I guess it is too much to expect M.D. Ophthalmologists to actually be able to think their way out of a scientific bag. I expect to be slapped around for my comments here but I actually think that just because people have a biased opinion about a subject they shouldn't expose themselves by acting as if they can make a scientific sounding policy about dyslexia and vision unless they actually understand dyslexia as well as vision and the fact that a minority of dyslexics can describe individually specific visual problems that make reading difficult.
Here is the link to the new policy saying that vision has nothing to do with dyslexia
http://www.aao.org/about/policy/upload/Learning-Disabilities-Dyslexia-Vision-2009.pdf
I see Sally Shaywitz and her husband's fingerprints all over the policy statement. I have always said that phonological problems are indeed the most common dyslexia problem ( regardless of the fact that there are a non trivial amount on non responders to phonological interventions)and that if you want to blindly choose an individual selected in a random manner from a group of dyslexics that phonological intervention has the greatest statistical chance of being helped. That method fails for a non trivial amount of dyslexics sometimes because of visual problems seeing text.
That Shaywitz uses fMRI information to prove the phonological problem relationship to dyslexia in her certain manner while not being able to identify if an individual is dyslexic or not by that method suggests to me that she is reading a little more certainty into the data than is there. I am not trying to criticize her, her star is at its height right now and the AAO believes her as if it is written in stone.
This is going to be a long post so I am going to go out on a limb and say that in all of history that there has never been any single way that Doctors have treated a large group of kids (or people in general) so that the results have been positive for every kid. I am not saying that groups haven't been helped just that a certain amount of collateral damage is acceptable. I guess that is why it is OK to promote drugs that may cause death in a few people as a side effect and OK to promote a single phonological intervention for dyslexics that will have some non responders to the intervention.
Sometimes it is informative to actually read the references that are used to evaluate them for quality and make sure they are inclusive of the information to date. GF Eden did one of the first fMRI studies on dyslexia and vision and found about the same differences that are seen in other areas of the brain : you can see differences between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics. That study was big news at the time I would think the everyone belonging to the Eye MD association would be familiar with the study. G. Eden went on and studied other areas of the brain related to reading and found the same differences as with vision. The eye MD's included one of Eden's studies just not the one on vision. I always liked the comment from a young girl in her study who said she could read if the words would just stop walking. I have a vested interest in this discussion because I sell glasses that would stop those letters from walking so that girl could read normally.
I can understand the eye MDs being upset with the low quality studies done on vision therapy and colored lenses but just as poor studies don't prove anything positive they also don't prove anything negative. It is not proper to conclude that because a study is very flawed that it proves that something doesn't work, it just still needs to be properly studied.
I have no idea about how effective vision therapy is. Personally, I believe there is no way that claims of 80% of learning problems are vision related can possibly be true so there has to be huge failure rates and since it can take months and thousands of dollars and is never guaranteed I would advise against it until a target group can be identified so that the success rate can be raised to the point that a guarantee could be offered. I just don't see that vision therapy is a viable product at this time.
I don't like the lack of a guarantee and the overselling of colored lenses either. Again the studies done with colored lenses have been poorly designed but are suggestive that a better selected at risk population could increase the success rate. The eye MDs just can't claim that poorly designed studies prove a negative when they don't prove anything.
Just because the eye MDs are embarrassed that anyone would invade their turf with big claims little proof and no guarantees doesn't give them the right to speak from the mount and spew poorly researched and selected articles to get rid of the invaders.
Since I sell and financially guarantee that See Right Dyslexia Glasses remove described visual problems that make reading difficult for a minority of dyslexics I have a dog in this (fight) discussion.
Statistically, dyslexics in general and visual dyslexics in particular have a higher rate of poor depth perception. My glasses restore normal depth perception for that group. It seems that eye MDs can't restore normal depth perception yet but they can measure depth perception. Feel free to challenge my glasses ability to do that if you find a dyslexic with poor depth perception. I run across them occasionally myself.
I think using the FAQ's on a dyslexia site as a reference indicates a sloppy gathering of information to develop a national policy on dyslexia and vision not being related. Also since Eden's study on dyslexia and vision indicating dyslexia and vision are related was of the same excellence as the one you used as a reference
I wonder if the eye MDs did more than read the abstracts. Eden often mentions the non universality of her results as pertains to dyslexics.
Put the policy back on the agenda and do a better job next time. Here is some info on visual dyslexia.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
Dyslexia Theories
Another way of looking at the theories of what causes dyslexia is to understand that all are partial explanations of the large condition that is dyslexia.
Together they form a fairly good understanding of what dyslexia is where they all fail when considered individually.
Granted, each theory has believers that claim " This is dyslexia ". If the goal is to understand a particular dyslexic and get help for that particular dyslexic, then the reality is that it needs to be determined which theory applies to that dyslexic so that a focused intervention can be developed.
There seems to be a disconnect between what dyslexia researchers are trying to do ,which is finding the single cause of dyslexia and what is wanted by most dyslexics which is what intervention will help him or her.
I offer as proof the different studies using fMRI to study dyslexia that study
specific areas of the brain ( generally each of which is related to a particular theory of what dyslexia is ). All the studies find the same result of being able to see the difference between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics but with data overlap between the groups that makes identifying individual dyslexics impossible.
If you have only read the media reports of those studies and have already picked one that you firmly believe is the right result and that what causes dyslexia has been found , I suggest you find and read the researchers conclusions. Not one researcher can claim to evaluate a person by fMRI and determine if he or she is dyslexic.
When different dyslexics have different problems , which is what is observed, how can one theory of one cause be correct. On the plus side you can conclude that indeed these theories are each and every one of them are supported by fMRI
FOR SOME DYSLEXICS BUT NOT ALL .
I personally have developed filter glasses for the minority of dyslexics that fit the criteria of being able to describe a visual problem that makes reading difficult. While that criteria covers a broad range of visual problems that make reading difficult it is narrow enough so that an individual can determine if he or she is in the group.
My point is that while no one theory covers all dyslexics, together they do form a list of problems from which any particular dyslexic is likely to be able to find the cause of his or her dyslexia problems. What is still needed is for the different interventions to determine criteria that will identify which intervention will help which dyslexic.
Until that happens, dyslexia interventions developed for a particular theory will continue to have failure rates due to the simple fact that some dyslexics have problems in other areas that are not addressed.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Dyslexia Interventions
Dyslexia interventions and reality. " Holly Shapiro Ph.D. said... I must advise this blog’s readers that dyslexia is not a visual problem (dyslexia.yale.edu). " and is using Sally Shaywitz, popular author and fundraiser , as her source of information.
A minority of dyslexics have visual problems as a primary source of their reading problems. I have never said that dyslexia is a visual problem but if an intervention ignores the visual problems that some dyslexics have it will fail for those dyslexics.
Well since Dr & DR Shaywitz seem to come to their conclusions from fMRI data and are also promoting sort of the same phonics and phonemic interventions as being the only valid and effective dyslexia interventions and useful for all dyslexics, I say open your eyes and look and the data again.
FMRI data does not support any universal problems for all dyslexics. If the data supported that position then you could identify a person as dyslexic or not by fMRI.
As for dyslexia and vision not being related if you are using fMRI studies to show the phonics relationship the fMRI vision studies should be as valid. This dyslexia and vision fMRI study shows similar results to all the dyslexia and language areas of the brain studies .
"
The human brain consists of a patchwork of regions that carry out different activities. At least 32 regions (labeled with a "V") are thought to participate in vision. Region V5, for example, seems to be crucial for tracking moving objects; V1 and V2 recognize colors and patterns. A number of studies in recent years have targeted a visual pathway that includes V5 as a trouble zone in people with dyslexia.
fMRI images of people with (bottom) and without (top) dyslexia, taken while looking at stationary patterns (left) or moving patterns (right) of dots" height="165" width="200">
fMRI images of people with (bottom) and without (top) dyslexia, taken while looking at stationary patterns (left) or moving patterns (right) of dots
In 1996, Eden and her coworkers at the National Institue of Mental Health (NIMH) in Bethesda, Md., (where she worked at the time) confirmed this association "
Pay attention readers, the reason that different dyslexia interventions are being promoted is that not one is effective for all dyslexics. Several government studies have found that systematic phonics instruction from a professional is the best reading help for children struggling to read. I do not and can not understand how that Best can be perverted into a conclusion that phonics instruction is effective for all dyslexics.
When there is found a reading instruction method that is Effective for all dyslexics there will be singing from the roof tops. Holly Shapiro says all her students learn from her phonics program and I assume she is talking about reading. I do not believe it. She either has a very low standard of success or is being misleading.
I am not saying that her particular program is good bad or indifferent. I am not saying that she is doing anything different than many other people selling dyslexia interventions. The reason I am not saying anything is because it is almost impossible to find what the results of these interventions are.
How would an effective intervention be defined? At the low end of effective I would at least require that the dyslexics would not be falling further behind . At the higher end an effective intervention would yield people who read at a level that would be expected from their intelligence.
Quack Quack Quack . Who was that . " Readers should also be made aware that Mr. John A. Hayes is an Internet marketing quack, who might be practicing optometry without a license."
says Holly Shapiro. Internet Marketing QUACK. Hummmmmm It seems that what started me off on this subject was all the PAID articles with PAID links showing up on my google alerts and wasting my time that were made to seem to be articles by different people.
Personally I don't use paid links or write articles as if I was a third party with no interest but the truth. That is considered Black Hat SEO techniques and frowned upon by google. Let's see sleazy black hat Internet Marketing techniques by Holly saying all her stuents learn ( I assume reading) no dyslexia testing needed, no guarantee Quack Quack. That is misleading . I did notice that you kept changing a few words here and there in that bogus article touting your place with links saying you are better than everyone else. Oh that's right, if you didn't change a few words now and then google would notice they were duplicate content and they would never see the light of day.
If I was trying to generate really good success stories for a dyslexia intervention, I might suggest that any poor reader in trouble not be tested for dyslexia but just start paying for the intervention. That way if I was lucky, I could get paid thousands for what could have been achieved with a few hours of after school instruction and when the non-dyslexics started reading as well as they should I could claim a very effective dyslexia intervention. Oh, I am sorry, that's not my technique that is what Holly Shapiro does. Quack Quack!
But if I did that I couldn't sleep at night. I would feel I was over promoting and misleading dyslexics to think my intervention could help all of them. Isn't that the definition of being a QUACK . I bet if I was going to be that unethical I sure couldn't offer any guarantee or for that matter give any kind of indication of what results my intervention might have. Paid links ,Paid articles as ads, fake claims of helping every dyslexic, duplicate content and I am the internet marketing quack.
It might be argued that because dyslexics differ in their specific problems and severity of those problems it is difficult to predict what the individual results would be. I suggest that if the people charging for the intervention can not evaluate an individual and come to a conclusion as to how well the individual will do at least in a general way then, they don't understand the relationship of the individual's problems to the intervention.
I on the other hand, having become familiar with the I have the answer for all dyslexics interventions, represent my visual dyslexia intervention to those for which it is 100% successful only and I identify who will or will not be helped by them. Rather than quacking up customers who will not benefit from my product I am the anti-salesman shooing them away.
To Holly who would say I may be practicing optometry without a license I say put that joint down and get your facts straight. The glasses I sell are usually without prescription and the prescription glasses I sell have the prescription provided by the customer. Nothing I do requires a license.
Holly you are welcome on my blog any day to voice your opinions. I am sorry but it is you that seems to have all the internet marketing hype and a narrow and incomplete understanding of dyslexia. You charge more for 2 hours of instruction that I do for my glasses and I refund the price and shipping if my customers ship them back. Who is the Quack??????????????
People like you and Shaywitz with your concept that dyslexia is a single condition and can be fixed with a single intervention are wrong . I am not even saying that your program isn't a good one for many or even most dyslexics. Teaching phonics is very important for the majority of dyslexics but it is not the whole answer for every dyslexic as you imply.
I have people calling me up and telling me how they have spent thousands for dyslexia interventions that didn't help much. Thinking about it now I have never had a pair of glasses returned by someone with whom I have discussed their vision.
You can not tell me that when you were working with children yourself that you didn't sometime have thoughts after the first interview that that child wasn't going to do well with your intervention.
My problem is with people who oversell their dyslexia interventions and drain out all the available money from non-responders so they end up stopping their hopes of finding an intervention that works for them because they go broke. Offer a guarantee and I won't be as harsh.
The worse possible financial situation someone buying my glasses could be in from trying my glasses is that they would be out the cost of return shipping . Trying your intervention for 3 months would cost $2500 with no guarantee of any help. Take the money and run is your business philosophy right ?
By the way ,your ignoring fluency and comprehension and assuming that they will develop on their own after the dyslexic learns phonics IMO is missing the point that the faster a dyslexic is helped the better off he or she is. Your program could be better .
A minority of dyslexics have visual problems as a primary source of their reading problems. I have never said that dyslexia is a visual problem but if an intervention ignores the visual problems that some dyslexics have it will fail for those dyslexics.
Well since Dr & DR Shaywitz seem to come to their conclusions from fMRI data and are also promoting sort of the same phonics and phonemic interventions as being the only valid and effective dyslexia interventions and useful for all dyslexics, I say open your eyes and look and the data again.
FMRI data does not support any universal problems for all dyslexics. If the data supported that position then you could identify a person as dyslexic or not by fMRI.
As for dyslexia and vision not being related if you are using fMRI studies to show the phonics relationship the fMRI vision studies should be as valid. This dyslexia and vision fMRI study shows similar results to all the dyslexia and language areas of the brain studies .
"
The human brain consists of a patchwork of regions that carry out different activities. At least 32 regions (labeled with a "V") are thought to participate in vision. Region V5, for example, seems to be crucial for tracking moving objects; V1 and V2 recognize colors and patterns. A number of studies in recent years have targeted a visual pathway that includes V5 as a trouble zone in people with dyslexia.
fMRI images of people with (bottom) and without (top) dyslexia, taken while looking at stationary patterns (left) or moving patterns (right) of dots
In 1996, Eden and her coworkers at the National Institue of Mental Health (NIMH) in Bethesda, Md., (where she worked at the time) confirmed this association "
Pay attention readers, the reason that different dyslexia interventions are being promoted is that not one is effective for all dyslexics. Several government studies have found that systematic phonics instruction from a professional is the best reading help for children struggling to read. I do not and can not understand how that Best can be perverted into a conclusion that phonics instruction is effective for all dyslexics.
When there is found a reading instruction method that is Effective for all dyslexics there will be singing from the roof tops. Holly Shapiro says all her students learn from her phonics program and I assume she is talking about reading. I do not believe it. She either has a very low standard of success or is being misleading.
I am not saying that her particular program is good bad or indifferent. I am not saying that she is doing anything different than many other people selling dyslexia interventions. The reason I am not saying anything is because it is almost impossible to find what the results of these interventions are.
How would an effective intervention be defined? At the low end of effective I would at least require that the dyslexics would not be falling further behind . At the higher end an effective intervention would yield people who read at a level that would be expected from their intelligence.
Quack Quack Quack . Who was that . " Readers should also be made aware that Mr. John A. Hayes is an Internet marketing quack, who might be practicing optometry without a license."
says Holly Shapiro. Internet Marketing QUACK. Hummmmmm It seems that what started me off on this subject was all the PAID articles with PAID links showing up on my google alerts and wasting my time that were made to seem to be articles by different people.
Personally I don't use paid links or write articles as if I was a third party with no interest but the truth. That is considered Black Hat SEO techniques and frowned upon by google. Let's see sleazy black hat Internet Marketing techniques by Holly saying all her stuents learn ( I assume reading) no dyslexia testing needed, no guarantee Quack Quack. That is misleading . I did notice that you kept changing a few words here and there in that bogus article touting your place with links saying you are better than everyone else. Oh that's right, if you didn't change a few words now and then google would notice they were duplicate content and they would never see the light of day.
If I was trying to generate really good success stories for a dyslexia intervention, I might suggest that any poor reader in trouble not be tested for dyslexia but just start paying for the intervention. That way if I was lucky, I could get paid thousands for what could have been achieved with a few hours of after school instruction and when the non-dyslexics started reading as well as they should I could claim a very effective dyslexia intervention. Oh, I am sorry, that's not my technique that is what Holly Shapiro does. Quack Quack!
But if I did that I couldn't sleep at night. I would feel I was over promoting and misleading dyslexics to think my intervention could help all of them. Isn't that the definition of being a QUACK . I bet if I was going to be that unethical I sure couldn't offer any guarantee or for that matter give any kind of indication of what results my intervention might have. Paid links ,Paid articles as ads, fake claims of helping every dyslexic, duplicate content and I am the internet marketing quack.
It might be argued that because dyslexics differ in their specific problems and severity of those problems it is difficult to predict what the individual results would be. I suggest that if the people charging for the intervention can not evaluate an individual and come to a conclusion as to how well the individual will do at least in a general way then, they don't understand the relationship of the individual's problems to the intervention.
I on the other hand, having become familiar with the I have the answer for all dyslexics interventions, represent my visual dyslexia intervention to those for which it is 100% successful only and I identify who will or will not be helped by them. Rather than quacking up customers who will not benefit from my product I am the anti-salesman shooing them away.
To Holly who would say I may be practicing optometry without a license I say put that joint down and get your facts straight. The glasses I sell are usually without prescription and the prescription glasses I sell have the prescription provided by the customer. Nothing I do requires a license.
Holly you are welcome on my blog any day to voice your opinions. I am sorry but it is you that seems to have all the internet marketing hype and a narrow and incomplete understanding of dyslexia. You charge more for 2 hours of instruction that I do for my glasses and I refund the price and shipping if my customers ship them back. Who is the Quack??????????????
People like you and Shaywitz with your concept that dyslexia is a single condition and can be fixed with a single intervention are wrong . I am not even saying that your program isn't a good one for many or even most dyslexics. Teaching phonics is very important for the majority of dyslexics but it is not the whole answer for every dyslexic as you imply.
I have people calling me up and telling me how they have spent thousands for dyslexia interventions that didn't help much. Thinking about it now I have never had a pair of glasses returned by someone with whom I have discussed their vision.
You can not tell me that when you were working with children yourself that you didn't sometime have thoughts after the first interview that that child wasn't going to do well with your intervention.
My problem is with people who oversell their dyslexia interventions and drain out all the available money from non-responders so they end up stopping their hopes of finding an intervention that works for them because they go broke. Offer a guarantee and I won't be as harsh.
The worse possible financial situation someone buying my glasses could be in from trying my glasses is that they would be out the cost of return shipping . Trying your intervention for 3 months would cost $2500 with no guarantee of any help. Take the money and run is your business philosophy right ?
By the way ,your ignoring fluency and comprehension and assuming that they will develop on their own after the dyslexic learns phonics IMO is missing the point that the faster a dyslexic is helped the better off he or she is. Your program could be better .
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Adult Dyslexia as a money making machine
I might just be having a bad week but everywhere I look I see products and services out to rip off adult dyslexics. If you are an adult with reading difficulties and suspect you are dyslexic , let me save you some money by giving you the results of any on line dyslexia test. The results will show you are dyslexic. The reason I say that is by the definition of not being a dyslexic , having normal or expected reading skills, the person who is not dyslexic is not going to be taking the dyslexia test.
It doesn't even matter if you are dyslexic or not and dyslexia is not the only reason for poor reading skills. Having English as a second language 20 or more years ago or missing a lot of school because you were ill come to mind as common reasons the educational system might have failed for an individual. Simplistic adult dyslexia tests are just going to identify poor readers as being dyslexic.
All these dyslexia tests for adults suggest once you know you are confirmed dyslexic it is easy to find a program to help your dyslexia, easy to complete the program and then blue skies forever. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but it is just not so. There may be the rare adult program available maybe even free but generally free programs if available are for children.
This is where I should be putting the answer to all your dyslexia problems for $29.99, get it today, limited offer and all the other hype for a product that isn't going to help anybody. I don't have such a product.
That hasn't stopped others from claiming to have the answer. To be fair I haven't reviewed this book but when the normal selling price is over $1 a page I think that it is going to be over priced. Here is the reason for my rant today. This is not new information !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Notice that almost every topic is covered in 1 page. Some pages cover 2 topics. I know that being concise and to the point is a virtue in writing but you can't cover much in a 2-3 page chapter. Chapters 4, 5,6,7,11,12 ,13,15 are all of 1 page long.
Look at their P.S. P.P.S. and P.P.P.S . and what they claim you will get from this book. I don't believe it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. Remember when I told you about those tips above? You could be enjoying the freedom from worry right now! Act Today!
P.P.S You could be enjoying the freedom and happiness that comes with controlling your dyslexia symptoms....Don't wait another minute! Join the hundreds of others that are completely impressed with the product!
P.P.P.S. After this special pre-launch offer, I will be raising the price tag back up to the original $34.00 price. Advertising online can get very expensive, and I'm not even sure if I can keep this offer up much longer!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I assembled these useful links as a resource for dyslexics without visual dyslexia.
These links were chosen because they either offer free services or information about dyslexia that is presented in an objective manner.
useful linksIf you are the type of person that thinks something only has value if it costs money you can send me the $29.99 LOL .
Monday, April 20, 2009
Garbage Dyslexia Spam Ravina Reading Center Chicago
I get annoyed sometimes when dyslexia spam fills my mailbox because I have google alerts for dyslexia. The latest is being put out by Ravinia Reading Center in Chicago and is an article that bashes everyone so that people looking for dyslexia will turn to this source of dyslexia wisdom. I have seen this garbage dyslexia article in about 20 alerts so far. That is about what I usually see on a real new dyslexia topic.
The title is Reputable Dyslexia Clinics Teach Dyslexic Kids and Adults More Effectively than Unspecialized Instructors.
Here is their deal . They charge about $100/hour and suggest 2 hours a week all year long . That's $10,000 a year . They are so good at what they do that you can expect the program to last 1,3 or 5 years or until you run out of money.
They mention Orton Gillingham as a method but say about the center's head" Dr. Shapiro has elected not to pursue recertification as a Fellow of the Academy."
All instructors are Speech Language Pathologist .
Here is a real gem of useful information." A pediatrician is often the 1st diagnostician to explore the nature of the problem. The doctor should figure out if the origin of the difficulty in reading by taking a standard physical examination and interviewing a thorough health history."
So what should the pediatrician do ???? If indicated, the patient could be referred for {a neurological examination I can only guess that when you take your child for a physical exam to determine why he or she has reading problems he or she can be evaluated for severe head trauma as a cause.
Well what to do if the pediatrician and the neurologist have not found the cause of the reading problem????????????????? "If dyslexia is instead suspected, the doctor should refer the struggling reader for intervention by a speech-language pathologist or needed testing with a specialized tester in learning disabilities."
Well what advice can I get from the website about testing ?????????????????????" No dyslexia test or evidence is necessary to confirm a reading difficulty, other than observed difficulty reading. It’s really that simple."
So let me recap . How should parents find help in Chicago for poor reading children suspected of dyslexia.????????????????? Between the article and the website the answer is to just sign up for the $10,000 a year program no testing needed.
I assume that the people expect that having dozens of random blogs ( I suspect paid) post an article with a link back to Ravinia Reading Center in Chicago is enough to get high ranking in the search engines.
What is funny in my opinion is that local search engine results are easy to get. This post will probably end up next to their search engine results.
What does the article say about finding dyslexia interventions ?????????????????????????????
"Despite the fact that it’spossible to locate good dyslexia help in most big cities, exercise caution. Ignorant, uneducated practitioners are marketing lies. Some solutions are out there as dyslexia treatments like colored overlays for “dyslexia reading glasses”. If dyslexia tools like these help with any disability or problem, it is surely not dyslexia, and could be nothing more than quack science."
Since I have developed See Right Dyslexia Glasses and market those glasses with a money back guarantee I would usually just comment on the blog posts of articles like this one to set the record straight. Every blog with this article on it has had their comments closed.
Visitors to my blog never find closed comments. My blog tries to weed out bad dyslexia information and the article and dyslexia help business in Chicago is as bad as any I have sen in a long time. BTW all the spelling errors are from my copying and pasting from the article or website.
The title is Reputable Dyslexia Clinics Teach Dyslexic Kids and Adults More Effectively than Unspecialized Instructors.
Here is their deal . They charge about $100/hour and suggest 2 hours a week all year long . That's $10,000 a year . They are so good at what they do that you can expect the program to last 1,3 or 5 years or until you run out of money.
They mention Orton Gillingham as a method but say about the center's head" Dr. Shapiro has elected not to pursue recertification as a Fellow of the Academy."
All instructors are Speech Language Pathologist .
Here is a real gem of useful information." A pediatrician is often the 1st diagnostician to explore the nature of the problem. The doctor should figure out if the origin of the difficulty in reading by taking a standard physical examination and interviewing a thorough health history."
So what should the pediatrician do ???? If indicated, the patient could be referred for {a neurological examination I can only guess that when you take your child for a physical exam to determine why he or she has reading problems he or she can be evaluated for severe head trauma as a cause.
Well what to do if the pediatrician and the neurologist have not found the cause of the reading problem????????????????? "If dyslexia is instead suspected, the doctor should refer the struggling reader for intervention by a speech-language pathologist or needed testing with a specialized tester in learning disabilities."
Well what advice can I get from the website about testing ?????????????????????" No dyslexia test or evidence is necessary to confirm a reading difficulty, other than observed difficulty reading. It’s really that simple."
So let me recap . How should parents find help in Chicago for poor reading children suspected of dyslexia.????????????????? Between the article and the website the answer is to just sign up for the $10,000 a year program no testing needed.
I assume that the people expect that having dozens of random blogs ( I suspect paid) post an article with a link back to Ravinia Reading Center in Chicago is enough to get high ranking in the search engines.
What is funny in my opinion is that local search engine results are easy to get. This post will probably end up next to their search engine results.
What does the article say about finding dyslexia interventions ?????????????????????????????
"Despite the fact that it’spossible to locate good dyslexia help in most big cities, exercise caution. Ignorant, uneducated practitioners are marketing lies. Some solutions are out there as dyslexia treatments like colored overlays for “dyslexia reading glasses”. If dyslexia tools like these help with any disability or problem, it is surely not dyslexia, and could be nothing more than quack science."
Since I have developed See Right Dyslexia Glasses and market those glasses with a money back guarantee I would usually just comment on the blog posts of articles like this one to set the record straight. Every blog with this article on it has had their comments closed.
Visitors to my blog never find closed comments. My blog tries to weed out bad dyslexia information and the article and dyslexia help business in Chicago is as bad as any I have sen in a long time. BTW all the spelling errors are from my copying and pasting from the article or website.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Dyslexia Misunderstood and Why
I have been reading some blogs that try to explain dyslexia in a few paragraphs and it is just impossible. By pointing out some common short cuts that are taken when writing about dyslexia I hope to promote a more careful reading of the material about dyslexia.
Dyslexia is very difficult to write about because having individualistic symptoms everything needs to be qualified. I thought I would make a couple of comments about what I have read lately. One recent study is being promoted as" Dyslexia Unraveled ". It repeates some generalized meaningless statements.
"In fact, most people who have this disability have average to above average intelligence." This is a nice feel good statement that everyone makes but is often taken to mean that people with below average intelligence never have dyslexia.
Here is the truth. Because dyslexia is easier to detect in people with higher IQ's , diagnosed dyslexics generally have a average or higher IQ.
Many definitions of dyslexia also have a cut off on the low end of the IQ scale where reading difficulties can't be attributed to dyslexia or low IQ because reading standards for low IQ individual don't exist. If you remove low IQ people from consideration as dyslexics of course the remaing dyslexics will tend to have average or higher IQ's
While the feel good statement is important to help dyslexics know that their reading problems are not generally caused by being stupid or slow it does direct the effort to identify dyslexics away from people with lower IQ's. Those unidentified lower IQ dyslexics would also benefit from help so the feel good statement also does quite a bit of harm also.
Consider that the following 2 statements are both true and add nothing of value to understanding of what a person is. Note: the reason both statements can be true is that average people are included and counted in both groups.
1) People generally have average or HIGHER than average IQ's.
2) People generally have average or LOWER than average IQ'.
Here is a statement that is true for both dyslexics and people .
Dyslexics , in common with people , may have lower,higher or average IQ's and as far as science has been able to determine dyslexics do not differ from people in respect to IQ.
I submit that the statement "In fact, most people who have this disability have average to above average intelligence." is true but also misleading and has the potential to divert attention away from dyslexics of lower IQ causing them to be under represented and ignored. This harm very well offsets the advantage of being a feel good statement.
My niche is visual dyslexia so I have to make another comment about another common statement used to define define as being "often exemplified by reversing letters and the order of letters in a word.". Another true statement but not really helpful in understanding dyslexia and reversing letters only adds confusion because so many people with and without dyslexia reverse letters when writing is first encountered and beginning to be mastered.
Early on in school people often reverse letters. This behavior in dyslexics continues longer than it does in people without dyslexia. Early on , because people without dyslexia outnumber those that do, indeed the group of those who reverse letters can have fewer dyslexics than non dyslexics.
There are standards of ranges of how many reversals are common at different ages with the behavior being extinguished in those without dyslexia usually by the second grade.
Without the qualification of age and rate of occurrence, reversing letters as a description of dyslexia is useless and I suspect causes many parents to worry that they have dyslexic children when they do not. Again a counter productive description of dyslexia because it is not qualified.
There are other visual problems , such as seeing vibrating text as an example, that are useful in identifying visual dyslexia because they are not common in the non dyslexic population. Adult visual dyslexics can usually describe their visual problems . Children will often be able to describe their visual problems if how they see the page is discussed. More information about visual dyslexia can be found at www.dyslexiaglasses.com .
About 10% of dyslexics have visual dyslexia as a primary and sole cause of reading difficulties. Most dyslexics have no visual problems and a poorly defined % have both visual and language processing problems.
Which brings us to .
"Once a child is diagnosed, studies have shown that multi sensory learning techniques have helped children with dyslexia a great deal"
All dyslexia intervention techniques have non responders. Because multi sensory instruction does address the most common dyslexia problems it has been proven to be effective for a majority of dyslexics. If no specifics are known except that a person is dyslexic, then in a statistical way it can make sense to use multi sensory instruction. It would be better to try to identify a dyslexic's individual problems and focus the intervention on his or her specific problems.
Visual dyslexics are not going to be have their visual problems addressed by multi sensory instruction. There are also some additional dyslexia related problems that are not addressed that may require different techniques.
We have found the cause of dyslexia or not ! There are 2 major sources of the " cause of dyslexia found". There have been many fMRI studies that have imaged many different areas of the brain to compare dyslexics and non dyslexics. Most have been reported to have identified the cause of dyslexia from a single area of the brain. To date all the studies have had the same result of seeing differences between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics but with enough overlap of results that individuals can not be identified as dyslexic or not.
If you take the time to read all the fMRI studies and treat them as a single study you would have a much clearer understanding of what the present fMRI research data is telling us.
The following statements seem to be true.
In general every dyslexic will not show positive results in every area of the brain studied.
Ever area of the brain studied will show that some of the dyslexics have problems related to that area.
Every area of the brain studied will show that some of the dyslexics do not have problems related to that area.
The conclusion that seems reasonable is
Different dyslexics have different problems and those problems are related to different areas of the brain. It seems likely that individual dyslexics can have an assortment of problems that are individualistic. It also seems likely that the severity of a dyslexic's reading difficulty will be reflected by differences in severity in the individual areas of the brain wher his or her problems exists.
Another common source of " the cause of dyslexia is found" is from personal accounts that basically say " I am dyslexic , this is my problem, so this is what dyslexia is. ". This personal account often results in an intervention based on that belief and you would expect that intervention to be successful for the % of dyslexics that do indeed have that particular problem and a failure for those dyslexics without that problem.
Ron Davis, "Dyslexia is a Gift" and believes dyslexia problems are caused by the fact that dyslexics think in pictures is one example. The Dore method that promotes a physical exercise program as a cure for dyslexia is another example. Both of these examples claim that their method will help all dyslexics.
Until techniques are developed to identify an individual dyslexic's weaknesses and also identify the best interventions matched to each of them so that the most effective individual plan can be developed, much time and money is going to be wasted .
As I said , my niche is helping visual dyslexics that can describe visual problems that make reading difficult. More information can be found at the visual dyslexia solution where I sell See Right Dyslexia Glasses.
Dyslexia is very difficult to write about because having individualistic symptoms everything needs to be qualified. I thought I would make a couple of comments about what I have read lately. One recent study is being promoted as" Dyslexia Unraveled ". It repeates some generalized meaningless statements.
"In fact, most people who have this disability have average to above average intelligence." This is a nice feel good statement that everyone makes but is often taken to mean that people with below average intelligence never have dyslexia.
Here is the truth. Because dyslexia is easier to detect in people with higher IQ's , diagnosed dyslexics generally have a average or higher IQ.
Many definitions of dyslexia also have a cut off on the low end of the IQ scale where reading difficulties can't be attributed to dyslexia or low IQ because reading standards for low IQ individual don't exist. If you remove low IQ people from consideration as dyslexics of course the remaing dyslexics will tend to have average or higher IQ's
While the feel good statement is important to help dyslexics know that their reading problems are not generally caused by being stupid or slow it does direct the effort to identify dyslexics away from people with lower IQ's. Those unidentified lower IQ dyslexics would also benefit from help so the feel good statement also does quite a bit of harm also.
Consider that the following 2 statements are both true and add nothing of value to understanding of what a person is. Note: the reason both statements can be true is that average people are included and counted in both groups.
1) People generally have average or HIGHER than average IQ's.
2) People generally have average or LOWER than average IQ'.
Here is a statement that is true for both dyslexics and people .
Dyslexics , in common with people , may have lower,higher or average IQ's and as far as science has been able to determine dyslexics do not differ from people in respect to IQ.
I submit that the statement "In fact, most people who have this disability have average to above average intelligence." is true but also misleading and has the potential to divert attention away from dyslexics of lower IQ causing them to be under represented and ignored. This harm very well offsets the advantage of being a feel good statement.
My niche is visual dyslexia so I have to make another comment about another common statement used to define define as being "often exemplified by reversing letters and the order of letters in a word.". Another true statement but not really helpful in understanding dyslexia and reversing letters only adds confusion because so many people with and without dyslexia reverse letters when writing is first encountered and beginning to be mastered.
Early on in school people often reverse letters. This behavior in dyslexics continues longer than it does in people without dyslexia. Early on , because people without dyslexia outnumber those that do, indeed the group of those who reverse letters can have fewer dyslexics than non dyslexics.
There are standards of ranges of how many reversals are common at different ages with the behavior being extinguished in those without dyslexia usually by the second grade.
Without the qualification of age and rate of occurrence, reversing letters as a description of dyslexia is useless and I suspect causes many parents to worry that they have dyslexic children when they do not. Again a counter productive description of dyslexia because it is not qualified.
There are other visual problems , such as seeing vibrating text as an example, that are useful in identifying visual dyslexia because they are not common in the non dyslexic population. Adult visual dyslexics can usually describe their visual problems . Children will often be able to describe their visual problems if how they see the page is discussed. More information about visual dyslexia can be found at www.dyslexiaglasses.com .
About 10% of dyslexics have visual dyslexia as a primary and sole cause of reading difficulties. Most dyslexics have no visual problems and a poorly defined % have both visual and language processing problems.
Which brings us to .
"Once a child is diagnosed, studies have shown that multi sensory learning techniques have helped children with dyslexia a great deal"
All dyslexia intervention techniques have non responders. Because multi sensory instruction does address the most common dyslexia problems it has been proven to be effective for a majority of dyslexics. If no specifics are known except that a person is dyslexic, then in a statistical way it can make sense to use multi sensory instruction. It would be better to try to identify a dyslexic's individual problems and focus the intervention on his or her specific problems.
Visual dyslexics are not going to be have their visual problems addressed by multi sensory instruction. There are also some additional dyslexia related problems that are not addressed that may require different techniques.
We have found the cause of dyslexia or not ! There are 2 major sources of the " cause of dyslexia found". There have been many fMRI studies that have imaged many different areas of the brain to compare dyslexics and non dyslexics. Most have been reported to have identified the cause of dyslexia from a single area of the brain. To date all the studies have had the same result of seeing differences between groups of dyslexics and non dyslexics but with enough overlap of results that individuals can not be identified as dyslexic or not.
If you take the time to read all the fMRI studies and treat them as a single study you would have a much clearer understanding of what the present fMRI research data is telling us.
The following statements seem to be true.
In general every dyslexic will not show positive results in every area of the brain studied.
Ever area of the brain studied will show that some of the dyslexics have problems related to that area.
Every area of the brain studied will show that some of the dyslexics do not have problems related to that area.
The conclusion that seems reasonable is
Different dyslexics have different problems and those problems are related to different areas of the brain. It seems likely that individual dyslexics can have an assortment of problems that are individualistic. It also seems likely that the severity of a dyslexic's reading difficulty will be reflected by differences in severity in the individual areas of the brain wher his or her problems exists.
Another common source of " the cause of dyslexia is found" is from personal accounts that basically say " I am dyslexic , this is my problem, so this is what dyslexia is. ". This personal account often results in an intervention based on that belief and you would expect that intervention to be successful for the % of dyslexics that do indeed have that particular problem and a failure for those dyslexics without that problem.
Ron Davis, "Dyslexia is a Gift" and believes dyslexia problems are caused by the fact that dyslexics think in pictures is one example. The Dore method that promotes a physical exercise program as a cure for dyslexia is another example. Both of these examples claim that their method will help all dyslexics.
Until techniques are developed to identify an individual dyslexic's weaknesses and also identify the best interventions matched to each of them so that the most effective individual plan can be developed, much time and money is going to be wasted .
As I said , my niche is helping visual dyslexics that can describe visual problems that make reading difficult. More information can be found at the visual dyslexia solution where I sell See Right Dyslexia Glasses.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Visual dyslexia videos
Without getting too technical, the visual noise that causes visual dyslexia is generated by a finite group of wavelengths of light . A particular dyslexic may be adversely affected by one or more wavelengths from that finite group. Different dyslexics may be affected by different wavelengths but they will all be from that finite group.
The good news is that by filtering out all the wavelengths of light from that group at the same time a universal visual dyslexia filter has been developed that can remove all the visual noise for all visual dyslexics . This filter is used for the lenses of See Right Dyslexia Glasses and is effective at removing all the visual problems for all visual dyslexics.
Visual dyslexia exists across a spectrum from mild to severe and it is impossible to depict the variations of severity or all the different manifestations of visual distortions that visual noise causes and how the individual brain responds to that visual noise.
I have collected a few visual dyslexia videos and posted them on my web site where they are easier to view than here. Together they give a fair picture or representation of the types of visual problems that cause difficulty reading for visual dyslexics.
The good news is that by filtering out all the wavelengths of light from that group at the same time a universal visual dyslexia filter has been developed that can remove all the visual noise for all visual dyslexics . This filter is used for the lenses of See Right Dyslexia Glasses and is effective at removing all the visual problems for all visual dyslexics.
Visual dyslexia exists across a spectrum from mild to severe and it is impossible to depict the variations of severity or all the different manifestations of visual distortions that visual noise causes and how the individual brain responds to that visual noise.
I have collected a few visual dyslexia videos and posted them on my web site where they are easier to view than here. Together they give a fair picture or representation of the types of visual problems that cause difficulty reading for visual dyslexics.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Multiple Deficit Theory of Dyslexia
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.
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.
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)
