dyslexia? Visual sequencing problem? second guessing myself.

[HattiFattner]

I had DS2s parent/teacher assessment this week. A very lovely and experienced teacher, who has taught both his siblings, and so knows our family.

SHe (and I) has concerns about DS2s reading, writing, spelling and numeracy.

On reading, he has not progressed from Y2 Sats level. He is in Y4. He is very hesitant, still 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?" He was in reading recovery in infants.

His handwriting is a mess, which I have put down to him being a left hander. Teacher implied theres more to it than that - letters are transposed, badly formed letters, writes everything in very big letters (about 2 lines deep for each letter). He has done a writing/coordination scheme through the school last year, to try and get him better hand control.

Spelling he 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.

In numeracy, he also transposes numbers - so 315 becomes 351. He also writes numbers back to front P for 9 for example.

Teacher says she will now keep him on her radar. But im wondering (and second guessing) if DS has some form of dyslexia or visual processing issue.

And if so, what ....and how can I help him?

His confidence is taking a big knock because he is not moving on to the later books, he hates reading out loud and now avoids doing so ("I left my book at school" and "I finished it in class".)

He is otherwise a bright boy, funny, articulate. Just falling behind.

Rerevisionist

There is also the possibility, of auditory processing disorder. One of the diagnostic tests included in the diagnostic battery of tests measures the size of gap between sounds that an individual can processes. (or in you terms their ability to process the different sounds that can make up a word, which are represented by letters). Most who have a diagnosis of APD are not able to process those gaps between the sounds that make up a word, nor even the gaps between words in rapid speech, so what you call phonic blending is not cognitively possible.

You really need to do your research as currently you are talking nonsense.
There is no general situation, each child is different, with different cognitive skill strength, different cognitive skill weaknesses, different cognitive skill disabilities, and different alternative compensating skill options to work around their weaknesses or disabilities. Being able to read, or decode text, does not imply that the reader understands what they have just read. Which is the weakness of phonics, it does to teach understanding, or how to make educated guesses, or develop risk taking skills, in fact it encourages just the opposite. More like Hyperlexia where children are able to decode complex texts, but have no idea of the content they have read.

Alexia is the result of illness which affects the brains ability to process various types of sensory information, and usually affects adults in their later years and has nothing to do withe how they were educated.

You replied so fast from my post with links to the freely available research papers that i very much doubt you could have read and absorbed the content. So I would suggest that if you really want to understand these issues then you need to read the recent research, and not the unsupported scribblings of authors trying to sell their opinions. Anybody can write a book, but it is not so easy to publish peer reviewed research papers.

My ds is dyslexic as are most of my male relatives. Between the ages of five and seven when he was struggling at school he was assessed by OT, physiotherapy and two different pediatricians. All of whom said he had some specific minor difficulties but did not need any intervention. He also was also assessed by the ophthalmologists at the regional eye hospital (he is long sighted but has no other sight problems). He had an IEP but it was all about his behaviour and it just wasn't recognised that he was seriously struggling because he was performing at the average.

So we took him to be assessed by an EP and found the report very useful indeed because we then knew where his strengths and weaknesses lay. Maybe we should have already known them. Maybe school should have known them, but they and we didn't. It did make a difference to how he was treated by his teacher, although the SENCO was very defensive (she spent the years previously trying to tell us he was autistic) and there was no help because he wasn't considered to be sufficiently behind.

So we got him some synthetic phonics tutoring from a lovely lady who used the Sound Reading System (on the advice of maverick, a poster here) and it totally turned his reading around. For ds the mixed method reading teaching he had had to that time not only hadn't led to him being able to read, it had also destroyed his confidence and he pretty much had to start again.

Five years later we are probably about to get another EP assessment because we are in a different school system and hitting the same problem, but this time with his writing. Apparently he can't be dyslexic because he doesn't do the classic letter swops etc, but he still writes at a significantly lower level than he speaks. We've been told if we can have him assessed as gifted then his difficulties will be recognised and he will get the additional time/IT support in his exams in a few years time. Otherwise he will significantly under perform, affecting his academic options. Very frustrating really.

dolfrog I'm confused. You say that the problem with the approach to dyslexia in the UK is that it is based on the Orton Gillingham approach. But one of the papers you link which is a study of brain imaging states that it provides 'strong support' for Orton's theory. Is the OG approach very different? Looking at the wiki entry it doesn't sound in any way like the SP tutoring that ds had, and I understood that the focus on phonics was very much the current approach.

Indigo, my ds's dysexia is probably a neurodevelopment problem. I am most interested to know how this can be simply 'fixed' as my understanding is that this is a part of who he is, and as unfixable as other neurological problems like autism for example. Certainly it is a very strong family trait, but one which has not stopped his uncle and cousins from succeeding, indeed one of them is convinced that rather than being a problem, it is an advantage (they are all highly creative, intelligent lateral thinkers).

www.ontrackreading.com/dyslexia-puzzle/convergence-insufficiency-study
One of the more common vision problems associated with reading difficulty, or dyslexia if you wish to call it that, is convergence insufficiency.

During the act of reading, the demand is for the two eyes to turn inward so that they are aimed at the reading task. If the eyes have a tendency to deviate outward, the child must use excess effort and energy to maintain fixation on the reading task. Most studies have shown that the greater the amount of effort involved in reading, the lower will be the comprehension and the lower will be the performance..

nooka

Orton's research was done in the 1920, 1930, and his work using the technology available at the time defined dyslexia to be a phonological processing problem.
The Orton Gillingham program was not a direct result of his research, more a program that he developed to help his dyslexic wife, and other dyslexics, which became the cornerstone of the Orton Gillingham organisation, especially after his death.

Technology has since moved on confirming that dyslexia is a phonological processing problem, but the researchers now have developed very much improved technologies to understand and define the causes of the phonological processing problems, breaking this down further into auditory processing , visual processing and attention issues.
Orton has could not have begun to identify auditory processing disorders, visual processing disorders or attention disorders, during his day using the scientific technology he had available.
And it is these disorder which are now understood to be the underlying causes of the dyslexic symptom, which are not addressed by the Orton Gillingham program. And the diagnostic procedures used by the UK dyslexia industry were based on whether an individual could benefit from using the Orton Gillingham program, rather than having one of the underlying cognitive deficits or disorders that cause the dyslexic symptom.

Tumble - you're a hospital ophthalmologist. That makes sense.

The hospital opthalmologist and hospital orthoptist missed my DSs convergence insufficiency and eye tracking problems.

We are not talking about visual processing difficulties in this thread. We are talking about simple physical problems which anyone can see ( once its pointed out) - the ability to smoothly track the eye across the page and the ability to bring the eyes together as an object comes in closer.

If you can't do these simple physical things you won't be able to read easily.

All vision therapy is is simple exercises to strengthen these muscles. Ie focus near, then focus far to improve convergency and look left, look right to improve eye tracking.

As it is a simple muscular problem, exercises like this strengthen the muscles and cure the problem.

A far as I understand this is something an orthoptist should have helped my DS with, and then I wouldn't have had to pay lots of money to go private. But as I said all the NHS wanted to do was see me again in 6 months.

Nooka - you fix neurodevelopment problems with a neurodevelopment therapy.

There are many to choose from. They all get you to do different physical exercises which stimulate different bits of the brain. For example exercises which make you cross the midline. You typically have to do them every day for at least a year.

I've had a lot of success with them and highly recommend them.

Reversionist - I certainly know someone who went to school before 1945 and never learnt to read.

I suspect what really happened before 1945 is you had to be able to read to move up a class, so if you didn't learn to read you stayed in the infants and you only got promoted to the juniors once you could read.

They also probably labelled kids 'imbecilles' or something, and excluded them from their sats.

But that's just my guess.

As to this kid who appears not to know words read left to right, I really, really doubt it's because he doesn't know words are meant to be read left to right. Kids are taught that.

But he could have the same extreme eye tracking problems my DD has. When she tries to read her eyes move back and forth across the word so many times that she isn't seeing the letters sequentially. She is actually seeing the 3rd letter, then the 5th letter, then the 1st letter etc.

A good reader will fix on 150 points when reading 100 words. My DD fixed on over 700 - most of them points she shouldn't have been looking at.

nooka

The Orton Gillingham program is probably one of the original phonics based teaching program, which has been licensed under many other brand names in the USA.
There has been a marketing war in the USA between the Whole Word (look say) program providers, and the Phonics program providers. Recent research of the last decade has identified that we use both processes as part of the reading process, especially when using an alphabet based writing system, as we do in the UK, Europe, and most of North America.
Phonics is the process we use to decode the letters that make up new words, or new words to us as individuals. Experienced readers or readers familiar with the format of the words read by whole word recognition. Some like me and others who share my disability are cognitively not able to sound out new words and have to go straight to matching the whole sound of a word to the whole visual representation of the word. Which can make life more difficult. Especially if the only teaching methods being used are phonics based.

This has caused great difficulty for all of my sons education as very few of their teachers could use any alternatives to using phonics. Because they could not use phonics they began to believe that they were stupid because they could not follow the form of instruction used by their teachers which their peers could understand.
So this is an example of bad teaching practice or "crap teaching" by teachers who could only use phonics and were not able to adapt their teaching methods to match our childs learning needs.

IndigoBell

It is not possible to fix neuro-development problems, you have become the queen of quack programs, which can offer some support to a few but not all those who have a wide range of neurological issues.
Research in many instances still has to unpick and identify the specific causes of a wide range of issue which can cause many of the issues that have been identified as problems. there are not always quick fix solutions available, especially if there is not sufficient understanding of the cause of the problems.
Neurology and Genetics sciences are still in there early development, and still do not as yet have a full understanding of all the issues. so it is not possible to begin to talk about the so called quick fixes you can only dream about.

In the 1940-60s there were schools for the "educationally sub normal" Reversionist

are you the king of pessimism dolfrog?

I don't think Indigo is suggesting it is a quick fix only that with hard work and patience there are things that work ... ok they might not work for every child but surely it's better to try than to give in

Dolfrog - I'm not at all concerned with whether or not a program works for all kids. I only care if it will help my 3. And Nooka only needs to care about her 1.

I wouldn't ever expect one program to work for all kids. That would be stupid, given the range of different problems kids can have.

I don't care what your defn of quack program's are. Everyone can see an improvement in my 3 kids since they've started their current neuro development therapy, and I'm therefore very happy with it. Last week all 3 of them came home with sporting medals / player of the week type awards. Including the 2 who have DCD.

It certainly isn't a quick fix. I have 3 kids, all needing to do the exercises 3 times a day. All complaining they don't want to. More like a logistical nightmare. Luckily I am seeing results, which makes it easier to keep this therapy at the top of my priorities. I expect to have to continue this regime for at least a year.

Equally there is zero risk from doing a neurodevelopment therapy - as all it is is various physical exercises. Nooka has nothing to lose by trying one - besides time and money. Oh, and ridicule from people like you who seem to have neither common sense nor compassion.

Unlike you I will never give up on my kids. Nor will I ever expect the world to change for them - as that will severely limit their options in life.

mrz

"are you the king of pessimism dolfrog?"

No, but like all medical disabilities there needs to be clinical trials to test and prove the effectiveness of any treatment.
Any creators program and program providers, to have any credibility need to demonstrate via well established trial procedures that the program can provide some form of universal difference or benefit for a specific type of disability. And there are many programs all very well marketed available in the private sector, which have either failed to pass these test procedures, or have support research which does not comply with the internationally agreed trial procedures. This means that many can pay very good money for a program which can provide not long term benefit.
And the expectation from spending the large sums of money for there to be some improvement can be devastating to both the child and parents when the long term results provide little or no benefit at all.
Some are lucky and their children can derive some benefit from these programs, but the outcome should not be based on luck.
So if a program has gained repeated good results from say Randomised Control Trials, etc then the program can be considered a cure for that specific issue.

I help run a national support organisation for Auditory Processing Disorder, and there are many so called quick fix programs, none of which to date have passed the rigors of research scrutiny. Although some can gain some benefit from these various programs, others can gain no benefit at all and for some they can cause actual harm. When i first began researching APD to get help for my own sons, via the APD forums in the USA, there were always parents on these forums proudly listing all of the programs they had already tried, and asking which program they should try next. All being paid for by their health insurance. The programs providers were making a fortune, but the children were not getting the help and support they needed. And it is these same programs some 10 years later are now surfacing in the UK.

So the message is buyer beware, and these program providers go out of their way to gain parental endorsement, it is how they earn their living.

as a parent were you never tempted to try some of those programmes on the off chance they might help your child (with or without research rigour) I know I was willing to try anything.

[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?

I am not sure what evidence they produce to support their case, but I have to say it seems unlikely. Children weren't measured and tested and the results put in the public domain the way they are now.

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

Many schools today using synthetic phonics report tremendous success but, in most cases, success has tended to depend on splitting children into smaller ability groups and providing teaching to their level. This would not have been possible with classes of 40 and no teaching assistants. And whilst phonic decoding is very important, practice is also important and, with large classes, opportunities to listen to children read were limited. And, of course, in those days, no reading books were sent home.

[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.

Between the 1950s and fairly recently, children started learning to read by whole word recognition. This does not mean that they were never taught letter sounds or that words started from left to right. Otherwise nobody would ever have learned to write, or work out new words for themselves. I am pretty sure that OP's DS knows the theory that words start from left to write but processing difficulties makes it difficult for him to put it into practice.

[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).

None of these would effect reading ability, other than that the long-sighted would need glasses to read.

[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.

It's a big if though, isn't it? We could all make many claims about pre-1945 and, while we could not prove them, it would be equally hard for others to disprove.

[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).

Poor literacy caused by poor teaching is not dyslexia, as it can easily be remedied by better teaching. I can't remember any more detail of the OP's DS's difficulties, but it sounds as if he can identify single letters but has difficulty with two or more letters making a single single sound. It sounds as if he has been taught but does not easily remember. It is also possible that he can read words by decoding but cannot distinguish between words like 'what' and 'that' at a glance as most of us can. The fact he also transposes numbers suggests there is more going on than poor teaching of reading. He also has a very clued up mum who could make up for any difficiencies in his school.

mrz
as a parent we did try the program which had been briefly looked at by the early UK APD researchers, and all of our children and i tried it. But it disrupted my existing coping strategies, DS1 could not be bothered with it, it caused DS2 pain, and DS3 was too young at the time.
I have since been in regular contact with the program, designer who freely admits that his program may not work for all.

Living with APD like most of these types of issues is more about understanding our own differences, recognising our limitations, and understanding the alternative compensation skills and abilities we can develop which help us cope.

And it is these skills we develop to compensate that some misguided call a gift, such as the gift of dyslexia. We develop skills that others do not need to develop, but others can benefit from our different skill sets. The most researched examples dyslexic entrepreneurs and hi-functioning autistic computer programers. Thinking differently can have its advantages, as well as disadvantages.

dolfrog I think accepting that some things will work but not for everyone is the key. However without trying how do we know who will benefit

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

Tumble8, parent's aren't worried that reading isn't their child's thing, as in reading as a hobby. Parents are worrried because their children are really struggling to acquire the most basic level of literacy. And literacy is an expectation for everyone in our modern society. And I just want to add that reading, at this most basic level, has very little to do with intelligence.

mrz

The problem is that we have many issues which have been identified as a clinically diagnosable disability for which currently there is no cure. Similar say to some cancers etc.
There has been a number of programs develop by well meaning researchers, but not always, that work for reasons that they do not fully understand. And it is this lack of full understanding that can actually result in unforseen harm.

It would be very easy for me to list all of the programs that have been suggested as possible sources of benefit for those who have various forms and degrees of APD on the APDUK web site so that site visitors could then choose a program, probably the one that best suited their financial situation, and disclaim any responsibility if the program did not provide the expected help.

The other question that sometimes is discussed is the ethics seeking a cure, which in the longer term will related to genetic engineering. And what would be the outcome of tampering with individuals genetic make up. And the other issue is more about society not being willing to understand the needs of those more different to themselves, or being willing to take the time and effort to make the required accommodations.
The term "normal development" is not replaced in research recently by the term "typically developing" as the word normal has taken taken on a more non statistical meaning in recent years. And many who describe themselves as normal only do so to conceal their own differences.

Personally I am quite happy being APD it has its advantages as well as its disadvantages. My APD is what makes me , me. The biggest problem is the ignorance of the wider population who have no understanding of my specific set of differences, and seem unwilling to want to discover how others survive.

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

Don't get this.

I have a dx of dsylexia my reading age after infants was actually quite high. My main problems has always been spelling, reading things like timetables, doing mental arithmetic, pronouncing unfamiliar words - thought this was quite common. As I've got older most issues I endured have vastly improved.

I am and always have been an avid reader - devouring book with excellent comprehension.

My teachers and parents always encourage believing it would help my spelling but it didn't help and as an early teen my spelling was so bad even spell checkers were a curse and cause of frustration to me.

Despite doing well academically I do not want my DC to go through what I did.

DD1 looks to be following in my path - initial reading issues apparently disappearing as she learns words by sight and according to her teacher she has excellent comprehension. She is left with spelling and writing issues.

Doing apple and pears has made it very clear that she can't so word searches - something I was dimly aware of but didn't get its importance. The thought of leaving her to suffer rather than try something is bizarre.

RudolphMinusRedNose

you sound a bit like me, but i was only diagnosed as being dyslexic late in life, and then a few years later with Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) which is the cause of my dyslexic symptom.
You could have a look at the APDUK web site

Yesterday, someone told me about this Nintendo game - Sight Training

Don't know if it's any good or not :)