A Hereditary Factor

“There seems little doubt, given existing knowledge, that the cognitive difficulties that characterize dyslexic readers stem from inherited differences in speech processing mechanisms located in the left hemisphere of the brain. “ Margaret Snowling (2000)

The incidents of dyslexia in families have led researchers to consider the possibility of an inherited factor. Not a 100% certainty of genetic transmission but a genetic predisposition.

Gene markers for dyslexia have been found in chromosome 15 (Smith, Kimberling, Pennington and Lubs 1983) and more recently in chromosome 6 (Fisher et.al 1999).

Links have been established between the gene markers and the phonological difficulties encountered by dyslexics.

“A strong genetic linkage for deficits in phoneme awareness and orthographic coding has now been confirmed in two independent laboratories for the same regions of chromosomes 6 and 18”.  Olson, R. K., Forsberg, H., & Wise, B. (1994).

Nicolson and Fawcett, (1999) have shown how cerebellar impairment may be implicated with dyslexia and may be involved in acquiring language dexterity. They had previously observed speed problems for dyslexic children in almost all areas (1994). The research at Sheffield University found that dyslexic children had severe problems with a wide range of skills, including balance, motor skills, phonological skill and rapid processing. Difficulties in automaticity (Fawcett and Nicolson (1992) implies that dyslexic children may not readily consolidate new learning and therefore find it difficult to change inappropriate learning habits. 

Metacognition

The role of metacognition in learning is of great importance as this relates to the learner’s awareness of thinking and learning.  Chapman, J.W., & Tunmer, W.E. (1997).  have shown how dyslexic children have poor metacognitive awareness. Students who use metacognitive strategies, such as those who monitor their reading comprehension, adjust their reading rates, consider the objectives and so on, tend to be better readers. Metacognitive knowledge or awareness is knowledge about ourselves, the tasks we face, and the strategies we employ.

“Good readers distinguish between important information and details as they read and are able to use clues in the text to anticipate information and/or relate new information to information already stated. They are also able to notice inconsistencies in a text and employ strategies to make these inconsistencies understandable.” Baker & Brown, (1984)

Educational Factors

Learning Environments
Dyslexic children will find it difficult to develop phonological awareness without instruction and special assistance. There is a link between gender and reading achievement and between socio-economic status and performance in reading. This is where individualised teaching by trained teachers can make such a difference to a child’s later reading progress.   This is why a dyslexia friendly learning environment can be so important for the child to develop strategies, which actually work and develop the self-esteem which will lead to increased confidence and sense of purpose.

Individualised teaching for dyslexic students is particularly important at the primary school stage as a means of intervention to prevent a lowering of self-esteem and early recognition of failure.  Unfortunately primary school classes are generally large with many demands on the teachers’ classroom time.

For mainstream schools to provide dyslexia friendly learning environments they need staff who are fully aware of the difficulties faced by dyslexic pupils and how they can be alleviated.  Many of these become major problems in a secondary mainstream environment with its multitude of teachers, rooms and subjects. 

 In the Ofsted report on dyslexia (1999) it is recommended that:

“ Dyslexic pupils need continuing support at secondary school, particularly with ‘higher’ literacy skills such as skimming and scanning text.

Dyslexic pupils should not be expected to do as much reading and writing work as other pupils – alternatives include group-reading and discussion using video equipment”     

SEN Code of Practice (C of P) (January 2002)

The C of P  for Special Educational Needs (SEN) places the rights of children at the heart of the process, allowing them to be heard and to take part in the decision making process whenever possible. The focus is on ensuring that SEN are identified as quickly as possible.

 Schools are expected to respond to the diverse needs of all students, to provide a ‘dyslexia friendly learning environment’ together with a guarantee of support and services to match these needs. There should be staff designated with responsibility for co-ordinating special needs provision in each school.

In mainstream secondary schools the key responsibilities of the Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO) as outlined by the DFES may include, managing the SEN team of teachers and learning support assistants, coordinating provision for pupils with SEN, overseeing the records on all pupils with SEN, liasing with parents of pupils with SEN, contributing to the in-service training of staff and liasing with external agencies including the LEA's support and educational psychology services, health and social services and voluntary bodies.

The introduction of The National Curriculum (NC) in 1988 meant that all (or nearly all) students were to follow a common curriculum: differentiation became more common in mainstream education as a means of delivering the NC.

In June 1994 representatives of 92 governments and 25 international organisations formed the World Conference on Special Needs Education, held in Salamanca, Spain. The Conference adopted a new Framework for Action, the guiding principle of which is that ordinary schools should accommodate all children, regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions. (UNESCO 1994)

In Northern Ireland there is a focus on structure.

“… comparative evidence might suggest that a more productive starting point may be to articulate the aims and purposes we wish to achieve from our education system. Once this had been agreed an educational structure which seems best placed to meet these needs can be designed.” (Mackinnon, D. et al (1997))

In Dec 1999, the Department for Educational and Science (DFES) introduced a new statutory Inclusion Statement into the National Curriculum, which set out three key principles for inclusion which schools should consider at all levels of Curriculum Planning:

a) Setting suitable learning challenges;
                                                                                                                            b) Responding to pupils’ diverse learning needs;
                                                                                                             c) Overcoming potential barriers to learning and assessment for individuals and groups of pupils.

Speaking in the House of Commons at the second reading of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Bill, David Blunkett said:

“All children have a right to a high quality education. If a child has a special educational need that isn’t identified and tackled early, they can fall behind other children and lose out.”

Wearmouth (2001) suggests that there should be “a focus on the characteristics of the individual pupil, the perspective of the parents and the school, and the planning of programmes that take account of all these perspectives, which can then be embedded into the whole school curriculum within an inclusive school.”

The DFES SEN and disability report: Towards inclusive schools (October 2004) reports:

i) progress towards inclusion in mainstream schools has slowed;

ii) a high proportion of the schools visited in this survey have still a long way to go to make the provision of the outcomes of the best;

iii) some pupils with SEN continue to face barriers to participation and achievement;

iv) too little is know by schools about the attainment of pupils with SEN;

v) mainstream and special schools are still too isolated from one another;

vi) many of those in mainstream schools could do better, provided that the curriculum, teaching and other support were better adapted to their needs and greater rigour was applied to setting and pursuing targets for achievement.

Practitioners need to be aware of the wide range of ways (some more subtle than others) in which dyslexic people may have difficulties. Riddick, B. (1996) highlights “the importance of not seeing dyslexia merely as a literacy difficulty but appreciating that some aspects of motor and organisational skills, as well as numeracy, may be affected.”

Policy

It is important that research has an impact on practice.  Education Authorities therefore need policies on dyslexia, staff development, classroom based assessment, computer programmes and curriculum materials focusing on differentiation to facilitate access to the full curriculum for dyslexic children.  Early identification and early intervention should be priority areas (Reid 1998).

Synthetic Phonics
The Government called for an immediate review of the National Literacy Strategy, introduced in 1998, and a large-scale evaluation of synthetic phonics.  It recommended that the DFES work with the Teacher Training Agency review Initial Teaching Training courses, ensuring that teachers are fully aware of different approaches and what the research evidence says about the effectiveness of these different methods. (The House of Commons 21st March 2005)

The Rose review published in Decemeber 2005, an interim inquiry ordered amid growing concern about poor standards of reading and writing among schoolchildren recommends that there should be a bigger and more systematic role for so-called synthetic phonics. Synthetic phonics differs from the more widespread system of analytic phonics which involves teaching letter sounds after reading has begun.

Synthetic phonics is used in Germany and Austria and is generally taught before children are introduced to books or reading. It involves teaching small groups of letters very rapidly, and children are shown how letter sounds can be co-articulated to pronounce unfamiliar words. In a UK version of synthetic phonics, i.e. Hickey's Multi-Sensory Language Course, the first block of letter sounds is 's', 'a', 't', 'i', 'p', 'n', which make up more three-letter words than any other six letters. Children are shown many of the words that these letters generate (e.g. 'sat', 'tin', 'pin').

Jonathan Solity of Warwick University has introduced synthetic phonics into parts of Essex, studying 10,000 children over a seven-year period and comparing his results with those produced by children following the National Literacy Strategy. In Basildon, where learning difficulties previously afflicted 25 per cent of all children, they now only affect 5 per cent.

Since many children seem to learn to read almost regardless of how they are taught, it's those that don’t that we need to worry about, if we are to avoid underachievement and illiteracy.

Results of a study of Scottish Government study of Synthetic Phonics trialled on 300 children in Clackmannanshire schools in Scotland concluded that:

“It is evident that the children in the study have achieved well above what would be expected for their chronological age according to standardised tests."

Overall, we can conclude that a synthetic phonics programme, as a part of the reading curriculum, has a major and long lasting effect on children’s reading and spelling attainment.” Rhona Johnston  and Joyce Watson

It is important that whatever methods are used that there is regular and ongoing assessment of progress.  Barbara Given (1998)

“Because reading is such a complex and multifaceted activity, no single method is the answer. It is time for educators, parents, and everyone else concerned with children's education to make sure that children have all the experiences that research has shown to support reading development." Snow (1998)

The above statement should be a starting point for provision for learners with literacy difficulties. I have observed classes being taught using programmes that are particular effective for some learners, whilst others are experiencing at least boredom and at worst failure. This can be prevented if lesson planning incorporates assessment opportunities and takes into consideration prior learning.   Barbara Given (1998) developed a model, which considers emotional, cognitive, social, physical and reflective elements of learning. This model offers structure to help teachers focus on what is relevant to the individual. It is for the teacher to find the means to motivate and generate appropriate learning.

Teachers are expected to be able to identify learners with particular needs, and then decide which aspects of literacy are the most appropriate for supporting and stretching them. This implies that teachers will need to work together under the guidance of those that understand the requirements of special needs children. The danger is that each subject teacher will make varying and demands upon their students, some having unreasonable high expectations and some having unreasonably low expectations.

Monitoring is essential to ensue that students are not experiencing failure.

Effective monitoring will ensure that standards of pupil attainment continue to rise, that curriculum coverage is appropriate, that planning, marking and assessment policies are followed, that pupils receive a broadly equal entitlement to the same curriculum and that the quality of teaching is addressed on a regular basis.

Monitoring can be a sensitive issue within school as it reaches the heart of teachers' practice and pupils' learning. Monitoring should be carried out with sensitivity, it should involve as many people as possible and it should be carried out within structured yet supportive framework of a team that is working together to improve standards. The information gathered from monitoring procedures must be used to carry the school, its staff and its pupils, forwards. The following are suggested procedures in five areas of monitoring:

Testing
Testing procedures monitor children's progress and attainment at various stages through the curriculum

Teacher Assessment
Where testing fails as a procedure for monitoring pupil progress is in its blanket application and content derived information. Therefore teacher assessment should be seen as a useful monitoring tool.

Monitoring of planning
Planning systems are currently undergoing much change at all levels. With these changes the monitoring of planning will play an important role. Much of the planning specifies exactly what should be taught in each subject and when the lessons should be taught.

Monitoring of books
Book monitoring is an essential tool to ensure that high standards are maintained, that planning, assessment and marking policies are followed and that children receive a broadly similar experience across each class in a year group with approximately the same standards of marking and assessment being applied.

Monitoring in class
Monitoring in class should be undertaken by subject leaders and senior management. It needs to identify two distinct areas: that of good practice and that of weakness. Where good practice is identified it needs to be shared across the staff as a model in a particular area. Where weakness is identified the teacher needs to be supported in a number of ways in order to raise the standard of teaching in that particular respect.

There should be an appropriate timetable for stages of implementation of the monitoring policy and examples of possible formats for the reporting of monitoring exercises. Ideally there should be a mixture of assessments as well as a collection of student work samples that have been gathered throughout the school year. The collection should documents children's progress towards curriculum levels and stages of development. The information included within the portfolio should build a picture of what the learner can do, what needs he or she might have, and what new objectives need to be set for the next steps in learning.  When evaluating student work, terms such as ‘not yet developing’ or ‘working towards’ may be assigned as descriptors of performance.

Good Practice

• seating arrangements need to be flexible to suit individual needs;
• the use of charts and diagrams to highlight the bigger picture;
• display timetables in a variety of places around the school and colour code subjects on the timetables. This simple method will help the pupil who finds it difficult to plan their day;
• the use of signs with pictures or symbols with arrows on corridor walls to help with room location ( they should also be subject colour coded to match the timetable);
• the use of coloured paper for worksheets to reduce glare;
• write on alternate lines on the blackboard/whiteboard and avoid using colours that are not affected by glare;
• increase the use of ICT, particularly word processors and the use of spellcheckers/thesaurus  to build confidence with spelling.  ICT is a good motivator for most pupils;
• add pictures to text and use colour for identifying subject specific keywords;
• label diagrams and charts;
• cloze passages can support the comprehension of important concepts;
• the use of flashcards and  individual letters to encourage the learning of keywords , these could be linked to the Fernald and/or Simultaneous Oral Spelling techniques;
• use games to consolidate vocabulary;
• combine listening and reading by combining texts and tapes;
• text for reading should be chosen to be challenging but within the dyslexic pupils capability;
• work targets set should be realistic and designed to raise self-esteem establish existing knowledge and capabilities to define a baseline for new learning to raise self-esteem;
• use concrete objects and games to support kinaesthetic learners;
• use mind maps and spider grams;
• present information in small amounts, using a variety of means, and provide opportunities for explanations, repetition and revision;
• develop study skills to provide coping skills;
• select homework carefully.

The lists above emphasise the multi-sensory approaches needed to provide a dyslexia friendly learning environment giving access to the curriculum.  Apart from finance and training there is no reason why the above recommendations cannot apply in any mainstream environment providing there is also the commitment and enthusiasm to make them work.

Most schools/colleges will already have Learning Support and/or Classroom Assistants who can provide an excellent service to students with dyslexic difficulties. However, not all assistants will have received specific training to cope with the problems of dyslexia and not all teachers will know how to provide a dyslexia friendly learning environment. Individualised teaching is likely to be reduced with ordinary class teachers being instructed to plan differentiated lessons. The LSA’s may be used to support differentiation.

The declared aim of the DFES is to set a clear strategic direction for support, staff training and development that will lead to a strong, confident and competent workforce focused on increasing pupils’ achievement.

The main difficulty is in achieving effective communication between LSA and subject teachers, particulary where the LSA may not be timetabled for all the lessons. In a large school, where support staff work only school hours this can be quite a problem. Increasingly the position of LSA’s is becoming full time and with so many more being appointed there needs to be different levels of responsibility and a proper career structure. It would be good to attract more men into the job as well to provide role models for some of our more challenging students.

Teacher training is essential if all pupils with dyslexic difficulties are to have access to the curriculum.  Training should address how to use the valuable time of LSA’s and Classroom Assistants.  It is good practice to include the role of the assistants within lesson planning. This goes some way towards encouraging teachers to consider their use and not merely seeing them as an extra body in the classroom.

English teachers are more likely to be familiar with the actual learning difficulties of children with dyslexia. Teachers of other subjects (unless they have received INSET) may be less aware generally of what is required.

West (1997) suggests that the transmission of knowledge and understanding is increasingly becoming visual and that those with well-developed visual skills can be at an advantage in acquiring the visual language of knowledge.

The introduction of interactive whiteboards in schools demonstrates that schools are becoming aware of the need to present information visually. Information, presented as diagrams, can be a great help. Awareness at the planning stage can make a positive contribution to inclusion.

An on-going problem for the provision of dyslexia friendly learning environments is the shortage of new teaching recruits and the increasing use of supply teachers at all stages of the school/college system. In an effort to fill vacancies head teachers are in some cases recruiting teachers from different countries. The effect of this situation is difficult to calculate, but it clearly depends on the continuity and/or the awareness of the supply teacher of the problems faced by dyslexic pupils. This could be a particular problem in schools with a high turnover of supply teachers. 

Pressure is increasing in the primary and lower secondary sectors where the National Tests at KS1/2 and 3 are becoming ever more important.  Whilst they may struggle with the Tests for English, this does not necessarily preclude success in Maths and Science for dyslexic students. It does however require financial support for LSA’s.

If we exclude dyslexic students from the learning process, it can lead to anti-social behaviour. In 1999 Pentonville Prison opened a dyslexic unit for inmates and found that it quickly became oversubscribed. (Pentoville Prison Dyslexia Project 1998)

If we neglect students with Learning Difficulties we run the risk of fuelling failure and in some cases this will lead to truancy and crime.  Schools/colleges calling themselves inclusive institutions must take care not to sideline students with dyslexia difficulties into special education programmes, which in effect exclude them from the community and curriculum within the institution.  As individualised teaching for dyslexic students reduces, the alternatives, differentiation, ICT and LSA’s, will be expected to give them access to the same curriculum and learning opportunities that non-dyslexics take for granted. 

 If parents feel that the system is failing to give their child individualised teaching, some of the wealthier and better informed parents will take matters into their own hands and organise extra help for their children in the form of home-tuition or extra curricular classes. For the rest there is advice at http://www.parentscentre.gov.uk or  http://www.parentpartnership.org.uk 

or in the government publication  Special Education Needs – A Guide For Parents and Carers  that is available from the DFES Publication Centre. Sadly not all parents will be able to access these.

In England and Wales Ofsted Office for Standards in Education outline that inspectors must evaluate and report on the effectiveness of the school’s partnership with parents, including parental involvement with the school and the school’s links with the community. This will help to utilise the skills of parents and maybe avoid potential legal wrangles and tribunals.

“There are many definitions of dyslexia but no consensus. Some definitions are purely descriptive, while others embody causal theories. It appears that ‘dyslexia’ is not one thing but many, in so far as it serves as a conceptual clearing-house for a number of reading skills deficits and difficulties with a number of causes.” Rice and Brooks (2004).

There is no known cure for dyslexia. However Given,B.K. and Reid.G. (1998) are positive that  “much can be done to advance the literacy and learning skills of dyslexic students through awareness of training programmes, identifying the range of difficulties and acknowledging the strengths often shown by dyslexic students.” 

Largely thanks to the Internet there is so much more information readily available to professions than there was 10 years ago. This provides a sound basis for staff development and assessment, teaching and classroom practices, which can enhance the opportunities for success for all dyslexic children.

A consistent approach to meeting children's Special Educational Needs (SEN) places the rights of children at the heart of the process  and consider  the idea of Brooks (2000) that children should ‘begin to perceive the world as a place where their strengths rather than their weaknesses are spotlighted. If this shift in perception occurs, then when they are expected to assume the tasks of adulthood, they will do so with increased comfort, confidence and success.”

Reference List

Baker, L., & Brown, A. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. D. P. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353,394). New York: Longman.

Bradford John  World of Dyslexia http://www.dyslexia.info

Brooks G. Support for Learning, Volume 14, Number 1, February 2000, pp. 27-31(5)

Publisher: Blackwell Publishing

Fawcett,A.J. and Nicolson (1992) Automatisation deficits in balance for dyslexic children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 507-529

Fisher SE, Marlow AJ, Lamb J, Maestrini E, Williams DF, Richardson AJ, et al. A quantitative-trait locus on chromosome 6p influences different aspects of developmental dyslexia. Am J Hum Genet 1999; 64: 146–56

Galaburda (1989) Ordinary and extraordinary brain development: anatomical variation in developmental dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia 39: 67–80

Barbara Given and Gavin Reid (1998) Learning Styles: A Guide for Teachers and Parents. Red Rose Publications. Lancs. pages 120.

Hickey Multisensory Language Course Editor: Combley, Margaret Published: December 2000 Whurr Publishers Ltd

Joel B. Talcott, Peter C. Hansen, Chas Willis-Owen, Alex J. Richardson, & John F. Stein University Laboratory of Physiology, Oxford, Parks Road, OX1 3PT Specific visual deficits in dyslexia r

Johnston Rona  and Joyce Watson Accelerated Reading Attainment: the effectiveness of synthetic phonics www.scotland.gov.uk/edru/Pdf/ers/interchange_57.pdf (Assessed October 2005)

 Mackinnon, D. et al (1997) Education in Western Europe – Facts & Figures. The Open University, London:Hodder & Stoughton

Miles T, Dyslexia The Pattern of Difficulties Second Edition 1993 Whurr Publishers

Muter,V., Hulme,C. and Snowling,M.(1997) Phonological Abilities Test London, Psychological Corporation.

Nicolson, R.I., Fawcett, A.J., and Dean, P. (1996) Impaired Performance of children with dyslexia on a range of cerebella tasks in Annals of Dyslexia XLVI 259-283

 RI Nicolson.,AJ Fawcett,(2002) - The relationship between motor control and phonology in dyslexic children Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines.

OFSTED (The Office for Standards in Education in the UK)  November 1999 www.ofsted.gov.uk 

Olson, R. K., Forsberg, H., & Wise, B. (1994). Genes, environment, and the development of orthographic skills. In V.W. Berninger (Ed.), The varieties of orthographic knowledge I: Theoretical and developmental issues (pp. 27-71). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Ott, P. (1997) How to Detect and Manage Dyslexia. Oxford: Heinemann

Pentoville Prison The dyslexia issue and the Adult Dyslexic G Randall, S Brown - Crisis, 1999b - crisis.org.uk (Assessed October 2005)

Reid G Wearmouth (2001) pp 81 Dyslexia A Practitioners Handbook Third Edition  2003 John Wiley & Sons  

Riddick, B. (1996) Living with Dyslexia.  London: Routledge

 Royal College of Psychiatrists Mental Health & Growing Up Fact sheet 11 Specific Learning Difficulties (2004)

Tallal Paul  - Temporal Processing Deficits of Language Science 5 January 1996: Vol. 271. no. 5245, pp. 77 - 81

UNESCO 1994 Special Education Programme 7, Place de Fontenoy 75352
PARIS 07-SP.

University of Durham (February 2005)

Chapman, J.W., & Tunmer, W.E. (1997). A longitudinal study of beginning reading achievement and reading self-concept. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 279-291.

Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., Hecht, S. A., Barker, T. A., Burgess, S. R., Donahue, J., & Garon, T. (1997). Changing relations between phonological processing abilities and word-level reading as children develop from beginning to skilled readers: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33, 468-479.

West, T. G. (1997) In the Minds Eye. Prometheus Books, Buffalo, New York

Copyright Margaret Tyers August 2005