Possible dyslexia and reaction of SenCo, confused and annoyed. WWYD?

[VinoEsmeralda]

I'm not the best in converting thoughts/conversations to paper but will try to give a neutral picture of current situation.

DD is in Yr2 and last year her teacher (NQT who is v young and IMO lacks empathy and is rather cocky, am not alone in thinking this but has made improvements this year) referred her to the SenCo but couldnt tell me why just that he thought she was not making much progress. She started of as a confident happy girl but very quickly lost confidence.

Possible thoughts of dyslexia but no intervention or extra 1-1 support was offered, other then the usual strategies with low ability groups, as DD was so young ( July baby) and it might level itself out which we were happy with as both are DC are immature or slow starters academically.

Fast forward to October last year, Senco felt she was making sufficient progress and no need for further meetings. Both me and DH disagreed and it was agreed we would meet again in March.

She has made more progress and her confidence has grown a lot. I have pushed hard to get her in a teddy talk time group and we have been doing lots of (fun) work at home. We read every day, use Nessy and generally try to link this to subjects taught at school. SenCo said she was pleased and I again disagreed, teacher agreed with me this time and said he spent a fair bit of time with her and the amount of input she had she should be at a higher level and SenCo said there was likely to be a mild form of dyslexia and now comes the part that really annoyes me.

She will not get any extra support as the level is not severe enough, said dont bother to get her tested as school is aware of the situation and ensure good handover to make transition between classes easier for her. Possibly get her tested so when she goes to secondary she has 'the label' and teachers will have an understanding. She would try and ensure she wouldnt slip through the net but couldnt say what these were.

I just dont get it! So dissapointed, have we shot ourselves in the feet but doing so much to get her to this level? She still struggles with number bonds up to 10, is on New Way reading scheme on the green band.

What are your thought? Would really appreciate feedback if I am overreacting or (as I am currently planning) to take this further.

Apolgies for long post!

Anybody who uses Tinsley House, I have googled Robin Pauc and he is not a doctor just a chiropractor and was admonished by his professional body back in 2010, but the details are no longer on their website. Has anyone had any negative experiences or care to comment before others are tempted into parting with their money?

We know he is a chirorpactor and neurologist DM thanks

He is not a medical Dr and does not state that he is.

He was "admonished" for an article that appeared in the Daily Mail, which misquoted him and which he did not agree to.

HTH

There's lots of rubbish written on the Internet.

He's not a medical doctor - and has never ever said he was.

He's a chiropractor neurologist. As it says on his website.

Which is fine by me - because no medical Dr can help with dyslexia.

As far as money, he's certainly an awful lot cheaper than 3 years of 1:1 tutoring at DA.

For a full list of his quals, please see the TH website.

For the record no "proper" doctor (I assume thats what you are trying to infer?) has ever been interested in or tried to help my son in nearly 9 years.

R Pauc is the only person in all that time who could tell me why my son tip toe walks, why he is so anxious, why he has vision problems and how I can help him.

I think "Chiropractor Neurologist" is more common in the US than here and Chiropractors are allowed to refer to themselves as "doctor". There is a Tinsley House thread on the Special Needs forum and I presume if anybody had been ripped off they would post there - generally people are more inclined to post bad reviews than good I find. The only bad thing I can find are comments on the Daily Mail article which presumably the journo distorted out of recognition.

Re the DA tutoring it was about £50 for 1.5 hours when we went a while back and my DD was seen with another child at the same level (which she liked). I was told the standard rate a the time for a non DA specialist tutor was around £30 an hour. I believe some kids were treated for free but I imagine you would have to have no employment income at all.

I don't think that tutoring and other therapies are mutually exclusive and DD got on well with tutoring, though obviously it is not a cure for dyslexia.

Yes, he qualified in the USA I think kensingtonia

When I enquired about tutoring at DA (for 3 half hour sessions per week) it would have cost £80 a week.

We just couldnt afford that long term.

Oh dear OP I totally sympathise. Both my children were diagnosed with dyslexia and it wasn't until I moved them into the private sector at ages 13 and 11 that this was finally diagnosed. We had thought my daughter had ADHD and she had minimal support in primary school because they thought so too. My son was always a high flier and I recall being berated by his year six teacher for him not reading enough!

Would recommend a private educational psychologist's report if you can afford this. This will give you some answers and ways to at least help at home and push for in school.

The Ed Psych who assessed DD (at DA premises) told me (in a whisper) that a normal specialist teacher was a lot cheaper. I would imagine it is somewhere in the region of £30 -£50 an hour. I think the BDA provides a list.

DyslexicMum and Maverick

There does appear to be a lot of evidence that cerebellum deficits or abnormalities are the cause of dyslexia.

Dyslexia: The role of the Cerebellum

Google: cerebellum dyslexia

Tinsley House and Dore work on improving the cerebellum. (INPP and RRT don't)

Certainly my DD (and Becaroo's DS) has made amazing progress over the last few months. And we still have a few more months of therapy to go.

I think DDs slow processing is now gone (and she had extremely slow processing before), and I think her memory issues are also gone now (she also had extreme memory issues - particularly with learning words).

It's hard to tell how much 'dyslexia' is left - and how much she just now needs to be taught to read and write. (ie I think she can now learn as quickly and easily as everyone else - but needs to learn all the stuff she missed out on over the last 5 years)

It's not just Chiropractic Neurologists who believe that improving the Cerebellum is a sensible thing to do (although it's mainly Chiropractic Neurologists who know how to do so)

indigo, the plural of anecdote is not data.

Sure. But in that talk you linked to, that lady said there was no evidence for cerebellum problems causing dyslexia.

So I have just shown you a scientific report which shows there is a link. They have tested cerebellum function in dyslexics and non dyslexics and found a strong correlation between cerebellum dysfunction and dyslexia.

And loads of other research papers have found similar evidence.

Which does not mean its definately correct. But it does mean it might be.

And as you have a huge interest in teaching children to read, I thought you'd be interested.

And while you may not be swayed by anecdotal evidence there is honestly no other explanation for the massive leaps both my DD and Becaroos DS have made. Neither of them have had extra teaching or anything else different over the 2 months during which they made massive progress.

If you want to be all scientific you do need an alternative hypotheses to explain their improvements.

maverick

This time last year (in Y3) my ds1 couldnt write a paragraph, didnt use capitals, punctuation or vowels and his teacher had to take his work to the Y1 teacher to "decode" it.

Last week he got "Star writer of the week" at assembly for a story he wrote.

Thats ALL I need to know.

(Since last year he has done AIT, RRT and is now doing TH)

Coincidence???

I truly believe in 10/15 years time this stuff about the cerebellum and its effects on LDs will be mainstream knowledge.

I get the feeling that how ever much empirical evidence I throw up that shows there in no cerebellum involvement in reading difficulties you will refuse to believe it because it's not what you want to hear -but I'll just stick one recent study up anyway and leave it at that:

journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7637156

Abstract

The cerebellar hypothesis of dyslexia posits that cerebellar deficits are associated with reading disabilities and may explain why some individuals with reading disabilities fail to respond to reading interventions. We tested these hypotheses in a sample of children who participated in a grade 1 reading intervention study (n = 174) and a group of typically achieving children (n = 62). At posttest, children were classified as adequately responding to the intervention (n = 82), inadequately responding with decoding and fluency deficits (n = 36), or inadequately responding with only fluency deficits (n = 56). Based on the Bead Threading and Postural Stability subtests from the Dyslexia Screening Test-Junior, we found little evidence that assessments of cerebellar functions were associated with academic performance or responder status. In addition, we did not find evidence supporting the hypothesis that cerebellar deficits are more prominent for poor readers with ?specific? reading disabilities (i.e., with discrepancies relative to IQ) than for poor readers with reading scores consistent with IQ. In contrast, measures of phonological awareness, rapid naming, and vocabulary were strongly associated with responder status and academic outcomes. These results add to accumulating evidence that fails to associate cerebellar functions with reading difficulties. (JINS, 2010, 16, 526?536.)

Maverick - I am very open minded, which is why I've tried so many things with my DD.

(Including endless, endless overlearning of synthetic phonics)

I can't read your article (without paying for it). And the abstract doesn't tell me enough about the study to understand how they tested the kids, how the classified them, and what results they found.

Bead Threading is not a test of cerebellum function. (AFAIK - Bead threading tests fine motor skills, and the cerebellum doesn't control fine motor skills)

Postural stability can be a test of the cerebellum. But without reading the full article I don't know what test they did, and how.

If you can find me some studies that I can read, I'll happily read them.

So, what's your theory of why mine and Beca's kids have done so well after doing therapies to help the cerebellum? I'm quite open to any other theory that supports the facts.

I am absolutely sure we can both find academic articles to support our positions. It's very hard to design proper tests, so very easy to have articles supposedly proving the opposite of each other.

But until I have an alternative hypothesis that supports the facts of my DDs improvements, (which may well be that TH works, but for some other reason), I'd be stupid to not believe the cerebellum deficit hypothesis.

Bead Threading is definitely not a test of the cerebellum. (Which obviously makes me doubt your whole article)

[http://www.ms-gateway.com/understanding-ms/diagnosing-ms/testing-cerebellar-function-67.htm Testing Cerebellar Function]]

The tests in that article are the type of tests my DS and DD underwent.

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091209121200.htm

If you keep clicking those links (in science daily) there are certainly lots of studies which have used MRIs to show differences in brains of children with dyslexia and without.

Some of these studies have found differences in the brains of pre-school children. (Who later get diagnosed with dyslexia)

Bead threading as a test of cerebellar function?

I think not maverick

Surely thats to test fine motor skills?

The cerebellar controls equilibrium and motor activity so threading 15 beads onto a string is actually part of the screening for a deficit in these areas.

Some more info on

this thread OP

Which hemisphere mrz ?

Mrz - bead threading involves both fine motor skills and gross motor skills.

The cerebellum only controls gross motor skills. So it's a fairly weak test for cerebellum problems, and it's not one that neurologists use.

cogprints.org/2349/1/JCPP02.pdf

brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/126/4/841.full

www.springerlink.com/content/53j6t81g0xm56977/