If your child is struggling with reading, and perhaps you're beginning to wonder if they are dyslexic, it is important to act fast. There is no biologically critical period for the learning of literacy as it is a man-made, cultural activity, but there is a window of opportunity between the ages of about 4-7 when children pick up the skills most easily and quickly. The window never closes, but the older the child the more difficult it will be to remedy any deficiency, eliminate the guessing habit, replace unhelpful strategies and prevent 'disaffection and disengagement from education' (Rose 2009. p38). The key to success with reading difficulties is early and appropriate intervention, though prevention is preferable -see Ruth Miskin's advice, below.

Most children start school enthusiastically, bright, keen and eager to learn but, typically, those who are failing to learn to read will become deeply unhappy after only a year or so and may suffer from frequent 'tummy aches' or other stress symptoms. Some children become rebellious and disruptive as an outward show of distress, maybe even receiving the 'ADHD' label, whilst others become unnaturally quiet and subdued and do their best to avoid all attention; the dreamers at the back of the class.

''The signs are there for mums and dads who care to look out for them. If you have a child who brings books home but doesn’t want to read them; a child who is suddenly either too quiet or too aggressive at school; a child who has clearly memorised her early books or who is being described as “possibly dyslexic” or “plateauing” by her teachers — be alert to the possibility that, no matter how old, she may never have learnt to read properly.'' (Miskin.Sunday Times 26/03/06)

Do NOT accept any of the following excuses for your child's reading and spelling difficulties:
- Your child is lazy / isn't trying / doesn't pay attention / needs to concentrate / lacks motivation
- Your child spends too much time watching television / playing computer games
- Your child has emotional barriers to reading created as a result of your anxieties (Rose 2009 p21)
- S/he hasn't memorised the list of essential sight words yet
- Boys are often slow learning to read
- It's part of his/her whole personality; you can't cure it (FE College staff 'dyslexia' support leaflet)
- His/her brain is wired differently from other children
- S/he has 'a different brain organisation' from other children (Wolf)
- Your child has a neurodevelopmental disability (Bishop 2010)
- S/he's got a phonological processing defect
- His/her particular learning style / 'intelligence' doesn't suit the school's phonics programme.
- His/her 'brain isn't well matched to a literacy-based society' (BDA. Pollak p131)
- S/he's still at the whole word stage
- Don't worry, s/he will catch up -s/he's just a bit slow developmentally
- You have unrealistic expectations; s/he's just not academic.
- It's because s/he's in a one-parent family
- It's because s/he has too many siblings at home
- It's because s/he's left handed / 'right-brained'
- It's due to 'visual stress'; s/he needs tinted lenses/overlays.
- It's because his/her diet is deficient in essential fatty acids
- You haven't /don't read to him/her enough at home
- S/he's inherited your dyslexia genes
- It's because English is his/her second language...
- It's because of his/her ''medical difficulties - constipation, anaemia, poor diet etc'' (UK Gov. LI16.Hewes)

Note that all these excuses place the source of the problem with the child or their parent, never with the teaching or the teaching materials, yet we know that, 'If a child can speak in whole sentences and participate in everyday conversation, the child has adequate prerequisites to be taught how to read' (Prof.Schutz)

Dr. Galen Alessi, Professor of Psychology at Western Michigan University, conducted a fascinating study on school psychologists. He asked 50 school psychologists to list the causes of the learning difficulties of about 5,000 students. ''Based on the results of these 5,000 reports prepared by school psychologists, "the results indicate clearly no need to improve curricula, teaching practices, nor school administrative practices and management. The only needs somehow involve improving the stock of children enrolled in the system, and some of their parents." (Page 149) 'After examining several "mainstream" school psychology texts, Alessi found that when assessing children’s reading problems, school factors were mentioned as a factor between 7% and 0% (zero) of the time. "Child factors" were held responsible for reading problems between 90% to 100% of the time'' (Wrightslaw.The Blame Game)

You are your child's best, sometimes only advocate. If your child is still at the primary stage, approach your child's school and find out what they are using (or have used) to teach your child to read. Until 2007, the programmes provided by the government (NLS, PiPs and Playing with Sounds) were a damaging mixture of methods, but, post the Rose Report, these were withdrawn and replaced by 'Letters & Sounds' (May 2007); a very basic synthetic phonics programme, hastily produced by the government as a free, stop-gap/fall-back programme for schools. N.B its use is not mandatory; schools can use any high quality phonics programme with their beginning readers (L&S FAQ) Unfortunately, even if your child's school is now using Letters & Sounds, Jolly Phonics or another genuine, synthetic phonic programme, there is no guarantee that their teachers know how to teach it properly.

Many teachers, due to poor training, a disinclination to change their ways or, possibly, an ideologically-based aversion to the explicit and discrete teaching of phonics, are still teaching synthetic phonic programmes incorrectly; they'll send home lists of high frequency words (HFWs) for your child to memorise as whole units and will expect your child to use non-decodable books**for initial reading practice. Only 27% of the schools which took part in the phonics reading check pilot (June 2011) said that they taught phonics systematically, as opposed to teaching children mixed methods such as picture clues and sight memory to read words. This ratio is believed to be broadly in line with the picture across England’s primary schools (DfE. Dec 2011)

If your child is just a 'beginning reader' yet brings home the early levels of colour-banded books (pink, red, yellow, blue..) with whole language text to read, then s/he is still being taught with a 'mixture of methods'; beginner readers have little choice but to use whole word memorising along with multi-cueing (guessing) strategies in order to read this type of book with any independence.

Additionally, teachers' synthetic phonics lessons may lack the five P's: Participation, Praise, Pace, Purpose and, perhaps most important of all, Passion. All need to feature strongly in every lesson to ensure successful learning -see Ruth Miskin's key principles below.

Ruth Miskin: 5 key principles to underpin all teaching:
http://www.oxfordschoolimprovement.co.uk/files/assets/video/RuthM_Powerful_Behav_Manag.pdf

Another problem, in many schools, is their ill-advised use of non-systematic, multi-cueing intervention programmes such as Reading Recovery and Catch Up Literacy, despite the 2006 Rose Review's recommendation (accepted by the government) that additional support in ALL the 'waves' of intervention should be fully compatible with mainstream (systematic, synthetic phonics) practice.

The synthetic phonics teaching approach positively excludes the use of multi-cueing reading strategies.

**Oct 2010. The DfE's revised set of criteria for synthetic phonics programmes includes new advice on early texts to practise reading: '(E)nsure that as pupils move through the early stages of acquiring phonics, they are invited to practise by reading texts which are entirely decodable for them, so that they experience success and learn to rely on phonemic strategies. It is important that texts are of the appropriate level for children to apply and practise the phonic knowledge and skills that they have learnt. Children should not be expected to use strategies such as whole-word recognition and/or cues from context, grammar, or pictures.'
http://dfe.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/pedagogy/teachingstyles/phonics/a0010240/criteria-for-assuring-high-quality-phonic-work

In September 2011, Ofsted produced a draft framework for school inspection from January 2012. There will be a new focus on 'the quality of teaching in the school'. In primary schools, inspectors will check on 'pupils’ attainment in reading by the end of Key Stage 1 and by the time they leave the school'. They will 'also look at any data from screening checks of six-year-olds' (Ofsted p.14) Inspectors will gather first hand evidence including discussions with pupils, listening to pupils read and checking on their rate of progress to assess their standard of, and progress in, reading with a particular focus on weaker readers and scrutiny of their work http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/draft-framework-for-school-inspection-january-2012

Parents and teachers will find the following document useful for evaluating their school's 'phonics' programme: Programme Evaluation

For a multitude of reasons a child can have difficulties learning to read even though the school is using a genuine synthetic programme first, fast and exclusively -and with passion! It is absolutely essential that the school implements some one-to-one tutoring immediately it is noticed that the child is failing to keep up with his/her classroom companions and that the tutor uses more of the same synthetic phonics programme, or an intervention programme based on the synthetic phonics principles, not something different; prevention rather than intervention.

Ruth Miskin, an early reading expert, explains, ''I think there will always be a small group of children who will need one-to-one tutoring - even with the best synthetic programmes, best training and best implementation; there are some children who have particular needs that cannot be met in a group - and not just SEN children. We tutored some children with SEN at my old school forever until they could read well. We also tutored children with behaviour problems, long term absentees, new arrivals just to mention a few. These children were always given more of the same and not something different. No amount of group teaching helps a child once they fall behind their peers - though you can sometimes teach in pairs if they are at the same level. If we want to be truly inclusive schools must plan for these children as a matter of course and not just hope for the best. Synthetic phonics is not a simple panacea - it takes determination to get every child reading. As soon as a child fails to learn the first letter on the first day - quick tutoring should take place''. Ruth Miskin recommends that those children who need quick tutoring, 'receive ten minutes of one-to-one practice before the lesson so they are confident from the start' (Miskin.SEN magazine 47)

'Be relentless – never give up until every child can read'. Ruth Miskin's advice to head teachers

If parents want their child tested for 'dyslexia' (BUT-see below), they can write to the Local Education Authority (LEA) themselves and request a free, statutory assessment. Note, that LEA psychologists 'work within a public service ethos in which fairness to all potential clients is actively pursued, but in which it is widely believed that it is also unethical to publicly ''raise expectations'' above what the LA or school can deliver' (Bunn.SEN magazine.54 p69) To avoid delay, parents can arrange for their child to see an independent educational psychologist. They will charge a hefty (£300-£600) professional fee for their services. Education consultant and trainer, John Bald, says that educational psychologists are able to, 'charge large fees for reports based on simplistic tests that are kept secret in order to protect them from legitimate public and academic scrutiny' (John Bald.blog 06/06/10)

In all cases caution is strongly advised; many educational psychologists, including some of those employed by LEAs, are steeped in whole language philosophy and seem unaware of the guidelines in the British Psychological Society's (BPS) publication, 'Dyslexia, Literacy and Psychological Assessment' (BPS.2005 see para 3.6/3.9), which they are expected to put into practice. As a result, their assessment reports will follow the whole language line of thinking. They will recommend, for example, that the student is, ''encouraged to use all the cueing systems in reading'', is provided with 'pictorial/graphical cues' to fit in with their 'visual learning style', and that the student should memorise the high frequency / key topic words globally. In addition, they're likely to recommend that the student is given 'bypass / coping strategies' (Rose 2009 p22), curriculum modifications, and, when older, various accommodations in exams. No mention will be made of the need to use a high quality, synthetic phonics intervention programme to actually deal with the reading deficit as remedial instruction which focuses on phonics at the level of the phoneme (as in synthetic phonics), is, they seem to believe, pointless and futile.

The problem with assessment for dyslexia is that research has cast serious doubt on the validity of all the past and present diagnostic procedures. For a start, a professional assessment will usually include an intelligence test despite the fact that using IQ tests as an integral part of diagnosing dyslexia is known to be scientifically flawed. 'The diagnosis for many years was based on these assumptions: if a child has a serious reading problem, but normal or above normal intelligence, the child must have a special type of reading disability- 'dyslexia'. Children with low reading scores and low intelligence are supposed to read badly because they have low intelligence' (D.McGuinness WCCR p134) These days, the BPS warn that, 'Assessments referring to cognitive test scores within batteries of tests, such as the BAS and WISC, can be informative when pointing to strengths and weaknesses in the individual case. No particular pattern of sub-test scores, however, can be regarded as necessary or sufficient in deciding whether and to what extent learning difficulties can be described as dyslexic' (BPS 2005 p68) At present there is no scientifically valid way of diagnosing dyslexia as a specific learning/literacy difficulty since there is no operational (infallible) definition.

Nowadays, the way most educational psychologists and researchers get around the irksome 'diagnosis problem' is by saying that dyslexia is not a discrete, "all or nothing" phenomenon, something one either has or doesn't have; diagnosis, they will tell you, is based on the level of reading difficulty a person has, measured along a continuum from mild through to severe (Rose 2009 p34) This is the 'Bell Curve' diagnosis, where struggling readers found at some arbitrary point, (say, the lowest 10%) on the normal distribution curve for reading ability may, if the professional doing the assessing deems it to be useful, be given the dyslexia label. ''Literacy difficulties exist on a continuum. There is no clear or absolute cut off point where a child can be said to have dyslexia... (W)hether or not to describe a child’s literacy difficulties as dyslexia will be a matter for professional judgement'' (italics added. Devon LEA Dyslexia Guidance) or 'an intuitive clinical impression' (italics added.Prof. Frith quoted in Miles. p171), In other words, all dyslexia diagnoses are presently based on opinion or guesswork. Kerr, rightly describes this as 'throwing in the sponge' (Kerr p98) and goes on to say, ''(I)t is not legitimate to claim that simply because they all find themselves in this bottom 10% they must all share any particular characteristic, let alone all suffer from the same syndrome, without further evidence that this is so. We have no evidence as to why these poor readers are in this group...All we can properly say from contemplation of the bell curve is that they all seem to be poor readers. It is improper to claim more than this on this evidence – especially to claim that membership of the poor readers group per se indicates possession of a neurological deficit – indicates that all these people suffer from dyslexia'' (Kerr p99)

The second method used by 'educated professionals' to identify dyslexia (used alongside, or as an alternative to the Bell Curve diagnosis) is whether the student's problem has proved resistant to a, ''prolonged and systematic reading intervention'' (Elliott/Gibbs p483) or a ''well founded intervention'' (Rose 2009 p10). This is the Response to Intervention (RTI) diagnosis. What precisely constitutes a, 'prolonged and systematic reading intervention' or 'quality instruction' (Reid Lyon) will not be stated and parents, yet again, will find themselves having to rely on the judgement (personal opinion) of the professional involved. Note that specialist dyslexia teaching as described in Sir Jim Rose's Dyslexia Report 2009 cannot, at present, be considered to provide a 'well founded intervention' as, ''(M)any of the things that specialist dyslexia teachers do have not been the subject of much published research'' (Singleton p21) and those few ''results reported from studies in UK specialist [dyslexia] schools and teaching centres would be regarded as disappointing (or even disregarded altogether)'' (Singleton p74).

Because of their inability to give a legitimate diagnosis (there is no legal definition of dyslexia in this country (Singleton p16) or scientific one), a specialist dyslexia teacher or educational psychologist's written report is unlikely to include the concrete label of 'dyslexia'. Instead, it will substitute words such as, 'has a specific weakness in phonological development', 'has deficits in phonological awareness', or it will be hedged about with words that avoid commitment to a definitive diagnosis; 'literacy difficulties follow the pattern of a SpLD known as dyslexia', 'has dyslexic traits' or, 'is at risk for Dyslexia-SpLD', with the clear cut 'dyslexia' label only given to parents verbally.

As teacher Patrick McEvoy says,'Terms like Dyslexia, Dyspraxia, etc, are not merely used casually, they are used in a quasi-medical way. Children are described as ‘suffering’ from Dyslexia, of being ‘diagnosed’ as ‘having’ Dyspraxia, etc. These labels are affixed as if the child had Measles, Tuberculosis, Asthma. People have forked out large sums to be told their child was ‘suffering’ from Dyslexia (or more likely, that the child was ‘somewhere’ on the Dyslexia spectrum). Such use of language can be very unhelpful, but it hasn’t caused the high priests of the diagnosis industry to question the morality of what they are doing. (“We must earn a crust somehow”, was what one psychologist said when questioned on the overlap one finds in children’s psychological reports)' (McEvoy. Label Babel)

After criticism of her comments on the TV documentary, 'The Dyslexia Myth', where she seemed to suggest otherwise, Professor Snowling declared that '(D)yslexia can be readily identified by educated professionals'. Presumably, being aware that there is no way this can be done legitimately when there is no operational (infallible) definition, she added, 'It is no longer relevant to ask ‘who is dyslexic and who is not' (www.myomancy.com/2005/09/response_to_the) Professors Stanovich and Elliott were more straightforward; 'The underlying difficulty appears to be the same, the way these children respond to treatment appears to be the same, there appears to be no justification whatsoever for going in and trying to carve out a special group of poor readers. This is what 15 years of research, all over the world has shown can’t be justified on a scientific or empirical basis (Stanovich in Mills. The Dyslexia Myth) 'After three decades as an educationalist, first as a teacher of children with learning difficulties, then as an educational psychologist and, latterly, as an academic who has reviewed the educational literature, I have little confidence in myself (or others') ability to offer a diagnosis of dyslexia.' (Elliott. TES)

''The power of the label is rooted in:
a) our natural desire to have a diagnostic term for our difficulties
b) its ability to foster a more positive conception of self
c) its leverage with teachers and the gatekeepers to resources''(Prof. Elliott ppt)

Parents need to ask themselves if it really is a good idea to spend a great deal of time, effort, and often, money, to get their child professionally labeled as 'dyslexic' when there is no genuine science behind its identification. More importantly, obtaining the label certainly does not guarantee that your child will, as a consequence, receive expert 'in school' tuition with a high quality, synthetic phonics intervention programme to remediate his/her reading difficulties see- The options

Possession of the label can make parents more vulnerable to the purveyors of snake oil cures: '(W)hen a child has problems, parents often feel guilty, and they can to some extent assuage that guilt by doing something. So alternative interventions are especially likely to be taken up in situations where the mainstream options are seen as ineffective and parents feel powerless to make a difference' (Prof. Bishop. BDA 2008 ppt) And, once they've gone to all the trouble and expense of obtaining the label, parents and students may be very reluctant to discard it, even if new information comes along which might make them question its legitimacy and usefulness: 'There’s a psychological phenomenon known as cognitive dissonance which is the tendency to filter out information that conflicts with what one already believes, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce one's beliefs. In the context of intervention, it is uncomfortable to conclude that one put in a lot of time and money into a treatment that has not worked. There is likely, therefore, to be a cognitive bias to paint as bright a picture as possible. This seems supported by studies that find a mismatch between people’s perceptions of efficacy and objective evidence.'' (Prof Bishop.BDA 2008. ppt)

Kerr offers other important reasons to avoid the 'dyslexia' label: 'Firstly, much thinking about dyslexia is almost wilfully sloppy and sloppy science never did anyone any good, very particularly the subjects of it... Many diagnoses stand on small, highly controversial and rather subjectively assessed, evidence. And then, people given a diagnosis of a neurological deficit may find such a label at the least disconcerting, at worst devastating... And then, what about those who don't achieve the label? Are they simply (and publicly) to be designated as stupid? And then, we don't appear able to see over or around dyslexia; once the diagnosis has been invoked we seek no other explanations for presenting phenomena. Simpler alternative, much more everyday, scientifically duller, less sexy (and much less lucrative) explanations are very much less assiduously sought once a diagnosis of ‘dyslexia’ has been made' (Kerr.p93)

Don't expect a 'Dyslexia Friendly' school to provide anything more than various accommodations (adjustments to the learning environment), coping strategies (Rose 2009 p22), technological workarounds or curriculum modifications (Rose 2009. p187), with the aim of circumventing children's reading and spelling difficulties rather than fixing them. If the school does provide remedial reading tuition, parents should ask for details so they can check the CONTENT (see What Not to do) and the TIME FRAME of the remedial programme for themselves, carefully: 18-35 hours one-to-one, with equal parent/TA back-up, is usually all that is necessary.

Children do some, or all, of the following as a result of flawed, insufficient or absent instruction NOT because they have a specific brain weakness, 'dyslexia':
- Use alphabet letter names.
- Add or miss out sounds in words.
- Change unknown words to familiar words.
- Say the first sound/s and guess the rest
- Mix sounds around in words e.g. 'girl' as 'grill'.
- Use the pictures or context to help with guessing words.
- Continue to be confused by the shapes and sounds of letters e.g. b/d e/i
- Reverse words e.g. saw/was pit/tip.

You may be able to remediate your child's literacy problems yourself if your child is in the first years of primary education and their reading difficulties aren't too serious. To fix-it-yourself: first, use the free tests here to assess your child's reading, spelling and alphabet code knowledge and then select a suitable programme from those listed here. If the task seems overwhelming then a sympathetic, synthetic phonics trained, remedial-reading tutor may be the answer, see- Choosing a remedial tutor

See 'Teenage Dyslexics' if your child is near or at the secondary stage.

http://www.wrightslaw.com/advoc/articles/ALESSI1.html
The Blame Game! Are School Problems the Kids' Fault?

The Alessi study
www.societyforqualityeducation.org/newsletter/archives/blame.pdf

http://www.patrickmcevoy.co.uk/2010/02/label-babel.html
Label Babel

www.nrrf.org/29_labeled_dyslexic.html
When a child is labeled dyslexic.

http://www.ednews.org/articles/miscue-analysis-a-critque-.html
Miscue Analysis -a critique.

http://www.rrf.org.uk/archive.php?n_ID=41&n_issueNumber=46
Special need or Can't Read? This is a précis of Dr. John Marks' paper 'What are Special Educational Needs?' where he puts forward the hypothesis that the main problem with the 20% of children with unstatemented SEN may be that they have not been properly taught, (and in particular not been properly taught how to read) in their early years at school.

Link to The Options/Choosing a tutor

©