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 g0D7N2022408; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 02:23:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 02:23:02 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020113011106.00a409c0@mail> 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: clifwillard <clifwillard@home.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-LD:3823] RE: NIFL-LD:3810 NO Support for phonetic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: multipart/alternative; X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 --=====================_27111029==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Art, What you say sounds very good but the facts do not support you. To begin with, there is no correlation between acquired language disabilities and genetic language disabilities. They have different origins. You simply cannot equate one with the other. The same is true for ADHD. Your experience is that of a person who recovered from a head injury. Brain damage and injury is a completely different ball game and has nothing what so ever to do with genetic language disabilities. There is absolutely no correlation and absolutely no support for the generalizing that you are doing. Clearly you understand the process of rehabilitation from a TBI but clearly you do not have any understanding of the general population of language disabled who are for the most part were born with the disability. Further, there is no evidence that the person with a language disability has any brain damage at all. There is nothing broken or damaged, it is a timing error. The emotional difficulties a person develops is a result of others not understanding their disability can be profound and life long. You state that you have a masters in Rehab Counseling. I teach in a graduate Rehab counseling program and have spent many years training Rehab counselors. There is nothing in the curriculum that qualifies you to be diagnosing and treating emotional and mental disorders. You are not licensed by any state board nor does your CRC qualify or certify you to diagnose and treat emotional problems and you doing so is a violation of your ethical responsibilities. There is a reason why people must complete programs, internships, years of supervision, and pass state licensing exams to diagnose and treat mental and emotional disorders. According to you, you do not have that training and your comments reflect that. "I've just seen far too many children and adults make complete turnarounds from those conditions and resume normal functioning parameters in "learning" with quite a number of those surpassing their peers in measured reading capability." I have seen this too, but NOT when the person was born with the reading disability. You are confusing rehabilitation from a TBI with a genetic language disability. "Therefore I simply refuse to administer a limiting prognosis to ANY human being regardless of their condition or capability..." That is exactly what you are doing and what I was referring to in my response to Lucille. You are telling people that if they do what you say, they will be able to read as a person without a reading disability. You are therefore placing that person under constant unrealistic expectations. This is the definition of emotional abuse. You are severely limiting their access to education and all that education and higher education would offer them. You are limiting them to a world of ignorance and feelings of not being smart enough to learn to "read like everybody else." You are denying these folks who come to you for help a choice. Third is professional influence. Negative professional influence can and does quite often set up a system of self defeating thought processing on the part of the child and the parent(s) and ultimately may become the most daunting to overcome. You are in fact that very negative influence. Your complete disregard for the facts creates an atmosphere of failure and negative self esteem. You have no right to do that to anyone. You have done an admirable job of recovering from you TBI but because you project your circumstances onto all others with language disabilities, you are denying them the very opportunities you were given. To accept their disability and make decisions that minimize the amount they are disabled by that disability. The facts do not support your very misguided beliefs. Your comments below reflect a complete lack of understanding of these disabilities and the various methods of resolving them. You also demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the emotional difficulties and the appropriate methods for resolving those difficulties. You might want to take a look at the facts. You also chose not answered my questions at the end of my response to Lucille. So I will ask you directly. What criteria do you use to determine what program to purchase and use with your clients? What are the criteria that you use to measure your results? How do you define a good result? If phonetic awareness is the cause, than why does progress in reading using these OG+ methods stop at the fifth grade? What do you tell someone when they get stuck in at the fifth grade level and cannot go any further? Why do you think the Recording for the Blind changed their name to the Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic???? Why are so many students with reading disabilities using books on tape and computers to access printed language. These are college and university students and they cannot read above a 5th grade level. They are however graduating and completing Ph.,D. programs as well. Why would you knowingly deny your clients and children that same opportunity? What gives you the right to to that? Most have had remediation and years of trying to learn how to read. They finally accept that they cannot and get on with getting on. This obsession with a fantasy that you can teach a person with a reading disability to read as a person without a reading disability is ignorant. You should be commended for your rehabilitation but your recovery has little or nothing to do with those with a genetic language disability and there is no information anywhere that says otherwise. Think what you could be giving your clients if you opened your eyes, got outside yourself, and started paying attention to your clients. I do not mean to be harsh but platitudes simply do not cut it. I don't believe in LD, ADD, ADHD, as PERMANENT situations. This is utter nonsense. It is this attitude that creates the failures and emotional problems, and is the biggest problem of all. You could not have improved your condition if you did not accept that you had a TBI. Yet you deny others the opportunity to accept their disabilities and disabilities. Instead you call them something else and therefore prevent them from accepting their disabilities and learning to deal with them. It is not helping someone to relegate them to pushing a broom because of a reading disability when they might otherwise complete a college education and possibly a graduate degree. This is what is happening though and with complete disregard for your clients and the facts. You have to ask, are you rehabilitating or disabling???? BTW What are the statistics on results for adult literacy programs? How many learn to read on a level with their IQ and achievement in other areas? How many leave Adult Literacy and complete college educations having learned how to read?? How many do not complete their education because they cannot be competitive academically due to a reading deficit?? How many with reading disabilities who come to Adult Literacy programs could complete their educations and get on with succeeding if Adult Literacy programs taught accommodations, rights under 504 and ADA, self-advocacy, and the use of technology to accommodate their disability so thay were not disabled by the disability??? You might ask, "Who has the disability? Your clients or you? Clif Willard symptoms and At 04:00 PM 1/9/02 -0500, you wrote: >This is actually a response to Clif Willard's response to Lucille >Cuttler's post which focused on her 14 yr old son, and can be referenced >in the nifl archives. > >Clif. > >I believe "Phonetics" and it's effects on reading capability is directly >related to several factors that are not connected to curriculum and >which further are not considered in any "research" that I'm aware of and >frankly I simply gave up trying to interpret current "research" and/or >apply such to my practice when I found that little of what was reported >as scientific fact actually held true in most situations. > >Of the several factors that I've noted as participants one is >motivation. Motivation can be and often is undermined by negative >emotions. Where "learning" is concerned the negative emotions are >usually set in place in the early school years when the child discovers >that his lack of progress (for whatever reason) results in embarrassment >and emotional pain. >The resultant is that the child avoids returning to that environment. >And I mean "avoids". One way or the other the child will not >participate in an environment that is emotionally painful. If we MUST >physically attend the environment then the possibility that the child >will mentally remove him/herself is extremely likely. You may find >evidence of mental distraction specifically in the diagnostic criteria >for ADD and ADHD. > >Second (not in any order) is repetetion. If the necessary mental skill >repetetion doesn't occur to a degree that permits strong neural pathway >development then short term memory outlives it's usefulness and the >brain never incorporates the new information as anything usable nor does >it get transferred into long term memory where it may be used in the >evaluation or decoding processes involved in 'reading'. > >Third is professional influence. Negative professional influence can >and does quite often set up a system of self defeating thought >processing on the part of the child and the parent(s) and ultimately may >become the most daunting to overcome. Many many times professional >reports follow the child into adult-hood. The quality of the >assessment, diagnosis, and narrative is totally dependent on the >capability of the assessor. And I think you might agree with me when I >say that we all don't see to eye on many aspects of human brain >functioning. > >Fourth is self concept. If a child believes him/herself to be "learning >inadaquate" as a result of "professional advice or diagnosis" or >significant-other influence (parents as an example), it will take 5 >times the work to disengage that pattern and open up or remove emotional >blackades to permit the "learning" sequences to begin. Self concept is >also tied directly to the first three factors mentioned here. One of >the primary reasons I address self-concept issues first as the highest >priority. > >"Curriculum" could be considered at this point if all other factors have >received remedy. And without a clear "understanding" of the decoding >processes for the language it is highly improbable that the student will >ever grow beyond his/her current level of expertise. The truth is that >to be able to decode any language you must "know" the code and have >better than a casual association with the skills involved. If you only >have a rudimentary understanding of the code, then you can only decode >at a rudimentary level. > >At age ten I lost the ability to express my thoughts verbally and in >writing as a direct result of a head injury, reading was also affected >but to a lesser degree. That was NO speech, NO writing, and minimal >reading. To bore you with the details of survival and reestablishment of >those skills would take more time than we have here. Nonetheless, I >learned to speak again fluently and to write fluently following better >than 30 years of less than adaquate language reception and expression. >As stated before in other posts, at age 43 I began working with the >disabled population in a rehab setting, earned a masters in rehab >counseling and then went on to adult literacy. I don't believe in LD, >ADD, ADHD, as PERMANENT situations. I've just seen far too many >children and adults make complete turnarounds from those conditions and >resume normal functioning parameters in "learning" with quite a number >of those surpassing their peers in measured reading capability. Nothing >is "black or white", fact is it's all gray and anything is possible. >Therefore I simply refuse to administer a limiting prognosis to ANY >human being regardless of their condition or capability (refer back to >factor # 3 and 4 above pls). > >Art > > >Art LaChance >Gilmer Learning Center >Ellijay, GA --=====================_27111029==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" <html> Art,<br><br> What you say sounds very good but the facts do not support you.<br><br> To begin with, there is no correlation between acquired language disabilities and genetic language disabilities. They have different origins. You simply cannot equate one with the other. The same is true for ADHD. Your experience is that of a person who recovered from a head injury. Brain damage and injury is a completely different ball game and has nothing what so ever to do with genetic language disabilities. There is absolutely no correlation and absolutely no support for the generalizing that you are doing. Clearly you understand the process of rehabilitation from a TBI but clearly you do not have any understanding of the general population of language disabled who are for the most part were born with the disability. Further, there is no evidence that the person with a language disability has any brain damage at all. There is nothing broken or damaged, it is a timing error. <br><br> The emotional difficulties a person develops is a result of others not understanding their disability can be profound and life long. You state that you have a masters in Rehab Counseling. I teach in a graduate Rehab counseling program and have spent many years training Rehab counselors. There is nothing in the curriculum that qualifies you to be diagnosing and treating emotional and mental disorders. You are not licensed by any state board nor does your CRC qualify or certify you to diagnose and treat emotional problems and you doing so is a violation of your ethical responsibilities. There is a reason why people must complete programs, internships, years of supervision, and pass state licensing exams to diagnose and treat mental and emotional disorders. According to you, you do not have that training and your comments reflect that. <br><br> "<b>I've just seen far too many children and adults make complete turnarounds from those conditions and resume normal functioning parameters in "learning" with quite a number of those surpassing their peers in measured reading capability.</b>"<br><br> I have seen this too, but NOT when the person was born with the reading disability. You are confusing rehabilitation from a TBI with a genetic language disability.<br><br> "<b>Therefore I simply refuse to administer a limiting prognosis to ANY human being regardless of their condition or capability..."<br><br> </b>That is exactly what you are doing and what I was referring to in my response to Lucille. You are telling people that if they do what you say, they will be able to read as a person without a reading disability. You are therefore placing that person under constant unrealistic expectations. This is the definition of emotional abuse. You are severely limiting their access to education and all that education and higher education would offer them. You are limiting them to a world of ignorance and feelings of not being smart enough to learn to "read like everybody else." You are denying these folks who come to you for help a choice. <br><br> <b>Third is professional influence. Negative professional influence can<br> and does quite often set up a system of self defeating thought<br> processing on the part of the child and the parent(s) and ultimately may<br> become the most daunting to overcome.<br><br> </b>You are in fact that very negative influence. Your complete disregard for the facts creates an atmosphere of failure and negative self esteem. <br> You have no right to do that to anyone. You have done an admirable job of recovering from you TBI but because you project your circumstances onto all others with language disabilities, you are denying them the very opportunities you were given. To accept their disability and make decisions that minimize the amount they are disabled by that disability. The facts do not support your very misguided beliefs.<br><br> Your comments below reflect a complete lack of understanding of these disabilities and the various methods of resolving them. You also demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the emotional difficulties and the appropriate methods for resolving those difficulties. <br><br> You might want to take a look at the facts. <br><br> You also chose not answered my questions at the end of my response to Lucille. So I will ask you directly.<br><br> What criteria do you use to determine what program to purchase and use with your clients?<br> What are the criteria that you use to measure your results?<br> How do you define a good result?<br> If phonetic awareness is the cause, than why does progress in reading using these OG+ methods stop at the fifth grade? <br> What do you tell someone when they get stuck in at the fifth grade level and cannot go any further?<br><br> Why do you think the Recording for the Blind changed their name to the Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic???? Why are so many students with reading disabilities using books on tape and computers to access printed language. These are college and university students and they cannot read above a 5th grade level. They are however graduating and completing Ph.,D. programs as well. Why would you knowingly deny your clients and children that same opportunity? What gives you the right to to that? Most have had remediation and years of trying to learn how to read. They finally accept that they cannot and get on with getting on. This obsession with a fantasy that you can teach a person with a reading disability to read as a person without a reading disability is ignorant. <br><br> You should be commended for your rehabilitation but your recovery has little or nothing to do with those with a genetic language disability and there is no information anywhere that says otherwise. Think what you could be giving your clients if you opened your eyes, got outside yourself, and started paying attention to your clients. <br><br> I do not mean to be harsh but platitudes simply do not cut it. <br><br> <b>I don't believe in LD, ADD, ADHD, as PERMANENT situations</b>. This is utter nonsense. It is this attitude that creates the failures and emotional problems, and is the biggest problem of all. You could not have improved your condition if you did not accept that you had a TBI. Yet you deny others the opportunity to accept their disabilities and disabilities. Instead you call them something else and therefore prevent them from accepting their disabilities and learning to deal with them. <br><br> It is not helping someone to relegate them to pushing a broom because of a reading disability when they might otherwise complete a college education and possibly a graduate degree. This is what is happening though and with complete disregard for your clients and the facts.<br><br> You have to ask, are you rehabilitating or disabling????<br><br> BTW What are the statistics on results for adult literacy programs? How many learn to read on a level with their IQ and achievement in other areas? How many leave Adult Literacy and complete college educations having learned how to read?? How many do not complete their education because they cannot be competitive academically due to a reading deficit?? How many with reading disabilities who come to Adult Literacy programs could complete their educations and get on with succeeding if Adult Literacy programs taught accommodations, rights under 504 and ADA, self-advocacy, and the use of technology to accommodate their disability so thay were not disabled by the disability??? You might ask, "Who has the disability? Your clients or you?<br> <br><br> Clif Willard<br><br> <br> symptoms and At 04:00 PM 1/9/02 -0500, you wrote:<br> <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>This is actually a response to Clif Willard's response to Lucille<br> Cuttler's post which focused on her 14 yr old son, and can be referenced<br> in the nifl archives.<br><br> Clif.<br><br> I believe "Phonetics" and it's effects on reading capability is directly<br> related to several factors that are not connected to curriculum and<br> which further are not considered in any "research" that I'm aware of and<br> frankly I simply gave up trying to interpret current "research" and/or<br> apply such to my practice when I found that little of what was reported<br> as scientific fact actually held true in most situations.<br><br> Of the several factors that I've noted as participants one is<br> motivation. Motivation can be and often is undermined by negative<br> emotions. Where "learning" is concerned the negative emotions are<br> usually set in place in the early school years when the child discovers<br> that his lack of progress (for whatever reason) results in embarrassment<br> and emotional pain.<br> The resultant is that the child avoids returning to that environment.<br> And I mean "avoids". One way or the other the child will not<br> participate in an environment that is emotionally painful. If we MUST<br> physically attend the environment then the possibility that the child<br> will mentally remove him/herself is extremely likely. You may find<br> evidence of mental distraction specifically in the diagnostic criteria<br> for ADD and ADHD.<br><br> Second (not in any order) is repetetion. If the necessary mental skill<br> repetetion doesn't occur to a degree that permits strong neural pathway<br> development then short term memory outlives it's usefulness and the<br> brain never incorporates the new information as anything usable nor does<br> it get transferred into long term memory where it may be used in the<br> evaluation or decoding processes involved in 'reading'.<br><br> Third is professional influence. Negative professional influence can<br> and does quite often set up a system of self defeating thought<br> processing on the part of the child and the parent(s) and ultimately may<br> become the most daunting to overcome. Many many times professional<br> reports follow the child into adult-hood. The quality of the<br> assessment, diagnosis, and narrative is totally dependent on the<br> capability of the assessor. And I think you might agree with me when I<br> say that we all don't see to eye on many aspects of human brain<br> functioning.<br><br> Fourth is self concept. If a child believes him/herself to be "learning<br> inadaquate" as a result of "professional advice or diagnosis" or<br> significant-other influence (parents as an example), it will take 5<br> times the work to disengage that pattern and open up or remove emotional<br> blackades to permit the "learning" sequences to begin. Self concept is<br> also tied directly to the first three factors mentioned here. One of<br> the primary reasons I address self-concept issues first as the highest<br> priority.<br><br> "Curriculum" could be considered at this point if all other factors have<br> received remedy. And without a clear "understanding" of the decoding<br> processes for the language it is highly improbable that the student will<br> ever grow beyond his/her current level of expertise. The truth is that<br> to be able to decode any language you must "know" the code and have<br> better than a casual association with the skills involved. If you only<br> have a rudimentary understanding of the code, then you can only decode<br> at a rudimentary level.<br><br> At age ten I lost the ability to express my thoughts verbally and in<br> writing as a direct result of a head injury, reading was also affected<br> but to a lesser degree. That was NO speech, NO writing, and minimal<br> reading. To bore you with the details of survival and reestablishment of<br> those skills would take more time than we have here. Nonetheless, I<br> learned to speak again fluently and to write fluently following better<br> than 30 years of less than adaquate language reception and expression.<br> As stated before in other posts, at age 43 I began working with the<br> disabled population in a rehab setting, earned a masters in rehab<br> counseling and then went on to adult literacy. I don't believe in LD,<br> ADD, ADHD, as PERMANENT situations. I've just seen far too many<br> children and adults make complete turnarounds from those conditions and<br> resume normal functioning parameters in "learning" with quite a number<br> of those surpassing their peers in measured reading capability. Nothing<br> is "black or white", fact is it's all gray and anything is possible.<br> Therefore I simply refuse to administer a limiting prognosis to ANY<br> human being regardless of their condition or capability (refer back to<br> factor # 3 and 4 above pls).<br><br> Art<br><br> <br> Art LaChance<br> Gilmer Learning Center<br> Ellijay, GA</blockquote></html> --=====================_27111029==_.ALT--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:00:45 EST