Return-Path: <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fA9FQg029606; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:26:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:26:42 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3BEBF512.17A321A6@ellijay.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Art LaChance <arthur@ellijay.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-LD:3754] Phonics again X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) Status: O Content-Length: 5658 Lines: 103 Clif Willard and ... Clif, I'm still working with the thought that those with reading dysfunction can't hear the sounds of the consonants or vowels. >From one perspective it would seem that if a person is unable to hear the sounds then they would not be able to reproduce them so expressive language would reflect that. We know that children who have repetitive ear infections during the period of early language development when the brain is establishing an early reference system for receptive and expressive communication develop slurring or some other indication that they stored inaccurate patterns. And we also know that in most instances speech therapy helps to rectify most of this, the success of which I think is dependent on age. >From another perspective it would seem that if a child is taught early language decoding skills inaccurately or ineffectively that they may integrate a reference system that would indeed significantly confuse the issue. My experience with LD children, many of whom were average or above average intelligence, tells me that they may learn so efficiently that they learn the mistakes as well as they learn the accurate stuff, and in some instances make up their own versions. I've seen this clearly many times in the processes of math, which because of the step by step processes is fairly easy to identify, but it also tells me that the same effect may occur in the language decoding processes, especially if there is no backup system in place to indicate that in fact the child "knows" the appropriate methodology. Once the reference system is in place it's like engraved in concrete, and therefore difficult to change. >From experience in the rehab field it was apparent to me on many occasions that the power of the "Professional" who tells a 7 year old child and his marginally literate family, (or any family group who has limited knowledge of the factors involved) "This child has a reading 'disability'", is exceptionally strong. It focuses on the negative and instills limitations that may or may not be present, nonetheless the child will manifest that limitation, and the family will reinforce the thought - very powerful. I did a small practitioner level research project a couple of years ago with UGA guidance, in which my "burning question" involved finding out how many adult students had experienced an early life head injury that could have affected their academic progress, much as what had happened to me. Well maybe 10% of that group had a head injury but only 1 of them may have had any real influence on learning processes. What "emerged" from the data however was that every one of the initial 15, and several several more since then, indicated significant emotional disruption during early school years. Common and varied occurrences in most lives; divorce, death of loved one, embarrassment in class, family moving and shifting schools (not necessarily an emotional factor but when combined with unstable family ....), and a few other fairly common situations. What appeared to occur was that for a short period of time the child lost focus on the importance of classroom information delivery and focused instead on the higher powered emotional preoccupation. The result was inaccurate intake and integration of basic evaluation and processing factors involved in establishment of reading, language, and math. And once again instilled at an early point in brain function development and exceptionally difficult to override or change, due primarily to the build-up of neural networks over time surrounding those particular reference bases. In a discussion yesterday with a coworker we discussed how Helen Keller was able to establish, over time, a communication system that permitted her to interact with the environment quite successfully although she had no visual or auditory capabilities. OK I don't know what the "grade levels" involved were or how really successful she was but it stands that she was able to develop an effective "language" via symbology that she could "read" and "express". I guess my point here is that although we may be able to confer with others regarding similar symptomatology the possibilities that arise are just too numerous and varied for me to draw solid conclusions regarding a "Disability" and/or to reinforce somebody's thoughts that they "Can't do". I've seen way too much magic happen in situations where a client or student came out the other side of the darkness to believe that our current system of analyzing the student to determine what's wrong with them is accurate, efficient, or effective. That's not to say that it will not be difficult or painful, it will, but in most cases it can be done. Everything changes. IF we guide the change consistently we get closer and closer to the goal. Knowing what to address to make the change is my goal. Although, I have worked with folks of all ages whose path to the goal was littered with impossibilities, to the point that attempting to improve 'reading' or 'math' was way down the list of survival skills that needed to be addressed first. I really would like to hear other's interpretations of what they see in their adult students, and how this may compare or not to our current school house processes. Unfortunately, one of the other factors we have to consider is that our adult literacy providers are actually only serving approximately 10% of those who could use that path to improve their lives. That alone tells me that what's hidden in the other 90% may be where we need to go to find the answer. Best, Art Art LaChance Gilmer Learning Center Ellijay, GA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:28:04 EST