Development of the Understanding of Dyslexia

Published Date: 19 Sep 2017

Introduction

The following three chapters offer not only an introduction, but an in depth analysis of the current state of the study of Dyslexia today. Much of the information evaluated for this study was based on the preeminent minds in the study of learning disabilities today. It is the responsibility of a curious society to determine the causal and symptomological relationships for a particular disorder prior to its diagnosis. Dyslexia presents a unique challenge to this social responsibility because of a uniquely manifested heterogeneity which is pervasive in many forms. Further research is decidedly required in order to isolate the underlying cause of such an affliction, yet with current medical data and a limited number of scientific studies, this feat remains next to impossible, even one hundred years after its initial recognition.

Chapter One

When his trembling hand gripped tightly to the pencil and the words began to flow freely, their meaning rushed through his mind; minute synaptic reactions converted thought into impulse and further into written word. When read, however, by a stupefied instructor, it was the letter reversal, in addition to poor, untrained handwriting which brought cause for alarm. Visits with a Neurologist, discussions with a Psychiatrist, all led towards an unfortunate diagnosis: Dyslexia.

Introduction

The following chapter is designed to offer an in depth history and background for one of the most misunderstood and misdiagnosed affectations in history: Dyslexia. It is only through thorough comprehension of this disorder and the potential affects on youth and adults alike that proper diagnosis and treatment will be initiated.

Defining a Theory

When theory becomes practice and eventually is predominately a diagnosis, it stands to reason that a clear and effective definition of that theory would aid in discussion with patients and training for educators. However, when a disability necessitates the scientific consensus of hundreds of doctors dealing with similar, yet uniquely defined cases, the theory will flounder, pinned in a net of conflicting case studies and rhetoric. Webster’s Dictionary defines Dyslexia as “a variable often familial learning disability involving difficulties in acquiring and processing language that is typically manifested by a lack of proficiency in reading, spelling, and writing.”^[1] This definition is not particularly enlightening, nor does it further our comprehension of what symptoms or solutions may be present for such a disorder.

Pop culture would have us believe that all dyslexics read words backwards, are inwardly frustrated individuals, and are oftentimes lazy in study while uniquely talented in another aspect of life. Yet, with the ambiguous definitions which have punctuated the study of this disorder, it can easily be seen how education in this area is lacking, particularly in terms of diagnosis. “The term dyslexia comes from the Greek root “dys” (trouble) and “lexia” (word).^[2] It is easily seen how such a generic definition can lead to great scientific debate, not only in study, but in treatment as well. There is no singular treatment for dyslexia, in fact, this is a lifetime disability where teaching awareness in addition to atypical forms of learning becomes paramount in the normal functionability of the patient.

Most common in modern definitions of Dyslexia is that it is a phonological disorder predicated by neurological dysfunction contributing to poor reading, writing, and oftentimes learning abilities. This theory, however, becomes problematic as a variety of scientific studies seek to minimize the extent that cerebral malfunction influences phonological impairment. Through simplification of the diagnosis procedure, tests such as IQ testing become the benchmark for identification dyslexics as opposed to poor readers. It is important to note that dyslexics do not have an intelligence deficiency. Their disorder is directly linked to improper phonological interpretation, and oftentimes, unique strengths arise from within this impairment. The following sections will further explore the preeminent theories behind dyslexia, in addition to extrapolating linked generic theories into cohesive formats by which further understanding of dyslexia will be simplified.

Dyslexia: Historical perspective

The first case study which endeavored to define dyslexia was recorded in 1872 by a physician, R. Berlin of Stuttgart, Germany. The initial cases of dyslexia were predominately adults who had lost the ability to read, write, or comprehend language in some cases due to severe trauma or head wounds. Early definitions of this disorder invoked use of a more common term aphasic, or a loss of the ability to use or comprehend words. In 1877, A. Kussmaul suggested the theory of “word blindness” to describe a patient who similar to earlier cases, had lost his ability to read. In 1887, the term alexia was first defined as an inability to comprehend written words by Charcot. All of these predecessors led to the modern term, dyslexia which we use fluidly today. This term was first defined by Bateman in 1890 who had determined a form of verbal amnesia in which a patient had lost his memory of the conventional meaning of language.

In 1896, Morgan formulated a revised definition called congenital word blindness, citing a 14-year-old boy who although he functioned on a similar intellectual level with his peers, had a specific difficulty in learning to read. Further comprehension of this disorder surfaced with James Hinshelwood, a surgeon at the Glasgow Eye Infirmary who published a series of articles in the journal “The Lancet.” These articles dealt more specifically with acquired word blindness than Morgan’s congenital word blindness and after his first experiences with congenital cases in early 1900, Hinshelwood eventually published a book on both forms of word blindness which further defined theories behind the disorders. “This taxonomic classification system was based upon the performance of the patients when attempting to read. In this regard, Hinshelwood’s formulations and methodology resemble those of contemporary neuropsychology.^[3] Hinshelwood’s research led him to create reading guidelines, including a three stage model of learning in which educators could focus their efforts on training students to read proficiently. Part of Hinshelwood’s congenital word blindness related to what he had previously witnessed in adults which were a major trauma or head injury which led to the apparent disorder. His believe was that during the birthing process or at some point during infancy, extreme head trauma or a birth defect had caused the lapse in language abilities, creating the word blindness.

Study in the area of reading difficulty continued. In 1925, an American Neurologist named Samuel Orton proposed a theory regarding the specific formation of these disorders. “According to Orton, reading reversals (e.g. b for d and saw for was) were caused by problems with cerebral dominance in the early stages of reading.”^[4] This mirror-image theory was one of the most misconstrued and misunderstood theories of the early twentieth century. By the early seventies, however, the mirror-image theory had been discredited on the basis that while dyslexia affects language functions, it does not seem to affect other visual tasks such as forms of recognition.

During the 60’s and 70’s, visual perception and correction of this problem in relation to dyslexia became a debatable theory. “Marianne Frostig developed a test for visual perception and a remedial training program involving tracing, and copying shapes and patterns.^[5]” This test was unsuccessful when paired with dyslexic students and was inappropriately utilized without positive result for some time. In 1962, Herbert Birch proposed the intersensory deficit hypothesis which proposes that because reading utilizes both auditory and visual senses, that there is an innate inability to perform the dual tasks. His theory was also discredited as testing lacked in control mechanisms and an inability to replicate results with consistent reliability plagued Birch and his associates.^[6]

From these bases of research on dyslexia came a flurry of tests, examinations, theories, discredited scientists, and the debate still continues. Current theories tend to focus on areas of the brain which are abnormally affected by the disorder, but more importantly, research into the techniques required in order to appropriately educate affected individuals has increased. This research, in addition to testing, continues to allow for uniquely afflicted individuals to lead remarkable yet uncured lives.

Phonology—From Record to record

When dyslexia moves from theory to diagnosis, phonological deficits become measurable symptoms of the disorder. Phonology, or the study and description of the sound changes in a language, can help educators pinpoint and explore specific regions of sound including word pairings and splits. Additionally, it is one of the most affected areas of comprehension relative to dyslexia. “The amazing discovery is that people systematically ignore certain properties of sounds. They perceive two different sounds as the same sound. We call the stored versions of speech sounds phonemes. Thus phonemes are the phonetic alphabet of the mind. That is, phonemes are how we mentally represent speech; how we store the sounds of words in our memory.” Dyslexia, however, as previously defined, is a disorder in accessing the proper linguistic characteristics as related to reading and writing. Therefore, in extrapolating disability from inability, it is essential to determine whether the child is phonetically challenged, they have an inability to attach proper synaptic responses to linguistic characteristic, or in a non-dyslexic case, that the problem could be directly related to visual acumen.

If there is a possibility that the child has a visual impairment which while serious and requiring further diagnosis and study, it does not decidedly group them into a dyslexic category. “Overall, studies have shown perceptual deficits: in vision related to impaired motion detection and in phonology related to impaired coding. This impairment is related to symmetry, reversed asymmetry, and lower numbers of neurons in, predominantly, the temporal lobes and visual motion areas of the occipital lobe. Also, the auditory deficits may be closely related to temporal abnormalities that impede speed and accuracy for speech-sound relationships in reading of the planum temporale region, as well as the thalamus near the corpus callosum.”^[7] It is this potential brain abnormality which makes this disorder so difficult to define and identifying specifically which deficits contribute directly to the dyslexic tendencies of a child is a most difficult and sometimes impossible process.

Additionally, the multitude of theories and definitions of learning disabilities makes the educator’s task of proper identification much more difficult. “It has been shown that explicit training in phonological awareness can lead to improved word reading; evidence of a reciprocal causal relationship between phonological awareness and reading has also been found.”^[8] In assessing potential dyslexics, it is widely held that phonological deficit is one of the most reliable assessors when comparing results from a controlled variety of children. Evaluations of this deficit oftentimes take the place of speed tests, word recognition studies, and testing of verbal fluency. As debate continues about the underlying causal factors of phonological deficit, one powerful theory is that “cerebellar deficit is the only single explanation of problems in balance, phonology, and speed, and is also one explanation of ‘pure’ phonology/speed problems.”^[9] This localized brain failure directly relates many of the predominant symptoms of dyslexia, including combining many different areas of testing and relating them to one overall failure, as opposed to a variety of causes for a multitude of symptoms.

Symptoms

In order to diagnose and treat such a heterogeneous disorder such as dyslexia, symptomology, or breaking down specific traits and behaviors into repeatable offenses, must be at the forefront of the educator’s investigation. But, when every child’s individual response to the disorder is different, where does one begin to define those unique traits which enable grouping, and therefore, repeatable treatment and disability management? As will be defined in future sections, it is essential to the educator that they are able to differentiate between the textbook dyslexic and the garden variety poor reader. Oftentimes, IQ testing is performed on children to initiate a benchmark for further evaluation of variance from this basis point. Children who exhibit reading variances below the average IQ of the test group cannot be immediately defined as dyslexic. Further investigation involving a variety of controlled examinations must be performed in order to discover the unique symptoms associated with the particular child’s disability.

It must be noted that oftentimes dyslexia is a hidden disorder, primarily because of social pressures placed on children to perform in school. Fear of labeling, coupled with parental disappointment can be a powerful motivator in masking or hiding of dyslexic symptoms. Initial determination of this disorder must be made through observation and recognition of potential warning signs. “Parents are often aware that their children have some problems with language before they start school. Youngsters with language processing disabilities may be slow in learning to speak, and may use shorter sentences, smaller vocabularies, and poorer grammar than their brothers and sisters did at similar ages.”^[10]

As symptoms are not easily identified due to lack of visual corroboration, there are a variety of discrepancy principles which are most often utilized for more accurate prognosis. IQ testing will be discussed in detail in further sections, yet, the ability to establish a connection between variances in observed and expected achievement make this form of testing one of the most consistent, yet debated, techniques for initial identification of dyslexic symptoms. Similarly, reading and listening comprehension are often studied in an attempt to determine obvious strengths in one category over the other.^[11] Determining that a patient’s reading comprehension is far inferior to his listening does not, however, decidedly diagnose them as dyslexic. This approach must identify the innate deficiency in word identification and contrast those results with alternate discrepancy evaluations.

Additionally, the definition of phonological deficiency pervades this model, as dyslexic children can have problems with written and spoken words alike. As dyslexia is clearly a heterogeneous disorder, a variety of symptoms requires varying evaluations, and in both of these discrepancy tests, the symptomology alone does not dictate dyslexia. A third area of discrepancy evaluation relates chronological age to reading age. Yet, historic evaluations of schooling and environmental factors (home environment, access to reading materials, etc) become paramount in determination whether or not the reading proficiency directly correlates to the social environment of the child. Again, it is the predicated evaluation of all apparent and collaborative symptoms which enables accurate diagnosis and appropriate educational tactics.

Causality

Often confused with symptomology, causality is the identification of the underlying failures contributing directly to the disorder. For dyslexic evaluations, an simplified approach to causality is to determine that a phonological impairment has contributed to an inability to read and write at the same level as their peers. Therefore, treatment tactics will include direct reading training, word recognition instruction, symbolic representation, and intensified reading emphasis. In the next chapter, RTI (responsiveness to intervention) will be discussed as a replacement for the “wait to fail” approach, which when utilized properly, determines their responsiveness to the training and potentially prevent misdiagnosis. Could the child respond to the phonological training? If there were dramatic improvement through basic teaching tactics which were more localized to poor readers, then perhaps the entire diagnosis of dyslexia could be removed, and focus on reading abilities and further instruction would become a priority. However, dyslexia, as previously stated, is a lifetime disability which mandates many changes in lifestyle and learning approach. The underlying causes are irreversible, and proper diagnosis is paramount in determining the best tactics toward normalization.

“The World Federation of Neurology defines dyslexia as a disorder manifested by difficulty in learning to read despite conventional instruction, adequate intelligence, and sociocultural opportunity. It is dependent upon fundamental cognitive disabilities which are frequently of constitutional origin.”^[12] Directly related to the phonological impairment is a cerebral malfunction or failure in which not only reading and writing abilities are impaired, motor skills including balance can also be affected. In addition to cerebral malfunctions, it is a well known fact that both sides of the brain process and perform different functions as related to thinking: the left side predominantly controls speech, reading, writing, and numeric processing ability; the ride side controls creativity, musical ability, and imagination. “Mixed hemispheric dominance” is attributed to the cause of improper phoneme reproduction is due to the brain’s hemispheric responses to stimuli.^[13] Therefore, the functions normally controlled by the left half of the brain are delegated in part to the right side, an area not typically charged with these particular functions. Dyslexics are often characterized as picture thinkers, or students who tend to think and speak in very imaginative capacities, often formulating speech as though they were painting a picture. In this scenario, the causality of photo-dictation is directly related to a confused hemispheric dominance. It is important, however, to note that assumption of causal relation to dyslexic symptoms can only be validated through intense scientific research and neurological study. Causes of this impairment are readily defined, but oftentimes troublesome in clinical corroboration.

Mythological Muddle or Modern Mystery

It is the duty and underlying objective of the scientist to investigate all causes and symptoms of a particular disorder in order to determine without a doubt the symbiotic relationship between the two and repeatability of testing procedures with future patients. Therefore, it would stand to reason that as time passes and frequency of variance within investigation techniques subsides, that scientific data would affirm one theory of dyslexia above all others. Unfortunately, the heterogeneity of this disorder has left a lifetime of neurologists without a solid foothold from which to hoist concrete scientific evidence as to the causes and treatments for dyslexia. The most problematic area of the body has proven to be the brain, and for obvious reasons, interpreting its responses to educational stimuli is a difficult and painstaking task.

Study aside, cultural mores supply myths which often muddle educated theories regarding dyslexia. One myth as qualified by an ignorant teacher of a dyslexic student was “well, I mean, it’s one of those things that has been conjured up by pushy parents for their thick or lazy children, quite often both.”^[14] These myths affect cultural perception as well as tactics educators explore in relation to future education of clinically diagnosed dyslexics. It is essential to the support and appropriate treatment of dyslexia that the dispelling of common myths becomes a priority. The following represents some of the most prevalent, but certainly not all myths associated with this disorder.

Myths:

All dyslexics read backwards

As previously stated, dyslexia is not simply a “backwards reading disorder.” While letter and word manipulation is a result of the disorder, not all dyslexics view words backwards. Oftentimes mirrored writing is an effect, yet proper teaching and techniques enable dyslexics to read and write over time as well as non-impaired individuals.

Dyslexia only affects reading

Discussion of symptomology of this disorder clearly shows that writing, listening, even motor skills are often affected by dyslexia. Phonological impairment does not limit dyslexic symptoms to poor reading alone. The inability to appropriately process and utilize language, words, and letters affects all areas related to these categories.

Dyslexics have a poor sense of direction

Dyslexics are often grouped into a category of individuals with poor sense of direction, and ones who are often clumsy or inept. While dyslexia can oftentimes cause a directional confusion, it is a trait which is dictated by the unique affectation of a heterogeneous affliction.

Dyslexia can be cured

Scientific advancements have challenged the confines of the human mind, yet manipulation of the brain, moreover, repair of major cerebral impairments, is as of date an impossibility with relation to dyslexia. Many dyslexics will learn to live normally with their impairment; many have already gone on to become great historical figures, yet curing this disorder is simply a task charged to the neurologists of the future.

My parents can read so I am not dyslexic

The genetic link between relatives and dyslexia is apparent and proven. The misconception however lies within the idea that genetic correlation is linked directly to the parents. Heredity and dyslexia form a bond within a family’s genetic makeup, enabling the link to come from oftentimes removed relatives, Uncle, Aunt, Grandfather. Dyslexia is a hereditary disorder and further research into a family tree reveals the path of its emergence.^[15]

Dyslexia, a mystery to scientists and educators for over one hundred years, presents children with challenges unlike other afflictions. The inability to localize the gene or regional affectation which causes dyslexia presents an almost hopeless image of what, in other scenarios, might be considered a gift. It is the unique modifications made by the mind which enable dyslexics to processes other areas of learning more quickly than other students, and this compensation oftentimes more than outweighs the debilitation of a decrease in language comprehension.

Personal Affectation—Why Me?

Scientific study aside, the human factor relative to living with dyslexia is prevalent and worthy of discussion. A child in an educationally pervasive society with expectations and standards thrust on him on a regular basis would find his inability to read common words not only frustrating but frightening. From a psychological standpoint, abnormality in a very standardized environment causes great confusion among children. Their inability to fully comprehend the situation will often lead to masking tactics in addition to rebellious behavior which carries the potential for misdiagnosis.

The perspective of a potential dyslexic is that they will be ridiculed in school settings for their differences and perhaps even placed in remedial classes in order to help them have a full and prosperous education. It is the responsibility of the educator as well as the parents to address this particular affliction, not as an illness but as a gift. Reminding students that a very impressive list of famous and successful dyslexics exists today and that more are added to it yearly allows for a comfort factor which can offset some of the fear. Creating an educational blueprint which navigates the student through the symptoms and adaptations of dyslexia and assists them to define a life of normalcy is a priority. The upcoming chapter will discuss the specific processes which can assist a student in a prosperous and diverse lifestyle in addition to addressing and identifying the unique factors of their disorder which may eventually help neurologists pinpoint the cause of dyslexia.

Chapter Two

Sitting before his teacher, hands clenched tightly in front of him on the desk, the student waited with anticipation as the cards were raised one at a time. The pictures were familiar, the writing seemed like something he had seen once before but it didn’t make sense. The instructor slowly prompted the wary student, the sounds forming behind tight lips. His first steps towards living with dyslexia had begun.

Introduction

The following chapter will not only evaluate dyslexia based upon specific traits and the modern techniques utilized to explore and define the disorder, it will explore the potential benefits of choosing each uniquely suited tactic in the attempt to properly diagnose and treat with accuracy.

Necessity or Misdiagnosis

“Congratulations, you have dyslexia.” This is not exactly a reasonable statement for a neurologist to make to a grade school child who is afflicted with the malady. Nor can he treat the diagnosis as though he has spelled the end of a normal lifestyle for this frightened adolescent. It is important for educators to note that the process which is undertaken in order to get to this step, the ultimate diagnosis of the disorder, must be recognized, internalized, and practiced on a regular basis in order to avoid unfortunate misdiagnosis.

The student who stands on his desk and yells mild obscenities at the top of his lungs will not only gain laughs from his classmates, but will most likely enjoy a trip to the school counselor. Should he appear restless and frustrated as his problems are probed, the counselor will suggest further examination. Eventually, ADD, Attention Deficit Disorder could become the prognosis, and Ritalin the drug of choice for overcoming this unfortunate scenario. And perhaps Ritalin does not work and the school performance continues to falter, then another trip to the physician and another diagnosis, yet a complete absence of alternate thinking regarding the disability is present at this time. The poor spelling and scribbled essays are completely forgotten in exchange for a reprise from destructive and irascible behavior. It is the failure of the teacher to note the extreme inability to read aloud in front of the class and realize that the reaction to his embarrassment is the disruptive nature for which they are medicating.

An ability to recognize, diagnose with accuracy, and utilize trained teaching abilities to inspire change and growth are qualities that are lacking in many of today’s teachers. It’s not a failure of their intelligence by any means, nor is it the training they have received; it is that there are simply too many variables from which to accurately diagnose learning disabilities in children.

Experience, coupled with comprehension of relevant learning categories is essential to proper dyslexic diagnosis.

1. Family and heredity, as stated before, is essential to understanding the child’s genetic makeup. If there is a history of dyslexia within the family, closer attention can be paid to specific traits which are associated with the disorder than if there were not such congruence.
2. Language skills are additionally a priority, as these abilities are essentially the area in question when formulating a diagnosis. Evaluation of comprehension, word identification, pronunciation and word retrieval are only a few of the basic categories from which to test a child.
3. Reading, aloud and silently should also be tested. Listening to the child and analyzing particular word confusion, in addition to pronunciation issues will allow for important data to be drawn. Additionally, querying the child regarding reading comprehension can give insight into how the child processes the information they are taking in.
4. Spelling and writing are essential as well. Looking for obviously inverted spelling in addition to word mirroring can be essential to the appropriate diagnosis.
5. Handwriting as well becomes a necessary category from which to draw conclusions. Letter formation, balance of lines, spaces, paper alignment, all are paramount to proper evaluation.
6. Memory becomes a category for study, as all time frames should be probed, from long to short term, in addition to visual memory.

It is through the mastery of evaluation of these categories, as well as experience with the basic psychology relevant to children of this age and proclivity, that will enable the educator or evaluator to appropriately diagnose and if all else fails, point the student towards the correct diagnosis and treatment center.

Phonological Instruction

The previously discussed phonological failure contributing to dyslexia warrants a structured approach to therapy and instruction. Nearly unanimously, researchers agree that proper phonological instruction is a priority for all school children, and even more necessitated with children diagnosed with dyslexia. “The general findings suggest that early and direct teaching of sound-symbol relationships produces better decoding skills than later and less explicit phonics instruction (Clark, 83).”^[16]

Synthetic Phonics Instruction

In this approach to phonological instruction, a specific phoneme is separated and taught to the child prior to blending or inclusion in syllables or entire words. ie. /ph/ is inscribed on cue cards where the student learns to recognize an image of a phone through sight in addition to phoneme. Once this process has been appropriately completed and the student exhibits repeatable comprehension of the relationship, the phoneme is synthesized within words with letters that are already known so that the child may read them. Synthetic relationships are in this way established between objects, letters, and phoneme.

Intrinsic Phonics Instruction

As suggested by its title, this form of phonetic instruction utilizes complete words, beginning with those that are most often already known to the children. The patients are then encouraged to draw relationships between the letters, practicing phoneme and letter relationship at one time rather than learning segments and then grouping them to create words.

One program which has successfully adopted the Synthetic Phonetic approach to dyslexic instruction was initiated by the wife and co-scientist of Samuel Orton in collaboration with her partner Anna Gillingham in 1960. The approach was summarized through the following distinguishing features:

1. It is a direct approach to the study of phonics, presenting the sounds of the phonograms orally as separate units and then teaching the process of blending them into syllables and words.
2. It is an integrated, total language approach. Each unit and sequence is established through hearing, speaking, seeing, writing it. Auditory, visual and kinesthetic patterns reinforce each other and this also provides for individual differences among the students. It is a circular, multi-sensory process
3. It is a systematic, step-by-step approach proceeding from the simpler to the more complex in orderly progression in an upward spiral of language development.^[17]

A converse program has identified the Intrinsic phonics instruction as a useful tool in improving phonetics in children. This program entitled “The Glass Analysis for Decoding Only method was developed by Gerald and Esther Glass in 1976.”^[18] As stated above, the Intrinsic instruction relies on phonemes being distinguished and recognized within the words themselves. A word is held up on a card and children are instructed to separate which letters make up a particular phoneme. Conversely to the Orton-Gillingham approach, teachers are instructed to work as quickly as possible which is important for “habituating decoding patterns.”^[19]

In extreme cases such as dyslexia, the ability to extract or simply comprehend the phoneme and visually relate that sound to its image or word structure proves more difficult. Therefore, utilization of Synthetic Instruction is most often recommended over the Intrinsic Instruction, as the intense reading and focus on word identification which is required by this technique proves highly difficult for dyslexic students. While research into both ideologies has yielded results in particular cases, the overwhelming success with the Synthetic Instruction Method mandates priority utilization.

IQ—You’ve Had Your Run

One highly regarded, yet highly controversial mechanism for measuring the relative intelligence, and therefore potential deficiencies in children, is the IQ (Intelligence Quotient) examination. This test is formulated in a way in which all students who are examined will be ranked based upon intelligence level in a variety of different categories. “Most definitions of dyslexia refer to a discrepancy between observed and expected achievement. The expected achievement is usually based on the pupil’s IQ.”^[20] An examination of intelligence provides the basis of further dyslexia examination, as it offers a representative slice of a similar population. IQ testing itself, however, is much debated in the field of psychology as it offers a time specific representation of the child’s intelligence at that particular moment. “At their best, IQ test scores are gross measures of current cognitive functioning.”^[21] They represent the status of a potentially disabled child who has not been diagnosed due to lack of testing or proper testing criteria.

There are also no socioeconomic stratifications which influence the decided score of the examination. “For minority students, cognitive measures such as IQ have been divisive procedures, preventing a focus on many of the more significant problems that educators must address to provide equivalent education for students of all economic, linguistic, and cultural groups.” ^[22] In many instances, grouping minorities into one IQ subcategory allows educators to look the other way as improper opportunities for the necessary education are being denied to less financially affluent groups. In this way, utilizing a single test factor such as IQ, a minority of similar circumstance becomes one subject matter as opposed to the individual strengths and successes of its people.

To utilize the IQ examination in order to determine potential dyslexics, evaluators must first define what the expected reading ability of the children tested should be. By exploring where children fall relative to the average in this initial test, it can be initially determined which children could potentially have the largest negative variance and warrant further investigation. Following this examination, a general intelligence, or IQ test should be administered to all children who were initially studied in order to determine the median intelligence levels and identify whether the students with poor reading abilities also have intelligence problems as well. Dyslexia, as stated before is a disability not functioning in tandem with intelligence, it is simply an inability to process aspects of language that unaffected children are able to do naturally. The variable reading examinations much more accurately determine which children are deficient in phonological and visual processing capabilities. Therefore, IQ cannot be the major indicator of dyslexia, it can simply function as a grouping mechanism by which to create median guidelines for dyslexic definition. “In short we have been basing educational classification systems in reading disabilities on special claims of unique potential that are not psychometrically justifiable.”^[23] It is improbable that a student at age three who is given an IQ test while in the midst of a parental separation would score the same as at age five when his household was stable and functioning rationally. IQ is an unfortunate basis point from which only further scientific data and RTI can help dyslexics escape.

RTI—Welcome to the Fold

Response to intervention “is not an alternative approach to accessing special education services, but rather only one of the criteria used in the identification process.”^[24] RTI is currently the most highly regarded possibility as a replacement to IQ testing. Conversely to IQ, RTI utilizes a preventative technique to ensure that there is no “wait to fail” guideline for students. RTI is currently being established in schools as a supplement with hopes that future legislation will allow for its solidification. The idea that a student will no longer have to wait until a standardized evaluation to know whether or not they are dyslexic is refreshing and an exciting modification of an antiquated field.

RTI works through school and government support, in addition to parental comprehension and training. RTI allows for the possibility of determining a specific learning disability at an early enough age to possibly aid in its subversion in the future. While dyslexic students will not be cured through this process, they will have more of an opportunity to be recognized prior to a time frame where treatment becomes more difficult. Parents could be immediately contacted when particular tests show discrepancies between the median student base and their child. The ability of a young mind to learn and assimilate data is much more significant than those that have had time to age and learn poor habits. With RTI, “a student with LD is identified as one who has unexpected difficulty learning and the discrepancy is measured relative to the expectation that most students can learn if quality instruction is provided.”^[25]

The guideline of Quality Instruction relates directly to the curriculum and faculty of the school which the student attends. In order to ensure RTI compliance, the school must be providing every student a similar opportunity to have quality instruction. This means that regardless of race or socioeconomic status, that all students will receive the same educational opportunities. If a student does not respond to those opportunities, continued testing is administered based on their performance relative to other students. Should the variance become a concern, the school is mandated to contact parents in order to ensure that every opportunity is give for the student to receive assistance. Outside learning assistance following this guideline allows for the student to potentially catch up to the remainder of his class. With the IQ testing format, the intelligence deficit, or potentially the lack of equitable instruction will not be determined until after the child has been evaluated and compared with his peers. This means that time has already passed during which he has potentially fallen behind, and perhaps into an at risk state.

A secondary goal of RTI in addition to early diagnosis is to “reduce inappropriate referral and identification.”^[26] The seriousness of an incorrect diagnosis is far reaching, even so much as to affect the future well being of the child. The ability to quickly step in after standardized evaluations determine a potential at risk situation and inform and educate the parents as to opportunities for treatment can support and nurture the normalcy and educational success of a child. It is paramount that the educator be able to recognize signs of digression from a classroom as soon as possible, and with standardized tools, be able to determine what further testing needs to be initiated.

Chapter Three

The cards with pictures on them far from his mind as he sits among his peers, the student feels eyes probing as his pencil scratches across the lines of the page. His essay is about a journey and a young man’s determination, but the words are struggling to flow onto the page. His teacher pauses, sees the angst in his eyes, and leans down to whisper the next word in his ear. He is writing. He is overcoming.

Introduction

This third, and final chapter, will address the specific educational concerns relative to dyslexic children and the educational systems in force today. Additionally, it will address many of the underlying psychological issues brought on by dyslexia and propose effective tactics by which to navigate this emotional disorder.

I Read dab—I’m Dyslexic

A natural reaction to a disorder such as dyslexia is a decrease in self esteem. This negative self image is significantly amplified if the surrounding peers, teachers, and parents treat the individual as though he is different, or as though the disorder made him something other than what he was before. Poor academic performance, rebellion, lack of interpersonal skills can all stem from a negative self image. Positive reinforcement, specifically from the core group of familial representatives is essential to helping a dyslexic student overcome the negative connotation associated with a disorder that is oftentimes misunderstood.

Teachers, as a rule, must learn a great deal of nurturing behavior in order to inspire and affect the futures of their students. With a dyslexic student, this path is the same; it simply branches into more specific areas of focus. It is essential that the student is encouraged. This means that their successes and failures are viewed as steps or stages which take him in the right direction. Failures must be identified as areas of opportunity and future study emphasis. In this way, the teacher will acknowledge the effort, monitor the growth, and inspire the student to focus their efforts on learning those things which come more difficultly. Additionally, compassion or empathy which is “defined as being able to appreciate the thoughts, feelings, emotions, and experiences of another person, and can be developed through trying to understand the feelings behind a person’s words,” must be offered in a consistent and genuine fashion.^[27] This alliance with the student creates a bond on which the student can feel confident and motivated. These essential behaviors for teachers will enable a strengthened relationship which assists in growing the self-esteem and image of a dyslexic student.

A more difficult realm of self-image to monitor and gauge are the peer-to-peer relationships that the student experiences in school. Should he feel bullied, threatened, or mistreated because of his disability, there is likely to be a significant decrease in self-esteem, and along with it, other difficulties with acceptance and motivation. It is essential that the student is encouraged to ally himself with educated, non-judgmental peers and as educators, that school bodies and teachers ensure this environment through a variety of facets, including peer watch groups and peer-peer counseling.^[28]

Garden Variety Versus Dyslexic—You Be the Judge

As though it were not difficult enough for educators to define a dyslexic individual, there is another group of language challenged individuals who continue to complicate the mixture. As discussed in the previous section on IQ, Dyslexia is not characterized by a substantial variance in intelligence from the median. There is, however, a group of readers who may but not always exhibit both poor reading abilities and intellectual deficits. “Investigations have demonstrated that it is often difficult to differentiate discrepancy-defined dyslexic readers from garden-variety poor readers.”^[29] It is through rigorous testing in addition to repeated observation that one can discern the main differences between these two very unique categories. A garden-variety poor reader is simply a student who has difficulty with reading comprehension, and sometimes visual acumen. Defining the cause of this inability to perform is essential to encouraging that child’s development, as it is with dyslexia. The difference, however, is that the reading abilities which are not currently functioning to their full potential are completely trainable. Identification, however, is the first step towards the dedication and commitment that will be required in order to accomplish the transition from poor reader to proficient.

Sometimes in children, the explanation for the variance is the most difficult task. Correction is simply the preset stages one must go through in order to resolve the apparent issue once it has been determined. With Garden-Variety poor readers, other possibilities exist than simply an inability to read. There may be some visual impairment, which again is not a common trait of dyslexia. Additionally, there may be another form of mental disruption (i.e. Attention Deficit Disorder) which is keeping the student from executing to their full potential. It is the realization, proper diagnosis, and rehabilitation tactics which will offer the greatest support to the deficient student.

When IQ tests are utilized in order to separate and define the levels of performance among a group of children, “research has demonstrated how surprisingly difficult it is to demonstrate cognitive differences among poor readers of differing IQ’s.”^[30] In the end it is not the intelligence factor which determines separation of similarly grouped students, it is the reading ability when factored into phonological processing and reading comprehension. These determining factors make identification of garden variety poor readers even more difficult, yet through proper analysis and utilization of the RTI guidelines, differentiation is eventually possible.

A study which was carried out with both dyslexic students and non-dyslexic students called the garden-variety control design. “The inferences drawn are relatively straightforward. If the two groups’ reading subskill profiles do not match, this is at least consistent with the assumption that they arrive at their similar reading levels via different routs. In contrast, if the two group’s reading subskill profiles are identical, this would undermine the rationale for different educational treatment of dyslexic children.”^[31] The most intriguing factor of this study is that the undermining of the educational treatment does not occur for the garden variety reader due to a lower IQ, and per the accepted definition of dyslexia, IQ cannot be a factor. Yet, there is no thought to a necessitated grouping of the garden variety reader with the dyslexic category due to this discrepancy. Therefore, a student with severe reading disorder is placed back into a normal classroom without any form of special attention or instruction. The dyslexic, on the other hand, is also returned, but with a demarcation which requires specific training, reasonable accommodations, and more one on one time with the instructor. Again, the IQ method is failing the educational system as garden variety students clamor for a necessitated form of additional reading instruction.

British Schools—Trendsetter or Reactionaries

It is the goal of every government to see the success of their people through education, prosperity, and a general sense of peace and well-being. Similarly, it is the goal and objective of the regulators of international school systems to encourage the same objectives within their districts. In England currently, the British Dyslexia Association (BDA) has been working closely with Department for Education and Skills (DfES) in order to determine the current standards for equitable education of dyslexic students in the school system. This research and modification initiative began with first defining dyslexia with the assistance of the British Psychological Society (BPS) in 1999. They decided that “Dyslexia is evident when accurate and fluent word reading and/or spelling develops very incompetently or with great difficulty.”^[32] After further research into the overall educational status of the British population, it was determined that in relation to international competitors, schools were severely lacking in reading comprehension.

Renewed vigor into a literacy program brought emphasis on phonological awareness and additional focus on intensified reading programs. Through this procedural modification, it became much easier to identify those children who were not making as significant progress in their reading/writing comprehension as the other students. As discussed before, one form of identification of language disorders is response to intervention, and in essence, with the addition of new literacy guidelines, the British were invoking a form of intervention which enabled for more significant identification of potential dyslexics.

A study performed in 2001 regarding the reading progress of dyslexic children in the United Kingdom was “disappointing, with most children making just over 6 months progress for each year of additional support and with only 13 % making progress toward catching up with their peers.”^[33] Further exploration of the British approach at this time to dyslexia revealed a method of diagnosis similar to IQ testing in which students were basically educated until they failed and then diagnosed as dyslexic based on further study and identification. No preemptive planning was in place and there was a severe lacking in dyslexic nurturing in UK schools.

“The British Dyslexia Association has since created a dyslexia friendly school resource pack. The BDA conception for a dyslexia friendly school is based on an interactional model that specifies both targeted interventions to address basic processing difficulties and more systematic environmental changes to address the barriers and negative feedback often facing students with dyslexia in the classroom.”^[34] This improved approach towards educating teachers and administrators has begun to influence and create the ‘dyslexia friendly environment’ within the British school system. The revised initiative includes educating teachers, partnering with parents, preparing the effective classroom environment, and encouragement of students. Similar to RTI, preventative approaches are being taken in order to identify dyslexia or reading disabilities in an earlier time frame than previously utilized.

The maintenance of these programs, in addition to future mandatory guidelines for schools to follow will assist Great Britain in becoming a leading supporter of dyslexia friendly environments. Changes are being made annually as new data becomes available. Currently, in an effort to improve the self esteem of dyslexic children they are being placed “in the set or ability/learning group in school commensurate with their intellectual abilities rather than on the basis of their literacy levels.”^[35] Additionally, school officials are recognizing that dyslexia friendly does not only affect those with learning disabilities. By creating an environment that nurtures the unique learning qualities of all students, eventual excellence and growth will be seen.

Necessitated Nurturing in Primary Students

To nurture the need becomes a primary question when evaluating the home environment of the dyslexic student. After diagnosis, a multiple phase shift can oftentimes be seen in not only the parent/child relationship, but the living habits as well. The re-interpretation of a disability into a psychologically influential disorder often stems from the parental fear of failure or disappointment for their child. There is a shift in dynamic at this point where education, reading, writing, and speech become second in the parents’ minds behind the increased emphasis on self-worth, self-respect, pride, and coping.

Students requiring specific home interactions, including much of the education that they will receive from their educational institution, will now find parents psychologically armed to dismiss the disability in exchange for creative counseling. “Parents of children with disabilities also did not place a high priority on the development of reading and writing skills, as they reported greater concern with the development of self-help and communication skills.”^[36] The parents deem emotional growth more important in this frameset and focus tactics on supporting the strengths and happiness of their child.

In studies which have been conducted with a variety of socioeconomic classes in addition to a variety of races and ages, oftentimes it is the literary climate of the home which determines the reading ability and proficiency of the child. Therefore, if the parents encourage reading through inclusion, through example, and through provision of appropriate materials, children exhibit much more successful characteristics in their performance at school. Interesting to note as well that socioeconomic status also plays a role in the successful outcome of students in reading examinations. Lower to working class families show lesser degrees of reading comprehension than those of more affluent classes. Perhaps time or ongoing parental education are underlying factors for these failures, as children of similar age but living at a higher socioeconomic status excel more in reading ability.

Due to a lack of evaluation material, students with dyslexia or any form of reading disability have not been evaluated as much as the general population. Those evaluations that have been conducted, however find that while child home literacy experiences did not account for a significant amount of variance, parent home literary experiences did.^[37] Therefore, the children with learning disabilities found their parent’s reading habits and literary experiences to be an effective framework for their own inspiration at school. Their success, while stunted in their own literacy experience due to their disability was defined by the environment created by their parent. Therefore, parents interested in improving the child’s reading abilities would provide a nurturing home environment with a variety of reading experiences, from parented directed reading-aloud to child directed individual time of study.

Essential in this and future studies of dyslexia is the parental support of not only the reading environment in the home, but the encouragement of success in overcoming the reading disability. This means that parents, as well as educators are directly responsible for the future success of their dyslexic children. Frustration and fatigue are underlying factors which will no doubt strike at inopportune moments, but it is the nurturing of the disability through a supportive home environment which will enable dyslexic students to excel at linguistic growth.

Training to Teach

With renewed fervor regarding educational excellence and equitability, it is the role of the teacher to continue his own personal education in relation to new theories, field studies, and government regulations. This educational responsibility falls into the hands of those who are motivated to motivate others, and in order to successfully assume this role, it is the introspection as well as determined research which will continue to make for effective teachers.

Governments place their own objectives into play. In the USA, the “No Child Left Behind” panel is determined to inspire success among schools with failure in achievement of goals bringing a decrease in funding or closure of the school. The determined educator should know that “improved instruction and reducing the achievement gaps should be primary goals in general and special education.”^[38] Those who fail in these guidelines should not be allowed the responsibility of teaching the future leaders of the world.

In regards to dyslexic education, lack of understanding of the specific characteristics of the disorder or tools from which to arm oneself to persevere and teach can lead to frustration and a sense of failure. Dyslexic students require individualized attention in addition to constant affirmation of their growth and abilities. They will probe for explanations to those things which they do not fully understand and require additional tutoring if the lesson is still not learned after re-explanation. They need a balanced, even-keel instructor who will not berate them for failure. And of high importance is the desire to remain similar, to blend into the group and to not be embarrassed or humiliated for their disorder.

Teachers have a direct responsibility for their own personal education in relation to this disorder, and seeking out the most recent studies and government information is one proactive way to support their disabled students. Additionally, regular conferences with parents in order to evaluate home situations and lifestyles will help to better understand the student’s in-class dynamic.

Conclusion

Dyslexia is a challenging and frightening disorder with powerful ramifications upon diagnosis. It is a tribute to the fragility of the human mind and a unique aptitude waiting to be unlocked. And above all it is an affectation which can maim and incapacitate those children who are not recognized in a timely fashion. Dyslexia is a lifelong struggle which can be nothing more than a daily routine such as tying shoes or getting dressed. Conversely, it can be a monster, a beast which makes a person different from his friends, that is characterized by traits such as laziness and sloth which will often fall from uneducated lips. This learning disorder is truly that it is a disorder which must be learned. Scientists continue to wrest the truth from the dyslexic psyche, seeking the chromosome or cerebral pinpoint which could end frustration for millions of individuals. Above all it must be respected, addressed, and challenged in a manner that supports the effective education of those children afflicted. It is their life which is determined by the pro-active teacher with a little bit more knowledge than the rest. And it is their perseverance which will overcome debilitation to invoke uniquely educated success.

Bibliography

Alm, Jan. “Dyslexia: Relevance of Concepts, Validity of Measurements, and Cognitive Functions.” ACTA Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala, 2004.

Baker, Elise & McLeod, Sharynne. “Evidence-Based Management of Phonological Impairment in Children.” Child Language Teaching & Therapy. Vol. 20, No. 3, 2004.

Kavale, Kenneth A. “Identifying Specific Learning Disability: Is Responsiveness to Intervention the Answer?” Journal of Learning Disabilities. Vol. 38, No. 6, 2005.

Baumer, Bernice H. How to Teach Your Dyslexic Child to Read: A Proven Method for Parents & Teachers. Toronto, Ontario: Carol Publishing Group Edition, 1998.

Bishop, Dorothy V.M. “Dyslexia: What’s The Problem?” The Authors. Journal Compilations. Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006.

Bishop, Dorothy V.M. & Snowling, Margaret J. “Developmental Dyslexia and Specific Language Impairment: Same or Different?” Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 130, No. 6, 2004.

Chinn, Stephen & Ashcroft, Richard. Mathematics for Dyslexics: A Teaching Handbook. San Diego, California: Singular Publishing Group, Inc., 1993.

Clark, Diana Brewster & Uhry, Joanna Kellog. Dyslexia: Theory & Practice of Remedial Instruction. Baltimore, Maryland: York Press, Inc., 1995.

Davis, Ronald D. The Gift of Dyslexia: Why Some of the Smartest People Can’t Read and How They Can Learn. New York, New York: The Berkley Publishing Group, 1994.

Dorman, Casey. “Commentary: Defining and Diagnosing Dyslexia: Are We Putting the Cart Before the Hose?” Reading Research Quarterly. Vol. 20, No. 4, 1985.

Fletcher, Jack M.; Coulter, Alan W.; Reschly, Daniel J.; Vaughn, Sharon. “Alternative Approaches to the Definition and Identification of Learning Disabilities: Some Questions & Answers.” Annals of Dyslexia. Vol. 52, No. 2, 2004.

Glass, G.G., and Glass, E.W. Glass Analysis for Decoding Only: Teachers Guide. Garden City, NY: Easier to Learn, 1976.

Gibbs, Simon. “The Interaction of Vocabulary and Short-Term Memory in Predicting Phonological Awareness: A Comparison of Dyslexic and Non-Dyslexic Children.&rdqu