Intervention for Dyslexia - The British Dyslexia Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Progressive Small Steps Logical Overlearning. The last of these points (overlearning) refers to the systematic use of repetition, both within and between lessons, in the attempt to ensure that newly acquired skills and material are automatised, consolidated in memory, so that they can be readily applied or recalled when needed, and will not be disrupted or confounded by subsequent lesson material. For many years the Hickey programme was the principal basis for phonologically-based teaching provided by the Dyslexia Institute until Walker and Brooks (1996) developed the variant called the Dyslexia Institute Literacy Programme (DILP), which remains the basis for teaching provided by Dyslexia Action. 1 Like Thomson, Walker and Brooks (1996) also emphasise the importance of overlearning. Walker (2000) has specified five key principles of specialist teaching for children with dyslexia and has outlined the reasons behind these (see Table 1). In a similar review, Townend (2000) stresses the importance of teaching phonological awareness, specifying that a specialist teaching programme for children with dyslexia should incorporate the following: Structure – i.e. logical progression of elements with small steps teaching and explicit links being made between steps. Multisensory – i.e. active and interactive integration of visual, auditory, kinaesthetic and tactile elements. Reinforcement – i.e. reinforcement of all skills through regular practice to provide automatic access to all components of learning. Skill teaching – i.e. teaching should concentrate on the development of useful and transferable skills rather than on learning facts and information, which would create unnecessary burdens on memory. Metacognition – i.e. encouraging the student to think about what strategies and approaches would be best for them to use in different circumstances. Thus according to all three authors who have reviewed this field – Thomson, Walker and Townend, all of whom have been professionally engaged in specialist dyslexia teaching themselves for many years – as well as being multisensory and phonologically based, the key features of specialist dyslexia teaching are that it is ‘structured’, ‘cumulative’ and ‘sequential’. For convenience these last three features may be summed up in one term: systematic. 1 Dyslexia Action is an educational charity that was established in 2006 following the merger of the Dyslexia Institute and the Hornsby International Dyslexia Centre. 20 Intervention for Dyslexia
Table 1. Why use multisensory teaching? (from Walker, 2000, p. 102) Principle Description Written English Relevant skills to Dyslexic Student MULTISENSORY PHONIC STRUCTURED CUMULATIVE SEQUENTIAL 1.3.4 Conclusions Links four sensory modalities: visual, auditory, oral and manual. Links graphemes to phonemes. An imposed order of presentation of graphemes, orthographic patterns and concepts. Built up in small steps, to ensure mastery of each, before progressing to the next step. Simple responses and concepts are taught before more complex ones. Easy before hard. High frequency before more esoteric. Words need to be seen and read: heard and spelled. English is basically an alphabeticphonetic system. The language can largely be ordered and classified into a coherent system of patterns and regularities. Simple letters build into morphemes and thence into longer words. The student must use all four sensory channels in synchrony to reinforce strong modalities, improve the weak ones and ensure automaticity. Student with poor phonological awareness must improve phonic skills. The dyslexic student may show good understanding of rules and classification. By applying this skill to language he can use analogy and reduce the burden of learning. The dyslexic student is slow to establish automatic responses. They ensure that he can consolidate single responses before more complex skills. This is not a review of all methods that have been applied to the teaching of dyslexics. The remit is to review evidence on ‘specialist dyslexia teaching’, which, by definition, is what qualified specialist dyslexia teachers do. But to review everything that specialist dyslexia teachers do is clearly not possible within the scope of this endeavour and, in any case, many of the things that specialist dyslexia teachers do have not been the subject of much published research. Accordingly, the approach adopted here has been to concentrate mainly on the core of specialist dyslexia teaching, which is structured Intervention for Dyslexia 21
Page 1 and 2: Intervention for Dyslexia A review
Page 3 and 4: Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........
Page 5 and 6: 4.3.4 Computer-based screening test
Page 7 and 8: presuppose any neurological link be
Page 9 and 10: (0.56 for reading accuracy, 0.91 fo
Page 11 and 12: instruction in phonics, it cannot b
Page 13 and 14: Acknowledgements I would like to ex
Page 15 and 16: The remit calls for conclusions to
Page 17 and 18: Co-occurring difficulties may be se
Page 19: Teacher Status (ATS). In general, c
Page 23 and 24: pupils are going to be identified a
Page 25 and 26: coloured overlay as the criterion f
Page 27 and 28: have reported standard scores; unfo
Page 29 and 30: 2 Intervention studies in the US an
Page 31 and 32: progressing normally (36 boys and 2
Page 33 and 34: training in phonological awareness,
Page 35 and 36: subtest. All these children were in
Page 37 and 38: intervention identified by Vaughn a
Page 39 and 40: Vaughn & Linan-Thompson, 2003). Ove
Page 41 and 42: 1. Lindamood Auditory Discriminatio
Page 43 and 44: and writing. Students were taught i
Page 45 and 46: evised as the Lindamood Phoneme Seq
Page 47 and 48: 2.5.10 Torgesen et al. (2004) Torge
Page 49 and 50: period 1995-2003 were identified, a
Page 51 and 52: “The actual reading impairment a
Page 53 and 54: from multisyllabic words. Instructi
Page 55 and 56: 3 UK intervention studies 3.1 Stage
Page 57 and 58: and effect sizes of 0.55 for readin
Page 59 and 60: used Lexia for 10 weeks, after whic
Page 61 and 62: structured phonologically-based sec
Page 63 and 64: 3.3.9 SIDNEY Norgate and Bentote (2
Page 65 and 66: Table 6. Summary of results of UK i
Page 67 and 68: Table 6 (continued). Summary of res
Page 69 and 70: Table 6 (continued). Summary of res
Page 71 and 72:
3.4 Studies in UK specialist dyslex
Page 73 and 74:
Rack and Walker (1994) presented an
Page 75 and 76:
probably require some 1:1 teaching
Page 77 and 78:
& Baker, 2008; Frost et al., 2005;
Page 79 and 80:
Unlike traditional learning disabil
Page 81 and 82:
According to Wolfendale and Bryans
Page 83 and 84:
cases). Glascoe and Byrne (1993) ar
Page 85 and 86:
Between 1.0 and 1.4: moderate dysle
Page 87 and 88:
provided by a study reported in Faw
Page 89 and 90:
Against the many advantages of comp
Page 91 and 92:
Peer, 1998). A high overall level o
Page 93 and 94:
Recently Singleton and Henderson (2
Page 95 and 96:
5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 Scope 5 Read
Page 97 and 98:
5.1.4 Reading Recovery and the teac
Page 99 and 100:
writing. To be able to work on word
Page 101 and 102:
success of the programme appears to
Page 103 and 104:
in a meta-analysis. However, the av
Page 105 and 106:
5.3.2 Every Child a Reader (ECaR) I
Page 107 and 108:
phonological awareness compared wit
Page 109 and 110:
(accuracy or comprehension or both)
Page 111 and 112:
5.5.2 Key Stage 1 results of Readin
Page 113 and 114:
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2
Page 115 and 116:
‘accelerated progress’ children
Page 117 and 118:
It is not until Level 2b that child
Page 119 and 120:
Reading Recovery specifically benef
Page 121 and 122:
6 Computer technology and support o
Page 123 and 124:
6.2.1 The advantages of computer as
Page 125 and 126:
and Olson, 2000). Software designed
Page 127 and 128:
new phonic principle was introduced
Page 129 and 130:
impact on reading and spelling, par
Page 131 and 132:
Berninger, V.W., & Hidi, S. (2006)
Page 133 and 134:
Clay, M.M. (1993a) Observation Surv
Page 135 and 136:
www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/primary/p
Page 137 and 138:
Frost, J. & Sørensen, P.M. (2007)
Page 139 and 140:
Hatcher, P.J. (2003) Reading Interv
Page 141 and 142:
Kuhn, M.R. & Stahl, S.A. (2003) Flu
Page 143 and 144:
Marks, A. & Burden, B. (2005) How U
Page 145 and 146:
Olofsson, Å (1992) Synthetic speec
Page 147 and 148:
Reason, R. & Boote, R. (1994) Helpi
Page 149 and 150:
Singleton, C.H. (1977) Dyslexia or
Page 151 and 152:
Speece, D.L., Case, L.P. & Molloy,
Page 153 and 154:
Torgesen, J.K., Alexander, A.W., Wa
Page 155 and 156:
Vaughn, S. & Roberts, G. (2007) Sec
Page 157:
Wilson, J. & Frederickson, N. (1995
show all

Intervention for Dyslexia - The British Dyslexia Association

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?