John--

I think the reference is from Shaywitz, maybe not from the book, maybe 
from her more classically research oriented articles for a professional 
audience.  The "post" scan would be after the training--you can judge 
WHERE the learning has taken place, right side or left side.  And I 
know I am  simplifying a lot, sorry.

Andrea

On Oct 28, 2006, at 5:12 PM, John Nissen wrote:


>

> Hello Andrea,

>

> You say:

>> If you are using a brain scan to see where a person is processing

>> words, it is IMPOSSIBLE to see at first if  the person is the victim

>> (yes) of poor teaching or has a real disability.  (I hope I'm not

>> overstating this.)  Post scanning should give you that information.

>

> Most of research into the causes of dyslexia and/or LD - in fact all 

> the

> research I have seen - fails to take into account the essential 

> environment

> factor of how the person was taught in the first place.  And, if you 

> are

> correct, it is impossible in a brain scan to see at first if the 

> person is a

> victim of poor teaching or has a real disability.   I don't know what 

> you

> mean by "post scanning" or how it would give you that information.  Do 

> you

> have a reference to the research?

>

> My own theory is that good phonics teaching can develop the pathways 

> in the

> brain that allow rapid decoding of words, and thence fluent reading.  

> My

> theory is most strongly supported by the 7-year Clackmannanshire 

> study, in

> which all 300 out of 300 pupils were taught, aged 4+, to read by 

> synthetic

> phonics, and their average reading age, by age 11, was 3 years ahead 

> of the

> norm.  There were no non-readers!  However, in that study, a group of

> "pupils at risk" was identified, and they were given special attention 

> to

> ensure they did not lag behind the other pupils.  This suggests that

> dyslexia and LD can make it more difficult for a person to develop the

> necessary pathways (i.e. this is their "disability"), but with good 

> phonics

> teaching (and synthetic phonics seems to be the best), those pathways 

> CAN be

> developed.  However unfortunately nobody has done any brain scans on 

> the

> pupils to identify any differences among them, and compare the scans 

> with

> poor readers from similar schools.  I would love to see research done 

> on the

> effect of teaching method on the brain.  Any volunteers on this list 

> to get

> the research going?  Anybody know of research already done?

>

> Cheers from Chiswick,

>

> John

>

> John Nissen

> Cloudworld Ltd - http://www.cloudworld.co.uk

> maker of the assistive reader, WordAloud.

> Try WordAloud with synthetic phonics:

> http://www.cloudworld.co.uk/teaching-synthetic-phonics.htm

> Tel: +44 208 742 3170  Fax: +44 208 742 0202

> Email: info at cloudworld.co.uk

>

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "Andrea Wilder" <andreawilder at comcast.net>

> To: <szach at hcpl.net>; "The Learning Disabilities Discussion List"

> <learningdisabilities at nifl.gov>

> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:49 AM

> Subject: [LearningDisabilities 729] Re: one-size-fits-all methodology

>

>

>> OK, let me toss my two cents back in this ring.

>>

>> I got my master's in the LD field years ago, and a lot has changed.

>> BUT even then we said:  teach to the STRENGTH , remediate the 

>> WEAKNESS.

>>   There are many types of brain anomalies which affect reading, we are

>> only talking about 2 hear.(!)

>>

>> A difficulty matching sound to symbol affects the majority of poor

>> readers.  The problem is in not being able to discriminate between 

>> some

>> sounds.  The visual problem is  like what I stated in my next to last

>> email--a lag time in cells that process images.  many fewer have this

>> problem.  BUT you can imagine  the difficulties with students  who 

>> have

>> both!!!  there's a company that specializes in slowing down the sound

>> production so  children can hear ALL the sounds, but while this helps

>> their hearing, it doesn't transfer to their reading.

>>

>> It is possible to compensate for each problem--you can retrain the

>> brain, and that apparently is what has happened in the sound/symbol

>> side.  I think I remember that  the right side of the brain takes 

>> over,

>> but I am a little hazy on this.

>>

>> If you are using a brain scan to see where a person is processing

>> words, it is IMPOSSIBLE to see at first if  the person is the victim

>> (yes) of poor teaching or has a real disability.  (I hope I'm not

>> overstating this.)  Post scanning should give you that information.

>> One way to work with the problem of sound/symbol is to change 

>> beginning

>> and final consonants, then the middle vowel, perhaps  using colored

>> letters so the units you are working on pop out.    (Blachman)  After

>> regular single syllable words are mastered, then multi syllable words

>> which break down into single syllable units can be mastered.  The 

>> point

>> here is to go from the MOST REGULAR to the LEAST REGULAR.  You have to

>> know the structure of English to work this way.  The Wilson program is

>> often mentioned here, but it doesn't include meaning, as far as I

>> know--SERIOUSLY consider meaning...I  know they do sentences.

>>

>>  Some words have  multiple meanings, and this is useful.  EXPAND THE

>> STUDENT'S VOCABULARY  while you are teaching the words.  Benita

>> Blachman does this, and a woman who works at Tufts in Medford, whose

>> name I can't remember now--it will pop up.

>>

>> I promised many months ago that I  would post here the sequence that

>> Blachman uses, I haven't yet.

>>

>> Yes, RAN is a predictor  of  dyslexia;  again, I haven't got all the

>> info at my fingertips, perhaps someone else out there does.

>>

>> Memory--short or long--the more memory "systems" you use, the greater

>> the retention.  On this list serv maybe a year?  year and a  half?

>> ago, a teacher shared one of her methods:  for a student who couldn't

>> remember any other way, she associated letters  with foods.  Now that

>> is an inventive teacher.

>>

>> I want to add another note here--a LOT of federal money was put into

>> the phonemic sound/symbol research because the people who were doing 

>> it

>> got publicity, got more money, got the publicity, etc.  We now seem to

>> be coming back to the visual difficulties, and money is now going

>> there.  More of this last research is done in Canada, the UK,

>> Australia.

>>

>> I've put a lot about Blachman in here;  well, she's good.  Laurie

>> Cestnick is one of the  people for the visual problems--she does

>> research, works  with kids in her lab. The Tufts researcher is 

>> Maryanne

>> Wolf.

>>

>> There is a lot to know.  In the dyslexia field much is made of famous

>> people who have dyslexia;  I am sure there are lots of non-famous

>> people who have it too,

>>

>> Andrea

>>

>> On Oct 26, 2006, at 5:48 PM, Steve Zach wrote:

>>

>>> I think this is a very important discussion.  Thank you all for

>>> continuing

>>> it.  If dyslexia accounts for 80 percent of people identified as

>>> learning

>>> disabled, according to the Shaywitz article cited earlier, I think 

>>> this

>>> discussion should take place year-round to talk about various

>>> specifics of

>>> how dyslexic adults learn to read -- from the perspective of any

>>> methodology.  I feel all of the perspectives aired recently have been

>>> helpful.

>>>

>>> To my understanding, dyslexia only affects the processing of sounds 

>>> in

>>> language, not the processing of visual information (according to 

>>> IDA's

>>> definition at www.interdys.org).  The question that the list has been

>>> discussing seems to be, should an instructor attempt to compensate 

>>> for

>>> this

>>> disability by teaching in a way that does not necessarily involve

>>> sounds, or

>>> by helping dyslexic students learn to process sounds in a way that

>>> those of

>>> us without dyslexia didn't need to employ, such as reading controlled

>>> texts

>>> only?

>>>

>>> A question I have about the first approach (if used for all words, 

>>> not

>>> just

>>> for phonetically irregular ones) is, isn't it really asking students 

>>> to

>>> memorize words not so much by sight, but as a sequence of letters?  I

>>> can

>>> see a word like "book" having a "look and feel" in terms of its 

>>> overall

>>> appearance -- maybe imagining two eyes peering out between the b and 

>>> k

>>> --

>>> but how would one go about establishing a way to remember pot, dot,

>>> hot,

>>> bat, pat, hat and hundreds of similar words that will come up?  Even

>>> though

>>> good readers recognize these and thousands of other words by sight, I

>>> don't

>>> think we came to such a capability, as we were first learning, by

>>> drawing

>>> upon an image of the word in print itself.  A mental image of the

>>> object, as

>>> opposed to the words in print, wouldn't be enough -- you wouldn't 

>>> know

>>> what

>>> image to call up until you could read the word.

>>>

>>> However, even if blending sounds is the skill we use to identify most

>>> words

>>> as we are first learning to read, as I believe now, I do think 

>>> meaning

>>> and

>>> memory are important in moving from the blending skill to the sight

>>> recognition that leads to fluency later on.

>>>

>>> I would like to learn more about the role of rapid naming ability in

>>> learning to read.  The lack of such an ability is frequently

>>> associated with

>>> dyslexia, I think.  It seems like that difficulty would present

>>> problems for

>>> either approach to teaching reading.  In addition, is there research 

>>> on

>>> short term memory that would be relevant?

>>>

>>> Steve Zach

>>> Harris County Public Library

>>> Houston, TX

>>>

>>> -----Original Message-----

>>> From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov

>>> [mailto:learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Muro,

>>> Andres

>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 2:02 PM

>>> To: The Learning Disabilities Discussion List

>>> Subject: [LearningDisabilities 724] Re: one-size-fits-all methodology

>>>

>>> If rapid phonemic decoding is the only way that adults read, as some

>>> suggested, then, Alan, you are an impossibility.

>>>

>>> I believe that most people learn, as Andrea suggests, both 

>>> phonemically

>>> and visually. Visual and phonemic passages function in most people.

>>> However, as Andrea suggests, the barrier from the first three basic

>>> stages of reading acquisition to the most advanced stages have to do

>>> with exposure to rich and varied print, as Carol Chomsky suggests. 

>>> So,

>>> it is not dwelling in phonemes that lead to the advanced stages of

>>> reading, but extensive exposure to lots of print in multiple forms.

>>> Most

>>> children and adults will adapt their personal styles to the print,

>>> probably combining a little of both. Just focusing on the basics,

>>> especially with academically and economically disadvantaged families 

>>> is

>>> a tremendous disservice, since opportunities for exposure to a 

>>> variety

>>> of literature are limited.

>>>

>>> With regards to LD people, it is important to understand the type of

>>> disability before implementing a plan. If dyslexics cannot process

>>> sounds properly, then, the only methodology is to teach words 

>>> visually.

>>> Obviously this can work, as is the case with Alan and another

>>> participant in this group that did, in fact stated that he learned

>>> visually. If dyslexia affects the visual processing of language, 

>>> then a

>>> phonemic approach will work best. If diagnosing the disability is not

>>> possible, then combining approaches, rather than, favoring only one, 

>>> is

>>> the best practice. In either case, reading must always include

>>> systematic exposure to rich and varied print from the very beginning.

>>> As

>>> I said before, focusing on the basics only is very detrimental to

>>> everyone.

>>>

>>> Andres

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> ----------------------------------------------------

>>> National Institute for Literacy

>>> Learning Disabilities mailing list

>>> LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov

>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities

>>> Message sent to andreawilder at comcast.net.

>>>

>>

>> ----------------------------------------------------

>> National Institute for Literacy

>> Learning Disabilities mailing list

>> LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov

>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities

>> Message sent to JN at cloudworld.co.uk.

>>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Learning Disabilities mailing list

> LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to 

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities

> Message sent to andreawilder at comcast.net.

>