## 5 Results
This pairs with the 25.4% of unfavorable opinions by the digital tutor in giving a clear indication of how interacting with machines instead of human beings should be avoided when teaching people affected by dyslexia. It is worth noting that using different colors for the words of a text, which is strongly recommended in childhood [55, 56], is still a helpful supporting tool at university age for almost 9 out of 10 people, but is less important compared to other tools. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Issue** & **Average Score** & **Not Experienced by (\%)** \\ \hline Reading difficulties & 3.18 & 8.9\% \\ Text comprehension difficulties & 3.18 & 6.5\% \\ Uncommon words understanding & 3.30 & 7.2\% \\ Concentration difficulty while studying & 3.76 & 2.6\% \\ Concentration difficulty during in-class lessons & 3.07 & 7.5\% \\ Concentration difficulty during online lessons & 3.76 & 5.8\% \\ Verbal short-term memory impairment & 3.46 & 3.2\% \\ Verbal long-term memory impairment & 3.35 & 4.0\% \\ Study scheduling & 3.37 & 11.1\% \\ Note-taking difficulties & 3.32 & 7.2\% \\ Lack of time to prepare exams & 3.57 & 3.5\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Average score of the experiencing of dyslexia-related issues, given by the students in the questionnaire, from 1 (very little experienced) to 5 (very much experienced) and percentage of students that has not experience them. The same analysis made for the supporting tools was also carried out for the supporting strategies listed in Table 4. Results are reported in Figure A3 (see Appendix A) and in Table 7.  
The very first observation that deserves to be made is that, on average, the score achieved by supporting strategies is higher than the one achieved by supporting tools. This fact highlights the necessity to combine both supporting methodologies in order to be capable of helping dyslexic students during their academic career. Conversely, the vast majority of approaches proposed until now [56; 57; 58; 59; 60; 61; 62; 63; 64; 65] have only taken into account digital tools, neglecting to also create, in parallel, a list of the best practices to be followed to provide support to dyslexic students. The supporting strategies that obtained the highest scores are taking pauses during lessons, hosting lessons online, repeating the studied material and making the program and the slides of the course available, which are considered useful by about 96 to 99% of the participants in the questionnaire. Having someone read the study material and recording the lessons also achieved high scores. This, again, underlines the importance of the auditory channel in the learning process of dyslexic students. A lower score was obtained by tutors and study groups, even if about 9 of every \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Supporting Tool** & **Average Score** & **Not Useful for (\%)** \\ \hline Audiobook with human voice & 3.25 & 26.8\% \\ Audiobook with artificial voice & 2.28 & 51.7\% \\ Words in different colors & 3.61 & 10.2\% \\ Clear layout of the study material & 4.02 & 4.6\% \\ Highlighted keywords & 4.24 & 2.5\% \\ Digital concept maps & 3.80 & 7.9\% \\ Digital schemes & 3.80 & 8.0\% \\ Summaries & 3.94 & 6.1\% \\ Digital Tutor & 3.34 & 25.4\% \\ Use of images for words memorization & 3.90 & 7.1\% \\ and understanding & & \\ Use of images for concepts memorization & 4.00 & 4.8\% \\ Audio recording of the lessons & 3.82 & 6.2\% \\ Video lessons & 3.67 & 9.2\% \\ Integrating study material using internet & 3.65 & 7.8\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Average score given by dyslexic students in the questionnaire to the usefulness of each supporting tool, from 1 (very little useful) to 5 (very much useful) and percentage of students that found it useless.