Page 6 | dyslexia? Visual sequencing problem? second guessing myself.

mrz · 23/12/2011 19:41

Dyslexia is a learning disorder that manifests itself primarily as a difficulty with reading and spelling. It is separate and distinct from reading difficulties resulting from other causes, such as a non-neurological deficiency with vision or hearing, or from poor or inadequate reading instruction
or
There are many definitions of the disorder called dyslexia but no consensus. The World Federation of Neurology defined dyslexia as follows:Specific developmental dyslexia is a disorder manifested by difficulty learning to read despite conventional instruction, adequate intelligence, and adequate sociocultural opportunity. It is dependent upon fundamental cognitive disabilities that are frequently of constitutional origin. Some of the other published definitions are purely descriptive, while still others embody causal theories. From the varying definitions used by dyslexia researchers and organizations around the world, it appears that dyslexia is not one thing but many, in so far as it serves as a conceptual clearing-house for a number of reading skills deficits and difficulties, with a number of causes.
or

The causes of dyslexia have been debated by experts for many years and remain unclear. Similarly, a consensus on the precise nature of dyslexia has still to be reached, although there is much more agreement than there was. Past research has been more concerned with the investigation of signs and symptoms than with explanations and causes.

or

?The definition of dyslexia has been a subject of much debate on an international scale, with recent suggestions in the media that that dyslexia may even be a ?myth?.

or

Definitions of dyslexia

Some researchers use a discrepancy definition, that is, a clear discrepancy between an individual?s general level of ability and their reading and writing attainment. They argue that this is a clear-cut way of identifying individuals with dyslexia. Others argue that this type of definition tends to favour more ?intelligent? people and is not useful for adolescents and adults, as obvious discrepancies (for example between reading age and chronological age) tend to diminish as learners get older. Some argue that since there is no objective measure of intelligence, this approach is fundamentally flawed. Discrepancy definitions can lead to bias in who is identified and to the under-identification of some groups of people.

or

dolfrog · 23/12/2011 22:09

The problem with the so called definitions of dyslexia has been cause by money and the marketing of remedial programs, the marketing organisations owning their our research journals (and therefore skewing the content via editorial control), and the marketing organisations promoting themselves as non profit organisations or charities. It is all about the money or funding needs of the dyslexia industry, especially in the USA and the UK.

Outside of the influences of the dyslexia industry say mainland Europe, Asia, and South America, the international researchers have been investigating the three cognitive subtypes of Developmental Dyslexia (auditory, visual attentional), and the Psycholinguistic models of reading which has evolved from Alexia (acquired dyslexia) research, or those who loosing or lost their ability to read.

Dyslexia is a man made problem, about having problems with a man made communication system, the visual notation of speech, or decoding and recoding the graphic symbols chosen by society to represent the sounds of speech.

A diagnosis of dyslexia is only a screening process for the existence of one or more of the underlying cognitive subtype disabilities. Dyslexia is not a condition, it is a symptom of either an auditory processing disorder, a visual processing disorder, an attention disorder, or some combination of the three.

Dyslexia is language dependent, as the structure of each language requires slightly different cognitive set of skills to process the information, which means that different types of disability can cause the dyslexic symptom.
The underlying disabilities that cause the dyslexic symptom have more serious symptoms than the dyslexic symptom.

Developmental Dyslexia has a genetic origin, and research done almost 10 years ago suggests that potential dyslexics can be identified from those at familial risk of dyslexia from about the age of 6 months old. This of course does not fit in with her UK dyslexia industries funding needs, which is about providing the diagnostic services and support program for children already in the education system.

So you need to look outside the influences of the UK and USA dyslexia industries (which are very closely linked) to get a real understanding of the real issues.

maizieD · 23/12/2011 23:14

The problem with the so called definitions of dyslexia has been cause by money and the marketing of remedial programs, the marketing organisations owning their our research journals (and therefore skewing the content via editorial control), and the marketing organisations promoting themselves as non profit organisations or charities.

And your proof of this is...? What, dolfrog?

A diagnosis of dyslexia is only a screening process for the existence of one or more of the underlying cognitive subtype disabilities. Dyslexia is not a condition, it is a symptom of either an auditory processing disorder, a visual processing disorder, an attention disorder, or some combination of the three.

I think that it what people like mrz and IB are trying to say, dolfrog. Except there is is the cause of the 'symptom' which you always ignore, which is poor teaching.

I will ask you again what I asked on another thread.

Would you, in your own words, give us the benefit of your extensive research into the way the brain learns and tell those of us who teach 'dyslexics' to read exactly what we are doing wrong? (Bearing in mind, of course, that we usually do succeed in teaching them to read...)

I know that you keep giving us lists of 'research collections' but unfortunately we just can't afford the cost of downloading a large number of individual research papers (about £20 per paper) in the hope of finding the one which gives the best information.

Happy Christmas

dolfrog · 24/12/2011 01:01

maizieD

Happy Christmas.

As I have mentioned before due to my own communication disability Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) I have word recall problems, sequencing problems, and problems processing the gaps between sounds which are the main factors which cause me to be dyslexic. APD is the cause of my dyslexia. And each dyslexic has to identify which of the cognitive subtypes of dyslexia (Free Full content research paper) causes their dyslexic symptom. So now I let the research papers do the talking or typing for me, it is less stressful and time consuming.
Many of the research papers are free full downloads or even online especially after two years of publication which is now being promoted in the USA and elsewhere to improve the understanding of these issues to a wider audiance. And many of the most informative papers can be located on various sites around the internet, if you are really interested. If I can find them, i am very sure you could if you really wanted.

You might also benefit from have a look at An Evaluation of Basic Reading Processes

The tracing the funding of the dyslexia industry is all about following the money, or sources of funding. Again not too difficult, and they even advertise their names on the journals they own. If dyslexia was to be taken seriously then all suspected of having the dyslexic symptom should be assessed by a multi -discipline assessment team made up of an audiologist to assess for any Auditory Processing problems, an optometrist to assess for any Visual Processing problems, a psychiatrist to assess for any attention problems. and following on from this further investigations to assess and diagnose the identified problems, so for instance if APD was identified a further multi -discipline team of an audiologist to diagnose the various Auditory Processing Disorders, a speech and language pathologist to assess how the diagnosed APD issues affect speech and language development, and a psychologist to assess the problems of living with the diagnosed APD problems.

You seem to have a misconception that dyslexics are illiterate, or do not learn to read despite of incompetent teachers and incorrect teaching methods. If a teacher repeats words often enough the memory takes over from learning and understanding. It used to be called learning by rote.

Poor teaching is down to poor quality teacher training standards, and a complete lack of understanding of the neurobiology of how we learn, which should be the basic part of any teacher training. And teachers should work on a 3 or 4 year license, renewable only if they can prove that they have kept up to date with recent advances in the neurology of how children learn. By the way this should also apply to all medical professionals and those who provide any form of support in the education system. This system of licensing to practice is used in the USA for Speech and Language Pathologists, by the recommendation of their own professional body. Should be standard practice for all professions that provide any form of service or care for children and adults.

So this would mean that all primary school teachers are frequented with all of the methods of teaching reading including phonics , whole word, and any others, so that they can adapt their teaching methods to best match any child's learning needs. By ignoring a childs learning needs and differences while persisting with a teaching method a child is telling the child that he /she is stupid because unlike their peers they can not use the teaching methodology being used. Neuroimaging can identify the areas of different brain activity when performing tasks such as reading, and it can also identify how some use different arws of the brain when performing the same task, sometimes to compensate for a disability in another area of the brain. This can identify who is cognitively able to use phonics, and who may not be able to cognitively use phonics and will need an alternative teaching method to effectively learn to read.

From here you will have to read the research papers, and i dd create a collection especially for you the Free Full Text Collection a couple of years back it is still there if you want to read the research.

Some further link options for parents, teachers, and support professionals.
Diggo
Key References
Dyslexia and Reading
Reading

CiteULike
Reading: Acquiring and Developing the Skills and Abilities
Working memory for sentence processing
Alexia (acquired dyslexia)
Developmental Dyslexia
Special Education

And my own web site where i list some of my PubMed collections
I am only a parent who has to do all the research to get he help my children need to overcome the ignorance and incompetence that exists in the UK Education system. And some of the corruption.
Unfortunately parents still need to do this level of research to advocate for their children, so thye can get the education they need and to overcome the poor training standards that exist in the education system; to be able to demonstrate that many teachers have no real informed idea of what they are doing to educate our children.

maizieD · 24/12/2011 09:48

^
As I have mentioned before due to my own communication disability Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) I have word recall problems, sequencing problems, and problems processing the gaps between sounds which are the main factors which cause me to be dyslexic.^

OK, then. So, step by step, how would you address each of these problems as a teacher?

So now I let the research papers do the talking or typing for me, it is less stressful and time consuming.

That's a cop out, dolfrog. You mange to write extremely lengthy posts.

The tracing the funding of the dyslexia industry is all about following the money, or sources of funding.

Examples, please! You are the person who has apparently done the research on this and you should have the answers at your fingertips.

Neuroimaging can identify the areas of different brain activity when performing tasks such as reading, and it can also identify how some use different arws of the brain when performing the same task, sometimes to compensate for a disability in another area of the brain.

With your extensive research background, dolfrog, you must surely be aware of brain plasticity. That what we learn and and how we learn it can actually alter brain activity (London taxi drivers?) . Neuroimaging of brains of 'struggling' readers only tells us what has developed in the brain, not what was there originally. And, how about the Shaywitz findings that systematic phonics instruction 'corrected' the 'abnormal' brain activation of 'dyslexics'?

IndigoBell · 24/12/2011 11:02

Maizie - brain literacy shows before and after pics of the brain, demonstrating how it changes with learning.

Have you read it? It looks interesting.

mrz · 24/12/2011 12:17

A diagnosis of dyslexia is only a screening process for the existence of one or more of the underlying cognitive subtype disabilities. Dyslexia is not a condition, it is a symptom of either an auditory processing disorder, a visual processing disorder, an attention disorder, or some combination of the three.

That is exactly what we are trying to say Dolfrog. A diagnosis of dyslexia on it's own is useless. Everyone concerned needs to know the nature/root of the difficulty so they can begin to understand and look for appropriate ways of supporting the child instead of saying ... oh he has dyslexia what a shame he can't keep up ... very understanding but doesn't help the child in the slightest...

Poor teaching is down to poor quality teacher training standards, and a complete lack of understanding of the neurobiology of how we learn, which should be the basic part of any teacher training. And teachers should work on a 3 or 4 year license, renewable only if they can prove that they have kept up to date with recent advances in the neurology of how children learn.

Very few teachers are taught how to teach reading and writing and counting and adding and ... insane! and yes there are teachers who qualify and think they know it all and have nothing to learn but thankfully they are in the minority. While we are at it is it right that someone with a good but totally unrelated degree can gain teacher status in a few short months ... or weeks if you are on the fast track route?

dolfrog · 25/12/2011 20:53

mrz the UK and USA dyslexia industries have no interest in identifying the multiple issues which can cause the dyslexic symptom because that would interfer with their funding from Orton Gillingham, who own and promote a phonics based remedial program. Orton Gillingham devised the International Dyslexia Association as its marketing arm, and has strong links with the British Dyslexia Association. Both both organisations own a dyslexia research journal each over which they have editorial control, more specifically researcher papers they publish talk about conflicting underlying causes of dyslexia, which is now at odds with researchers from counties outside of their influence, and who have their papers published in alternative research journals. So the UK Dyslexia industry would loose its main sources of income if it was to follow international neurological research. The UK Dyslexia industry would also prefer it if Alexia (acqwired dyslexia) did not exist, and more especially Alexia research which demonstrates that there is more to reading than processing phonics.
I was alarmed when I found out that the BDA were not interested in working with APDUK, especially as 60% of dyslexics have some degree of APD. So uinfortunately you will have to join the other parents to research dyslexia, as the UK educational establishment has a vested interest in not wanting to understand the underlying causes of developmental dyslexia, and especially not wanting real dyslexics from having a full understanding of the nature of their various disabilities. They want to keep us in ignorance and make money out us and our disability.

dolfrog · 25/12/2011 21:24

maizieD
Communicating with you and your fellow members of the Reading Reform Foundation triggers my Post Traumatic Stress. Your attitude to my disability, and your failure to understand that a considerable minority of the population are not cognitively able to use phonics, and your failure or refusal to discuss any alternative for those who share my disability. So I would prefer not to even have contact with you, because of your built in bigotry. But that would not enable us to expose your failure to even want to understand the differences of others especially the children.

Plasticity is a two way street, and what can be improved by various remedial processes can just as easily be undone by our own genetic blue prints. Plasticity of the brain is only at the very early stages of being understood, and is not the magic bullet some thought it might be nor a source of income for the programs based on these so called new concepts. You could have a look at my Plasticity Research paper collection (but i know how you hate reading text not published by or given to you by your colleagues at the Reading Reform Foundation, you only seem to be able to type or write their mantra, ("Phonics, and only phonics" it is like you copy and paste the same posts on different forums over the years.) you seem incapable of independent thought and begin to understand the nature of the various disabilities of others.

So if i, a parent who has a clinically diagnosed communication disability can do the research, i am very sure a Secondary School Teaching Assistant, who should be trained in these issues should be able to find the time and have the abilities to do their own research give the basic information i have provided. Yes i can type long explanations but it is very stressful for me under normal circumstances, but this is even more stressful when replying to you and fellow members of your lobby group.

So when you feel able to freely and positively discuss alternatives to phonics for the teaching of reading, then we can have a lengthy discussion on any forum, until then it will be only links to research.

breadandbutterfly · 26/12/2011 21:02

Seasonal greetings to everyone, and thank you to Indigo Bell, mrz and others for your suggestions for tracking exercises - loved the eggi game and found it curiously, soothingly addictive - hope dd finds it the same. Will try as many of the others as I have time for and she has patience for.

IndigoBell · 27/12/2011 09:34

Dyslexia, really? explains how vision problems get confused with dyslexia.

IndigoBell · 27/12/2011 09:36

Sorry - wrong link

This is the link to Dyslexia, Really? Convergence Insufficiency: the REAL story

dolfrog · 28/12/2011 18:34

IndigoBell

"explains how vision problems get confused with dyslexia"

dyslexia is a symptom not a condition, very much like a runny nose. And like a runny nose there are many possible underlying causes including the various visual information processing disabilities.
So a diagnosis of dyslexia is very much like being diagnosed with having a runny nose, obvious to most observers, but the real specialists are able to assess and diagnose the real underlying cause, such as flu or hay fever in the case of a runny nose.

Rerevisionist · 28/12/2011 22:22

I wonder if someone here can tell me what their opinion is of Mona McNee & Alice Coleman's book 'The Great Reading Disaster'? They maintain that primary education WAS largely focused on the look-say method. The result being that a generation or two (or more) of children post-1945 were deliberately not taught the alphabet. [The child you discussed at the start sounded that type - if he couldn't tell that from what he surely must have a recognition problem]. If they're right, the trick is simply and rather obviously to teach the alphabet, along with words that aren't too unusual (e.g. foreign etymology).

It seems incredible that for decades primary school kids went to school and learned all but nothing - part of the explanation must be that they were 'disadvantaged', i.e. working class or something.

I'd be very grateful for informed comment as I'm testing the idea that the whole thing was deliberate.

dolfrog · 28/12/2011 22:41

Rerevisionist

Mona McNee is the cause of the problem of the phonics only brigade.
Mona has no or A very limited understanding of neurology of how children learn.

if you have read any of the neurological research from the last decade on this topic you will know that there are at least two parallel processes required for the task of reading, the lexical process (whole word (look say) and sublexical (phonics), and teachers need to be able to use both teaching methods to help children to learn to read, and be adequately trained in these areas of neurological issues, and how to recognise which approaches are best for each child, and that each childs needs can vary from day to day, and that some children are not able to cognitive use one of more of the teaching methods.

So there needs to be a balance approach based on each childs learning needs and not based on the limited teaching skills and abilities of any single teacher. There is no single best teaching method, and the problem with Mona is that she thinks that all children can use phonics and refuses to begin to want to understand the communications disabilities which can prevent children or even adults from being able to use phonics. I have had this debate endless with her over the years on various forums, and her ignorance of the science of reading is astounding, very much like maizieD

tumble8 · 28/12/2011 22:56

I treat children with visual disorders , convergence insufficiency is not linked with the learning difficulties described, the symptoms of convergence insufficiency are frontal headache, blurred vision on prolonged reading and sometimes double vision, it can be treated really easily.
Unfortuntly some children are just not as bright as their parnets would like them to be ( Im talking generically here) and I see parents on a daily basis who search and search for help for their child that just wont be there.

There is no proof that a lot of these "visual processing " disorders exist. There are numerous people in the private sector who claim to be able to treat visual or auditory processing difficulties, if it were possible it would be happening in the public sector too. Sometimes all these people are doing is "teaching" children to concentrate a bit better, that is all.

tracking exercises are one example of simply practicing concentration, nothing else.

Rerevisionist · 28/12/2011 23:21

wow @ prompt replies. Thanks. There are several issues here--

[1] Mona McNee AND Alice Coleman (their book was jointly-authored) maintain that before about 1945 virtually all children learnt to read, with the fairly simple alphabet/ C A T etc system. If this is true, all the subsequent stuff is a waste of time and/or blind alley. (And write, I should add). Is it in fact true?

[2] They also say this process was complete in most cases by 7.

[3] dolfrog - I read through some of your previous emails & was quite impressed. And I take the point re money and control over information etc. (McNee & Coleman seem naive on that point; they regard money wasted on education as a scandal - but people receiving the money might have a different view). However, I don't want to be awkward, but the brain simply isn't understood, and if there's any proof about 'whole word' methods I'd be highly sceptical. McNee and Coleman - and I'd imagine anyone before about 1900 and ideas like 'holism' - maintain that (in effect) recognition of words comes from knowing the letters, and then rapidly piecing them together in what seems one perceptual operation.

Unfortunately McNee is very deaf - it's very difficult to discuss things with her.

[4] One of the things McNee & Coleman state - which I found hardly credible - was that teachers would not tell them that words start at the left, in English. And the child quoted seemed a victim of that - starting 'rudely' with a 'd' suggests he's guessing, and his parents should instruct him and show him how English words are assembled. They might include things like serifs and italics, come to think of it, too.

[5] Tumble8 - when you say 'visual disorders' do you mean eg short sight/ long sight/ colour blindness/ strangely-shaped eyeballs, squints etc? (Or whatver Latinate terms are preferred).

IndigoBell · 28/12/2011 23:51

Tumble- are you a troll?

If you are representative of public sector vision 'professionals' (you forgot to say what your job title and qualifications are) - no wonder people go private.

God help any poor child who is seen by you.

Intelligence is in no way linked to an ability to learn to read - as is clearly evidenced by the fact that you can read.

tumble8 · 29/12/2011 00:01

no, I guess im not being clear.

of couse myopia, hypermetropia , astigmatism exist but the notion that a person can be "cured " of learning difficulties by improving how the eyes work is something I have come across and simply cannot work.

There are things which can help like coloured overlays .

dolfrog · 29/12/2011 00:15

Rerevisionist

The research into how the brain, neurology, works is still in its infancy, and while some processes have been well documented, others can still be a mystery.
Some wrong assume that because researchers have identified a defect, or problem area that there is automatically some type of quick fix. Which is not just not the case. As tumble8 pointed out.
Reading problems for so long have been identified as being a phonological processing disability. Research is now breaking down phonology into auditory processing, and visual processing, and one of the the unknowns is memory.

The problem with understanding of dyslexia in the UK has been the dyslexia industries dependence on the Orton Gillingham (OG) program, due this there is a need for only to be a single cause of dyslexia. To consider multiple causes of dyslexia would then question whether the OG program would work for the various different causes of dyslexia. Which is why the UK dyslexia industry has ignored the international research of the last decade which has investigated the three different underlying cognitive causes of developmental dyslexia auditory, visual, and attentional. (There are more related links included here)

Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) is my own area of interest, as all of may family different degrees of APD, all clinically diagnosed, and the underlying cause of our dyslexia. Having APD means that we have problems processing all that we hear, or a listening disability. APD is not a hearing impairment. There are no magic cures as some might claim, and most of the programs which may be new to the UK have been around in various other countries for years, especially the USA.

The understanding of how we learn to read has evolved from Alexia research. Alexia or acquired dyslexia is concerned with those who are loosing or have lost their ability to read, as a result of brain injury, substance abuse, stroke, dementia or some progressive illness. These are the Psycholinguistic models of reading. These models were first discussed in the 1970s, and have been continually revised as research has progressed.
you could have a look at
Connectionist Models of Word Reading
Aphasia, Alexia, and Oral Reading includes a good summary of reading models for 2004
Neural Representations of Visual Words and Objects: A Functional MRI Study on the Modularity of Reading and Object Processing
Development of neural mechanisms for reading
An Evaluation of Basic Reading Processes
there are more links at my DIIGO Reading links list

IndigoBell · 29/12/2011 00:18

Tumblt - you're still not being clear - you're still not telling us:

what your job is
why you think that eye tracking difficulties don't cause reading difficulties
why you think eye tracking difficulties can't be improved
why you think convergence insiffuciency doesn't cause reading difficulties
how you treat convergence insiffuciency
what other 'things' besides coloured overlays can help
why you think my DD isn't bright enough to learn to read? (are you seriously suggesting she has an IQ of less than 50?)

Rerevisionist · 29/12/2011 00:23

Thanks for your prompt reply.

[1] You're actually missing the point - if children learnt, before 7, to read and write in almost all cases, then the system since 1945 doesn't work. That's the central point.

[1a] If that's true, 'acquired dyslexia' presumably in almost all cases is caused (or triggered, or amplified) by crap teaching methods. (You don't comment on the boy starting ion the middle of a word, possibly not knowing letters, etc).

[2] On your subject - auditory processing disorder. I see what you're saying - that there's something unusual in processing of sounds, not the actual mechanism with stapes etc - just as tumble8 distinguishes the mechanism of the eye from the information provided by it to (presuambly) the brain. That's inetresting stuff, but not relevant to the thread imho!

tumble8 · 29/12/2011 00:55

Indigo,

No Im not suggesting your child isnt bright enough to read all I am saying is that there is no clinical basis for the diagnosis of visual processing disorder, no medical, scientific basis. A lot of it guesswork, fantastic if someone is helped by the supossed improvment of their visual processing but In my 15 years experience as a hospital ophthalmologist and throughout my training I have not come across any evidence .

Convergence insufficiency is treated by exercises under the care of an orthoptist . Some people are helped by coloured overlays , ie Mears Irlen syndrome.

Ihave seen numerous children whos parents have taken and paid for them to have therapy for visual processingdisorder and all it does is to teach them to concentrate better and gives the parents a sense of being helped by someone when quite often and quite understandbly they are desperate for help.

A lot of the time reading just isnt the childs thing, some people ar great at somethings, others not so good, thats normal.

dolfrog · 29/12/2011 01:07

Rerevisionist

regardless of what ever teaching methods are used 60% of children will learn to read. The the single methods of teaching cause problems for those who are not able to access one or other of the teaching methodologies, either look say, or phonics. children since 1945 have learnt to read, and during the same time period there have also been children who have not learnt to read. Mona is only interested in phonics, and has no interest in child development, only selling her programs.

Due to how children develop, they are not ready to learn until after the age of maturation 6-8 years of age, which means that the formal education of reading should not begin until 7 years of age.

You obviously have no understanding of acquired dyslexia which is the result of a severe illness. and nothing to do with teaching methods.
It would appear that you are from the Phonics only lobby, the Reading Reform Foundation, Mona McNee's creation which should be more appropriate named the Reading Regression Foundation.

Rerevisionist · 29/12/2011 01:20

dolfrog, McNee & Coleman - quoting from various sources - say that before 1945 almost all children had learned to read before 7. If this is true, your claim about 'formal education of reading' not beginning till 7 is manifest nonsense. That's the point.

And this is what the original poster stated:
He is very hesitant, ... does not really see the difference between "what" and "that" or "Where" and "There", but can pick up on very long words and decode them. Still hits a major block with certain sound blends - ai / ay in particular. Reads words from the middle - so last night, the word "rudely" became "Druley?" ... His handwriting is a mess, which I have put down to him being a left hander. Teacher implied theres more ... - letters are transposed, badly formed letters, writes everything in very big letters (about 2 lines deep for each letter). .. Spelling .. is 2 years behind his age. Although he gets 10/10 for every spelling test, he forgets the spelling when he has to write them in stories. .. he also transposes numbers - so 315 becomes 351. He also writes numbers back to front P for 9 for example.

It looks as though he has never been told words and numbers start at the right, maybe also that words themselves are arranged left to right; and also has little idea of what the separate symbols mean.

I'm interested really in trying to establish the general situation - is it ture that most people could read from about 7; is it true that the other figures on progressive deterioration (if you regard inability to read as 'deteriorating') ar emore or less right; and is it true that all this was deliberate?