Teaching the dyslexic

[carol]

Has anyone heard of a teaching methodology for dyslexics called Robertson or something like that? I really am not sure I got the name right. I think it is based on the Orton-Gillingham method. OG is the method that was in my son's IEP that he responds well to and specifies he needs. When I chose this school, it said on their website and when I spoke with them that they provided OG and now when I went to his IEP meeting late last month, they said they are really focusing on sight words and less phonics. Helloooo! I am getting nervous about what I am hearing and am not sure how to approach it. When my hus called a month ago, they said this Robertson or something was being incorporated in the classroom somehow. It says on his IEP, he is to have 1:1 instruction OT, 5x week. They claim they are providing the 1:1, but I am not really sure. My son is resistant to reading. It is almost like a phobia for him constantly reminding him of his struggles and making him feel inadequate. This is a feat all by itself. Anything to do with reading, he is resistant. I bought a word BINGO game and try different fun things, and he gets frustrated.

I even thought about getting a certification and attempt to teach him OG myself. Although I feel this may not be all the way appropriate, a tutor is costly. The tutor from Scottish Rite does not want to put up with his feelings of inadequacy. He must just go and perform the whole hour. He just is not there yet. Weird thing is, he did work for her about 6 months and stopped trying. Since he does respond to me when counseled about his behavior and such, I thought maybe I could support or teach him the OG. I do not want to confuse him. Was just a thought.

[lillian]

I have not heard of the system you mentioned, but if you are thinking of tutoring him yourself, you may want to check into Susan Barton's system.

www.dys-add.com/

[carol]

I believe this is the one I am currently researching. She was the person who spearheaded my whole suspicions about something not being right with his reading. One of her Dyslexia Testing Specialist tested him. She was wonderful.

There are two conferences upstate, but I simply cannot leave the children. I am try to scheme a way to get there.

Thanks for the info.

[rakuflames]

Apr 8, 2008 6:19:32 GMT -5 carol said:

I believe this is the one I am currently researching. She was the person who spearheaded my whole suspicions about something not being right with his reading. One of her Dyslexia Testing Specialist tested him. She was wonderful.

There are two conferences upstate, but I simply cannot leave the children. I am try to scheme a way to get there.

Thanks for the info.

I have just read a little on this approach, and I know a little bit about neurodevelopment in children.

Personally I would be wary about this approach because I think its base may be a house of cards. He makes basic assumptions: first, that the students miss the firsts letter in a word, and second, that they can then read the word when it's upside down. He puts neurological interpretations on this.

However, there can be several explanations for this reading pattern. First, all children do it at one time or another. Second, AD/HD can cause a child to look at words randomlly and superficially. Turn the word upside down and you immediately require the child to pay more attention to the word. In addition, it is then taken out of the context of the rest of the text, so there are no other word distractions.

Many children with AD/HD read quite impulsively. They may or may not use any phonics at all -- and using the first letter of the word is using phonics. Often they're context readers and can make sometimes wild guesses based on what else they're reading, and the context will cause them to make some pretty creative substitutions. If they ever did use the first consonant, they may have forgotten it by then.

When people look at complex topics from their field only (in this case, neurology), they aren't going to take in the whole picture.

Finally, this approach, when done, may have some surface similarities to Orton-Gillingham, but it's not related to it. O-G is based on careful, systematic research on how children learn. I haven't been able to find any research online (it's not all available without paying a very high price for it, so that doesn't mean the research isn't there, just that I couldn't look at any) showing that it works -- just claims.

I would urge parents to be careful. People think up theories all the time, but impulsiveness in reading can look like all sorts of things to people who don't know much about AD/HD. Robertson is from Great Britain, where they unfortunately don't take AD/HD very seriously yet.

[carol]

Rakuflames

Do you thing implementing a Susan Barton or other OG tutoring will confuse him? I do not feel like the phonics is being addressed enough. He knows the sounds, but struggles with decoding.

Thanks.

[rakuflames]

Apr 9, 2008 12:29:11 GMT -5 carol said:

Rakuflames

Do you thing implementing a Susan Barton or other OG tutoring will confuse him? I do not feel like the phonics is being addressed enough. He knows the sounds, but struggles with decoding.

Thanks.

For myself I would want more information on the cause before looking for a solution. It could be a memory retrieval problem -- maybe he knows the sounds, but has trouble retrieving them with the rapidity and ease you need to sound words out.

Maybe it's just not an efficient way for him to learn. What phonics really does is provide a path to ... visual memory. In other words, sounding a word out builds sight vocabulary. Unless it does, it is a cumbersome and inefficient way to read. There are a number of people for whom sounding words out does not result in increased sight vocabulary, so it doesn't result in more fluent speech. For some children, if they sound out the word it does not trigger comprehension of the word. In other words, they may sound out "rock" but it may not bring to mind either a rock or the act of rocking.

When any of these things happen, it's going to interfere with developing the fluent use of phonics -- because there's no payoff for doing it. It doesn't result in better reading or improved comprehension. Then the child starts to tend to use the phonics randomly, or not at all, trying to use any other tool first. Or, often, they'll use the initial consonant only and then guess from the context. Too much guessing interferes with ... fluency and comprehension.

Then of course, the child could have Central Auditory Processing Disorder -- CAPD. That can only be determined by an audiologist.

If it were my child, if possible I would take him to a good reading clinic (I don't mean Sylvan, Huntington, etc. Often universities have very good reading clinics if they have a graduate teacher education program). These clinics do much more in-depth testing than our schools do, and often can answer the question "Why doesn't he/she use phonics?"

It's already April. If you want to do that I wouldn't delay trying to get an appointment. They also often have absolutely wonderful summer reading clinics.

[carol]

Rakuflames,

I was told by the psychologist that did his psychoeducational testing, it was an outside eval, that if he did not progress with his fluency, he could have a "double deficit" and I use enlist the knowledge of a Carol Wolf, I believe was her name, from Tuft University. She wrote a book about it, but the psychologist told me it would be difficult to understand. Because of his hesitancy, resistance, anxiety, whatever you want to call it, I just don't know, he is difficult to test. Although his current school places him at somewhere on a 2nd grade level, (he is 10), his previous school had him at a preprimer(which I really think was incorrect, because he was so much more behavioral at that school and is not in his new program. I guess what I am trying to say, I do not really know if he has actually progressed or that much since last year. On paper, it may seem that way, but a mother knows.

I backed off on the reading and incorporated more outside activities, because he just had such a phobia, if you will. I feel like he should be further ahead somehow and more needs to be done. I mean, I would come home and say, Oh, look what I brought home today, He would say, "As long as it is not a book." This was a child who throughout his entire Early Childhood experience which I was heavily involved in, loved books and loved information. The information and inquisitiveness is still there, but do not approach him with a book or expect him to read too hard or too easy. It is just so sad since my husband and I are avid readers.

As far as testing goes, I have 2 psycheducational evals, dyslexia testing from a specialist(Susan Barton tutor), a psych eval, and 2 evals from developmental pediatrician, all about 1 year old. I have to say I do not understand some of it. I do know that his auditory memory like if you read him a story, even at an advanced level is in the superior range. I thought that would rule out the CAPD. This is the best way he learns.

I appreciate your information. I will keep plugging away until I have an answer.

Thanks again.

[lillian]

Carol,

You mention that your son has had a lot of testing in the last year. I suggest pulling that testing out and looking closely at it. Where are his weaknesses in reading? His remediation should be based on trying to improve those areas of weakness.

I think OG serves a purpose, but there is much more to reading than just phonics; yet, children will be dxed with dyslexia and phonics will be drilled down their throats year after year after year, with the belief that this is the only method for remediating dyslexia. It's not. It's a very important aspect, but any dyslexia remediation program should also focus on morphology, fluency, and comprehension. And after going through what I have gone through with my son, I'm a big believer that writing skills should be developed alongside reading skills from DAY ONE! Oh, if I had know then, what I know now .

So...I advise getting out the testing and looking at it. What achievement tests was he given? What are his scores in psuedoword decoding, letter/word identification, spelling (and what remarks were made about his spelling errors), reading comprehension, written expression, short-term memory, and long-term memory? These scores will help you choose effective remediation.

[carol]

I will do that. THank you.

[rakuflames]

Apr 10, 2008 8:45:04 GMT -5 lillian said:

Carol,

You mention that your son has had a lot of testing in the last year. I suggest pulling that testing out and looking closely at it. Where are his weaknesses in reading? His remediation should be based on trying to improve those areas of weakness.

I think OG serves a purpose, but there is much more to reading than just phonics; yet, children will be dxed with dyslexia and phonics will be drilled down their throats year after year after year, with the belief that this is the only method for remediating dyslexia. It's not. It's a very important aspect, but any dyslexia remediation program should also focus on morphology, fluency, and comprehension. And after going through what I have gone through with my son, I'm a big believer that writing skills should be developed alongside reading skills from DAY ONE! Oh, if I had know then, what I know now .

So...I advise getting out the testing and looking at it. What achievement tests was he given? What are his scores in psuedoword decoding, letter/word identification, spelling (and what remarks were made about his spelling errors), reading comprehension, written expression, short-term memory, and long-term memory? These scores will help you choose effective remediation.

I COMPLETELY agree with you. Very often there is too much emphasis on phonics. Some children willl always struggle with phonemic blending, and if they have any kind of sight vocabulary, moving on to analyzing words syllable by syllable, learning word endings and structural conventions such as "tion" can help them tremendously.

I didn't ever give up on phonics completely but I did have students for whom using the initial consonant was all they could do efficiently. Those children needed other strategies.

I do think phonics should be well taught, but if the child either can't blend it efficiently, or it doesn't build sight vocabulary (which is its actual purpose; it's a cumbersome way to read), or if the words often don't make sense to the child after it's been sounded out, the teacher needs a Plan B.