Dyslexic dd v. upset at school

[YeahBut]

Hi, I've also posted on the SEN board but wondered if I might also get some advice here.
Dd2 is 8 and in Yr 3. We've recently moved and she is at a new primary which has a "whole school" approach to spelling. This means that all the children in the school have their spelling ability assessed and are then placed in spelling groups based on ability rather than age or yr group. Obviously, as a child with dyslexia, dd2's spelling is pretty atrocious. She's completely despondent because she's been put into a group with kids in Yr 1. I've just been into her room to check on her and found her sobbing her heart out because she's "so stupid at spelling she's with the little kids" and "worse than everbody else in her class." I've tried to explain that dyslexia means she learns differently to other people, but that is is a really bright child. I also tried to explain that spelling and reading are going to take a bit longer to click for her.
Any advice would be appreciated. Is it even worth saying anything to the teacher?

Well, MaisieD, it doesnt surprise me at all, because we have, unfortunately, had to deal with a few staff with small minded attitudes over the past 11 years! All I can say is that I am really pleased you are not working in DDs school! DD is obviously one of your "very few" then, but responds so much better with positive, supportive teachers who understand her and dont put her down and highlight things that she struggles with.

DD is now 16 and she would have probably been in the year 1 spelling group until about a year ago. How is that good for her? For her self esteem? How would she feel about her peers knowing that?
You could have taught her to spell a word one day, by the next day she would need teaching that one again, and again, and again. Things have now "clicked" over the past year far more and she is doing well and for the first time in her life enjoys reading.

thumb, she doesn't actually say she doesn't believe in it, does she?

I think she is probably just a bit naive and sure of her own ability to wave a magic wand. One of my (lovely) teachers was like this: she co-incided with the time when I suddenly started reading, and she thought it was all about sorting out problems with poor previous teaching, too.

Then she got my dyslexic brother and learnt better.

I hope the OP's child is ok. I am feeling awful for her.

not in so many words, LRD - but the last line of her second post is the one that led me to believe that is what she might think:
"I really wish that parents understood more about the real reasons for most of their children's difficulties with reading and writing and turned their anger against the schools that created the problem; not against the people who suggest that 'dyslexia' is perhaps not a 'condition' at all... "

maizie I'd like to know how turning my anger against my DD's reception and Y1/2 teachers would help DD to spell now (Y4). If only life was so simple!

Surely it is better to focus on how to help dyslexic children than to argue over who or what is to blame?

watching this thread with interest - my DSD (12) is dyslexic. strangely though, she's really enjoying yr7, although obviously is still behind in terms of attainment - but her non-identical, very-good-at-literacy twin hates secondary school!

School attitude is so important. Thankfully both primary and secondary schools have seen DS as an intelligent boy who can't spell and treats him as such and he flourishes.
He has had a lots of one to one with spelling using "wordwall" and "stareway to spelling", but his writing is still a long way behind the rest of him.
Literacy problems are not just about poor teaching. Like Positive Attitudes DD, you could teach him a word one day and it would be forgotten the next. He could look at a sum on the wall and have forgotten the numbers by the time he looked down to the paper to write them down. He reads well because he was taught synthetic phonics well, but he can't recall the words to spell them.

OP talk to the school and see if you can get some better clarification as to what they want to do with your DD.

Scratch beneath the surface and you frequently find that a child with a spelling problem in Y3 has an underlying reading problem, hence my assumption that the child(labelled dyslexic)has a more general problem with reading, spelling and writing.

All children need to be treated with kindness and sensitivity - I'm sorry if I came across as unsympathetic. I'm not. But the answer to increasing self-esteem is to give the child something to be proud of, and learning and increasing skills and expertise does this.

Perhaps the parent of this child needs to ask if the new school has received reports from the previous school. Usually the Ed. Psych. who diagnosed the child as being dyslexic will have also provide recommendations.

"All children need to be treated with kindness and sensitivity - I'm sorry if I came across as unsympathetic. I'm not. But the answer to increasing self-esteem is to give the child something to be proud of, and learning and increasing skills and expertise does this".

Im sorry but this whole school approach does anything but treat a child with 'kindness and sensitivity'. Anyone with any sense would see that placing a much older child with infants for spellings would be soul destroying!

I think the school needs to look at how they teach spellings in the first place. A dyslexic child often needs a very hands on, multi-sensory approach. Someone mentioned 'rainbow writing', that would be a start in the right direction.
It is quite possible to teach spellings which are quite individualised without humiliating the child in the process.

Dyslexic children can suffer terribly with low self esteem, but this doesnt have to be the case. Unfortunately the National Curriculum is not kind to dyslexics. A lot of teaching is geared towards auditory learning, yet this is exactly the style of teaching which dyslexic children struggle with. They (dyslexics) need a more visual or Kinaesthetic approach.

Imo you really should go and talk to the teacher. You don't have to go in all guns blazing, but I really think they need to account for how the groupings are making your child feel. This is really important, you are NOT making a fuss. I find it completely unacceptable.

I would strongly recommend reading, at the very least, the opening section of this research review:

www.nrdc.org.uk/uploads/documents/doc_166.pdf

"If it is still true, as it often appears to be, that ?most of what we can say about dyslexia is tentative, speculative, and controversial? (Ables et al., 1971), that ?the standard diagnostic criteria for diagnosing dyslexia cast much too wide a net? (Seidenberg et al., 1986) and that ?dyslexia carries with it so many empirically unverified connotations and assumptions that many researchers and practitioners prefer to avoid the term? (Stanovich, 1994), then it should be no surprise that ?the body of research associated with reading disability is unusually complex and confusing? (Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 1994) and that the confusion is widespread in almost every quarter. Teachers in schools are likely to be familiar with the argument that ?dyslexia? has become a diagnostic label of convenience (Smith, 1997), applied to learners ?who are so confused by their poor reading instruction that they can?t overcome it without special help? (McGuinness, 1998)."

There are no certainties about 'dyslexia'.

I have no objection at all to being flamed, but I do think that the flamers have sometimes jumped to conclusions completely unjustifed by by anything I have written.

I do know of a mother who successfully sued her son's school for failure to teach him to read - she'd been palmed off with all the 'something wrong with your child' stuff for years, but wasn't prepared to accept it. Australian, though, and a very determined lady... She was right, too. When he eventually got effective teaching he was fine, nothing wrong at all.

I am confused by you, Maizie. First, rather naively, you tell us your 'only universally accepted' definition of dyslexia. Then, when someone points out your mistake, you try to sell us the revelation that - shock, horror - 'there are no certainties about 'dyslexia'.'

Well, no shit Sherlock. Why should there be? Do you think complexities can't exist in the real world, or only in your own mind?

You know, I love this retro 'just teach 'em hard and they will learn' approach. But perhaps you will be able to explain why, with some excellent teaching, each time I am faced with a new alphabetic system, I react exactly as I did when learning to read English? Surely all that 'effective teaching' ought to have solved the problem once and for all?

(Btw, this is a real question. I am fine learning French, Italian, Latin, etc., but languages with different alphabets such as Russian and Greek knock me for six. It is exactly like being back to age 6 again. If it were simply a problem of 'poor teaching', shouldn't I have got over it?)

LittleRedDragon

Sorry to confuse you.

If you look at the multiple definitions of 'dyslexia' (p133 on)in the review you will find that the only constant in them is 'difficulty in learning to read (and spell)'.

I have a problem with something which purports to be a discrete, medicalised, 'condition' when no-one can agree on anything but one defining symptom.

What I don't have a problem with is identifying a range of factors which may be causing the symptom and assessing the individual in such a way as to pinpoint the particular factor which is the cause of the symptom. With that information it is much easier to give appropriate help.

I wouldn't expect to go to the doctor with a headache and be told that I have malcephalitis, full stop. I would expect the doctor to try to ascertain what is ccausing the headache (hangover or brain tumour?) and treat it appropriately. Dyslexia could be symptomatic of so many things that just throwing the gamut of strategies at it and hoping one or two will stick is inefficient and ineffective. So are daft generalisations such as 'dyslexics are visual learners'. I don't believe in learning styles either, because I've read the research...

As to your problems with learning languages which use a completely different symbol set, you surely didn't think that because you were completely familiar with the Roman alphabet you should be able to learn to read and write those languages as easily as you did the ones which use the same symbol set as English (and have quite a number of letter/sound correspondences in common)? If you have a good understanding of phonetics it should make it a bit easier, but you are still having to start again from scratch with the symbols.

But then, you do have an odd view of 'teaching' with all this 'retro' rubbish. Are you one of these people who believes it all comes naturally with a bit of immersion? I'm afraid I believe in imparting knowledge and skills through direct instruction.

Ok, as I understand you, you are suggesting that a condition that is complex, on which scientists do not all agree, is somehow less 'real' than a condition that is simple and easy to define. This is fundamentally flawed. You are looking at it as if dyslexia were a disease, but it is not: it is an umbrella term, used as a helpful model to describe real-world symptoms.

Make sense?

Sorry, pressed send too soon.

I don't really understand why you don't believe in learning styles having read 'the research'. Real research? Or a mish-mash 'review of research? I would have thought it was quite clear that different people have different learning styles. Many people consciously choose their learning style, for a start. Many more have clear needs to rely more on one type of learning than another. At a very simple level, for example, a blind person will not be able to revise by colour-coding notes.

I maybe should have explained a little more about the alphabets example (didn't want to take over the thread, hope I'm not doing so). No, I don't think 'it all comes naturally with immersion'. Trust me, if it takes you years learning to read, you don't think that!

The interesting thing with the languages/alphabets is the degree and nature of the problems. Everyone who learns more than one alphabetic system must start from the beginning and learn new symbols. But, if there were no underlying problem except poor teaching to blame for my initial struggle to learn to read English, you would not expect the same severe and abnormal problems with learning to persist in other alphabetic systems. However, they do. Clearly these cannot be blamed on 'difficulties with learning a new language', as I don't struggle with different languages in the same alphabetic system.

I don't know what the OP's daughter struggles with, so I don't know how relevant this is. But I know that with me, I will need to put in a disproportionately huge amount of time to master even the alphabet of a strange language. I will decode words very, very, very slowly, because I forget what the symbols mean. This has been the case, not in one episode of teaching (which you would argue, was faulty), but in three, all at different times. If there were no underlying problem, I don't believe I would have had the same patterns of difficulties, over and above what one expects when learning a new alphabet.

This is just one example, but it makes me personally aware of the underlying patterns of strengths and weaknesses that still control the way I learn, which I am sure are independent of teaching, and which I recognize in other dyslexic people.

Learning styles? Try this: industry.becta.org.uk/download.cfm?resID=15472&download_url=/content_files/industry/resources/Key%20 docs/Contentdevelopers/learningstyles.doc

It is taken from a much longer research review by Frank Coffield (2004)

"But, if there were no underlying problem except poor teaching to blame for my initial struggle to learn to read English, you would not expect the same severe and abnormal problems with learning to persist in other alphabetic systems. However, they do. Clearly these cannot be blamed on 'difficulties with learning a new language', as I don't struggle with different languages in the same alphabetic system. "

Well, I don't know how you were taught to read English, nor how you are (or have been) taught to read the new languages. I would need to know that before I could even begin to make a tentative assessment. I would still suggest that the reason you didn't find languages using the Roman Alphabet so difficult was because you were familiar with the symbols and many of the letter/sound correspondences. It is learning the sound symbol/ correspondences that is the difficulty (I am, of course, assuming that you are talking about difficulty in learning to read and write the language). If you struggled to learn one set then it is more than likely that you may struggle to learn another set if they are presented/taught in the same way.

If you struggled to learn English sound symbol correspondences it could be for two reasons 1) they weren't taught systematically and explicitly 2) you have an underlying difficulty. The symptom of 1) & 2) would be the same, poor word reading skills.

I am not for one moment saying that no one has difficulties with learning to read. All I am saying is that there is no discrete 'condition' called dyslexia; that it is a symptom of an underlying difficulty and that it is better to identify,name, and teach to appropriately, the underlying difficulty. Sadly, the most common underlying difficulty is poor initial teaching.

I have been in my current post for 5 years now and have worked with over 100 children in that time. Most of them have no problem when given systematic, explicit code based instruction. About 10% (which would extrapolate to less than 5% of the whole of KS3) have specific, identifiable difficulties which make learning to read harder for them - mostly short term memory based.

I get a pretty good idea of how the children have been taught from reading their primary IEPs and just talking to them generally about reading and what strategies they have been taught.I can quite confidently say that it is the initial teaching which has caused the problems of most of the children I work with.

I can tell from the posts I have read on mumsnet over the past few months that an awful lot of schools aren't teaching reading particularly well. Luckily about 75% of children survive this. I've also read some sad posts about children who are getting poor instruction and are struggling. I don't know what is to be done about it; it is so frustrating to see children's lives being spoiled at such an early age and to be unable to convince parents that they should be getting cross about this and not accept any nonsense about a child's difficulties preventing them from learning. The basic skills of learning letter/sound correspondences and applying that knowledge to decoding and blending are achievable by all children apart from those with severe cognitive difficulties.

Sorry, but I don't think you are taking in what I and others are reading, you're responding to something entirely.

'All I am saying is that there is no discrete 'condition' called dyslexia; that it is a symptom of an underlying difficulty and that it is better to identify,name, and teach to appropriately, the underlying difficulty.'

No-one here has suggested that dyslexia is a 'discrete' condition, and I certainly used the term 'umbrella' to describe it.

If you don't mind me saying, I think I will trust the advice of several educational psychologists, rather than someone who has worked with 'a hundred children' (a whole hundred? Really? Goodness me, what a lot you must know). Yes, it is possible that I was badly taught. In three separate languages. But if that were true, I would just apply the knowledge I eventually gained with English, to Greek and Russian. I can't. That's the short version. I posted it to suggest some of the problems and strangenesses that persist into adulthood with dyslexics, which can't be 'cured' by simple 'good' teaching. I didn't post it to have someone do amateur guesstimation on me.

maizie you have read 'some' research. How widely you have read we do not know.
OP I think your school's spelling groups are outrageous and damaging. Children with dyslexia need specialist intervention.

...and what about the children with common or garden reading difficulties? Do they get specialist intervention as well.

It makes little differnce what the label is, the low progress readers all need the same - and what they need can be provided by a savvy teacher with the right tools.

A school with homogeneous groups is one very effective mthod of delivery in a mass education system.

To provide regular individual help is a luxury that many systems cannot afford, mainly because the tax payers protest, or other parents whose children are not similarly privileged (maybe they are a different category of need) also protest.

Maizie is quite right, get instruction right early on with the majority (as per Rose Report)then there are resources for the really difficult cases.

common or garden reading difficulties - such as?
The low progress readers do not all need the same. Dyslexic children need specific intervention because their difficulties are specific.

I agree with Maleleuca in that all children who struggle to read should get the help. There are lots of common reasons to struggle that aren't dyslexia - visual impairment being an obvious one, deafness (not so oddly, when you think about phonics) being another. Of course they should all get as much help as each other.

But what helps a child with one problem may not be as good for a child with another. It's better to know all the strategies that work across the spectrum. If a child is struggling to read because she is deaf and doesn't understand phonics, there is little point in repeating sounds at her. If you are teaching many dyslexic children (not all, but many), they will respond well to reading for the context: ie., they will make accurate guesses about words based on the rest of the story. A child with a very low IQ, who is struggling to grasp the story at all, will find this much, much harder.

I don't agree that it's best to teach the majority then come back and sort out the dyslexics, either. It's very damaging to feel you're failing. Of course costly individual help can't always be given, but simple strategies could and should be put in place. Eg., the OP's daughter really should not be being put with the infants for spelling! In her case, it is simply cruel.

The Rose Report, btw, gets a lot of opposition from those who teach adults to read, for obvious reasons. It is very much more expensive to teach an adult basic literacy if that adult has been failing throughout their school career, than it is to put extra resources in classrooms.

"It's better to know all the strategies that work across the spectrum.' In fact, a multiplicity of 'strategies' is counter-productive. Essential strategies for beginners are few and rather simple, (say the sounds, read the word, or think the sounds spell the word -decoding and recoding).

For deaf children, it is now understood that 'phonics' is also essential, letter/sound correspondences are linked to visual cues as in cued speech, plus the use of microphones in the classroom.
'Guessing' is a poisonous 'strategy', thank goodness 'multicueing' is recognised as damaging.

Yes, the costs of producing illiterates is high, but funding in the early years still needs to be caefully managed.

Back to the child upset over being the only 8 year old in a group of 6 year olds. If she is the only older one then it speaks volumes - that the school manages its spelling instruction rather well. Some posters are suggesting this type of delivery is poor, without, I suspect, understanding the organisational dynamics of teaching large numbers of children.

As a Literacy co-ordinator, I would also strongly suggest that this kind of delivery is very poor. It may undoubtedly be very efficient, but totally fails to take into account this child's self esteem, which is also a hugely important factor in teaching. She is obviously bright, and the implications of shoving her in with 'little kids' are devestating to her. We would never do this in our school - I agree with LittleeEd Dragon, it's just cruel to put a KS2 child in with KS1.

I find Malaleuca's assertion 'To provide regular individual help is a luxury that many systems cannot afford, mainly because the tax payers protest, or other parents whose children are not similarly privileged (maybe they are a different category of need) also protest' extremely odd in the current climate of precise SEN teaching, intervention after intervention and Every Child Matters. Most schools have had all these things coming out of their ears for the last few years.

You also made an extremely odd post regarding current teaching methods in Maths today which seemed to display a lack of understanding regarding the teaching of calculations. Do you actually still teach, Malaleuca?

Yes I do still teach, and very effectively. I am particularly successful with low progress children. How patronising of you to remark that I have a 'lack of understanding' because, perhaps, you disagree.

I realise what I say sounds 'old-fashioned'!
I've been around the traps for a quite while and seen fads come and go.

At the moment I reckon I am ahead of the current fashion.

Oh, come on, you know exactly why early years children aren't taught formal calculations and why the op on that thread shouldn't be showing her child 'her way'. You also know why you encounter children who haven't been taught column calculations - they haven't the knowledge of basic place value to support it.

You will also know damn well that this op's daughter should be on an IEP and receiving individual help with her spelling.

You will also know that damaging a child's self esteem is the very worst thing a teacher can do, and will never help them.

As a teacher of nearly 20 years, I've seen 'fashions' come and go also. But the fashion in this country has not been to push children backwards by educating them with much younger children - in the last few decades, at least.

Malaleuca your theory is fine for children who do not have specific reading difficulties.I agree that the ability to read relies heavily on the reader knowing the sounds of the phonemes within a word and being able to blend them smoothly together. Dyslexic children however may continue to have difficulties with automaticity, working memory, concentration, visual/auditory discrimination and experience wordfinding difficulties despite good whole class phonics teaching.

I taught for many years in a multi-age grouped class ( years R-2)which was then the fashion. I still teach in a composite class.

In swimming lessons, children here(in Australia) typically start at the beginning and move up when they have acquired the requisite skills. Some parents and children do get upset if child does not 'pass' ie acquire the skills for moving to the next level. But the swimming instructors do not promote children, otherwise they would not be able to manage the next class successfully. It is true that younger children dominate the early levels.

The swimming lessons provided by the government are free, and very good. Parents are able to supplement instruction with private lessons, or can teach the child themselves. What they cannot do, is fool themselves or their child that they can swim when they can't. Neither have I ever heard any parent complain that they don't like how swimming lessons are organised.

Somehow, learning to read is not treated like learning to swim, even though there are some similarities in learning a new and unfamiliar skill.