Dyslexia in American Public Schools - Research Paper Example

?Dyslexia in American Public Schools One learning disability gaining varied research (Kirby et al., 2008; Nugent, 2008; Glazzard, Hornstra et al., 2010; Ness & Southall, 2010) interest today is dyslexia. This, perhaps, is due to the many misunderstandings and confusions about dyslexia (Hudson, High & Al Otaiba, 2007, p. 507), causing problems on how to identify and treat school-aged dyslexic children, especially so that the movement towards inclusive education for students with special needs has been gaining worldwide recognition against the traditional special education framework (Meijer, Pijl & Hegarty, 1997, p. 1). Furthermore since in our educational system successful learning requires reading ability, being dyslexic would consequently be of great disadvantage, that the need for early diagnosis and intervention of dyslexia is argued to save dyslexic children from experiencing failure (Bentham, 2002, p. 72; Wadlington & Wadlington, 2005, p. 16; GB Parliament, 2006, p. 395), which studies (Turkington & Harris, 2006, p. 126; Carson-Knight, 2007, p. 37) show may cause them undue social and emotional problems. Understanding Dyslexia History Most probably, dyslexia had been present since early human civilizations, but was unnoticed because the system of writing then is pictographic (proto-writing) unlike today, which is alphabet-based (letters), with the Latin alphabet the dominant writing system worldwide (Fischer, 2001, p. 7). Then, as societies have become literate, the abilities to read, write and count have become essential. Hence it was only then that dyslexia has begun to raise serious concerns and studies. (Riddick, 1996, p. 8) How dyslexia has gained much attention in the educational field, specifically in the US, will be presented here in three stages: 1) The Origin, 2) The Move to the US, and 3) The Current Theories of Dyslexia. The Origin (17th - 18th centuries). The origin of dyslexia can be understood following the historical accounts on the learning disabilities field (Hallahan & Mock, 2003, pp. 16-29; Wong, Graham, Hoskyn & Berman, 2008, pp. 1-3), which can be traced back to the 17th century in Europe from the works of European doctors and researchers on the relationship of brain injury and speech disorders – Franz Joseph Gall (1809) and John Baptiste Bouillaud’s (1820) localization of brain functions, Pierre Paul Broca’s (1861) nonfluent aphasia, and Carl Wernicke’s (1874) “sensory aphasia” (Hallahan & Mock, 2003, p. 17). Findings of these studies have shown indisputably that the brain is divided into specific areas with each area tasked with specific kinds of mental/cognitive functions. Hence, it had been believed that brain damage to specific brain area would mean impairment on the given function of that area (Wong, et al., 2008, p. 2). Consequently, this had inspired studies on reading disorders leading to the discovery of reading disability and was named differently – ‘word-blindness’ by the German physician, Adolph Kussmaul (1877), “dyslexia” by the German ophthalmologist, Rudolf Berlin (1884) (Hallahan & Mock, 2003, p. 18), “alexia” by Charcot (1887), “alexia or dyslexia” by Bateman (1890) (Guardiola, 2001, p. 6), ‘pure word blindness’ by the Swiss-born neurologist Joseph Dejerine (1892) (Heim & Benasich, 2006, p. 271), ‘word-blindness and visual memory’ by James Hinshelwood (1895) (Ott, 1997, p. 6). From this, succeeding research studies on more specific areas of reading disability ensued –William Pringle Morgan’s (1896) first case study on congenital word-blindness and Sir Cyril Hinshelwood’s (1896-1917) first systematic clinical studies of reading disorders essentially validating Broca & Wernicke’s areas (Wong, et al., 2008, p. 2). Thus the first theories of dyslexia had taken their form, which observably had focused on the causes of dyslexia being attributed either to defects on the structure of the brain or to deficits on the functions of the brain (Guardiola, 2001, p. 9). The Move to America (19th-20th century). The research interest of dyslexia had moved from Europe to America, mainly triggered by the remediation problems that American schools were facing. Understandably so, American researchers assessed, categorized, and treated the problem based on their European predecessors’ studies. And much of their works unexpectedly had been drawn to children’s reading disability (Hallahan & Mock, 2003, p. 18). However, it was the American neurologist and pathologist, Samuel Torrey Orton, who with his series of studies (1925-1948), had brought forth the developmental studies of dyslexia in the US (Ott, 1997, p. 6-7; Guardiola, 2001, p. 9). According to Heim and Benasich (2006), Orton was the first to incorporate biological, psychological, and behavioral factors in studying dyslexia. Among the results of his works are the introduction of the term ‘strephosymbolia – literally, twisted symbols’ (emphasis original); the preferential use of the term developmental dyslexia to connote the hereditary and environmental factors to dyslexia rather than the earlier term congenital dyslexia; the extensive use of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale to understand literacy, agreeing with Morgan and Hinshelwood on the irrelevance of intellectual impediment in dyslexia; his the theory of ‘mixed hemispheric dominance’ (Davis & Braun, 1997; Hallahan & Mock, 2003, p. 19) on the etiology of dyslexia refuting the angular gyrus hypothesis; and the introduction of training strategies to improve dyslexic children’s reading difficulty using the auditory and kinesthetic senses, stressing the need for phonics and blending instruction. Orton’s influence in the study of dyslexia is best manifested in the Foundation of the International Dyslexia Association, which was originally named Orton Dyslexia Society (1948) in honor of his theoretical contributions on the field. Orton’s multi-sensory educational approach was later elaborated by the tandem of Anna Gillingham and Bessie Stillman, better known today as the Orton-Gillingham method (1936). (Heim and Benasich, 2006, p. 272) As such, it was Gillingham, who pioneered the application of neurological theories to education (Cousins & Duhl, 1983, p. 8). From Orton’s studies Hallahan and Mock (2003) continue that Orton’s mobile clinic associate, Marion Monroe later developed a synthetic phonetic approach to teach reading (1932) and training teachers in Chicago, of which she reported impressive achievement. More significantly though, she introduced the pedagogy of calculating a reading index to identify children with specific reading needs and advocated the pedagogy of the need to establish patterns of errors as basis for specific remedial intervention, arguing that reading errors vary into different typologies. Consequently, Samuel Kirk, Monroe’s colleague at the Institute of Juvenile Research, who she taught in diagnosing and remedying reading disabilities, would later introduce the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (1961) – a diagnostic aid to distinguish children’s specific abilities and disabilities. ITPA was commonly used through the 70s but would later be criticized. Nevertheless, Kirk’s work had brought to light two historically vital concepts: 1) that children with disabilities are intraindividually different; 2) that assessment is vital to instruction. (pp. 19-20). On the other hand, Torgesen (2004) accounts that, two German immigrants, Heinz Werner and Alfred Strauss (1940s-1950s), who unlike Hinshelwood and Orton, chose to study deficient learning processes. Despite the weak scientific support of their work, they nonetheless had contributed the three concepts that would later form the pillars of the learning disabilities movement. (p. 12) For many years until 1970s, emphasis on visual problems and reversal error had dominated studies of dyslexia (Guardiola, 2001, p. 10; Heim and Benasich, 2006, p, 272), but would later be altered by Isabelle Liberman and company, who identified phonological deficits as the cause of dyslexia. More theories have been developed identifying the auditory and visual deficits, brain dysfunctions, and general sensory motor impairments as the cause of dyslexia. A wide-ranging studies focusing on the neuroanatomical and neurophysiological correlates of dyslexia had also been conducted after the publication of Norman Geschwind’s seminal work on cerebral asymmetry (1960s). These works, despite their differences have in fact inspired current interventions and theories on dyslexia. (Heim and Benasich, 2006, p, 272) The Current Theories of Dyslexia. Despite the century-long studies of dyslexia, literatures on dyslexia show that a search for a single theory to explain dyslexia is pointless, because until today there are different contending theories of dyslexia. Among these varied theories, at least four has gained prominence, which Lane (2005) identified as, phonological deficit hypothesis, double deficit theory, magnocellular deficit hypothesis, and cerebral deficit hypothesis. The phonological deficit hypothesis argues that the abilities to represent, store and retrieve sounds are impaired in dyslexics (Khan, 2009, p. 152) because they have neurological abnormalities in the language areas of the brain. This phonological deficit causes them to have difficulty learning the phoneme-grapheme and grapheme-phoneme conversion. Furthermore, this deficit is for life. (Lane, 2005, p. 9) On the other hand, the double deficit theory states that phonological deficits and deficits in processes responsible for naming can occur together or independently, which may cause inaccurate or slow reading (Cain, 2010, p. 140), slow at naming colors or pictures or slower in reacting to an auditory tone or even to a flash of light (Lane, 205, p. 9), Whereas, magnocellular deficit hypothesis, also known the visual theory, describes dyslexia as a deficit on visual perception. It is this deficit that causes difficulties for dyslexics in processing written letters and words. This deficit is caused by a disruption in the magnocellular pathway in their visual system. (Khan, 2009, p. 155). Lastly, the cerebral deficit hypothesis argues that dyslexics actually possess a wide array of deficits such as ‘balance, motor skills, phonological skills, and rapid processing’ and one of these deficits – problems in acquiring automatic fluency in skills through extensive practice, for example in reading – can be explained by a deficit in the cerebellum because the cerebellum is evidently involved in reading. (Lane, 2005, p. 9) The history of dyslexia shows the complexity of the problem because despite going through a long time period of varied research done from different point of views, until today there is no single theory that could define the cause of dyslexia. One thing is sure though, the implications dyslexia can have to learning necessitates serious intervention. Definition As stated earlier, there is no single definition for dyslexia. Those provided by literatures (Lundberg, 1999, pp. 9-30; Snowling, 2000, pp. 14-28; Hartas, 2006; 10-12) simply reiterate the different definitions provided by different theories of dyslexia. Nonetheless the definition that Siegel and Smythe (2004) provide appears the simplest and clearest. Dyslexia is a difficulty in the acquisition of literacy skills that is neurological in origin. It is evident when accurate and fluent word reading, spelling and writing develop very incompletely or with great difficulty. This does not negate the existence of co-morbid difficulties, including receptive and expressive oral language deficits, developmental coordination difficulties and dyscalculia. The manifestation of dyslexia in any individual will depend not only upon individual cognitive differences, but also the language used. (p. 135) Following Siegel and Smythe’s explanation, this three-part definition attempts to incorporate the difficulties dyslexics suffer from, the definitions of the British Psychological Society, the International Dyslexia Association and the National Institute of Child and Human Health Development, and other conditions that may co-exist with dyslexia, for example dyspraxia – difficulties in developmental coordination skills (e.g. poor handwriting skills, difficulty with tying of shoe laces) (p. 135). Features Although dyslexia is commonly associated with reading problems, Riddick (1996) clarifies that is in fact more than a reading problem (p. 18). As Berninger (2000) explains, “dyslexia is a developmental disorder that manifests in different ways at different developmental stages, initially as difficulty in learning letters and letter-sound correspondence, next in learning to read words accurately, and finally in impaired reading rate and written expression skills” (p. 175). In fact, aside from the general features stated in its definition of dyslexia, the International Dyslexia Association (2008) specified features of dyslexia in young children – “difficulty reading single words, difficulty learning to associate letters and sounds, confusion of small words such as "at" and "to," letter reversals, and word reversals” (cited in Williams & Lynch, 2010, p. 66). IDA furthers that “difficulties with letter and word reversals are developmental in nature and are found typically in readers up through the age of 7, children who demonstrate the characteristic of dyslexia may sometimes not be identified as being dyslexic” (cited in Williams & Lynch, 2010, p. 66). The difficulties dyslexic children may encounter actually revolve around reading, writing and spelling, and speaking. Among these difficulties are confusions over letters direction (e.g. b/d) and numbers face (e.g. p/9); sequencing of letters and blending of sounds into words (e.g. cat = [k] [a] [t]); vowel confusion especially with digraphs and diphthongs; difficulty in spelling words, in hearing syllables; difficulty in pronunciation, in rhyming and remembering words, and in sequencing dates, numbers and alphabets; and may also be delayed in learning to talk. (Williams and Lynch, 2010, p. 69) Dyslexia may be accompanied by social, emotional and psychological problems (Ryan, 1994, cited in Wadlington, Jacob & Bailey, 1996, p. 2) Dyslexia in American Public Schools Data consistently show a significant number of dyslexic school-aged children in the US: 85% of the 2.9million children with LD are dyslexics comprising 5% of the total population of public schools (Wright, 2009, p. 396); at least 17%-20% or 1: 5 child has reading disability (NICHD, 2000, cited in Berninger, 2000, p. 175). Federal laws, such as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (1975), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (1990), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, unanimously mandate the protection of dyslexic students (Wadlington, Jacob & Bailey, 1996, p. 2). However, what the law states, unfortunately does not conform with reality, because until today, according to Berninger (2000) many dyslexic public school students remain neglected. (p. 175) In fact, Williams and Lynch (2010) report that the term dyslexia is more commonly referred to in the US public schools as reading and learning disability, as indicated by the lack of school programs specifically addressing dyslexia (p. 66). This problem Berninger attributes unscientific philosophical beliefs influencing educational practice; untrained teachers – preservice teachers are not knowledgeable of dyslexia and general education instructors regard dyslexia a special education issue, while special education instructors regard it a general education problem (Williams and Lynch, 2010, p. 66); lack of research-validated methods; and conflicting legalistic and professional framework to education programming. (p. 175) Much more, dyslexic students themselves indicate a discrepancy between them and their teacher as to how they perceive their scholastic competence, which adversely affect dyslexic students socially and emotionally (Wadlington & Wadlington, 2005, p. 16). In short, there is not enough seriousness in the enactment, implementation and monitoring of the law and there is much confusion among educators in regarding dyslexia. References Bentham, S. (2002). Psychology and Education. New York: Routledge. Berninger, V. W. (2000). Dyslexia the Invisible, Treatable Disorder: The Story of Einstein's Ninja Turtles. Learning Disability Quarterly 23 (3), 175. Cain, K. (2010). Reading development and difficulties. UK: John Wiley & Sons. Carson-Knight, V. N. (2007). Why adults with learning disabilities dropped out of college: Support services and accommodation. A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Capella University, School of Education. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest Information and Learning Company. Cousins, C. And Duhl, L. (1983). Health technology case study 25: Technology and learning disabilities. Washington, DC: US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment: Davis, R. D. and Braun, E. M. (1997). The gift of dyslexia: Why some of the smartest people can't read and how they can learn. New York, NY: Penguin. Fischer, SR. (2001). A history of writing. London: Reaktion Books. Glazzard, J. (2010). The impact of dyslexia on pupils’ self-esteem. Support for Learning 25 (2), 63-69. Great Britain Parliament: House of Commons, Education and Skills Committee. (2006). Special Educational Needs: Oral and written evidence. Norwich: The Stationery Office. Guardiola, J.G. (2001). The evolution of research on dyslexia. Retrieved from http://ibgwww.colorado.edu/~gayan/ch1.pdf Hallahan, D. P. and Mock, D. R. (2003). A brief history of the field of learning disabilities. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, and S. Graham, Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 16-29). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Hartas, D. (2006). Dyslexia in the early years: A practical guide to teaching and learning. Oxon: Routledge. Heim, S. and Benasich, A. A. (2006). Developmental disorders of language. In D. Cincchetti and D. J. Cohen (eds.), Developmental Psychopathology (2nd edition, vo. 3, pp. 268-316). US: John Wiley and Sons. Hornstra, L., Denessen, E., Bakker, J., Van de Bergh, L., and Voeten, M. (2010). Teacher attitudes toward dyslexia: Effects on teacher expectations and the academic achievement of students with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities 43 (6), 515-529. Hudson, R. F., High, L. And Al Otaiba, S. (2007). Dyslexia and the brain: What does current research tell us. The Reading Teacher 60 (6), 506-515. Khan, A. (2009). Developmental dyslexia: Current scenario. In R. Shyam and A. Khan (Eds.) Clinical child psychology (pp. 149-162). India: Gyan Publishing House. Kirby, J., Silvestri, R., Allingham, B.H., Parrila, R., and La Fave, Chantal, B. (2008). Learning strategies and study approaches of postsecondary students with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities 41 (1), 85-96. Lane, K. A. (2005). Developing ocular motor and visual perceptual skills: An activity workbook. USA: SLACK Incorporated. Lundberg, I. (1999). Towards a sharper definition of dyslexia. In I. Lundberg, F. E. Tonnessen, and I. Austad (Eds.), Dyslexia: Advances in theory and practice (pp. 9-30). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Meijer, C. J. W., Pijl, S. J. and Hegarty, S. (1997). Chapter 1: Introduction. In S. J. Pijl, C. J. W. Meijer and S. Hegarty (Eds.), Inclusive education: A global agenda (pp. 1-7). London: Routledge. Ness, M.K. and Southall, G. (2010). Preservice teachers’ knowledge of and beliefs about dyslexia. Journal of Reading Education 36 (1), 36-43. Nugent, M. Services for children with dyslexia – the child’s experience. Educational Psychology in Practice 24 (3), 189-206. Ott, F. (1997). How to detect and manage dyslexia: A reference and resource manual. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers. Riddick, B. (1996). Living with Dyslexia: The Social and Emotional Consequences of Specific Learning Difficulties. London: Routledge. Snowling, M. J. (2000). Dyslexia (2nd Edition). US: Wiley-Blackwell. Siegel, L. and Smythe, I. (2004). Dyslexia and English as additional language (EAL): Towards a greater understanding. In G.Reid and A. Fawcett (Eds.). Dyslexia in context: Research, policy and practice (pp. 132-146). England & USA: Whurr Publsihers. Torgesen, J. K. (2004). Learning disabilities: An historical and conceptual overview. In B. Y. L. Wong (ed.). Learning about learning disabilities (3rd Edition, pp. 3-40). UK: Elsevier Academic Press. Turkington, C. And Harris, J. R. (2006). The encyclopedia of learning disabilities, 2nd edition. New York, NY: Infobase Publishing. Wadlington, E. M., Jacob, S. and Bailey, S. (1996). Teaching Students with Dyslexia in the Regular Classroom. Childhood Education 73 (1), 2. Wadlington, E. M. and Wadlington, P. L. (2005). What educators really believe about dyslexia. Reading Improvement 42 (1), 16+. Williams, J. A. and Lynch, S. A. (2010). Dyslexia: What Teachers Need to Know. Kappa Delta Pi Record 46 (2), 66+. Wong, B. Y. L., Graham, L., Hoskyn, M. and Berman, J. (2008). The ABCs of learning disabilities (2nd edition). UK: Elsevier Academic Press. Wright, Z. S. (2009). Dyslexia. In C. Clauss-Ehlers (ed). Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural School Psychology (pp. 396-397). New York, NY: Springer. Read More