Frequently Asked Questions

The guidance to prorate the ACI was only intended to be followed for online assessments. In face-to-face assessments, if the assessor wanted to be able to calculate the ACI, it would be expected that they would implement the Manual Imitation subtest.

Prorating may occasionally be necessary in exceptional circumstances. It is not the preferred approach and is only used when unavoidable.

For example:
When conducting a face-to-face assessment, if an assessor intends to administer digits and letters forwards and backwards and would like to calculate the ACI, it would be expected that they would also administer the Manual Imitation subtest. Administering all five subtests of the TOMAL2 ACI makes for the most robust measure of the skill under consideration and enables reliable analysis and evaluation of performance.

There might be a circumstance in a face-to-face assessment when an assessor would need to prorate a subtest to be able to calculate the composite and the TOMAL2 manual (p.58) notes these as ‘the testing period was cut short, the examinee refused to go on, the examiner incorrectly administered or scored the test, or something happened to raise serious question about the validity of an examinee’s test performance…’ These are unusual circumstances.

Whilst it is permissible to report the composite index, which contains a prorated value, in this case the ACI, it must be understood that the composite can only be used for a ‘statistical rather than a clinical purpose’. Therefore it should not be used as a basis for your clinical decision. A specific prorated subtest score should not be reported, either in the main body of the report or in Appendix 2, nor can it be taken to represent/reflect the examinee’s memory performance on that subtest. (TOMAL2 p. 59).

In practice, all five subtests of the ACI take a relatively short time to administer, and the inclusion of the Manual Imitation test can produce a result which might be interesting diagnostically.

Comprehensive guidance on the use of the Test of Dyslexia is available on our website at: https://www.sasc.org.uk/media/4t0jxo20/tod-guidance-october-2024.pdf

There is also further support from our 2025 Test List, which can be found here: https://www.sasc.org.uk/media/qr3dgiso/test-list-june-2025-final.pdf

Assessors can choose which subtests from an approved battery best support their investigation of an individual’s profile, if choosing to use a single subtest, they would need to justify their choice, particularly considering the advice in AG91: Why are composite or index scores used in SpLD assessments?

There is no section in particular where you would report the outcome of the specific index scores or the composites, you can use the index information to add depth to your discussions, in the particular area where it is relevant. For example in relation to linguistic processing, reading skills etc in the appropriate sections and also to strengthen your conclusions.

If you think it is useful for your profile, you can report the indices, but these are not mandatory.

Yes this reference can be used for the Delphi Dyslexia Definition if the re-ordered definition with headings is used as per the briefing paper on page 2: https://www.sasc.org.uk/media/vpzcqyz2/sasc-briefing-paper-delphi-dyslexia-study-march-2025.docx

Yes. Please see: AG93: Referencing definitions of SpLDs

“Appropriate definition(s) will be given as relevant to the context of the report. Any definition must be current (within the past 15 years) and quoted and referenced in full.”

In our 2025 Report Format guidance we have asked assessors to organise their table of results in Appendix 2 as follows:

This appendix should typically be 1 to 2 pages in length.

Organisation by Test Battery

Assessment scores should be organised and reported primarily under the name of each test battery used.

For every test battery listed, all subtests used and relevant/useful composites/indexes should be reported.

All scores must be reported in a consistent format as:

• Standard scores with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. If standard scores in this format are unavailable in the test manual, a psychometric conversion table should be used.
• Percentile scores are not mandatory to include in Appendix 2.
• Reporting confidence intervals for composites rather than individual standard scores is advisable.

Appendix 4 (Test References and Descriptors) must be presented in the same order as the Summary Table of Test Results (Appendix 2)

In addition to the Summary Table of Test Results, some assessors will choose to include a graphic or visual chart of test results, and this can be helpful.

You may like to review:

AG90: Presentation of statistical information

AG91: Why are composite or index scores used in SpLD assessments?

AG92: Confidence intervals

The AAB Reading Comprehension is not an appropriate test of reading comprehension skills.

Please see STEC guidance at: https://www.sasc.org.uk/assessment-guidance/assessment-test-guidance/

“The Reading Comprehension Passages subtest, which requires the person tested to insert punctuation in a passage of text, could be completed by someone with a knowledge of sentence construction but without full understanding of the meaning of the sentences in passages used.”

This means it does not appear on the 2025 test list under ‘Reading Comprehension of Continuous Prose’.

Additional tests from test batteries on the STEC list should only be used if they add value to the assessment and a reason given in the report for their use.

Care should be taken to avoid over-testing.

SASC requirements are for the requisite number of SASC authorised CPD hours within the APC period of validity to maintain up to date knowledge and skills. SASC does not stipulate which providers or whether provision must be from a range of providers. It is important that all themes are covered.

The only restriction is that CPD on access arrangements updates may only be used once within the relevant 3 year period.

We would recommend not using these terms as the impact of dyslexia varies depending on demands and circumstances which can change. The terms are ambiguous and subjective. Additionally the terms 'moderate' and 'severe' have other meanings in relation to special educational needs and disabilities.

Assessors will normally test both receptive and expressive language skills.

Here is a clarification based on the detailed guidance accompanying the SASC Report Format 2025:

The Standard Practice: Testing Both

• Normally assessors will test both receptive and expressive language skills.
• The overall purpose of assessing these skills is to assess vocabulary knowledge, language structure, and the ability to put thoughts into words and sentences in ways that make sense.

Rationale for Assessing Both Language Skills

Assessing both receptive and expressive language is often vital in identifying a Specific Learning Difficulty (SpLD) like dyslexia, particularly to establish the concept of 'unexpectedness':

1. Establishing Unexpectedness: Good receptive and expressive language skills in the context of poor reading or mathematics attainment can indicate that the specific identified difficulties are unexpected. Such strengths may also act as protective factors in the management of those difficulties.
2. Identifying Risk Factors: Poor early language skills are implicated as a risk factor for dyslexia.
3. Differential Diagnosis: Very poor oral (receptive and expressive) language skills are implicated in Developmental Language Disorder (DLD), and assessors should refer on to a Speech and Language Therapist in instances where DLD or other language-based difficulties are suspected.

When Testing Both May Not Be Necessary

The guidance acknowledges situations where testing the full range of language skills may be omitted:

• There may be situations where assessors, after drawing on the background information supplied, and/or their informal impressions of the verbal skills of the individual being assessed, decide that a full range of language tests is not needed.
• If there is already a recent, comprehensive speech and language assessment in place.
• If assessors have used tests (e.g., of listening comprehension and oral skills) which they feel have fully covered either language or verbal reasoning abilities, there is no need to add in further separate tests.

If an assessor chooses to omit certain tests in the Language and Reasoning section, they should provide a clear rationale or evidence for omitting tests.

In summary, best practice mandates assessing both unless specific evidence or prior comprehensive assessment justifies omission, particularly because good performance in both areas helps establish the crucial element of unexpectedness in a dyslexia assessment.

We would suggest carrying out a full re-assessment is necessary. Report the previous assessment in the Background Information section of the report, and explain the circumstances that have led to the re-referral (e.g. response to intervention, continued concerns from home and/or school). It would be important to conduct a new background history investigation with both home and school so that you have access to all of the up-to-date information necessary. The visual screening protocol should also be repeated.

You may find it helpful to review AG57: Assessing writing skills: considerations in the Report Format Guidance, June 2025.
“Assessors may prefer to exclusively use a standardised test of writing, others may combine this with a qualitative analysis of a further set piece of writing. There may be situations where assessors feel only the qualitative analysis is required or useful.”

The assessor should use their professional judgement when setting a short piece of writing set on a particular topic for a set amount of time during the assessment session, which is appropriate to the circumstances of the learner. For some learners this might be the new DASH 2 Past, Present and Future task. For other learners, a more demanding task might need to be set. The choice of task should be justified within the report, by the assessor.

If the TOD Screener is completed during an assessment, it would be discussed under the relevant areas:
The Picture Vocabulary test measures Receptive Language, and therefore it would be discussed under ‘Language and Reasoning’.

The Letter and Word Choice test contributes to the understanding of orthography and could be discussed under ‘Spelling and Writing’ or ‘Speed of processing and retrieval’.

The Reading Fluency test would be placed in ‘Attainment: Reading’.

If the TOD Screener is completed prior to the assessment, it would be discussed under further information in the background information section.

Phonological Memory would be discussed under the Cognitive Presentation: Memory and Attention section. Although the report template lists Verbal Working Memory first, you can discuss Phonological Memory before Working Memory if this structure aligns better with the test battery you are using, or if it creates a clearer narrative flow—for example, moving from simpler retention (PSTM) to complex manipulation (VWM). The crucial point is that both areas are covered comprehensively and reported clearly within the "Memory and Attention" section.

The Extended Investigation section would only be used in cases where the individual with attentional difficulties is 16 years or over. When assessing an individual aged 15 years or younger, background information on attentional difficulties, collected from home and school would be reported in the ‘Background Information’ section of the report. The assessor would be expected to make qualitative observations of any difficulties in assessment that appear to be affected by attentional difficulties as they describe each area of assessment. This would then lead to a recommendation for onward referral, noted in ‘Action Points’, with further detail on the local pathway expanded upon in the ‘Recommendations’ section. A referral letter would always be completed, even without the use of screening tools, to explain the referral to subsequent professionals.

When the individual is 16 years or over and has attentional difficulties, the ‘Extended Investigation’ section is used to explore through structured interview schedules and screeners.

The following areas of guidance may be helpful to review:
AG43: Reporting planning, memory and attentional difficulties
AG44: Screeners, rating scales and interview frameworks
AG76: The Extended Investigation

The copying task is expected, but not absolutely mandated if a valid reason is given for omission. The copying task is strongly encouraged, but assessors may justify omission if, say, for example, in the online assessments psychometric integrity would be compromised by remote administration. In these cases the assessor would use alternative data, and clearly show how this equivalent evidence was gathered.

If the assessment is conducted remotely and the copying task can’t be administered, the assessor should record the reason and indicate how aspects of written output have otherwise been evidenced. The emphasis is on justified professional judgement rather than fixed test lists.

Questionnaires could be completed by the assessor in discussion with the parent, or completed directly by the parent, as long as the necessary information is collected and confirmed as having been administered. This should be done preferably in advance of the assessment. The key aim is that the assessor gathers the specific information required by the VDSP to identify any indicators of visual discomfort and disturbance and determine the need for onward referral to a qualified vision practitioner, such as an optometrist.

SASC has prepared this additional document as a response to frequently asked questions about the inclusion of headings in the 2025 Report Format Guidance. It is intended to support assessors in setting up their report format template. It should be read alongside guidance and does not replace or change it.

Please see downloads frequently-asked-questions-about-headings.pdf

The SpLD Assessment Standards Committee (SASC) is a representative organisation for professionally qualified  assessors of specific learning difficulties (SpLD). SASC members work to agreed standards of practice, established collaboratively by the organisation. See About SASC for further information.

SASC is a voluntary body of representative organisations that oversee standards for SpLD assessment. SASC is a not for profit body. See About SASC.

SASC sets standards which are implemented and monitored by the professional membership bodies (BDA, Dyslexia Guild and Patoss); the authorised issuing bodies for Assessment Practising Certificates.

An Assessment Practising Certificate (APC) recognises not only professional achievement but also a commitment to continuing professional development (CPD) and has to be renewed on a regular basis. Therefore, those wishing to hold or renew an APC will be required to demonstrate this commitment by showing how they have regularly updated their professional skills and competence through study, professional discussion, training and practice.

The Assessment Practising Certificate for Specialist Teachers should not be confused with Chartered Psychologist or Practitioner Psychologist registrations. See also FAQs relating to psychologists below.

Patoss, the Dyslexia Guild and the British Dyslexia Association currently award APC certificates for fully qualified specialist teacher assessors.

Assessors must belong to one of these three membership bodies in order to obtain an APC from them. You must also maintain your membership throughout the 3-year issue period to maintain validity of your APC certificate.  

Pressure for effective monitoring of standards in assessment grew both from bodies such as the Department for Education (DfE) and the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) who use assessment reports to make important decisions, and from within the professions themselves.

In 2005 a (DfE approved) working group was set up to consider the whole question of assessments that conferred eligibility for a Disabled Students' Allowance.  The working group recognised and emphasised in its report the need to monitor the quality of assessments, by ensuring that assessments were carried out by people who possessed requisite knowledge and skills to do the job to the highest professional standards.

Assessment Practising Certificates (APCs) were developed in response to this report. They:

• encourage continuing professional development in the skills of assessment
• recognise and award these skills
• are valid for a set period of time only and then will need to be renewed
• provide a focus for training to enable specialist teachers to achieve the requisite skills.

You will need an Assessment Practising Certificate (APC) for a diagnostic assessment you produce to be used as evidence for a Disabled Students' Allowance. 

However an APC is also recognised as a benchmark standard for all SpLD assessment reports.

You will first need to obtain membership as a specialist teacher assessor with one of the relevant professional bodies (BDA, Dyslexia Guild or Patoss). 

You will then be able to apply for an APC.

However, if you completed your qualification over 5 years ago you will need to demonstrate your assessment practice is up-do-date submitting additional evidence to the relevant professional body. This will include a diagnostic assessment meeting current SASC guidelines, with working papers, demonstrate 25 hours of CPD plus five hours SASC approved CPD (30 hours in total), along with an up-to-date CV. 

Yes, the SpLD Assessment Practising Certificate is recognised by the JCQ as an approved standard for the provision of reports and evidence for candidates requiring Access Arrangements for school-based and further education examinations.

To be accepted as qualifying evidence  for the Disabled Students' Allowance, an assessment report must be written by:

• a Specialist Teacher Assessor holding a current APC 
• OR a Practitioner Psychologist registered with the HCPC

and must follow SASC’s report format and guidelines. SASC also provides guidance on appropriate assessment tests.

No the APC is not relevant for Chartered Psychologists who are recognised by the British Psychological Society (BPS). 

The BPS is no longer overseeing psychologists' practice. Chartered Psychologists must now be registered  with the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) as a practitioner psychologist.

No, the Assessment Practising Certificate (APC), is for specialist teachers who have followed a SASC approved course of study and can demonstrate their knowledge and competence in both Specific Learning Difficulties and assessment. It is issued by either the BDA, the Dyslexia Guild or Patoss.

A Practitioner Psychologist is a legally registered title certified by the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC). Psychologists should therefore apply to the HCPC.

Professionals other than specialist teachers (e.g. psychologists, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists) wishing to gain the Assessment Practising Certificate (APC)  in SpLD Assessment would need to provide evidence of training in SpLD teaching.

Such training must include synthesizing theory and practice in assessing SpLDs in order to qualify for an APC.

See Approved SpLD Qualifications for further information.

No this is not an approved pathway. While the Test User modules of the Certificate in Occupational Testing (CCOT) are about relevant assessment theory and statistics.  The CCOT is only relevant to occupational testing and not to SpLD assessment leading to an APC.

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) may take place through study, professional discussion, training and practice. It is important to maintain a CPD log containing evidence of ongoing learning and practice in order to build up a CPD portfolio. A CPD log should answer the following
'What have you learned? What would you change as a result? What has been the impact on your practice?'

There are requirements for additional SASC authorised CPD in the first 3 year certification period. This is aimed at better supporting those holding an APC for the first time to encourage the development of assessment and reporting skills for new assessors. Mentoring is strongly recommended. Mentoring could be SASC authorised and meet some of the required authorised hours.

For details of requirements for first time holders of an APC see:
CPD Requirements for all NEW APCs. 

SASC approved courses are listed on the website under CPD Events. Only courses that are currently approved are listed. All providers are required to meet CPD evaluation criteria which are determined by SASC.

Our SASC events do not count as SASC authorised CPD. SASC has a policy to support development of additional quality training from other providers and therefore does not authorise its own conference and presentations.

SASC produces regularly updated lists of assessment tests which are reviewed annually by the SASC Test Evaluation Committee (STEC). See: Test Lists

Lists produced by the SpLD Test Evaluation Committee (STEC) for SASC are designed for assessments which diagnose SpLDs and which may be used as evidence of disability for DSA and other SpLD assessment purposes.

The lists are not designed for Access Arrangements but may be used for reference. Individuals do not have to have a disability to have access arrangements in school examinations.

Under government guidance on Parental Rights and Responsibilities separated parents retain parental rights and responsibilities
(https://www.gov.uk/parental-rights-responsibilities)

“If you have parental responsibility for a child but you do not live with them, it does not mean you have a right to spend time with your children. However, the other parent must include you when making important decisions about their lives.

You do not always need to get the consent of the other parent for routine decisions, even if they also have parental responsibility.

If it's a major decision (for example, one of you wants to move abroad with your children) both parents with responsibility must agree in writing.”

It could be said that to commission a diagnostic assessment, which has the power to identify a long term (life-long) impairment (dyslexia) with a substantial impact on everyday life, would be considered an important decision in a child's life.

It should be the responsibility of the parent to the other parent, and not the responsibility of the assessor to probe into the nature of the parents' relationship. However, it would be advisable to put a question on background questionnaires around this.  For example:

• Please delete any question if not applicable. Name of commissioning parent/s or guardian/s:
• Do all those with legal responsibility for the child agree to this assessment?