I’d like to see them evaluated on the same bases as we would evaluate interventions for students with LD. Do these simulations produce verifiable improvements in participants; outcomes? Do people who get the simulationjs have better perspeectives and Ld? Do they help parents and teachers seek better outomes for studetns? That is, to me, the gold standard.

Stepping back from the gold standard (better outcomes for kids), do advocates understand that there are differences among us? Might some of us fail?

JohnL

The second one I use to talk about the error of assuming dyslexia is only reversals. I take 3 overheads and put them up backwards. The first is a first grade passage, the second a middle school and the last an advance algebra passage. We then talk about the errors of the public opinion that LD means reads backwards and also talk about how the demands of text for students with a learning disability in reading decoding increase over time. This activity allows for lots of discussion about early intervention and detection.

Lisa Dieker – University of Central Florida

http://www.interdys.org/servlet/viewbranch?branch_id=5

“Perhaps we are best known for presenting the dyslexia simulation, “Put Yourself in the Shoes of a Dyslexic,” which is a hands-on dyslexia simulation designed to increase understanding of the difficulties and frustrations dyslexics encounter daily. Participants simulate a beginning reading problem; an auditory figure-ground discrimination problem; a visual-motor and writing task problem; a fine motor problem on a written task; a visual perception and processing problem; and a hearing problem. The simulation leads to greater empathy and understanding of the problems and gives insight into working effectively with these individuals. The Northern California Branch provides simulations locally, or you may purchase a simulation kit by contacting our branch.”

It does seem to help teachers understand the kids’ struggles, especially in high school, but as you say the evidence is anecdotal.