Once upon a time in Education Land there was a wise king named Success. He wanted above all else to have his subjects succeed in life and be happy. After much thought about how to gain this goal, he came upon the idea that having a good educational system for his subjects would be a good place to start. Gathering all of his advisers together a plan was developed to build the best educational system possible. The future looked bright for Education Land.
Word went out to find the best teachers , the best builders and the best book makers and soon the books were printed and the schools were built and teachers made their lesson plans. All of the kingdom's children were required to attend because the king wanted all to succeed.
Time passed by and it was many years before the King went to inspect the schools and see how well his plan was working. At first he was very pleased because the teachers brought out the best students to show him what they had learned. He soon noticed that some students were not included in the demonstrations and asked the teachers why.
The teachers explained that some students kept falling behind because they wouldn't learn to read. Those students are slow or lazy and have refused to put out the effort to learn to read the teachers said. With their poor reading skills they can't learn their other subjects. It is not our fault if they won't learn.
The king wanted to believe the teachers. He had never heard of children who had trouble learning to read but he also wanted all the children to succeed so he took all those children back to the castle to talk to them.
After talking to the children he found that they didn't seem to be slow or lazy and they were really trying hard to learn to read. The King didn't know what to do so he called in all his advisers and asked for suggestions.
Maybe all children can't learn to read the same way said one. Maybe if we ask them what makes reading difficult for them they can tell us said another. Maybe if we can determine how they are different from the children that read well that might help said still another. All good suggestions said the King . I want you to start an investigation immediately.
The advisers called the condition dyslexia . The investigation is still going on.
Showing posts with label dyslexia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dyslexia. Show all posts
Monday, November 22, 2010
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Flawed Joint Statement about learning Disabilities And Vision.
Here we go again. A new Joint statement from pediatricians and eye doctors who admit they can't diagnose any learning disabilities want to make a blanket statement that learning disabilities and vision aren't related. Here is the PDF file link.
http://www.dys-add.com/VisionTherapy2009.pdf
After reading the statement , my thought is that that they are throwing out the baby with the bath water. It is easy to understand their position and why they felt the statement was needed. It would also be easy to correct their statement with the addition of a few facts. Fact # 1 , there are a minority of dyslexics , properly called visual dyslexics , whose reading problems are caused by visual problems .
Fact #2 , the minority of visual dyslexics is about 10% of the dyslexic population or about 1-1.5% of the general population.
I designed and sell See Right Dyslexia Glasses which act as a universal visual dyslexia filter to remove the visual problems associated with visual dyslexia. I make no claims that the glasses help learning disabilities in general. They do not help dyslexics in general. The small minority of dyslexics with visual dyslexia that can describe visual problems that make reading difficult will have the visual problems removed with the See Right Dyslexia Glasses.
Visual dyslexics are known to have a higher rate of poor depth perception than the general population. Eye doctors that would like to see evidence of the affect of See Right Dyslexia Glasses might consider the fact that they will correct poor depth perception instantly and the poor depth perception will return when the glasses are removed. I mention that because I do not believe that eye doctors have anyway of correcting poor depth perception of visual dyslexics.
The idea presented in the statement that missing letters and moving words leading to reading problems are the result of anything other than visual problems is FALSE. It is really a stretch to say that it is a proven fact. I would suggest that the failure to being able to identify dyslexic individuals is partly because of a poor understanding that some dyslexic problems are visual.
Products that associate learning disabilities in general with visual interventions are likely to fail the majority of people with learning disabilities and at best help a small minority. The Irlen method has had some real success but does a poor job of identification of who will be helped leading to many failures. I have yet found any indication that vision therapy is an effective therapy for learning disabilities. I would describe vision therapy as bait and switch. People want educational help and vision therapy promises to help all with learning disabilities. The eye training provided has never been shown to help anyone.
Reading the joint statement about dyslexia and vision by every type of doctor that can NOT diagnose dyslexia was interesting. In many ways I do agree with their results for the mentioned vision therapies and how they have not been proven as beneficial for learning disabilities and so shouldn't recommended.
I believe that their basic agenda is a result of feeling that promoters of the mentioned vision therapies in the statement do not take a professional approach to the business of selling their products. It is actually hard to argue with the position that the mentioned promoters are not acting professionally.
All doctors are expected to act in a professional and ethical manner.Whether or not those promoters are being ethical depends on if they are knowingly over promoting the products or just incompetent or unaware.One requirement of being a professional doctor is to prescribe treatment to those that need treatment and to not prescribe treatment to those that do not need to be treated. The majority of years of education a doctors receives are slanted towards being able to diagnose who is to be treated for what and how.
I suspect that the joint statement was prepared because The Irlen Method and Vision Therapy are seen as overselling their respective products as being the necessary treatment for learning disabilities. Their sin is at least that learning disabilities is too broad a subject ( or condition) to only have a single treatment and to suggest either as a general treatment.
The joint statement basically says that Vision Therapy has never shown any educational benefit and that Irlen tinted lenses studies have shown mixed results at best. It implies that you can conclude results from flawed studies. By any reasonable standard you can't conclude results from flawed studies.
There is no reason that visual problems should be related to learning disabilities in general. If there is a visual aspect to some learning disabilities it would be a subset of reading problems or dyslexia. This has never been tested in a proper manner and so has not been shown to exist. It is no surprise that something that has never been shown to exist does not have a recommended treatment.
Visual dyslexia is not likely to be proven any time soon by a scientific study.
Dyslexia testing is prohibitively expensive and best case today is what is called dyslexia risk identification followed by some intervention for kindergarten children.This is often called dyslexia testing but has low standards.
By its very nature a generalized dyslexia testing program is going to test all children in an area. The people to give the tests and record results must have some generalized skills with testing and children ( think money ) and testing all the children will take time ( think money). Identification of children at risk ( the bottom half) and intervention ( more money). After intervention you find that 70% have come up to standard and that 30% didn't. They are the children most likely to be dyslexic and can now be tested for dyslexia.
It is also very likely that because of the assumptions on language abilities tested to determine dyslexia risks that visual dyslexics will not be included in the final group as their language skills are often very good.
To conclude , I suggest that See Right Dyslexia Glasses that claim to remove described visual problems , have a money back guarantee , and are easily evaluated in a matter of minutes to at most hours indicate that at least some people with learning disabilities have visual problems where removal of those problems leads to faster more accurate reading with better comprehension.
More information about See Right Dyslexia Glasses and visual dyslexia can be found at The Visual Dyslexia Solution web site
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Visual Perception Reading Problems
I have my own views on what causes visual dyslexia reading problems and how to correct them and that is how I developed See Right Dyslexia Glasses. I have always limited my claims to helping those dyslexics that can actually describe their visual problems that make reading difficult and mention that those visual dyslexics are a small minority of dyslexics in general. The Irlen Method has been around a lot longer than my glasses and is much better known.
Irlen convinced people that visual dyslexics needed to be evaluated to determine particular color lenses for particular dyslexics to get help and that works for some visual dyslexics. Irlen doesn't guarantee any positive results and in my opinion oversells her product. Between her claims of correcting the reading problems of visual dyslexics along with helping good readers, autistic and ADHD problems it seems her glasses help everyone with any educational difficulties.
Now ADHD and dyslexia do co-exist in many people so it is likely that there are some people with ADHD that do have visual dyslexia causing reading problems. I just suspect that removing visual dyslexia problems from someone with ADHD doesn't actually do anything for their ADHD and so I personally only market See Right Dyslexia Glasses for visual problems that make reading difficult. My success rate at removing described visual problems that make reading difficult is close to 100% so I can offer a money-back guarantee.
I also eliminated the need for a personal evaluation by designing the See Right Dyslexia Glasses as a universal visual dyslexia filter that is effective for all visual dyslexics.
I read almost everything that is published on the web that concerns dyslexia by having Google alerts for dyslexia, visual dyslexia ,dyslexia research and several more. Today I was reading a blog about visual perception that had a book reference that discussed the Irlen method and at the end mentions See Right Dyslexia Glasses as a more promising approach to the problem of visual dyslexia and here it is below the line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visual Perception
The following is excerpted from A User’s Guide To The Brain, by John J. Ratey, M.D.
I met a psychotherapist from the West Coast named Rolf at a conference in Aspen, Colorado. It was autumn, cool and overcast, yet Rolf was wearing yellow-tinted sunglasses. I just thought, Oh, it’s the California thing. But Rolf, age sixty-eight, had discovered only two years earlier that he had a visual-processing problem. He had begun to work with dyslexics when he retired from active practice, and in studying all he could, he learned about a technique called the Irlen method for helping a small subset of dyslexics.
Certain dyslexics have difficulty reading because as they move their eyes from left to right across a line of type, the letters seem to shimmer… they move. The affected individual can’t keep track of the words, and so has to struggle mightily to read. The Irlen idea was that if such a person looked at written material or any fine details through a certain type of filtering lens, the shimmering would stop.
Rolf had been tormented all his life with the idea that he was not as smart as he thought he was. It had taken him much longer than other students to study. He was smart enough to get by, and got his medical degree by forcing himself to listen well and ask lots of questions. Indeed, his first love was neurology, but that required much more detailed reading than psychology, which relied more on talking and listening, so he ended up becoming a psychiatrist. He had always loved literature, but just never read it because it was too much of an ordeal.
Upon discovering that different-colored Irlen lenses helped certain dyslexics, Rolf drove to his neighborhood pharmacy, picked up a magazine, and began trying on different-colored sunglasses. He tried blue, then brown. Nothing happened. But then he put on a $5 pair of yellow tinted lenses, and began to read the magazine. The words stood still! He read it more easily than anything he had ever tried to read before in his life. He was elated.
Rolf was already wearing glasses for common farsightedness. He hurried to his ophthalmologist to explain his discovery, and together they ordered a pair of Irlen lenses. Today Rolf is a voracious reader.
It’s important to note that Irlen lenses help only a small fraction of people who suffer from dyslexia, which can be caused by many different perceptual or brain processing problems. The shimmering of letters is not a problem that can be diagnosed with routine eye exams. Rolf happens to be in the small group of dyslexics who can be helped by Irlen lenses, was aware enough to apply what he was learning about dyslexia to himself, and was clever enough to find some ready evidence for a possible cure at his local pharmacy.
Rolf needlessly spent much of his adult life with a poor image of himself. Despite his outwardly successful career, he had been in analysis for years trying to understand why he thought of himself as inadequate and lazy, why he had to study so hard to achieve what others did routinely, why he didn’t read the journals as his fellow psychiatrists did or keep track of the news in the papers. His struggle had nothing to do with an intellectual deficit or a motivational problem. It was pure perception.
Just for a moment, look up and examine the scene around you. Be it a sterile office, cozy bedroom or den, allow yourself to sit back and really see the world that surrounds you. In the amount of time that you averted your gaze from this page, your eyes meticulously dissected the image cast upon your retina into approximately 126 million pieces, sent signals for every one of these tiny elements to a transfer station in the thalamus, which then fired neuronal networks to and within the visual cortex, then sent the information to the frontal cortex, and somehow you put the pieces back together into a seamless pattern perceived by you as a sterile office, cozy bedroom, or den.
To add to this complexity, recent physiological findings suggest that all this processing takes place along several independent, parallel pathways. One system processes information about shape, one about color, and one about movement, location, and spatial organization. If you look up and see a clock, the image of its face and the action of its sweeping second hand are being processed independently, despite how unified the image appears. It may seem bizarre to think of vision as functionally subdivided. But how otherwise could a person who has perfect focus and tracking of moving objects be color blind? Some so called blind people who cannot see colors or objects can still see movement.
As humans, our highly convoluted cortex enables us to combine visual messages with other sensory messages and past experiences to give unique meaning to particular visual situations. The sight of a fresh bouquet of red roses will probably have a different effect on me than on the florist who works with roses every day. Most other species do not have cortical convolutions, so the greater part of their visual processing occurs as pure sight. Humans have evolved to process most visual information in the visual cortex.
Since the introduction of the Irlen lenses, a more promising approach has been developed with the See Right Dyslexia Glasses. These glasses, which require no evaluation and are backed by a money-back guarantee, are an affordable risk free option to correct the problems associated with visual dyslexia. For more information, visit the web site at http://www.dyslexiaglasses.com
Irlen convinced people that visual dyslexics needed to be evaluated to determine particular color lenses for particular dyslexics to get help and that works for some visual dyslexics. Irlen doesn't guarantee any positive results and in my opinion oversells her product. Between her claims of correcting the reading problems of visual dyslexics along with helping good readers, autistic and ADHD problems it seems her glasses help everyone with any educational difficulties.
Now ADHD and dyslexia do co-exist in many people so it is likely that there are some people with ADHD that do have visual dyslexia causing reading problems. I just suspect that removing visual dyslexia problems from someone with ADHD doesn't actually do anything for their ADHD and so I personally only market See Right Dyslexia Glasses for visual problems that make reading difficult. My success rate at removing described visual problems that make reading difficult is close to 100% so I can offer a money-back guarantee.
I also eliminated the need for a personal evaluation by designing the See Right Dyslexia Glasses as a universal visual dyslexia filter that is effective for all visual dyslexics.
I read almost everything that is published on the web that concerns dyslexia by having Google alerts for dyslexia, visual dyslexia ,dyslexia research and several more. Today I was reading a blog about visual perception that had a book reference that discussed the Irlen method and at the end mentions See Right Dyslexia Glasses as a more promising approach to the problem of visual dyslexia and here it is below the line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visual Perception
The following is excerpted from A User’s Guide To The Brain, by John J. Ratey, M.D.
I met a psychotherapist from the West Coast named Rolf at a conference in Aspen, Colorado. It was autumn, cool and overcast, yet Rolf was wearing yellow-tinted sunglasses. I just thought, Oh, it’s the California thing. But Rolf, age sixty-eight, had discovered only two years earlier that he had a visual-processing problem. He had begun to work with dyslexics when he retired from active practice, and in studying all he could, he learned about a technique called the Irlen method for helping a small subset of dyslexics.
Certain dyslexics have difficulty reading because as they move their eyes from left to right across a line of type, the letters seem to shimmer… they move. The affected individual can’t keep track of the words, and so has to struggle mightily to read. The Irlen idea was that if such a person looked at written material or any fine details through a certain type of filtering lens, the shimmering would stop.
Rolf had been tormented all his life with the idea that he was not as smart as he thought he was. It had taken him much longer than other students to study. He was smart enough to get by, and got his medical degree by forcing himself to listen well and ask lots of questions. Indeed, his first love was neurology, but that required much more detailed reading than psychology, which relied more on talking and listening, so he ended up becoming a psychiatrist. He had always loved literature, but just never read it because it was too much of an ordeal.
Upon discovering that different-colored Irlen lenses helped certain dyslexics, Rolf drove to his neighborhood pharmacy, picked up a magazine, and began trying on different-colored sunglasses. He tried blue, then brown. Nothing happened. But then he put on a $5 pair of yellow tinted lenses, and began to read the magazine. The words stood still! He read it more easily than anything he had ever tried to read before in his life. He was elated.
Rolf was already wearing glasses for common farsightedness. He hurried to his ophthalmologist to explain his discovery, and together they ordered a pair of Irlen lenses. Today Rolf is a voracious reader.
It’s important to note that Irlen lenses help only a small fraction of people who suffer from dyslexia, which can be caused by many different perceptual or brain processing problems. The shimmering of letters is not a problem that can be diagnosed with routine eye exams. Rolf happens to be in the small group of dyslexics who can be helped by Irlen lenses, was aware enough to apply what he was learning about dyslexia to himself, and was clever enough to find some ready evidence for a possible cure at his local pharmacy.
Rolf needlessly spent much of his adult life with a poor image of himself. Despite his outwardly successful career, he had been in analysis for years trying to understand why he thought of himself as inadequate and lazy, why he had to study so hard to achieve what others did routinely, why he didn’t read the journals as his fellow psychiatrists did or keep track of the news in the papers. His struggle had nothing to do with an intellectual deficit or a motivational problem. It was pure perception.
Just for a moment, look up and examine the scene around you. Be it a sterile office, cozy bedroom or den, allow yourself to sit back and really see the world that surrounds you. In the amount of time that you averted your gaze from this page, your eyes meticulously dissected the image cast upon your retina into approximately 126 million pieces, sent signals for every one of these tiny elements to a transfer station in the thalamus, which then fired neuronal networks to and within the visual cortex, then sent the information to the frontal cortex, and somehow you put the pieces back together into a seamless pattern perceived by you as a sterile office, cozy bedroom, or den.
To add to this complexity, recent physiological findings suggest that all this processing takes place along several independent, parallel pathways. One system processes information about shape, one about color, and one about movement, location, and spatial organization. If you look up and see a clock, the image of its face and the action of its sweeping second hand are being processed independently, despite how unified the image appears. It may seem bizarre to think of vision as functionally subdivided. But how otherwise could a person who has perfect focus and tracking of moving objects be color blind? Some so called blind people who cannot see colors or objects can still see movement.
As humans, our highly convoluted cortex enables us to combine visual messages with other sensory messages and past experiences to give unique meaning to particular visual situations. The sight of a fresh bouquet of red roses will probably have a different effect on me than on the florist who works with roses every day. Most other species do not have cortical convolutions, so the greater part of their visual processing occurs as pure sight. Humans have evolved to process most visual information in the visual cortex.
Since the introduction of the Irlen lenses, a more promising approach has been developed with the See Right Dyslexia Glasses. These glasses, which require no evaluation and are backed by a money-back guarantee, are an affordable risk free option to correct the problems associated with visual dyslexia. For more information, visit the web site at http://www.dyslexiaglasses.com
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" 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 .
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.
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
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
