[senco-forum] what works best when children are failing?

Dear All,

I have taken the liberty of copying some correspondence from the dyslexia
forum to the senco forum - not because I believe that anyone is right or
wrong but that I feel the points discussed raise some pertinent issues.

And discussions are centring on literacy - numeracy is also important.  For
those that have not heard of Numicon, may I suggest that a peek at
www.numicon.com is worth the time?   Do we have a system where children who
seem to have a good nonverbal score under-perform in numeracy?

Philippa

Hi Dolfrog,

Thanks for your detailed reply. If the 10% figure for APD is correct then
that is 90% of pupils who should learn well through a phonics based
programme.  The 10% who do not learn well should show up more quickly and -
in the ideal world - be given alternative teaching for their learning
styles.  I think that some 25% or more are currently failing in the UK
system?  So good quality phonics teaching points towards a potential
improvement of affairs, rather than a deterioration.  In an ideal world
no-one should be tortured - there should be alternative forms of teaching
for those who do not make it with the 90%.

There are two major gaps in the system, aren't there?

One - that the majority do not usually receive the best quality phonics
teaching;

Two - that the minority do not receive the best quality alternative forms of
education.

Far too many children arrive at secondary school without the literacy skills
they need and with their self-esteem consequently damaged.  (3 years in
secondary school in the UK in the 70s was enough for me. I left to find out
more about how to help these kids). Both gaps need to be addressed.  The
Rose Review was addressing the first gap.  Dyslexia Guidance aims to go some
way towards addressing the second gap.  (That book would have been helpful
to me as a secondary school teacher - I just got the failing kids with no
meaningful resources).

Our book is not a study of teaching; it is more a description.  It is based
on 20 years experience of what works for the majority of dyslexics. It was
written to accompany The Dyslexia Screener, although any quality assessment
is a good starting point.  For the primary years' section, the book
describes the 1 to 1 individualised teaching that has worked for so many of
our pupils over the years.  The book acknowledges the importance of
multisensory education and describes some methods that are aimed directly at
teaching literacy.  You enquire about science and hard evidence. Martin
Turner has assessed many of our pupils and he was impressed not only by the
number of pupils who benefited but by the amount they had benefited too.  I
would never have had the audacity to think that my work was good enough to
write a book without his solid encouragement and that of other educational
psychologists who also assessed the pupils we have taught.

I agree that there are pupils who need more than a phonics approach and in
our school we do recommend that pupils who are not responding to the phonics
and who appear to have hearing and/or listening issues have hearing tests,
APD assessments and try The Listening Programme.  The evidence for this
approach was not sufficiently accepted in the UK that this could have been
included in our book. I am sure there is underassessment in this area, as
you say.  I am in touch with Dilys Treharne with regard to more rigorous
assessment and she has promised to advise us how to assess once the research
has been carried out in the UK.

Vision screening is also of great importance and we will soon have whole
school screening for vision offered to the parents by a paediatric
optometrist.  Keith Holland has been visiting the school for some years now
to carry out Behavioural Optometric assessments but this is targeted only at
those children we pick up.  My feeling is that some are missed.

We have also engaged the services of an Occupational Therapist who has
carried out observations within the younger years classrooms.

Our school accepts and practises that better training and better teaching is
always to be sought and no matter how good anyone is, there is always room
for improvement.  I wish there was an ideal world with holistic assessment
available for all that need it to cover at least motor, vestibular,
proprioceptive, vision and hearing systems.  I have been looking for this
for a long time and I am still looking - if anyone can advise where this is
obtainable - and at a reasonable cost - please let me know.  Our school has
been very supportive in my attempts to lead a small change in one
institution. It is easy to feel overwhelmed, frustrated and upset by the
lack of awareness and provision for children's needs.

There is also the topic of parent education - that children need to move,
talk, play, be fed well etc.  Is there a lack of early years' stimulus for
our children in this modern world?

Kind regards,

Philippa

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussions by and for dyslexic people [mailto:DYSLEXIA at JISCMAIL.AC.UK]
On Behalf Of dolfrog.com
Sent: 14 March 2008 23:15
To: DYSLEXIA at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [DYSLEXIA] BDA CONFERENCE MARCH 2008 - HARROGATE, UK

Hi Philippa

The whole Rose review recommendations are based on the false assumption that
all are able to improve the listening skills. Which is the basis of any
phonics based program, and those who have an Auditory Processing Disorder,
10& of the population according to the Medical Research Council has a
listening disability.
The Rose Review failed to discuss any non phonics based teach programs such
those based on the whole word concepts, or the kinaesthetic based programs
such as Brain gym which the BDA favour.
With regards to APD the Rose Review could be seen to promote Disability
Discrimination under the 2005 Act, and would conflict with any schools
Disability Equality Duty policies. Which will really pose problems for
OFSTed in the very near future, as they have to inspect every schools DED
policies The review had no scientific basis and was conducted like a soap
powder research program trying to promote a specific product, namely
synthetic phonics. There was no input about what works from learners only
from program providers, or their supporters.
The Documentary by Channel4 regarding the Ruth Miskins way was almost
unbearable to watch watching that kid being tortured by Ruth Miskins and her
teaching program. And it was noticeable that some teachers just of camera
were sometimes using alternative to help the pupils learn to read.

I notice you have included a reference to your book, I would like to know
which type of dyslexic have been included in your study, what were the
underlying causes of their dyslexia, and how was it diagnosed, and what
works for each different groups of dyslexic. There are so many unscientific
books written about dyslexia, which fail to define the specific groups of
dyslexics that the author has encountered which groups best demonstrate
their findings.

Best wishes

dolfrog