[SENco-forum] Re Reading research project

Dyslexia is not created -it is already present at birth and likely before.
Acquired dyslexia comes after a stroke or other head injury, possible at
birth but less likely than later head trauma.

SpLD can include poor reading skills, but not always as it is  a cluster of
things revolving around poor manipulation of symbols as well as other things
like poor sequencing/motor control /balance/ social skills that can be seen
in other SEN - the difference between it and GLD being the huge
discrepancies seen between verbal & written skill, or subjects or actual
ability/IQ determined ability as well as its reluctance to be successfully
supported by 'more of the same' teaching.

It cannot be conferred on a child because of lack of access to adequate
teaching as Eddie says  has been stated.  If students are failing to read
then they haven't had access to adequate teaching anyway that is in a form
that meets their needs.  It may be with all the emphasis on phonics they
could be the undiagnosed APD's and/or SpLD type who prefer whole word
reading.

If I were a parent of SpLD children, which I am, I would give it a go.  It
is a hour of so per week for 12 weeks.  It won't cost me £2,000 and many be
beneficial to some students.  How many remains to be seen at the end of the
research.

Sharon Tringham

-----Original Message-----
From: senco-forum-bounces at lists.becta.org.uk
[mailto:senco-forum-bounces at lists.becta.org.uk]On Behalf Of Eddie Carron
Sent: 27 February 2007 20:19
To: senco-forum at lists.becta.org.uk
Subject: [senco-forum] Re Reading research project

I should advise anyone thinking of participating in my research project to
read the very revealing comments on the RRF website (www.rrf.org) about my
proposal. They make much of  the notion that they support evidence-based
research but in reality,  are fearful of real, practical research. They
favour searching the literature for and propagating anything that supports
their own ideas. And of course, almost you can find 'evidence' in the
literature to support almost anything. Remember the literatti who fell over
themselves to support the 'Peter and Jane'  approach. I certainly do.
They claimed that my project (1) will give children dyslexia, carefully
ignoring the fact that participating children will already have an average
five/six year record of failure to learn to read (funny kind of logic that!)
They claim (2) that this research has already been done (!!!) in spite of
having no inkling of what the project involves
and (3) that it is about getting children to learn list of words. The
reality is that it is not about getting children to learn any words, singly
or in lists but small details like that dont phase fundamentalists one bit.
Theirs is the true path. If you don't beleive them, just ask and they will
tell you so.
and (4) that it is just the usual 'balanced literacy/mix of methods'(???)
that is already being carried out (I dont uderstand that one myself).

They offer the usual kind of pseudo-intellectual 'proofs' that are used by
all fundamentalists in every walk of life. They carefully avoid reference to
the fact that I have the hardest kind of evidence of having already
completed a very large scale published research project which did not
include any phonics teaching yet mysteriously and  undisputably, turned
literally hundreds of virtual non-readers into competent readers and earned
the praise of their current president before she became president (I still
have the emails). But of course, the prevailing wind has changed since then!
One leading contributor asks "Will the parents be warned that a possible
outcome of the experiment?" and this from the group that proposes the
impostion of SP irrespective of the views of all teachers, headteachers and
parents. Additionally they make no bones about the fact that they would have
it taught as a compulsory component of NURSERY Education. Beware all
fundamentalists.

I defy anyone to read their mails and not think about the three witches in
Macbeth sitting round their cauldron, stirring their foul brew.

I welcome and distribute their contribution which I suspect may be at least
partly responsible for the good response I am already having to my request
for participation (14 enquirers after about two hours) I wonder if, after
the one-term project, participating teachers confirm that no dyslexics have
been created, they will apologise. That would be the reponse of any
responsible person with any degree of intergrity and intellectual honesty.
My expectations are not high.

Keep them coming.

Eddie C.

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/703 - Release Date: 26/02/2007
14:56

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/703 - Release Date: 26/02/2007
14:56

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/703 - Release Date: 26/02/2007
14:56