positive findings in regards to pre-study speculations was that the dyslexic group showed a smaller range of sketches in their process of design and appeared to sketch a single idea and develop that slightly into a workable scheme. This was synonymous with the findings of question 8, mentioned previously in this section, where dyslexics confirmed they felt they produced fewer ideas before getting to a final choice that they would develop. The range of outputs in this case also differed as it appeared non-dyslexic participants had produced more sketches, consequently presenting a more understandable scheme that demonstrated a more advanced development process in their design. Subsequently it could be argued this is what led to high functionality scores when being scored by the UWE senior lecturer. The personal findings from the questionnaire and design task produced by the focus dyslexia group provided influential evidence of the impact the ‘learning difficulty’ has on their thinking and design work. This was not that they outperformed the non-dyslexic group, but that they displayed a range of different more ‘creative’ work based on the academic contribution to scoring and opinion of a UWE senior lecturer of architecture.

3.3 Limitations Reliability and Validity As with most research studies there are a number of limitations, reliability and validity issues that have arisen. It has been extremely difficult to achieve total reliability due to the type of study, the variables being measured, and the methods of how they are being measured. In addition to this, it also holds questions of validity from its sample size, type and imbalance of gender. This section will evaluate a few of these issues and suggest how they have been dealt with to produce the best possible results. One reliability issue of this study is that its criterion for classifying dyslexia is entirely based on selfreport methods, alike to that of Wolff and Lundberg’s 2002 findings of ‘Dyslexia among art students’. It was revealed earlier that self-report methods have proved to be “surprisingly reliable and valid procedures” (Lefly and Pennington, 2000) In order to achieve an increased reliability of the self-report measures used within the questionnaire, a split half method could be adopted. This would involve reusing the same participants to complete the study again, this time though, in two parts, completing either the design task or the questionnaire. This would evaluate the internal reliability of the study and whether or not the same findings could be seen. Another limitation of this study is that for the link to be examined it has to ignore that individuals, such as the ones that scored highly for creativity, may have exceptional artistic ability beyond their dyslexia. It can be viewed from the perspective that an individual with or without dyslexia may hold creative abilities due to many other factors and it is this that is ever present in debates within the topic as advised by Biggs et al earlier. This questions dyslexic attributes and links it to situational and genetic causes as well as its biological background. It would be difficult to conduct such an experiment where these factors are all examined in order to locate a cause. It is because of this a broad spectrum and range of definitions exists. For the purpose of this dissertation it has not been important to track down an explanation but address the topic of architecture, identifying what could, or in some cases, could not be, attributable to dyslexia. Validity of this study to architecture schools other than UWE is unknown and a bias may be suggested as questions and the design task were all influenced by the methods adopted through studying at UWE. It can be assumed that all of the samples used have been taught in such similar ways, resulting in similar design task outputs and design processes. Findings were however, different between the two control groups, but still this cannot be generalised across other institutions. An alternative validity issue, proposed in the earlier stages of this dissertation, is that participants must have already proven a level of artistic creativity and intelligence to of gained a

place onto a degree course. For that reason it was essential to have a senior architecture lecturer score each of the design tasks so that exceptional levels of creativity were recognised.

28 Â

4.0 Discussion and Conclusion This section will discuss concluding thoughts and summarise what this dissertation means for students and academic lecturers within the study of architecture. Strong links have been established within this subject; however, the importance of this dissertation is that of its more specific link to architecture and design, something that is still unclear. Research findings have been vague and limited in validity, querying whether it can be applied to specific fields such as that of architecture, where creativity and thinking laterally can be considered paramount. Some questioned the need to investigate this link more, suggesting what is known can be generalised to creativity within architecture. This study has highlighted that not all aspects of dyslexia can be generalised in such a way and using secondary and primary research this conclusion has been reached. Personal accounts of dyslexia have added first-hand evidence to the debate of dyslexia and creativity by delivering a range of unique and perceptive results. As a result of this, my investigation has confirmed a positive link between creativity and dyslexic architecture students when challenged within the parameters of a design brief typical to that of the architecture studio, a key element of any architectural degree. It has produced findings that are in line with the current consensus of dyslexia being linked to higher creativity and a process of thinking or problem solving in ‘unusual ways’, demonstrated through ‘out of the box’ thinking styles. By supplementing questionnaire self-reporting methods with the objective measures of the design task it has been possible to concur with the theories discussed within the literature review. Furthermore, it has extended my knowledge of the subject as well. Although the findings are in line with what I discovered through the use of the literature review it is important to not disregard other theories that are less recognised. For example, the idea that specific stimuli and environmental inputs during early years of a dyslexic participant’s life are what could have resulted in heightened creativity as well as or in absence of dyslexia. My findings could also suggest that difficulty with understanding a design brief is what could encourage creativity, demonstrating wilder designs that have a lower functionality as a result of not absorbing key information, The results, nevertheless, should not be disregarded as they have achieved appropriate findings for this dissertation in that the sample size and type has given significant results of heightened

creativity amongst dyslexic architecture students. This being said, it does not guarantee creativity and also should not be taken as an advantage in terms of artistic success. Finally, despite its lack of clarity, dyslexia has shown to be a learning difficulty that occupies a high frequency and relationship to architecture as well as within art and design more generally. This is largely recognised within HEI already indicating that “architecture and design appear to attract a higher proportion of dyslexic students than many other courses” (Parnell, 2007). I feel this study has highlighted areas of question within the course where dyslexia can benefit or impede students within the core architectural design studio. I am also convinced that there are consequently a number of minor improvements that could be realised to enable a more dyslexic-friendly way of educating within architecture.

§§

5.0 Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

6.0 References Benton, A, (1975). Developmental Dyslexia: Neurological Aspects. Advances in Neurology. 7, 33-47. British Dyslexia Association. (2012). Dyslexia 40 Years on. 1-2 [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/files.Adults-and-Dyslexia-report-2012.pdf. [Last Accessed 21st Jan 2014] Carson, C. (2005). ‘The Creative Dyslexic’, Creative Review. 25 (1): 36-38 Craft, A., Gardener, H., Claxton, G. (2008) Creativity, Wisdom, and Trusteeship. Exploring the Role of Education. p23. Sage Publications. Galaburda, A (1993). Dyslexia and Development: Neurobiological Aspects of ExtraOrdinary Brains. Harvard University Press. 2-34 Gaut, B. (2010). The Philosophy of Creativity. Philosophy Compass, 5. 2 Graves, J. (!999) Visual Spatial Ability and Dyslexia in Padget, I. and Steffert B. Make Dyslexia your friend not your enemy. London: Central St Martins Higher Education Statistics Agency (2008). Student Tables: Table 11b- First Year UK Domiciled HE Students by Qualification Aim, Mode of Study, Gender and Disability 2006/07. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.hesa.ac.uk/holisdocs/pubinfo/student/disab0304.htm. [Last Accessed 23rd Feb 2014] Jackson, L. (2004). Dyslexia, IconEye Magazine. 013. 1 [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.iconeye.com/read-previous-issue/icon-013-%7C-june-2004. [Last Accessed 6th Feb] Kampylis, P. (2010). Redefining Creativity-Analyzing Definitions, Collocations and Consequences. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 44: 191-214 Kersting, K. (2003). What exactly is creativity? Psychologists continue their quest to better understand creativity.10 [ONLINE] Available at: http:/www.apap.org/monitor/nov03/creativity.aspx. [Last Accessed 19th Mar] Kiziewicz, M. (2007) Welcome to CASCADE. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.bath.ac.uk/cascade/. [Last Accessed 25th March] Kiziewicz, M. and Biggs, I., eds. (2007) CASCADE – Creativity Across Science, Art, Dyslexia, Education. University of Bath, Bath Lubart, T. (1999) The Concept of Creativty: Prospects and Paradigms. Handbook of Creativty, p3-16. London: Cambridge University Press Lyon, G. (1995). Toward a Definition of Dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 45 Lyon, G., Shaywitz, S,. Shaywitz, B. (2003) A Definition of Dyslexia. Ann. Dyslexia 53, 1-14

References Martin, M. (N.D) Dyslexia and Creativity. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.oxbowschool.org/gallery/pub/os24papers/MadelineM.pdf. [Last Accessed 20th Feb 14] Mortimore, T. and Crozier, W . (2006) Dyslexia and Difficulties with Study Skills in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education 31, (2) 235-257 Parnell, R. (2007). The Crit: An Architecture Student’s Handbook, 2nd Ed. 11-12. Routledge Pile, J. (2003). Interior Design. 3rd ed. 134. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc. Plucker, J., Dana, R. (1999). Drugs and Creativity. In Runco and Pritzker. Encyclopedia of Creativity. p607-611. San Diego, CA: Academic Press Pugh, K., et al. (2000). The Angular Gyrus in Developmental Dyslexia: Task-specific differences in Functional Connectivity within Posterior Cortex. Psychological Science 11 Rogers, R. (N.D) Artists, Architects and Designers. The Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity. [ONLINE] Available at: http://dyslexia.yale.edu/rogers.html. [Last Accessed 12th Jan 2014] Shaywitz, S., Shaywitz, B., Fletcher, J., Escobar, M., (1990). Prevalence of Reading Disability in Boys and Girls. National Library of Medicine 8 (3) 1. Shaywitz, S. (1996). Dyslexia. Scientific American. Nature Publishing Group. Nov ed. 104-105 Smythe, I., Everatt, J., and Salter, R. (2004). International Book of Dyslexia: A Guide to Practice and Resources. Chichester. UK. John Wiley and Sons Taylor, M., Duffy, S., England, D. (2009). Teaching Students with Dyslexia in Higher Education. Education and Training. Vol. 51 iss: 2, 139-14 Taylor, K. (2003) Occupation Choices of Adults with and Without Dyslexia. Dyslexia: An International Journal of Research and Practice, 9 (3), 177-185 Vaughan, D., and Yorke, M (2009). The Paradox of NSS Scores for Art and Design. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/library/files/adm-heaprojects/glad-nss-project/nss-report170310 . [Last Accessed 12th March 2014] W hitby, M. (2005). Hidden Arts. Mark Whitby on Design and Dyslexia at School and Work. RIBA. 11. [ONLINE] Available at: http://Liveriba.contensis.com/Files/MembersOnly/Publications/RIBAJournalPracticePages/Volume200 5/Issue11.pdf. [Last Accessed 19th Jan 2014] W olf, U. and Lundberg, I. (2002) The Prevalence of Dyslexia Among Art Students. Dyslexia 8 (1): 34-36, 41-42.

Bibliography Cramer, D., Howitt., Laurence, D. (2005). The SAGE Dictionary of Statistics: A Practical Resource for Students in the Social Sciences. 3rd Ed, SAGE Department for Education and Skills. (2004). A Framework for Understanding Dyslexia. Everatt, J., Steffert, B. and Smythe, I. (1999). An Eye for the Unusual: Creative Thinking in Dyslexics. 5 (1) Geshwind, N., and Glaburda A. (1987). Cerebral Lateralisation: Biological Mechanisms, Associations and Pathology. Cambridge, MA: MIT. McCarney, R., W arner, J., Iliffe, S., van Haselen, R. Griffin, M., Fisher, P. (2007). The Hawthorne Effect: A Radomised, Controlled Trial. BMC Med Res. Methodol 7. 30. Miles, T. and Miles, E. (1999) Dyslexia: A Hundred Years On. Buckingham: Open University Press Phillips, A. (2011) Parti Diagrams, Part one. Architecture the Whole Unorganised Thing. [ONLINE] Available at: http://mgerwingarch.com/2011/02/07/parti-diagrams-part-one/. [Last Accessed 25th Mar 2014] Pennington, B. (1999) Toward an Integrated Understanding of Dyslexia: Genetic, Neurological and Cognitive Mechanisms. Developmental Psychopathology 11 Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming Dyslexia: A New and Complete Science-Based Program for Reading Problems at Any Level. 1st Ed. Alfred A. Knops: New York, USA. W inter, G. (2000). A Comparative Discussion of the Notion of Validity in Qualitative and Quantitative Research. The Qualitative Report, 4, 3 and 4. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-3/Winter.html [Last Accessed 30th Mar 2014] W est, T. (1997). In the Mind’s Eye: Visual Thinkers, Gifted People with Dyslexia and other Learning Difficulties, Computer Images and the Ironies of Creativity. 2ed, Amherst, NY: Prometheus