Latest Comments
- Liz Ditz on the post Local parent groups
- Liz Ditz on the post Local parent groups
- John on the post NLP bunk
- Timaru Herald Newspaper Covers on the post Another splendid feat
- Philip Boudreau,PhD on the post Helmer Myklebust
- Ghotit on the post FCRR dyslexia document
- Ghotit on the post An illiterate teacher
- JohnL on the post Differential drug effects in arithmetic
- Jacki on the post Differential drug effects in arithmetic
- Michael Mckeehan on the post Dyslexic entrepreneurs
Show us your data!
I remember hearing Og Lindsley recommend that the most important request one could learn to make was to ask the advocate of a treatment, practice, therapy, or intervention to show us the data. Without clear, objective, compelling data about how those who receive a therapy fare, we shouldn’t be adopting a therapy. To be sure, teachers and others are faced with great pressure to improve learner’s outcomes every day. But, that shouldn’t be a reason to use sham methods.
I find myself falling back on Lindsley’s advice frequently in considering topics in learning disabilities. Sadly, there are many faulty recommendations about how to treat LD. I’ll comment on some of these in the next few weeks.
For now and for those who are interested, there are some good sources. In a new book edited by John Jacobson, Richard Foxx, and James Mulick, Controversial Therapies For Developmental Disabilities: Fads, Fashion, and Science in Professional Practice, an impressive array of authors contribute chapters about the mistaken methods that have been advocated in special education and related areas. The book’s a bit pricy ($125 list), but the ideas are very valuable.