Try as I might I haven't been able to make popular the idea of dyslexia as a syndrome. Syndrome being a term that has major essential aspects which all people must have to be considered having the dyslexia syndrome after proper reading instruction. Poor reading skills ,lack of fluency,slow inaccurate reading and poor comprehension seem to be common to all dyslexics and could be considered major essential parts. A dyslexia syndrome also has minor aspects that may or may not affect the individual and usually make up a laundry list of symptoms.
reading below grade level
trouble rhyming words
oral word confusion
short term memory problems
poor spelling
Bothered by glare on print
see text in motion
left and right confusion
auditory problems
poor phonemic understanding
reversing letters in words
writing letters backward after third grade
slow naming of pictures
delayed speech
and many more minor essentials would usually be included in the list. Most of you reading this have seen similar lists. If anyone wants to comment and have other minor essentials added to the list I will, but that is not the point of this post.
Failing to make the dyslexia syndrome popular as a way of understanding why dyslexics are different from each other and need interventions based on their individual problems, like a thief in the night, I am going to steal new terminology, modify it, and hopefully come up with terminology that the public can use to discuss the subject of dyslexia in a more comprehensive way .
My opinion is the the issue of dyslexia needs a paradigm shift , A paradigm is a system of belief
based on an individuals personal knowledge and assumptions. It is a way of looking at situations. Your personal paradigm about particular issues actually colors your opinions and behaviors.
I am sure I need to have an example of a paradigm shift to show how changing a paradigm can be powerful. Many people have the paradigm that the homeless are lazy,dirty ,thieving,drug addicted alcoholics that wouldn't work even if they had the chance and so helping them is futile .
A different paradigm might include different facts such as a large % of the homeless are veterans who suffered post traumatic stress syndrome from being exposed to horrors in war defending or country, others are hard working family people who have lost their jobs through layoffs, and some are single mother families with children who are on the street because of financial hardships that they had no control over. We can also expect a large increase in homeless from people that we actually know due to the financial depression we are having in our country. Many people are only a paycheck or medical problem away from being homeless. The conclusion from this paradigm is that many homeless are not that different from us and so are deserving of help and that with help they may indeed recover and leave the homeless population.
The second paradigm does not exclude that the first paradigm is partly true. There are indeed some homeless that will always be homeless for different reasons. The second paradigm does try to expand our thoughts and can change people's behavior to some degree. Perhaps they might consider voting for rather than against some homeless laws to protect the homeless. If nothing else, having more information is likely to help people make better informed decision about the homeless.
Back to dyslexia. I have posted before about how people tend to report about dyslexia as if it has a single cause. I propose that we now call that the Single Deficit Theory. The SDT (single deficit theory ) has been pretty common to describe dyslexia and some ore used to base SDT interventions.
The Dore Method SDT dyslexia is based on brain structure problems that can be helped by exercise programs .
Ron Davis Method SDT dyslexia is based on the fact that dyslexics think in pictures.
Irlen method SDT dyslexia reading problems are based by their sensitivity to a single color
Timing problems in the brain SDT dyslexia problems are caused by slow processing in the brain
Phonoogicial problems SDT dyslexics have problems associating sounds with letters
Auditory processing problems SDT problems differentiating individual sounds
Language processing problems SDT problems in the word formation part of the brain
Executive processing problems SDT problems sequencing thoughts
Short Term Memory Problems SDT problems with short time memory as the cause of dyslexia
MRI areas of the brain SDT every area of the brain associated with reading visual,auditory,phonemic,language processing,word formation etc has each has its day as the SDT of dyslexia
See Right Dyslexia Glasses SDT for the 10% of dyslexics that can describe specific visual problems that make reading difficult.
There are many more SDT's about dyslexia. The obvious lack in all is they have is that none account for all the different problems that dyslexics express as why individuals with dyslexia have problems reading fluently with good comprehension.
I read a post the other day about the concept of the Double Deficit Theory of dyslexia. The position was that while the author used to believe in the SDT of phonological problems she saw dyslexics that had no phonological problems still having reading difficulties She thought by adding delayed time processing problems and calling that the DDT she could now describe all dyslexics as having phonological and or delayed processing problems.
I see the DDT as still lacking as a final description of what problems all individual dyslexics have.
My first thought was that be DDT lacked any acknowledgement that some dyslexics have visual problems that make reading difficult and there needed to be at least a Triple Deficit Theory or TDT. My second thought, seconds later, was that it was unlikely that even a TDT was going to be able to accurately describe dyslexia.
This is why I am proposing the paradigm shift to the Multiple Deficit Theory of dyslexia or MDT. The value of the paradigm shift to include MDT rather than DDT or SDT is this. If you are looking for dyslexia help and the person you see believes in a SDT , say phonological problems,
then your are tested for phonological problems and any positive results for phonological problems are defined as being your dyslexia problems and any intervention is based on helping you overcome those phonological problems only. No other dyslexia problerms are looked for ,evaluated or have interventions available at that location.
On the other hand if someone believes in the MDT of dyslexia then while phonological problems will probably be evaluated and intervention recommended that will not be the end of the process. Perhaps auditory processing will be evaluated next and intervention recommended if needed. Perhaps executive decision making and short term memory evaluations would follow with recommendations that interventions would or would not be needed in those areas. To be complete I would recommend visual testing for visual dyslexia and if problems are found that See Right Dyslexia Glasses are considered if necessary.
If you are out in the woods and want to have a fire and only consider that fires are made from big logs, when you return with only big logs you are going to have trouble making that fire. Call that Single Object Fire. Double Object Fire might include matches also. A Multiple Object Fire might also include an ax, dry grass, fire pit, rocks for fire pit, pine cones, bucket of water, cell phone, small dry branches, chairs, cooler with drinks,book to read, snacks, friends, music, permit or other objects as well. Few people will need all the Multiple Objects to make their fire just as most dyslexics only need help with a few different problems but only by considering that their problems need to be identified from an all inclusive list rather than than an SDT or DDT to start their reading fire.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Educational Neuroscience Dyslexia and Special Educational Needs
Too many people think that researchers have already found all the answers to why people are dyslexic by studying the brain. The following article is much broader than my usual focus on visual dyslexia. For those that really want to understand what has and has not been discovered in the field of neuroscience as pertains to dyslexia and special educational needs I think this states the information as well as anything I have read on the web.
It also inplies support for what I have long believed , that the individual educational problems that need to be worked on for the individual are not going to be identified anytime in the near future by imaging techniques. Pen and pencil and verbal type testing is much more likely to produce indications of specific skill deficiencies that need to be addressed for educational success.
While being able to describe visual problems that make reading difficult is a start in being able to define visual dyslexia, I am finding that some dyslexia evaluations are starting to include visual testing also and finding co-existing visual and non-visual problems with much success in removing the visual dyslexia problems with See Right Dyslexia Glasses.
http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/educational-neuroscience-where-are-we-3675 >
Are advances in brain sciences useful to the field of education? Dr Jodi Tommerdahl looks at whether breakthroughs in our knowledge of how the human brain works can provide insight into how children learn, particularly in the area of SEN, and, if so, what’s taking so long?
The rise of educational neuroscience
Monday, October 13, 2008
Misleading Dyslexia Headlines
Research Finds Genetic Causes Behind Dyslexia
This isn't a shout it out from the rooftops moment but I like the direction of the research. It is new, fresh and based on a different way of developing what may be a cost effective dyslexia identification method for a majority of dyslexics.
This is what the article says that relates to the headline. My analysis of the value of the research follows.
"We are trying to find out which genes cause the disease. A predisposition to dyslexia could be detected by a genetic test to support affected children appropriately at a very early age," says Arndt Wilcke, scientist at the Fraunhofer Institute for Cell Therapy and Immunology (IZI) in Leipzig.
The research focus is based on the structural differences in the dyslexic brain and is trying to determine the genes that cause the structural differences. To date the genetic research has looked at families with a high incidence of dyslexia and found "dyslexia genes " related to those families but have not been successful finding " dyslexia genes" that are universal.
These scientists hope to find the gene responsible for the structural differences in the brain which is likely to be more universal to populations of dyslexics. The identification of the particular genes is still years away but their investigation is in a direction that I believe could be successful. By the time they identify the gene ( or genes) the cost of genetic testing should be relatively inexpensive. The cost of genetic testing continues to drop as new techniques are
developed and more labs have the capability to run the tests.
One down side of medical testing for dyslexia is that if 10% of the population is dyslexic then 10 people need to be tested to identify 1 dyslexic and the effective cost is 10 times the cost of the test. That is why even if fMRI testing finally becomes able to identify individual dyslexics it will never be used as a screening method.
It must be recognized that all dyslexics that take part in dyslexia studies have been identified as dyslexic by pen and paper tests and personal evaluations. As much of the testing can be done in stages eliminating many as not dyslexic early on at little cost , it may be that what is missing from dyslexia screening is not a new method but rather the failure to use the screening methods available on all our children.
Perhaps the best headline we could hope for is not a new medical breakthrough in medical testing but
Federal Government Mandates and Pays for Dyslexia Screening for All Children!!!!!!!!
Sunday, October 12, 2008
When Should Dyslexics Try Visual Intervention
Visual dyslexia only affects about 10% of dyslexics as the primary cause of their reading problems and so it is seldom the first thought about what intervention is needed. While that is as it should be , I don't think that it should only be considered after spending much time and money on interventions and concluding that the final results fall below what could be reasonably expected from those interventions.
To muddle things up more, there are perhaps another 20% of dyslexics who co-mingle visual and more prevalent language and auditory processing problems. As these dyslexics show the typical early speech and communication problems so common to dyslexia they are likely to be enrolled in whatever the local community has deemed the answer to dyslexia without visual problems ever being considered.
People tend to believe their own senses and assume whatever they experience is normal. This is particularly true in children. Depending on the age of the child, visual problems can sometimes be determined by discussions about their vision. Being extremely near sighted all my life my Ah-ha moment came when I went to school with my first pair of glasses. I found that my teacher was not doing her usual arm waving dance up front while explaining things by the black board but was actually writing on the black board. I had no idea . It occurred to me later that if someone had asked how well I could read the blackboard I would have answered " read what?". I also remember my first eye exam and the first question . What direction is the E pointing? my answer " what E ?". My mother almost screamed THAT E ON THE WALL , "what E? I said.
My point being that , at least for me , as a child I thought my vision was normal . My fuzzy little world where only things closer than my outstretched arm were clear was normal. Later in life I realized that any discussion about my vision would have revealed its flaws.
My criteria for whether the See Right Dyslexia Glasses will help visual dyslexics is: can the visual dyslexic describe specific visual problems that make reading difficult. That works well for adults. Children can often answer questions about how they see the page that indicate problems that to them seems normal. Are all the words clear ,sharp , in focus , stable or in motion, and look uniform?
I am going to add another indication of visual dyslexia for children that parents can check. It is not universal but often can be used as an indication of visual dyslexia. If by changing font size on the computer the child's fluency improves with increasing size then a visual problem may be indicated.
As some visual dyslexics experience problems even with the large print in first grade books it may be impossible to both increase the size and have enough words to read for a fair test for all.
It is a better test for those visual dyslexics that only started to have their problems about third grade when print size in their school books gets smaller. It might also be helpful to stop near a billboard with very large print and ask if the print looks the same as that in their books.
A careful observer can often listen to a child's speech and determine if any language or auditory processing problems are likely to lead to reading problems and need to be addressed. In an ideal world discussions about vision and how a child see the written word would also be included. As visual dyslexia is unlikely to produce any noticeable problems before school age it is important to at least have a discussion about their vision if reading problems occur.
Visual intervention should be tried when there is an indication that visual problems with seeing the printed page are present. As See Right Dyslexia Glasses have a money back guarantee they are a low financial risk and are very effective in removing visual dyslexia associated visual problems.
To muddle things up more, there are perhaps another 20% of dyslexics who co-mingle visual and more prevalent language and auditory processing problems. As these dyslexics show the typical early speech and communication problems so common to dyslexia they are likely to be enrolled in whatever the local community has deemed the answer to dyslexia without visual problems ever being considered.
People tend to believe their own senses and assume whatever they experience is normal. This is particularly true in children. Depending on the age of the child, visual problems can sometimes be determined by discussions about their vision. Being extremely near sighted all my life my Ah-ha moment came when I went to school with my first pair of glasses. I found that my teacher was not doing her usual arm waving dance up front while explaining things by the black board but was actually writing on the black board. I had no idea . It occurred to me later that if someone had asked how well I could read the blackboard I would have answered " read what?". I also remember my first eye exam and the first question . What direction is the E pointing? my answer " what E ?". My mother almost screamed THAT E ON THE WALL , "what E? I said.
My point being that , at least for me , as a child I thought my vision was normal . My fuzzy little world where only things closer than my outstretched arm were clear was normal. Later in life I realized that any discussion about my vision would have revealed its flaws.
My criteria for whether the See Right Dyslexia Glasses will help visual dyslexics is: can the visual dyslexic describe specific visual problems that make reading difficult. That works well for adults. Children can often answer questions about how they see the page that indicate problems that to them seems normal. Are all the words clear ,sharp , in focus , stable or in motion, and look uniform?
I am going to add another indication of visual dyslexia for children that parents can check. It is not universal but often can be used as an indication of visual dyslexia. If by changing font size on the computer the child's fluency improves with increasing size then a visual problem may be indicated.
As some visual dyslexics experience problems even with the large print in first grade books it may be impossible to both increase the size and have enough words to read for a fair test for all.
It is a better test for those visual dyslexics that only started to have their problems about third grade when print size in their school books gets smaller. It might also be helpful to stop near a billboard with very large print and ask if the print looks the same as that in their books.
A careful observer can often listen to a child's speech and determine if any language or auditory processing problems are likely to lead to reading problems and need to be addressed. In an ideal world discussions about vision and how a child see the written word would also be included. As visual dyslexia is unlikely to produce any noticeable problems before school age it is important to at least have a discussion about their vision if reading problems occur.
Visual intervention should be tried when there is an indication that visual problems with seeing the printed page are present. As See Right Dyslexia Glasses have a money back guarantee they are a low financial risk and are very effective in removing visual dyslexia associated visual problems.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Dyslexia V's Visual Dyslexia
Dyslexia and visual dyslexia result in the same types of reading difficulties. Slow, inaccurate reading that results in poor comprehension of written material is common to both dyslexia and visual dyslexia.
Dyslexia and visual dyslexia are both information processing problems but have different causes. The different causes require different interventions.
Dyslexia or Visual Dyslexia ?
The problem is how someone can determine if an individual's problem results from dyslexia or visual dyslexia.
The most common research based theory of dyslexia is that it is a brain structure problem that interferes with processing the auditory and phonemic information in a normal manner.
This often shows up in speech and comprehension of speech difficulties prior to exposure to reading.This is the child who mixes up words, has trouble with rhyming and sometimes following directions. The inaccurate processing of speech makes learning to read a battle which leads to poor fluency, accuracy and comprehension. When asked to describe a page of print the response from a dyslexic is a clear, focused, uniform and stable page. This indicates that their problem is not visual.
Visual dyslexia is not an auditory or phonemic processing problem.
The visually dyslexic child does not have the speech problems associated with dyslexia of mixing up words, rhyming or following directions. His or her problems show up when difficulties with the visual aspects of reading are
encountered.
Moving words, missing, transposed or reversed letters and an assortment of other visual problems are what the visually dyslexic child has to battle. When asked how the words on a page look the result is quite different for the visually dyslexic child than the dyslexic child.
I could read if only the words would stop moving or if the words would always look the same are common complaints for the visually dyslexic child.
Visual dyslexics have trouble with reading because they have trouble seeing what is written. With the See Right Dyslexia Glasses all the words on the page will be stable, uniform and in focus. That is why they are called the visual dyslexia solution.
Reading errors caused by visual problems will be eliminated with the See Right Dyslexia Glasses. The visual dyslexic will no longer have to slow down or stop to guess at words. This results in an immediate increase in reading speed, fluency and accuracy.
Spelling will also improve over time as having an accurate visual memory of words makes them easier to remember.
Dyslexia and Visual Dyslexia may co-exist.
When dyslexia and visual dyslexia co-exist it may still be beneficial to have the visual problems removed by the See Right Dyslexia Glasses. If a dyslexic can also describe a visual problem that makes reading difficult that visual problem will still be removed by the glasses. While not a complete solution he or she will no longer have to battle both types of problems when reading.
More about See Right Dyslexia Glasses
Dyslexia and visual dyslexia are both information processing problems but have different causes. The different causes require different interventions.
Dyslexia or Visual Dyslexia ?
The problem is how someone can determine if an individual's problem results from dyslexia or visual dyslexia.
The most common research based theory of dyslexia is that it is a brain structure problem that interferes with processing the auditory and phonemic information in a normal manner.
This often shows up in speech and comprehension of speech difficulties prior to exposure to reading.This is the child who mixes up words, has trouble with rhyming and sometimes following directions. The inaccurate processing of speech makes learning to read a battle which leads to poor fluency, accuracy and comprehension. When asked to describe a page of print the response from a dyslexic is a clear, focused, uniform and stable page. This indicates that their problem is not visual.
Visual dyslexia is not an auditory or phonemic processing problem.
The visually dyslexic child does not have the speech problems associated with dyslexia of mixing up words, rhyming or following directions. His or her problems show up when difficulties with the visual aspects of reading are
encountered.
Moving words, missing, transposed or reversed letters and an assortment of other visual problems are what the visually dyslexic child has to battle. When asked how the words on a page look the result is quite different for the visually dyslexic child than the dyslexic child.
I could read if only the words would stop moving or if the words would always look the same are common complaints for the visually dyslexic child.
Visual dyslexics have trouble with reading because they have trouble seeing what is written. With the See Right Dyslexia Glasses all the words on the page will be stable, uniform and in focus. That is why they are called the visual dyslexia solution.
Reading errors caused by visual problems will be eliminated with the See Right Dyslexia Glasses. The visual dyslexic will no longer have to slow down or stop to guess at words. This results in an immediate increase in reading speed, fluency and accuracy.
Spelling will also improve over time as having an accurate visual memory of words makes them easier to remember.
Dyslexia and Visual Dyslexia may co-exist.
When dyslexia and visual dyslexia co-exist it may still be beneficial to have the visual problems removed by the See Right Dyslexia Glasses. If a dyslexic can also describe a visual problem that makes reading difficult that visual problem will still be removed by the glasses. While not a complete solution he or she will no longer have to battle both types of problems when reading.
More about See Right Dyslexia Glasses
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
MRI Screening for Dyslexia
I recently read an article where a researcher concluded that by using both reading skill tests and fMRI tests together that the identification of dyslexics would be improved. This seemed to be greeted with the usual enthusiasm from the public that is looking for the magic bullet that is going to be able to finally identify dyslexics so that appropriate help can be arranged. It seems to be reasoned that as the identification of dyslexics has already been mandated by law in many states that the states will pay for any method that works.
I don't think that even the MRI researchers themselves believe that there will ever be routine MRI scanning procedures to identify potential dyslexics in the general population. Who would pay for it ? Genetic testing suffers from the same problems. First of all, both are medical procedures, and under existing conditions that means that either the insurance companies would have to include that as a benefit ( not likely ) or the individual would have to pay. Neither are cost effective methods for the identification of dyslexics.
Consider this. If the 5-10% of the population that is dyslexic could be identified by a test, then the effective cost of identifying 1 dyslexic will be 10 to 20 times the cost of the test. If an MRI evaluation costs $2000 then the identification of 1 dyslexic would be $20,000 -40,000.
The reason the researcher in the article said that a combination of MRI and a reading skills test together would increase the ability to identify a dyslexic is that MRI tests alone can not identify individual dyslexics at this time. Only differences between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics are reported with so much overlap that individuals can not be put into either group with certainty. It does seem to be almost a cheat if ( as far as MRI goes ) to find that someone has good reading skills and so can be removed from the group with dyslexic looking scans and put into the group of non dyslexics or moving someone into the group of dyslexics from the non dyslexic looking scans because of poor results on a reading skills test.
I can understand the frustrations of going into a study with the preconceived idea that a particular part of the brain is going to be able to identify whether a person is dyslexic or not and having the results only be able to tell the difference between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics. What I really can not understand is the continued fixation with only focusing on one part of the brain for each study.
MRI studies have their place in generating information about dyslexia but are not ever going to be used for evaluation on a widespread scale because the cost of testing all the non dyslexics would also need to be absorbed.
I don't think that even the MRI researchers themselves believe that there will ever be routine MRI scanning procedures to identify potential dyslexics in the general population. Who would pay for it ? Genetic testing suffers from the same problems. First of all, both are medical procedures, and under existing conditions that means that either the insurance companies would have to include that as a benefit ( not likely ) or the individual would have to pay. Neither are cost effective methods for the identification of dyslexics.
Consider this. If the 5-10% of the population that is dyslexic could be identified by a test, then the effective cost of identifying 1 dyslexic will be 10 to 20 times the cost of the test. If an MRI evaluation costs $2000 then the identification of 1 dyslexic would be $20,000 -40,000.
The reason the researcher in the article said that a combination of MRI and a reading skills test together would increase the ability to identify a dyslexic is that MRI tests alone can not identify individual dyslexics at this time. Only differences between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics are reported with so much overlap that individuals can not be put into either group with certainty. It does seem to be almost a cheat if ( as far as MRI goes ) to find that someone has good reading skills and so can be removed from the group with dyslexic looking scans and put into the group of non dyslexics or moving someone into the group of dyslexics from the non dyslexic looking scans because of poor results on a reading skills test.
I can understand the frustrations of going into a study with the preconceived idea that a particular part of the brain is going to be able to identify whether a person is dyslexic or not and having the results only be able to tell the difference between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics. What I really can not understand is the continued fixation with only focusing on one part of the brain for each study.
Common knowledge is that different dyslexics have different dyslexic symptoms. Some dyslexics seem to have auditory problems where they have difficulty hearing the difference between sounds. fMRI studies have determined that this occurs in one part of the brain and when studied the standard results of being able to determine differences between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics but not individually dyslexic or non dyslexic is found. Some dyslexics seem to have problems making words from letters. This word forming part of the brain has been studied by fMRI studies with the same standard result......................I get tired of writing it all out.................................different groups...............................not able to identify individuals. Some dyslexics have visual processing problems. Again the visual center is identified with the same result............................groups ....................not individuals. Some dyslexics have problems with the meanings of words. Word processing area of the brain identified same fMRI results ...........................groups ....................................not individuals.
Now I suspect that some of you know where I am going with this but I am going to spell it out anyway. Some dyslexics may have problems in all the above areas to different degrees but most function adequately in some areas. Not all dyslexics have auditory problems and so for those dyslexics their results of being in a fMRI study focused on the auditory area of the brain would likely result in a similar analysis as non dyslexics. There are dyslexics without word processing problems that can't be identified by looking at only the word processing area. Dyslexics without visual problems that can't be identified by looking at only the visual processing area of the brain by fMRI.
Now as far as overlap going the other way I am going to use an analogy. Many dyslexics are poor spellers. There must be a spelling part of the brain. Some very good readers are also poor spellers. Any fMRI study that only had a focus on the spelling part of the brain to identify dyslexics would expect to see the same standard results....................groups ...................not individuals.
I am not saying that fMRI research into dyslexia is worthless. The useful information that is being developed by looking at specific areas of the brain is just not ever going to develop into a identification screening procedure for dyslexia by looking at one brain site. I predict that at some point fMRI may be used to determine what specific areas are problem areas for a particular already diagnosed dyslexic so that an intervention may be developed that most effectively addresses his or her dyslexic problem/s.
The economics of fMRI evaluation for the best intervention selection for a diagnosed dyslexic could turn out to be very favorable for the people that can afford $20,000-30,000 a year for dyslexia intervention. Spending $2,000-4,000 to custom design the intervention based on fMRI results could be cost effective.
A more reasonable future screening process for dyslexia from the general population would include some skill tests and include a family's IQ and educational history along with a questionnaire about their reading habits and other questions that might be found to be helpful such as how well oral directions are followed. The goal should be to identify not only dyslexics but all who are likely to need extra help developing reading skills. Some screening tests already exist and are possibly something that could find funding from educational budgets.
My niche in dyslexia is for the minority of dyslexics that describe visual problems such as jumping or missing letters that make reading difficult for them. I sell dyslexia glasses that remove described visual problems at http://www.dyslexiaglasses.com/ . I follow most mainstream dyslexia research and am amazed at the hype that is generated as if dyslexia is caused by a single factor and that the answer has been found. I am also concerned that the % of poor readers is so much higher than any estimate of dyslexics and conclude that the educational system is failing many when it comes to teaching the skills needed to read.
MRI studies have their place in generating information about dyslexia but are not ever going to be used for evaluation on a widespread scale because the cost of testing all the non dyslexics would also need to be absorbed.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Dyslexia and High Intelligence a Common Belief
I have posted on a couple of sites lately that there is no scientific data that indicates that dyslexics have normal to above average intelligence . Diagnosed dyslexics do have average or above average intelligence not because dyslexics have average or above average intelligence in general but because lower intelligent dyslexics are harder to identify and so never enter the group of diagnosed dyslexics that is used for all comparisons to non dyslexics.
While below average dyslexics may be harder to identify that does not mean they could not be helped by proper intervention. The result of this false belief is that dyslexics that could be helped are never identified.
After searching the Internet , I have found why this is such a common belief.
Everybody says so -
A review of many pages of dyslexia web sites indicates that almost all say dyslexics have normal or above normal intelligence. ( This seems to be enough for some people but I usually require at least anecdotal evidence )
By Definition -
Dyslexia is considered a learning disability in the Federal Register under Public Law 94-142. As with other learning disabilities covered under this law, dyslexia involves what is called an exclusionary diagnosis. That is, instead of describing characteristics directly, the definition describes all the conditions that must be ruled out (e.g., low IQ, physical handicaps, environmental factors, etc.) before making a diagnosis. ( This carries more weight than everybody says so. This is a case of I say so and I make the rules. The agenda here seems to be to limit who will be able to get added money from school resources.)
There are other definitions for dyslexia and learning disabilities. I tend to think this next source's agenda is more directly related to scientific reality.
The term "learning disability" was apparently first used and defined by Kirk (1962, cited in Streissguth, Bookstein, Sampson, & Barr, 1993, p.144). The term referred to a discrepancy between a child’s apparent capacity to learn and his or her level of achievement. A review of the LD classifications for 49 of 50 states revealed that 28 of the states included IQ/Achievement discrepancy criteria in their LD guidelines (Ibid., citing Frankenberger & Harper, 1987). However, the National Joint Committee for Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) (1981; 1985) preferred a slightly different definition: "Learning Disability" is a generic term that refers to a heterogeneous group of disorders manifested by significant difficulties in the acquisition and use of listening, speaking, reading, writing, reasoning or mathematical abilities. These disorders are intrinsic to the individual and presumed to be due to Central Nervous System Dysfunction. Even though a learning disability may occur concomitantly with other handicapping conditions (e.g. sensory impairment, mental retardation, social and emotional disturbance) or environmental influences (e.g. cultural differences, insufficient/inappropriate instruction, psychogenic factors) it is not the direct result of those conditions or influences.
Another reason for believing dyslexics are above average is not that they are but only that they are easier to detect.
Current National Institutes of Health (NIH) studies estimate the prevalence of this disorder (dyslexia) at 20% of school age children. This means that one in five children have the fears and emotions expressed above. It is by far the most common form of learning disability. In addition, dyslexia affects all socio-economic classes and all races equally (2) (2). It affects as many boys as girls (3). However, boys are usually spotted more quickly because they tend to exhibit externalizing behaviors such as acting out when doing poorly in school. Consequently the teacher is more likely to look for a problem in a child who is acting out in class rather than one who is quiet. Thus, boys who tend to act out more will be noticed more by the teacher.
As described above, children with the disorder often feel stupid as a result of their constant struggle in school. However, there is no correlation between intelligence and dyslexia. Furthermore it is important to note that phonological abilities do not depend on IQ - the genetic risk can affect learning to read in children of high and of low IQ equally though the problem is easier to detect in those of higher ability who do not show other learning problems. This does not mean however, that it will be easy to differentiate at school entry
between children with dyslexia and children at risk of failure because they come to school from socio-economically or linguistically disadvantaged backgrounds.
Has anyone actually looked to see if low IQ children would benefit from reading intervention compared to higher IQ children?
There's now evidence from research at York University that shows - contrary to what you might have expected - that children with a low IQ can be helped just as much with reading problems as children with a high IQ, providing it's the right reading programme and providing it's implemented in the right way. What you might have expected is that children with a low IQ wouldn't progress as quickly as children with a high IQ: but what these studies in York have found, he says, is that they do.
This isn't a complete review of the subject and I should add that some researchers have looked at dyslexics V's non dyslexics and indeed concluded that dyslexics are of average or above average intelligence. The flaw I see is in those comparisons is that the group of dyslexics does not actually represent all dyslexics but rather diagnosed dyslexics. As the NIH says, the higher intelligent dyslexics are easier to identify and therefore I believe they are over represented in the groups of dyslexics that are compared. If you consider the fact that there also does not seem to be any real difference between the prevalence of dyslexia in boys and girls but more boys are identified as having dyslexia because they seem to act out their frustration more often, then the resulting ,everybody says so , that dyslexia occurs more often in boys than girls starts to be explained in a similar manner.
My little niche in the field of dyslexia involves visual dyslexia. I would like to give one anecdotal example of a undiagnosed visual dyslexic who was considered mildly mentally retarded. It is about the saddest waste of potential I have ever experienced.
Briefly, I accidentally discovered filters that seemed to remove visual problems for a dyslexic back in 1992. After reading all the literature and seeing how badly everyone thought about tinted lenses as a solution I really didn't want to get involved.
My girlfriend's son seemed to meet the description of reading below his intelligence level for being dyslexic as he was a 20 years old special ed student and had never written or read a word in his life except his name and still did not know his alphabet. He was classified as being mildly retarded, had cerebral palsy affecting his left side and had some hearing loss.
Being bored one day, I thought to see if the filters that later became the See Right Dyslexia Glasses might help Chris. It wasn't readily apparent how to go about that but eventually I tried writing out the alphabet once in order and below that I scrambled the letters. I asked him to match A-A and B-B etc. He could only match 13 of the letters. That did seem to help explain why he never learned his alphabet or to read.
After putting on the See Right Dyslexia Glasses he could match all 26 letters and in 3 days he could read the alphabet from flash cards. He wrote his first note to his mother after a week. Since then I have been looking for the research that has been done to conclude that dyslexics are only from the group of average to above average intelligence and I still do not believe it has ever been done.
My experience with how Chris responded to the dyslexia glasses motivated me to investigate several subjects. The first was to identify who the See Right Dyslexia Glasses might help and why. The second was to identify why dyslexics were thought to be from the group of people who have average to above average intelligence.
15 years later I have the answers to both questions. The See Right Dyslexia Glasses remove any described visual problem that makes reading difficult for visual dyslexics and so benefit any dyslexic that can describe a visual problem that makes it difficult to read. The myth of why dyslexics are considered to have average or above intelligence is the result of several factors described in this post but does not seem to have any valid support and is a self fulfilling prophecy.
While below average dyslexics may be harder to identify that does not mean they could not be helped by proper intervention. The result of this false belief is that dyslexics that could be helped are never identified.
After searching the Internet , I have found why this is such a common belief.
Everybody says so -
A review of many pages of dyslexia web sites indicates that almost all say dyslexics have normal or above normal intelligence. ( This seems to be enough for some people but I usually require at least anecdotal evidence )
By Definition -
Dyslexia is considered a learning disability in the Federal Register under Public Law 94-142. As with other learning disabilities covered under this law, dyslexia involves what is called an exclusionary diagnosis. That is, instead of describing characteristics directly, the definition describes all the conditions that must be ruled out (e.g., low IQ, physical handicaps, environmental factors, etc.) before making a diagnosis. ( This carries more weight than everybody says so. This is a case of I say so and I make the rules. The agenda here seems to be to limit who will be able to get added money from school resources.)
There are other definitions for dyslexia and learning disabilities. I tend to think this next source's agenda is more directly related to scientific reality.
The term "learning disability" was apparently first used and defined by Kirk (1962, cited in Streissguth, Bookstein, Sampson, & Barr, 1993, p.144). The term referred to a discrepancy between a child’s apparent capacity to learn and his or her level of achievement. A review of the LD classifications for 49 of 50 states revealed that 28 of the states included IQ/Achievement discrepancy criteria in their LD guidelines (Ibid., citing Frankenberger & Harper, 1987). However, the National Joint Committee for Learning Disabilities (NJCLD) (1981; 1985) preferred a slightly different definition: "Learning Disability" is a generic term that refers to a heterogeneous group of disorders manifested by significant difficulties in the acquisition and use of listening, speaking, reading, writing, reasoning or mathematical abilities. These disorders are intrinsic to the individual and presumed to be due to Central Nervous System Dysfunction. Even though a learning disability may occur concomitantly with other handicapping conditions (e.g. sensory impairment, mental retardation, social and emotional disturbance) or environmental influences (e.g. cultural differences, insufficient/inappropriate instruction, psychogenic factors) it is not the direct result of those conditions or influences.
Another reason for believing dyslexics are above average is not that they are but only that they are easier to detect.
Current National Institutes of Health (NIH) studies estimate the prevalence of this disorder (dyslexia) at 20% of school age children. This means that one in five children have the fears and emotions expressed above. It is by far the most common form of learning disability. In addition, dyslexia affects all socio-economic classes and all races equally (2) (2). It affects as many boys as girls (3). However, boys are usually spotted more quickly because they tend to exhibit externalizing behaviors such as acting out when doing poorly in school. Consequently the teacher is more likely to look for a problem in a child who is acting out in class rather than one who is quiet. Thus, boys who tend to act out more will be noticed more by the teacher.
As described above, children with the disorder often feel stupid as a result of their constant struggle in school. However, there is no correlation between intelligence and dyslexia. Furthermore it is important to note that phonological abilities do not depend on IQ - the genetic risk can affect learning to read in children of high and of low IQ equally though the problem is easier to detect in those of higher ability who do not show other learning problems. This does not mean however, that it will be easy to differentiate at school entry
between children with dyslexia and children at risk of failure because they come to school from socio-economically or linguistically disadvantaged backgrounds.
Has anyone actually looked to see if low IQ children would benefit from reading intervention compared to higher IQ children?
There's now evidence from research at York University that shows - contrary to what you might have expected - that children with a low IQ can be helped just as much with reading problems as children with a high IQ, providing it's the right reading programme and providing it's implemented in the right way. What you might have expected is that children with a low IQ wouldn't progress as quickly as children with a high IQ: but what these studies in York have found, he says, is that they do.
This isn't a complete review of the subject and I should add that some researchers have looked at dyslexics V's non dyslexics and indeed concluded that dyslexics are of average or above average intelligence. The flaw I see is in those comparisons is that the group of dyslexics does not actually represent all dyslexics but rather diagnosed dyslexics. As the NIH says, the higher intelligent dyslexics are easier to identify and therefore I believe they are over represented in the groups of dyslexics that are compared. If you consider the fact that there also does not seem to be any real difference between the prevalence of dyslexia in boys and girls but more boys are identified as having dyslexia because they seem to act out their frustration more often, then the resulting ,everybody says so , that dyslexia occurs more often in boys than girls starts to be explained in a similar manner.
My little niche in the field of dyslexia involves visual dyslexia. I would like to give one anecdotal example of a undiagnosed visual dyslexic who was considered mildly mentally retarded. It is about the saddest waste of potential I have ever experienced.
Briefly, I accidentally discovered filters that seemed to remove visual problems for a dyslexic back in 1992. After reading all the literature and seeing how badly everyone thought about tinted lenses as a solution I really didn't want to get involved.
My girlfriend's son seemed to meet the description of reading below his intelligence level for being dyslexic as he was a 20 years old special ed student and had never written or read a word in his life except his name and still did not know his alphabet. He was classified as being mildly retarded, had cerebral palsy affecting his left side and had some hearing loss.
Being bored one day, I thought to see if the filters that later became the See Right Dyslexia Glasses might help Chris. It wasn't readily apparent how to go about that but eventually I tried writing out the alphabet once in order and below that I scrambled the letters. I asked him to match A-A and B-B etc. He could only match 13 of the letters. That did seem to help explain why he never learned his alphabet or to read.
After putting on the See Right Dyslexia Glasses he could match all 26 letters and in 3 days he could read the alphabet from flash cards. He wrote his first note to his mother after a week. Since then I have been looking for the research that has been done to conclude that dyslexics are only from the group of average to above average intelligence and I still do not believe it has ever been done.
My experience with how Chris responded to the dyslexia glasses motivated me to investigate several subjects. The first was to identify who the See Right Dyslexia Glasses might help and why. The second was to identify why dyslexics were thought to be from the group of people who have average to above average intelligence.
15 years later I have the answers to both questions. The See Right Dyslexia Glasses remove any described visual problem that makes reading difficult for visual dyslexics and so benefit any dyslexic that can describe a visual problem that makes it difficult to read. The myth of why dyslexics are considered to have average or above intelligence is the result of several factors described in this post but does not seem to have any valid support and is a self fulfilling prophecy.
Monday, February 12, 2007
An Example of Sampling Bias in Dyslexia Reporting
Pre selecting has a long history in dyslexia research. " dyslexics are of average or above average intelligence." is a self fulfilling prophecy because if you look for dyslexics from the group of people having average to above average intelligence to the exclusion of below average intelligence then that is what you find. This technique produces what is called a sampling bias.
The following is from an article that suggests that schools need to do a better job teaching dyslexics how to read. That is certainly true. I just do not believe that the example below supports what is inferred from the rest of the article.
"Robert Broudo, the Landmark School's headmaster, said the school selects students with strong intellectual ability, even if they have serious reading deficits.
It then gives them concentrated help with their reading difficulties, he said, including one-on-one tutoring each day and grouping students by reading ability in each of their classes.
The results? About 90 percent of Landmark's graduates go on to college, and all of them passed Massachusetts' state graduation exam last year, compared with 65 percent of special education students elsewhere in the state. "
Let me take the above information and look at it differently to see why I suggest the results might not be what it suggests. I will use a group size of 100 as an example.
1) Normally 65 special ed students pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam out of a group of 100.
2) Normally 35 special education students do not pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam college out of a group of 100.
3) If you look at the top 50 of the group as indicated by intellectual ability you would expect a higher % to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam .
4) If you look at the bottom 50 of the group as indicated by intellectual ability you would expect a smaller % to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam.
5) All 50 passed the Massachusetts' state graduation exam from the top group after intervention.
6) If 15 out of 50 passed the Massachusetts' state graduation exam from the bottom group ,a 30% average, then the total would be the same.
Is it reasonable to suspect that the rate of passing the Massachusetts' state graduation exam is 100% from the top half and 30% from the bottom half for special education students when the average for the whole group 65% without the intervention? I believe it is.
For the intervention to not be indicated as any success by the standard of passing the Massachusetts' state graduation exam , the only thing that would have to be true is that the 35 special education students who did not pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam all were from the bottom half of the students.
I think it is reasonable to suspect that the 35 students who were not going to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam were indeed from the bottom half of the group along with 15 students who were going to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam.
Do I think the intervention was of no value? NO ! Was any information given that would support the value of the intervention? NO !
How reading is taught needs to be improved, examples are everywhere in the statistics.That is why I will not say that the intervention had no value. This sloppy example does nothing to give any indication of what type of intervention works or does not work. The standard used, that the selected students did better than average as indicated by passing the Massachusetts' state graduation exam, could have also resulted from the sampling bias of selecting the better students and then comparing the selected group to the average.
The following is from an article that suggests that schools need to do a better job teaching dyslexics how to read. That is certainly true. I just do not believe that the example below supports what is inferred from the rest of the article.
"Robert Broudo, the Landmark School's headmaster, said the school selects students with strong intellectual ability, even if they have serious reading deficits.
It then gives them concentrated help with their reading difficulties, he said, including one-on-one tutoring each day and grouping students by reading ability in each of their classes.
The results? About 90 percent of Landmark's graduates go on to college, and all of them passed Massachusetts' state graduation exam last year, compared with 65 percent of special education students elsewhere in the state. "
Let me take the above information and look at it differently to see why I suggest the results might not be what it suggests. I will use a group size of 100 as an example.
1) Normally 65 special ed students pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam out of a group of 100.
2) Normally 35 special education students do not pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam college out of a group of 100.
3) If you look at the top 50 of the group as indicated by intellectual ability you would expect a higher % to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam .
4) If you look at the bottom 50 of the group as indicated by intellectual ability you would expect a smaller % to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam.
5) All 50 passed the Massachusetts' state graduation exam from the top group after intervention.
6) If 15 out of 50 passed the Massachusetts' state graduation exam from the bottom group ,a 30% average, then the total would be the same.
Is it reasonable to suspect that the rate of passing the Massachusetts' state graduation exam is 100% from the top half and 30% from the bottom half for special education students when the average for the whole group 65% without the intervention? I believe it is.
For the intervention to not be indicated as any success by the standard of passing the Massachusetts' state graduation exam , the only thing that would have to be true is that the 35 special education students who did not pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam all were from the bottom half of the students.
I think it is reasonable to suspect that the 35 students who were not going to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam were indeed from the bottom half of the group along with 15 students who were going to pass the Massachusetts' state graduation exam.
Do I think the intervention was of no value? NO ! Was any information given that would support the value of the intervention? NO !
How reading is taught needs to be improved, examples are everywhere in the statistics.That is why I will not say that the intervention had no value. This sloppy example does nothing to give any indication of what type of intervention works or does not work. The standard used, that the selected students did better than average as indicated by passing the Massachusetts' state graduation exam, could have also resulted from the sampling bias of selecting the better students and then comparing the selected group to the average.
Dyslexia is a syndrome
A minority of dyslexics have predominantly visual problems and most of these dyslexics surprise their parents and teachers with their difficulty learning to read because they have normal verbal development. When these ( a minority of dyslexics ) describe symptoms such as not being able to read because the letters are moving around to much or there is an amount of time before the next word comes into focus, it is easy to see their problem isn't phonological.
The prejudice against visual problems being involved with dyslexia partly is generated by the public response to those overselling the concept that there is a single color for a particular dyslexic that will help their dyslexia. When the evaluation is actually the product being sold there is no recourse when there is failure and no financial reason to limit those tested as the profits are the same for both success or failure.
This failure of high priced evaluations to determine a particular color for a particular dyslexic should not result in the conclusion that dyslexics have no visual problems. All the failure does is to make it a financially risky action to try those high priced evaluations.
Why then are we reading lately that fMRI studies have now proven that dyslexia is caused by phonological processing areas of the brain? Simply because that is the latest study reported and almost all fMRI studies conclude that they have found the cause.
My opinion is that there just doesn't seem to be any glory in concluding that a factor in dyslexia has been found. In fact every part of the brain that involves reading ,when studied by fMRI , shows the same type of results when a group of dyslexics is compared to a group of non dyslexics. The results show differences between groups but have so much overlap that individuals can not be identified as being dyslexic or not.
Now, I do not question any of the brain imaging results. I do note the fact that the differences observed ( when looking at any single brain location ) only show up when comparing groups and not individuals.
I suggest that the dyslexics in those studies whose results overlap non dyslexics actually have their dyslexia caused by different factors than what is being studied. I suspect that 1 group that skews the results have visual processing problems. This also works in reverse when studying the visual centers by the phonologically impaired.
Having a group of dyslexics made from dyslexics that actually have different factors causing their dyslexia would produce the fMRI results that are reported. I think that dyslexia having more than one cause the more reasonable conclusion rather than there is one cause which can not identify a individual as being dyslexic.
To consider dyslexia a syndrome and not be constrained by the single cause theory is much more likely to result in arriving at being able to identify a dyslexic by the fMRI method. This would require that several areas of the brain are evaluated for signs of dyslexia and at least might identify those individuals whose cause of dyslexia is able to be evaluated by fMRI data.
The prejudice against visual problems being involved with dyslexia partly is generated by the public response to those overselling the concept that there is a single color for a particular dyslexic that will help their dyslexia. When the evaluation is actually the product being sold there is no recourse when there is failure and no financial reason to limit those tested as the profits are the same for both success or failure.
This failure of high priced evaluations to determine a particular color for a particular dyslexic should not result in the conclusion that dyslexics have no visual problems. All the failure does is to make it a financially risky action to try those high priced evaluations.
Why then are we reading lately that fMRI studies have now proven that dyslexia is caused by phonological processing areas of the brain? Simply because that is the latest study reported and almost all fMRI studies conclude that they have found the cause.
My opinion is that there just doesn't seem to be any glory in concluding that a factor in dyslexia has been found. In fact every part of the brain that involves reading ,when studied by fMRI , shows the same type of results when a group of dyslexics is compared to a group of non dyslexics. The results show differences between groups but have so much overlap that individuals can not be identified as being dyslexic or not.
Now, I do not question any of the brain imaging results. I do note the fact that the differences observed ( when looking at any single brain location ) only show up when comparing groups and not individuals.
I suggest that the dyslexics in those studies whose results overlap non dyslexics actually have their dyslexia caused by different factors than what is being studied. I suspect that 1 group that skews the results have visual processing problems. This also works in reverse when studying the visual centers by the phonologically impaired.
Having a group of dyslexics made from dyslexics that actually have different factors causing their dyslexia would produce the fMRI results that are reported. I think that dyslexia having more than one cause the more reasonable conclusion rather than there is one cause which can not identify a individual as being dyslexic.
To consider dyslexia a syndrome and not be constrained by the single cause theory is much more likely to result in arriving at being able to identify a dyslexic by the fMRI method. This would require that several areas of the brain are evaluated for signs of dyslexia and at least might identify those individuals whose cause of dyslexia is able to be evaluated by fMRI data.
Friday, February 2, 2007
The Visual Dyslexia Solution
I have a web site where I sell See Right Dyslexia Glasses that claim to remove any described visual problem that makes reading difficult for dyslexics. I used to blog on Jumbled Letters which was for dyslexics but they are no longer in existence.
The address for the site is dyslexiaglasses.com .
The address for the site is dyslexiaglasses.com .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
