Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you all. I have had a nice break and have enjoyed having my children home for the holidays. While I have taken two weeks off from my regular duties at SelfDesign, I have been working on a new conference that I will be hosting in January on the "ABC's of Reading".
The basic philosophy of SelfDesign is that if we allow children to explore their own interests at their own pace, (which also means we don't impose our methods and ideas on them)they will learn everything they need in life, and will learn it better because they are intrinsically motivated. To be able to adopt this philosophy, parents (and some learning consultants, myself included) have to be prepared to adjust their perceptions of the timeline imposed from the system. We have to be able to accept and embrace that learning will happen in it's own time, and it may look very different from the school system with it's definite expectations from year to year.
I have found this very challenging as a "systematized" teacher. I have made excellent progress for the most part, but there is one area that I have stood firm on, and that is, early intervention for children who have learning disabilities.
I have had mild and not-so-mild discussions with administration and some parents over this- and I remain unapologetic- to no-one's surprise, I'm sure! The executive of SelfDesign Learning Community encourages me to adopt a "hands off" approach, believing that these kids will read when they are ready, and while I respect their combined body of knowledge and experience, I can't ignore my own. For some learners, remaining "hands off" is the worst thing you could possible do. It's akin to waiting for them to fail, before offering assistance. (check out the link on my page to Joe Torgesen's article, "Catch Them Before They Fall")The learners I will be focusing on have diagnosed learning disabilities, have had several interventions and have indicated they want help- as have the parents.
So I am very grateful that the exec team and my special ed cohort within SelfDesign is supporting me in this endeavor... I am hosting a conference, to offer practical assistance for parents who want to understand the nature of their children's struggles with reading, and to workshop techniques and strategies that teach parents how to teach their own kids. This is NOT what SelfDesign is usually about- but I believe it's a move that acknowledges that there are all types of learners, and some have brain structures that make learning to read with casual or intermittent exposure impossible.
I am now researching web conferencing so that I can present a workshop to 8 or 9 parents over the Internet. I have been using iChat with great success for teaching reading in a one on one situation, but I now need to find something that allows me to interact with more than 3 participants at a time. That seems to be the limit for most small scale interfaces.
This is going to be a very cool process for me,and I am so excited about this whole thing! I will update you all from time to time on how this reading conference works out!
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
Adaptations- who are they for?
I have been really busy with my work with SelfDesign, and I have had a steady stream of "in person" learners as well as internet learners. This post is going to be SCREECH... I have encountered some issues around the learners I'm seeing in person that are making me crazy... it's time to get it off my chest.
First... I have been working with a family from another province since the end of August. It's a little girl with fairly significant phonological processing problems.
She may or may not have ADHD but she does have difficulty staying focused. There could be different reasons for this so I can't say- but regardless this precious little girl has to work really hard to learn. Hannah was in French Immersion for the first two years of her education, so she hasn't had any formal English instruction, however, her difficulties would have been just as obvious in the French Language. In the Fall she was transferring to a new school and to English Instruction. The parents had a meeting in August with the principal and shared their concerns about their daughter and told the principal about the reading clinic.
Hannah came to BC for a few weeks holiday in August, and during that time I started the program with her and did a full week "in person". We continued online from her home after that. When we started she was virtually a non reader, and she required alot of hands-on refocusing and direction.
When the family left to go back home, I suggested that her new school contact me if they had any questions about what we were doing- and they did.
I was speaking to her new classroom teacher, so I explained a little about what I do and then asked what they had in place for Hannah. I was stunned by her response. She said, "Oh, we don't do special education here." I was sure I misheard her but she said it again. When I suggested that the law requires it, she said, well we have it but "she" is too busy to see kids and does mostly testing. !!!
I asked if she knew anything about Hannah, and she said she didn't really but did notice Hannah was not reading. I filled her in on what I found during testing and how Hannah responded to the clinic and from that moment on the teacher seemed to be convinced that Hannah was in the wrong class. She said she couldn't do anything for her. She thought their special class would be better- it had a small number of kids in it and Hannah would feel less pressure there. I asked what the other kids were like in there and she "assured" me that Hannah would be OK and that none of those kids could read well at all, and that many had significant developmental delays. I made sure she knew that Hannah could learn in a regular class but needed some sort of support as she was coming out of French Immersion and also that she needed intensive phonemic awareness training. She needed an adapted program, not a modified one, and the most important thing was that she needed to keep receiving intensive instruction in phonemic awareness. The classroom teacher, who is retiring next year, said that she didn't know what that was (Oh please- she teaches reading to grade 2s!) but that she thought the special ed teacher might.
A week later Hannah told me she had a new teacher. In speaking to the mother after our online lesson, she told me that they moved Hannah to a room with only 9 students.
Sigh- not what I wanted to hear. However, Hannah seems happy and her mother was just glad that the pressure was lifted for the time being. This new teacher seems to know what phonemic awareness is, but the other kids in the class are quite challenged.
I am worried about Hannah's self esteem. The bottom line, in this situation, the family has to go outside the school to get Hannah's needs met.
The second thing that made me screech lately is the plight of a boy named Jeremy. He has been coming to see me since he was 11 and he is now 15. He is a tall handsome boy who is very athletic and has a good self image. He also has a very stubborn written output and expressive language problem. He is dyslexic too, but he has worked really hard over the past four years and has improved his reading ability quite a bit. While he is far from a fluent reader, he can decode and apply strategies to unfamiliar words.
Jeremy came back to see me because he was worried about his English class. He said that there was going to be a big writing component and he was pretty sure he would not be able to keeping up. I asked him if he had ever used Dragon Naturallyspeaking or MacSpeech Dictate, which are both speech recognition software programs. He said no.
I would have thought that was one adaptation that most high schools would put in place right away because here in BC, high schools do not do much, if any, direct instruction anymore. It's a pretty simple yet direct way to help kids like Jeremy. I spent a week teaching him how to use it and then set up small writing assignments for him to do. He caught on right away, but more importantly- he was stoked. He was excited about it! His mother remarked at the beginning of the second session, that Jeremy had never showed this much excitement about any thing school related.
It wasn't just that the program was cool to use, which it is- it was more that he seemed to have a renewed sense of hope. Jeremy could see that with this working for him, he would finally be able to do what all his classmates could do- and he could do it for himself.
In the span of one week Jeremy wrote four 1/2 page paragraphs and one full page essay that he wrote by reading and synthesizing two different articles. He did it willingly- happily actually. He kept saying that it would have taken him three times as long to do these and he would have hated it. I have seen his spontaneous writing and believe me when I say that for him to read an article, organized his thoughts so he could retell it, and then write 1/2 a page and edit it in 45 minutes for him is astounding.
His mother was convinced, and sent a note to the learning assistance teacher at his high school asking if he could use Dragon Naturallyspeaking in the resource room there to do his assignments, and she wrote about the difference they believed it would make for him. It was surprising that an email came back saying that no, they couldn't accommodate him. They don't use it for kids like Jeremy- they use it for kids with physical problems, like amputees and kids in wheel chairs.
So now I'm screeching like a banshee... SR software is an adaptation- and adaptations are appropriate for kids like Jeremy...
What's wrong with those people!!!
First... I have been working with a family from another province since the end of August. It's a little girl with fairly significant phonological processing problems.
She may or may not have ADHD but she does have difficulty staying focused. There could be different reasons for this so I can't say- but regardless this precious little girl has to work really hard to learn. Hannah was in French Immersion for the first two years of her education, so she hasn't had any formal English instruction, however, her difficulties would have been just as obvious in the French Language. In the Fall she was transferring to a new school and to English Instruction. The parents had a meeting in August with the principal and shared their concerns about their daughter and told the principal about the reading clinic.
Hannah came to BC for a few weeks holiday in August, and during that time I started the program with her and did a full week "in person". We continued online from her home after that. When we started she was virtually a non reader, and she required alot of hands-on refocusing and direction.
When the family left to go back home, I suggested that her new school contact me if they had any questions about what we were doing- and they did.
I was speaking to her new classroom teacher, so I explained a little about what I do and then asked what they had in place for Hannah. I was stunned by her response. She said, "Oh, we don't do special education here." I was sure I misheard her but she said it again. When I suggested that the law requires it, she said, well we have it but "she" is too busy to see kids and does mostly testing. !!!
I asked if she knew anything about Hannah, and she said she didn't really but did notice Hannah was not reading. I filled her in on what I found during testing and how Hannah responded to the clinic and from that moment on the teacher seemed to be convinced that Hannah was in the wrong class. She said she couldn't do anything for her. She thought their special class would be better- it had a small number of kids in it and Hannah would feel less pressure there. I asked what the other kids were like in there and she "assured" me that Hannah would be OK and that none of those kids could read well at all, and that many had significant developmental delays. I made sure she knew that Hannah could learn in a regular class but needed some sort of support as she was coming out of French Immersion and also that she needed intensive phonemic awareness training. She needed an adapted program, not a modified one, and the most important thing was that she needed to keep receiving intensive instruction in phonemic awareness. The classroom teacher, who is retiring next year, said that she didn't know what that was (Oh please- she teaches reading to grade 2s!) but that she thought the special ed teacher might.
A week later Hannah told me she had a new teacher. In speaking to the mother after our online lesson, she told me that they moved Hannah to a room with only 9 students.
Sigh- not what I wanted to hear. However, Hannah seems happy and her mother was just glad that the pressure was lifted for the time being. This new teacher seems to know what phonemic awareness is, but the other kids in the class are quite challenged.
I am worried about Hannah's self esteem. The bottom line, in this situation, the family has to go outside the school to get Hannah's needs met.
The second thing that made me screech lately is the plight of a boy named Jeremy. He has been coming to see me since he was 11 and he is now 15. He is a tall handsome boy who is very athletic and has a good self image. He also has a very stubborn written output and expressive language problem. He is dyslexic too, but he has worked really hard over the past four years and has improved his reading ability quite a bit. While he is far from a fluent reader, he can decode and apply strategies to unfamiliar words.
Jeremy came back to see me because he was worried about his English class. He said that there was going to be a big writing component and he was pretty sure he would not be able to keeping up. I asked him if he had ever used Dragon Naturallyspeaking or MacSpeech Dictate, which are both speech recognition software programs. He said no.
I would have thought that was one adaptation that most high schools would put in place right away because here in BC, high schools do not do much, if any, direct instruction anymore. It's a pretty simple yet direct way to help kids like Jeremy. I spent a week teaching him how to use it and then set up small writing assignments for him to do. He caught on right away, but more importantly- he was stoked. He was excited about it! His mother remarked at the beginning of the second session, that Jeremy had never showed this much excitement about any thing school related.
It wasn't just that the program was cool to use, which it is- it was more that he seemed to have a renewed sense of hope. Jeremy could see that with this working for him, he would finally be able to do what all his classmates could do- and he could do it for himself.
In the span of one week Jeremy wrote four 1/2 page paragraphs and one full page essay that he wrote by reading and synthesizing two different articles. He did it willingly- happily actually. He kept saying that it would have taken him three times as long to do these and he would have hated it. I have seen his spontaneous writing and believe me when I say that for him to read an article, organized his thoughts so he could retell it, and then write 1/2 a page and edit it in 45 minutes for him is astounding.
His mother was convinced, and sent a note to the learning assistance teacher at his high school asking if he could use Dragon Naturallyspeaking in the resource room there to do his assignments, and she wrote about the difference they believed it would make for him. It was surprising that an email came back saying that no, they couldn't accommodate him. They don't use it for kids like Jeremy- they use it for kids with physical problems, like amputees and kids in wheel chairs.
So now I'm screeching like a banshee... SR software is an adaptation- and adaptations are appropriate for kids like Jeremy...
What's wrong with those people!!!
Friday, August 22, 2008
Resiliency is the key for learners with disabilities
I have been doing some reading about resilience and the role it plays in a successful outcome for people with dyslexia. I would like to hear what others think or know about this model.
The Risk Resilience Model posits that resilience is not static, as was accepted in early research on the subject. Resilience used to be thought of as a set of stable traits; the Risk Resilience Model suggests that it is actually a dynamic and responsive process.
There are many different definitions of resiliency in this context, but the underlying concept seems to be the ability of the learner to “spring back” from adversity. Each of the definitions seems to suggest a measure of surprise regarding the achievement wrought, “against the odds”. The definition of risk, in this situation is not having the resources to deal with one’s environment. Resilience is optimized when protective factors are present in the individual as he or she is faced with risk. Protective factors can include individual temperament and skill level, effort and persistence, parental support, the presence of a mentor, and relevant and timely opportunities to succeed.
There is a host of well-known psycho-social adjustment problems associated with learning disabilities; anxiety, depression, higher risk of suicide, reduced social competence, poor self-esteem etc. The issues are not just related to skill deficits; there are internal and external factors, or context, that influence the psycho-social outcomes for these children. Internal factors such as neurological processing deficits and hyperactivity work in tandem with external factors such as family interactions, teacher expectations, and interactions with other children to shape the outcome.
In one of the papers I read, (Sorenson, Forbes et al) a study was done to determine if academic improvement had more of an effect on the psycho-social functioning of the learner than the contextual support. The study concluded that contextual factors did indeed influence the outcome, according to the teachers and parents interviewed, while children attributed improvement in adjustment to academic achievement. This study also concluded that in fact, very little academic improvement occurred. The study was completed over a two-year span and during that time the subjects, all LD, made very little progress. Most “held their own”, but even though 70% of them were on IEPs and had interventions in place, they did not move closer to their age appropriate levels. Sadly, this didn’t surprise the researchers, however, these authors attributed the lack of improvement to the “chronicity” of LD. I don’t agree with that- this seems to “blame the victim” even if it is to say, “Tsk tsk, you have a terrible disability”. The fault is still laid at the feet of the person who is struggling. I am inclined to examine the support more closely, not the learner. It is important to note however, that the interventions were not described, so it’s hard to make much more of that.
Another paper, (Miller) in which several university students with LD were interviewed, noted several themes related to resilience: identifiable success experiences, awareness of their own particular strengths, self determination, distinctive turning points, special friendships, encouraging teachers, and their own acknowledgement of their learning disabilities.
If we embrace the Risk Resilience Model, we accept that academic support is only part of the solution. We need to support the learner with contextual support as well, if we are to ensure improved overall functioning. Successful interventions need to do more than improve academic skill. Unfortunately this enlarges the school’s, and most likely the special education teacher’s role in a time when they are already stretched to their limit.
Sources
Margalit, Malka, Resilience Model Among Individuals with Learning Disabilities: Proximal and Distal Influences, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2003
Margalit, Malka, Second Generation Research in Resilience: Social-Emotional Aspects of Children with Learning Disabilities, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2004
Meltzer, Lynn, Resilience and Learning Disabilities: Research on Internal and External Protective Dynamics, 2004
Miller, Maurice; Resilience Elements in Students and Learning Disabilities, Journal of Clinical Psychology, 2002
Sorenson, Lisa, Forbes, Peter, Bernstein, Jane, Weiler, Michael, Mitchell, William, Waber, Deborah, Psycho-Social Adjustment Over a Two-year Period in Children Referred for Learning Problems: Risk, Resilience, and Adaptation, Learning, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2003
The Risk Resilience Model posits that resilience is not static, as was accepted in early research on the subject. Resilience used to be thought of as a set of stable traits; the Risk Resilience Model suggests that it is actually a dynamic and responsive process.
There are many different definitions of resiliency in this context, but the underlying concept seems to be the ability of the learner to “spring back” from adversity. Each of the definitions seems to suggest a measure of surprise regarding the achievement wrought, “against the odds”. The definition of risk, in this situation is not having the resources to deal with one’s environment. Resilience is optimized when protective factors are present in the individual as he or she is faced with risk. Protective factors can include individual temperament and skill level, effort and persistence, parental support, the presence of a mentor, and relevant and timely opportunities to succeed.
There is a host of well-known psycho-social adjustment problems associated with learning disabilities; anxiety, depression, higher risk of suicide, reduced social competence, poor self-esteem etc. The issues are not just related to skill deficits; there are internal and external factors, or context, that influence the psycho-social outcomes for these children. Internal factors such as neurological processing deficits and hyperactivity work in tandem with external factors such as family interactions, teacher expectations, and interactions with other children to shape the outcome.
In one of the papers I read, (Sorenson, Forbes et al) a study was done to determine if academic improvement had more of an effect on the psycho-social functioning of the learner than the contextual support. The study concluded that contextual factors did indeed influence the outcome, according to the teachers and parents interviewed, while children attributed improvement in adjustment to academic achievement. This study also concluded that in fact, very little academic improvement occurred. The study was completed over a two-year span and during that time the subjects, all LD, made very little progress. Most “held their own”, but even though 70% of them were on IEPs and had interventions in place, they did not move closer to their age appropriate levels. Sadly, this didn’t surprise the researchers, however, these authors attributed the lack of improvement to the “chronicity” of LD. I don’t agree with that- this seems to “blame the victim” even if it is to say, “Tsk tsk, you have a terrible disability”. The fault is still laid at the feet of the person who is struggling. I am inclined to examine the support more closely, not the learner. It is important to note however, that the interventions were not described, so it’s hard to make much more of that.
Another paper, (Miller) in which several university students with LD were interviewed, noted several themes related to resilience: identifiable success experiences, awareness of their own particular strengths, self determination, distinctive turning points, special friendships, encouraging teachers, and their own acknowledgement of their learning disabilities.
If we embrace the Risk Resilience Model, we accept that academic support is only part of the solution. We need to support the learner with contextual support as well, if we are to ensure improved overall functioning. Successful interventions need to do more than improve academic skill. Unfortunately this enlarges the school’s, and most likely the special education teacher’s role in a time when they are already stretched to their limit.
Sources
Margalit, Malka, Resilience Model Among Individuals with Learning Disabilities: Proximal and Distal Influences, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2003
Margalit, Malka, Second Generation Research in Resilience: Social-Emotional Aspects of Children with Learning Disabilities, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2004
Meltzer, Lynn, Resilience and Learning Disabilities: Research on Internal and External Protective Dynamics, 2004
Miller, Maurice; Resilience Elements in Students and Learning Disabilities, Journal of Clinical Psychology, 2002
Sorenson, Lisa, Forbes, Peter, Bernstein, Jane, Weiler, Michael, Mitchell, William, Waber, Deborah, Psycho-Social Adjustment Over a Two-year Period in Children Referred for Learning Problems: Risk, Resilience, and Adaptation, Learning, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 2003
Monday, August 11, 2008
Resiliency
Hi everyone!
I am just checking in, part way through my summer holiday on the sunny Shuswap Lake. Well, today it's not sunny, which is why I made the trek to the nearest internet cafe...
I have been doing some reading on resiliency, and when I am back in September, I will be posting some articles. In the meantime,if you have some thoughts on the role that resiliency plays in successful outcomes for students with LD, leave a comment.
I am just checking in, part way through my summer holiday on the sunny Shuswap Lake. Well, today it's not sunny, which is why I made the trek to the nearest internet cafe...
I have been doing some reading on resiliency, and when I am back in September, I will be posting some articles. In the meantime,if you have some thoughts on the role that resiliency plays in successful outcomes for students with LD, leave a comment.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
differential pay?
I found this post in a folder- I wrote it last year, in response to a discussion on another blog about the necessity of differential pay for special ed teachers. I thought it might be interesting to see if it sparks any discussion here!
A few years ago, in a rare moment of candor the administrator for Special Needs learners in one of our BC school districts lamented that while he didn’t have a shortage of special ed teachers, he did have a shortage of special ed teachers who had adequate training and skills to do the job.
I think part of the problem is that there is no standard of what a special ed teacher should know- not up here anyway. There are attempts, and each district wants trained Special Ed teachers, but the training varies from university to university. I completed my Masters degree in 2004, and at one point was berated for using the term “dyslexia” by a senior (too senior, obviously) professor. At another university in the same province, the head of the Special Education department is writing papers on dyslexia! Half of my Masters cohort was under age 35, and all of these admitted to having no training at all in teaching students with learning challenges, and yet all were expected to teach students with a wide range of abilities/disabilities.
Some schools advocate waiting until a learner is 8 or 9 before intervening, and some screen kindergarten children. It is this uneven application of knowledge and methodology that is really hurting our special needs population in our school systems up here.
So, I am all for better training of special education teachers, and I agree with you that differentiating pay is necessary. However- I think first we need a standard training program for special ed teachers.
While I believe that teachers are professionals and are very capable, in this area I think we need to start telling teachers what they need to do, and insisting on certain courses being taken. Up here there is a very strong sense of teacher autonomy- teachers resent and reject being told what to do. Unfortunately, in the field of learning disabilities it is the child who suffers.
A few years ago, in a rare moment of candor the administrator for Special Needs learners in one of our BC school districts lamented that while he didn’t have a shortage of special ed teachers, he did have a shortage of special ed teachers who had adequate training and skills to do the job.
I think part of the problem is that there is no standard of what a special ed teacher should know- not up here anyway. There are attempts, and each district wants trained Special Ed teachers, but the training varies from university to university. I completed my Masters degree in 2004, and at one point was berated for using the term “dyslexia” by a senior (too senior, obviously) professor. At another university in the same province, the head of the Special Education department is writing papers on dyslexia! Half of my Masters cohort was under age 35, and all of these admitted to having no training at all in teaching students with learning challenges, and yet all were expected to teach students with a wide range of abilities/disabilities.
Some schools advocate waiting until a learner is 8 or 9 before intervening, and some screen kindergarten children. It is this uneven application of knowledge and methodology that is really hurting our special needs population in our school systems up here.
So, I am all for better training of special education teachers, and I agree with you that differentiating pay is necessary. However- I think first we need a standard training program for special ed teachers.
While I believe that teachers are professionals and are very capable, in this area I think we need to start telling teachers what they need to do, and insisting on certain courses being taken. Up here there is a very strong sense of teacher autonomy- teachers resent and reject being told what to do. Unfortunately, in the field of learning disabilities it is the child who suffers.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
What about Vision Therapy?
A colleague wrote in a few days ago and she raised a topic that I thought might be of interest to others. She gave me permission to post part of her message here:
I have been doing LOTS of research on struggling readers and have found some instresting information on vision therapy. Rod Everson from Wisconsin (Ontrackreading.com)says that 80% of his reading students improve in their reading after developmental vision therapy. Have you ever heard of this or had any experience with vision therapy? I wonder if this third grader might be having some sort of vision problem..... I am looking at any possiblities to help her and her mom.
My strongest feeling is that she is lanugage deprived, (like I wrote to you in earlier posts). But I also wonder if a vision problem may be affecting her fluency. When I was working with her she could read 1st grade material at 80 -90 wpm, but at 2 and 3rd grade she struggled continually between 50 - 70 words per minute. I wonder if this might be related to a visual problem.
I worked with her intensly on phonics and syllable separation strategies so she could decode longer words. She picked up on that information quickly. She also had a strong grasp on the phonics rules (not sure about now).
In conclusion, I still think two things for sure are at play - 1) language, vocabulary, 2) practice practice practice... but am really wondering about this vision thing. Any insights????
Hmmm. Vision therapy has been questioned since the early 1980s (that's when I started teaching and I recall this controversy then) regarding it's effectiveness in the treatment for dyslexia. I did some searching, and found several articles dated in the late 80s and early 90's.
In BC, we went through a period where children with reading problems were put through vision exercises,especially "eye-tracking" in the early 80s. It is still in practice in some environments. It is natural to suspect that there is something wrong with the visual mechanism in the brain if a person struggles with reading- it is obviously a task that requires vision. Way back, the thinking was that dyslexics saw words backwards. So this is actually a re-emergence of this issue as far as I am concerned. (by the way, the best way to improve eyetracking for reading, I think, is to read print more, not to follow a light or red ball on a stick)
In the past 10 years there has been exciting and compelling evidence brought forth that indicates that dyslexia a problem in the language system, based in the processing of the speech sounds and rapidly attaching them to printed symbols.
In my search, I found an article, published in the Journal of Optometric Vision Development, 2004 and it reported a positive but weak relationship between oculomotor vision therapy and reading improvement in people with non-specific reading disability. Non-specific disability means that the subjects in the 11 studies discussed did not have dyslexia, so we need to keep that distinction in mind. The results say that the improvement was about the same as what was achieved with straight reading therapy. There was a slightly better result when the two were done together. The article also mentions that the study samples were small, many had no control groups, and that larger samples would be needed to draw hard conclusions. The 11 studies were collected from 1940-2004.
So- here's what I think. I think vision therapy could well be warranted in kids with dyslexia, if near vision testing indicates problems with vision skills. But then, one would assume that anyone tested with these issues would probably benefit, whether they had a reading problem or not. If dyslexic children don't have any weaknesses as determined by testing, then it would not benefit them to go through it.
What I don't agree with is a blanket assumption that the therapy would benefit all people with reading problems and would produce results in reading. In a position statement on vision therapy, dated 1985, the American Optometric Association affirmed that optometrists don't teach reading- educators do. Optometrists treat vision problems. So if there are diagnosed vision problems, therapy is going to hopefully fix the vision problems. By itself, it will not improve reading. Reading skills still have to be taught explicitly and intensively.
It would be like saying glasses will improve reading in people with reading disability. Well, they will certainly make it easier to see, IF the learner also happens to be far-sighted. As a matter of course, we always start with vision (not just vision acuity, but near vision skills too) and hearing testing in kids with reading problems. If the learner needs glasses, they are advised to get glasses, but we don't put glasses on a learner just because he is struggling to learn to read.
While the article I mentioned makes a distinction between dyslexia and non specific reading disability, the gentleman you mention above doesn't seem to. I do find it interesting, in reading some of his comments about dyslexia, that he believes that dyslexia is an inherited trait (I agree) and that dyslexia manifests itself as a vision skills problem. That finding seems to be at odds with much of the latest research. He does admit that he is not that comfortable talking about dyslexia, and doesn't have it completely figured out yet. While I don't think anyone has it completely figured out, there certainly is compelling evidence that dyslexia is a language based problem, not a visual one.
To summarize- I don't think there is anything wrong with vision therapy if it is warranted. I don't agree with assuming it is warranted in all people with dyslexia, or any other reading problem, and I don't agree that the therapy itself is responsible for reading improvement.
About the third grade learner mentioned in the quote above... it is tempting to question the phonological and language basis of the disability when appropriate treatment doesn't seem to have fixed the problem... but we need to remember that we can't cure dyslexia. The issues with rapidly translating the letters into speech sounds persist into adulthood. With TONS of reading practice we can make huge improvements and make the whole process easier (thus making that volume of practice more palatable)- but the fluency problem, in my opinion is based in the phonological processing and slower conversion of letters into speech sounds.
That's my two cents.
I have been doing LOTS of research on struggling readers and have found some instresting information on vision therapy. Rod Everson from Wisconsin (Ontrackreading.com)says that 80% of his reading students improve in their reading after developmental vision therapy. Have you ever heard of this or had any experience with vision therapy? I wonder if this third grader might be having some sort of vision problem..... I am looking at any possiblities to help her and her mom.
My strongest feeling is that she is lanugage deprived, (like I wrote to you in earlier posts). But I also wonder if a vision problem may be affecting her fluency. When I was working with her she could read 1st grade material at 80 -90 wpm, but at 2 and 3rd grade she struggled continually between 50 - 70 words per minute. I wonder if this might be related to a visual problem.
I worked with her intensly on phonics and syllable separation strategies so she could decode longer words. She picked up on that information quickly. She also had a strong grasp on the phonics rules (not sure about now).
In conclusion, I still think two things for sure are at play - 1) language, vocabulary, 2) practice practice practice... but am really wondering about this vision thing. Any insights????
Hmmm. Vision therapy has been questioned since the early 1980s (that's when I started teaching and I recall this controversy then) regarding it's effectiveness in the treatment for dyslexia. I did some searching, and found several articles dated in the late 80s and early 90's.
In BC, we went through a period where children with reading problems were put through vision exercises,especially "eye-tracking" in the early 80s. It is still in practice in some environments. It is natural to suspect that there is something wrong with the visual mechanism in the brain if a person struggles with reading- it is obviously a task that requires vision. Way back, the thinking was that dyslexics saw words backwards. So this is actually a re-emergence of this issue as far as I am concerned. (by the way, the best way to improve eyetracking for reading, I think, is to read print more, not to follow a light or red ball on a stick)
In the past 10 years there has been exciting and compelling evidence brought forth that indicates that dyslexia a problem in the language system, based in the processing of the speech sounds and rapidly attaching them to printed symbols.
In my search, I found an article, published in the Journal of Optometric Vision Development, 2004 and it reported a positive but weak relationship between oculomotor vision therapy and reading improvement in people with non-specific reading disability. Non-specific disability means that the subjects in the 11 studies discussed did not have dyslexia, so we need to keep that distinction in mind. The results say that the improvement was about the same as what was achieved with straight reading therapy. There was a slightly better result when the two were done together. The article also mentions that the study samples were small, many had no control groups, and that larger samples would be needed to draw hard conclusions. The 11 studies were collected from 1940-2004.
So- here's what I think. I think vision therapy could well be warranted in kids with dyslexia, if near vision testing indicates problems with vision skills. But then, one would assume that anyone tested with these issues would probably benefit, whether they had a reading problem or not. If dyslexic children don't have any weaknesses as determined by testing, then it would not benefit them to go through it.
What I don't agree with is a blanket assumption that the therapy would benefit all people with reading problems and would produce results in reading. In a position statement on vision therapy, dated 1985, the American Optometric Association affirmed that optometrists don't teach reading- educators do. Optometrists treat vision problems. So if there are diagnosed vision problems, therapy is going to hopefully fix the vision problems. By itself, it will not improve reading. Reading skills still have to be taught explicitly and intensively.
It would be like saying glasses will improve reading in people with reading disability. Well, they will certainly make it easier to see, IF the learner also happens to be far-sighted. As a matter of course, we always start with vision (not just vision acuity, but near vision skills too) and hearing testing in kids with reading problems. If the learner needs glasses, they are advised to get glasses, but we don't put glasses on a learner just because he is struggling to learn to read.
While the article I mentioned makes a distinction between dyslexia and non specific reading disability, the gentleman you mention above doesn't seem to. I do find it interesting, in reading some of his comments about dyslexia, that he believes that dyslexia is an inherited trait (I agree) and that dyslexia manifests itself as a vision skills problem. That finding seems to be at odds with much of the latest research. He does admit that he is not that comfortable talking about dyslexia, and doesn't have it completely figured out yet. While I don't think anyone has it completely figured out, there certainly is compelling evidence that dyslexia is a language based problem, not a visual one.
To summarize- I don't think there is anything wrong with vision therapy if it is warranted. I don't agree with assuming it is warranted in all people with dyslexia, or any other reading problem, and I don't agree that the therapy itself is responsible for reading improvement.
About the third grade learner mentioned in the quote above... it is tempting to question the phonological and language basis of the disability when appropriate treatment doesn't seem to have fixed the problem... but we need to remember that we can't cure dyslexia. The issues with rapidly translating the letters into speech sounds persist into adulthood. With TONS of reading practice we can make huge improvements and make the whole process easier (thus making that volume of practice more palatable)- but the fluency problem, in my opinion is based in the phonological processing and slower conversion of letters into speech sounds.
That's my two cents.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Reading instruction over the Internet
I have just completed another session of reading instruction over the Internet, with great results again! I used my Primary Program and then made some modifications to suit this learner. He is 9 years old and has significant language problems. I learned very early on that I had to greatly reduce my verbiage! I also learned that in general I talk too much! It was a difficult adjustment for me. I worked closely with his mother to guage his energy level, as he was quiet and didn't express much.I started to be able to read his body language and finally found the right balance. When I was talking too much he tended to sag a little, and lean back, away from the computer. Having said that, he did respond to the story telling element of the program. But, don't most children respond to stories?
Here's what I mean.
For the lesson about R controlled vowels I have a fairly elaborate story about the Boss being a bad guy who extorts money... as I was telling the story I could see my learner, listening intently. A few minutes went by and I heard a giggle that chimed in with his. I asked, "Is there someone in the room with you T?" Suddenly a little head slid into view at the left side of the screen- his little sister. I said hello... and then another head appeared at the other side of the screen- his older sister who I had taught earlier! She said, "We knew you were going to tell this story today!" We all had a good laugh, then I went on with the story.
I will be doing another reading clinic online with a learner in Alberta in the first weeks of September. I hope it goes as well as the first two. The little girl is going to be visiting her grandmother in a town about an hour from here at the end of August, so this time we will start in-person. I look forward to seeing if it makes any difference.
Here's what I mean.
For the lesson about R controlled vowels I have a fairly elaborate story about the Boss being a bad guy who extorts money... as I was telling the story I could see my learner, listening intently. A few minutes went by and I heard a giggle that chimed in with his. I asked, "Is there someone in the room with you T?" Suddenly a little head slid into view at the left side of the screen- his little sister. I said hello... and then another head appeared at the other side of the screen- his older sister who I had taught earlier! She said, "We knew you were going to tell this story today!" We all had a good laugh, then I went on with the story.
I will be doing another reading clinic online with a learner in Alberta in the first weeks of September. I hope it goes as well as the first two. The little girl is going to be visiting her grandmother in a town about an hour from here at the end of August, so this time we will start in-person. I look forward to seeing if it makes any difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
