Here’s a message I got over the past weekend followed by my response.
>Professor Lloyd,
>My 8 year old son has dyslexia and he attends a [a local] public school in
>Virginia. I am interested in knowing why the public schools do not use the
>word Dyslexia, and why they do not employ systematic researched based
>methods to help those with the diagnosis? Thank you for answering these
>questions.
(a) The answer to your first question is pretty straight forward. “Dyslexia” is not an educational label, but one used in medicine and the popular press. Dyslexia is one of the disabilities included in “Learning Disabilities.” Learning Disabilities is the category of special education services that allows children with severe problems in reading (what others might call “dyslexia”), arithmetic or mathematics, writing, or other areas to received special education services under federal and Virginia law. Has you son been identified as having Learning Disabilities by the Henrico schools? Who has diagnosed dyslexia?
(b) The answer to your second question is very difficult. I would like to know that answer, too. Although some would dispute it, I think we have very clear evidence about what instructional methods and practices have been scientifically shown to produce better outcomes for students. I have spent most of my adult life describing those methods and practices to teachers, administrators, and colleagues. Still, people seem to chose instructional methods not on the basis of what has been shown to benefit learners, but on other bases. Before I retire, I hope to have a bigger effect on this problem than I have had in the past 30+ years.
I caution you to listen carefully when people say that they are using scientifically documented or “research-based” methods. Some methods that are quite popular have only modest evidence of benefits. It is possible to argue that a method has a scientific basis, but to point to less-important types of research as that basis. One needs to know whether the scientific evidence is expressly connected to student outcomes (e.g., direct comparisons showing that in real school situations a method or practice produces better outcomes on relevant and important measures of student achievement), not that it is “consistent with developmental theory,” “endorsed by such-and-such-group-of-educators,” etc.
Please suggest alternative responses, dear reader.
Sphere: Related Content
Professor Lloyd, My son was diagnosed with dyslexia by Carolyn Myers MEd an educational consultant in Richmond. She revied multiple tests-WISC-IV, Auditory processing, C-Topp,TOVA, VMI, Language Processing test, and WJ=III, NEPSY,Process Assessment of the Learner,and the Illinois Test of Paralinguistics. She was supervised by Dr. Edward Peck III PhD. The public school did a brief one hour assessment(WJIII)and determined there were no learning disabilities. They have disregarded the assessment results of all of these tests listed. My son does have a speech IEP, so we have been able to make some accomodations using this IEP.I hope this answers your first question. The approach that was recommended to us is the Orton- Gillingham Approach and my son has been tutored 3x a week for the past year and a half. He has responded well ,although he is a slow reader and is having a lot of trouble sequencing in math. Is this a valid approach? What do you consider to be a solid approach for Dyslexia? I have read Dr. Sally Shaywitz’s text Overcoming Dyslexia- she believes that the brain can actually be altered in one year by employing these research based educational interventions. If this is true than why aren’t our schools doing this, under IDEA arent they supposed to provide a free and APPROPRIATE education? It is as if we had the cure for cancer but chose not to apply it. Well, I apologize for asking so many questions but no one seems to have the answers and the Dyslexia word is not in the public’s school vocabulary, What would George Orwell say?