[senco-forum] Dyslexia in the Genomic Era

That is a very interesting question...  anyone else got answers?  Here are
some of my thoughts, for what they are worth.

The 12 year old girl in my class who could decode but not comprehend what
she had written had trouble understanding most of what went on in the
classroom and did not mix socially with her peers.  She did not have
interactive friendships, although her class mates always looked after her
needs.

But one of my friend's sons, now a university graduate and productively at
work(!) could decode ok but did not get inference (actually he was totally
unaware it existed) when he was 11.  He was referred to me for 1:1 work by
his secondary school SEN as he could not take part in their group based
support work either, it was that extreme.  Some targeted and intensive
tuition with his Mum sitting in on lessons and in full homework support
mode, and he acquired the skills to think about what he was reading.

So maybe that indicates that some people can decode, have the cognition but
don't know how to look for subtle meanings in text... is that a function of
today's world where kids read books less?  Or the texts they do read are
less complex?  Or that they have read lots of non-fiction but not enough
higher level fiction?  A 16 year old who read avidly, is extremely
articulate, very bright and had a fantastic general knowledge, had dropped
reading fiction at about age 10 unless it was science fiction (Terry
Pratchett) or something purely humorous.  Faced with DH Lawrence and All My
Sons etc at GCSE, this boy was lost.  6 weeks of my intensive tuition on key
words, key sentences, text comprehension, study skills and essay structuring
and he got A in his English mocks, when he had been getting low to fail
marks.  Other text based subjects were similarly low but once the exam
strategy of applying these skills in a time limit had been explained to him,
his marks shot up.  I included all this work in Dyslexia Guidance as it is
how we work with KS2 students in the Dyslexia Unit but this student is not
dyslexic.  Just a boy.  (While at university a lecturer referred a peer to
me for help on how to write an essay... much the same kind of strategies
worked for him too... these skills go across a wide age band).

Other kids learn to decode and just fly on their own, as you say.  What your
story emphasizes all over again is how important it is to get the basic
skills right at primary school - and too often this does not happen.

How many schools/LEAs have Ruth Miskin as their reading scheme?  We are just
moving over to it, having trialled it last year to bring the teachers on
board.  It is a joy to see a reading scheme that actually teaches reading.
And those that do not learn that way are those that truly need the special
help that we all offer.  As per Solity's research.

I know what you mean about the life skill but not getting good exams.  Maybe
he'll blossom later - hope so.  I met a guy, a Phd teaching at a UK uni, who
told me he only learned to read as an adult.  He said he had struggled all
his life with dyslexia and was amazed when I asked him if he appreciated the
positive bits.. such as being able to visualise to a high level.  This
question so shocked him (as it was true - he did visualise brilliantly) that
he had to sit down.

Have met several high functioning adults with similar stories.  One guy's
dyslexia was only spotted as he handed in his Phd - he had gone back to
education after failing at school.  His son is in our unit (the power of the
genetic pattern worked well there as I met the guy at a party, got chatting,
found out his story, asked about his kids, found out his son was at our
school in kindergarten, put a red flag next to his name and tested the boy
when he was old enough.  We got him early and as the Dad says, hopefully the
pattern of literacy failure will not be repeated)

Sorry this is long but failure is hateful and success is worth aiming for.

Philippa

On 9/18/07, Maggie Downie <maizie2004 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I agree with you, too, Philippa!
>
> I was very careful to say that 'decoding' was the lower order skill; the
> ability to understand and make make use of the information in text (whether
> to advance learning, obtain information, or for entertainment) is a higher
> order skill and clearly dependent on cognitive ability.  Would it be fair to
> say that a child who cannot do this would also be a child who cannot respond
> effectively to spoken language?
>
> But until children are taught to decode there is no way of knowing whether
> or not progress to higher order reading skills will be made.
>
> We have a child just entering Y9 who came to us from a primary school
> which was extremely concerned about his ability to cope with mainstream
> secondary.  "He will not be able to achieve anything without full time
> support" was clearly stated in his file.  His Reading & Comprehension Age
> was below the lower limit of the test (6y 5m), his Word Reading Age was 6y
> 9m & his Spelling Age 7y6m.  After 15 months on the Ruth Miskin programme
> his Word Reading was 11y 1m and his Spelling Age 10y 6m (which compares
> favourably with many of his peers).  He gets very little support (we have
> very few, overstretched, TAs) but is able to participate in all his lessons,
> shows understanding, and has, in my view and that of all his teachers,
> thoroughly confounded the prognostications of his primary school.  His
> Reading & Comprehension Age in July this year was 9y 10m, which says more
> about the limitations of his vocabulary than it does about his decoding
> skills.  He won't do anything for our 5
> A*-C stats in Y11, but he has a life skill which will always be of use to
> him.  Who could have guessed that learning to decode effectively would do so
> much for him?
>
> Maggie
>
>
>
> Paul and Philippa Bodien <bodien at gmail.com> wrote: I agree.  But how is
> "severely" defined?
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this
> month.
>