The purpose of the Introductory Chapter is to set the scene on the nature of dyslexia. Firstly, dyslexia is defined in the chapter as a multiple deficit disorder characterised by difficulties with phonological processing, rapid naming, working memory, processing speed and the automatic development of skills that may not match up to an individual’s cognitive abilities. These difficulties present differently in each dyslexic individual. Secondly, the specifying of the characteristics of dyslexia leads to outlining the types of cognitive difficulties that students with dyslexia face when undertaking various academic tasks. Reading, writing, spelling, exams, presentations, organisation, seminar discussion and note taking all present barriers for dyslexic learners. These difficulties are explained in relation to each study skill and reasons for these problems specified. Consequently, the reader will gain an understanding of how dyslexia deficits such as problems with phonology, information processing, working memory, retention and retrieval impact negatively upon the ability to competently undertake study tasks. The ways in which this affects dyslexic learners emotionally is also presented and it is explained how negative emotion such as anxiety can also impede on academic performance, perhaps to a greater extent than the cognitive difficulties associated with dyslexia.

The chapter looks at definitions of dyslexia and argues that definitions confined to reading deficits are limited for understanding the complex range of difficulties faced by the adult student at university. As such, definitions provided by the Rose Report (2009), and the British Dyslexia Association (2007) describing core characteristics of dyslexia and co-occurring difficulties are presented as more appropriate for comprehending the spectrum nature of dyslexia. The chapter also draws attention to Elliott and Grigorenko’s (2014) claim that dyslexia does not exist. This is dismissed by arguing that their concept of dyslexia is perceived as a reading disability in school-aged children and is not applicable to understanding adult dyslexia. The refutation of Elliott and Grigorenko is reinforced by outlining evidence of the existence of dyslexia from empirical work on causal theories. It is suggested, however, that causal theories looking for a single deficit are less suitable for characterising adult dyslexia than models such as Pennington’s multiple deficit model. Finally, a picture is provided of adult dyslexia by considering ways various causal theories manifest in different subgroups of students with dyslexia. Types of academic areas affected by these various deficits are also specified.