Your Experiences this year

Just out of curiousity, what piece of FFW did they like? My son’s Neuronet therapist only likes one piece also and I wondered if the opinions were the same.

Beth

/

Thanks for thinking of me. Like you and the teachers you met, I want to help a child improve reading especially and I look for sound answers. This year, I have put 60 kids through FFW and I have 20 scheduled for summer. Some of the summer kids are returning for FFW 2. I have been pleased with the skills the program practices so intensely. Those auditory channels get a full workout and it is interesting to see the spread of skills in the kids that I have worked with. Some kids with reading delays will zoom through the language skills games and struggle so with the phoneme discrimination. Kids with more language based difficulties zoom through the phonemes and struggle with language games.

Hearing so much about early intervention, I had hoped to see a lot of progress with my youngest students, 1st - 3rd grades. For my most impaired students in those grade the program is hard and some wore out before they could get game percentages high enough to consider complete and successful.

I have watched especially closely, the many middle school students I have worked with. They fall into two groups. One group did only FFW and I carefully pre and post tested with the LAC and some
simple and complex syllable words lists with both real and nonsense words. This group showed some progress on the LAC, approx. 20 point improvement, just doing FFW. Word lists improved a little. The main improvement their special ed teachers reported was improved confidence and participation in both reading and oral activities. The second group, has done FFW 1 and then gone into one-to-one intensive (daily, one to two hour) lessons for decoding and comprehension. The decoding lessons are based on Lindamood LiPS. Of course, these students are making the most progress. Some will return this summer to do FFW 2 after considerable work in LiPS. I think that we are hoping to improve automaticity when they go back again to reading in the fall.

So, ours is an intensive program that expects to work with a child daily for two years. FFW is one piece to improve processing accuracy and speed. My experience here and of course with my son is that FFW did not produce any dramatic changes. BUT, if over the long run, as part of an intensive remediation plan, it gives the student some needed skills, I as a parent and a teacher support its use. I do believe the biggest results will come from careful use of a respected “reading” program like Lindamood, Wilson, PG, Orten, Slingerland etc.

Anitya,

Sounds like you are involved with an interesting group of people. Experienced teachers have alot to share.

You have interesting info already and I enjoy you sharing what you know.

Have a great summer.

I thank you for taking the time to respond. My concerns are with the profitibility that has grown up around dyslexia. So many programs purport to “fix” the child for $2,000 or whatever. I tend to think the best thing is good old fashioned TEACHING that employs solid methods and techniques. Even programs like LiPs seem to cover issues that are probably unnecessary for most students, just to get to the few that are the real issue.

Now, I am interested in the automaticity improvements. This area of reading disability research is getting hot. I have not found the magic bullet when the child has a rapid automatic naming deficit (RAN). I have had children who had simply not mastered decoding skills read slowly and haltingly. When that problem is fixed the reading fluency and rate takes off. Other students who have the RAN deficit do not take off, they may add a few words per minute to their reading rate per year, but they remain very, very slow compared to their peers.

It looks like you are doing summer school. I am, too. This year I am trying SDC summer school. I am sure I will be reminded of all the good reasons why I chose to teach resource. But, I also plan to enjoy the four weeks and make the most of them for myself and my students.

Good luck, let us know once in a while what happens.

I know there is alot of critisism of programs that have claims of fixing children’s deficits.
I can not speak to all such programs.

I do respect that these programs have taken the tact of a semblence of using scientific data to support their programs. One must be astute in assessing the adequacy of such studies.
I wonder if the teachers who try to discredit these programs have taken the approach of using the vast scientific knowledge about how the brain functions we have available to us to implement their own programs. Is this a case of people in glass houses throwing stones?
Can the methods you currently use stand the test of known scientific principles?
I would be the first to admit that there is insufficient scientific data in the area of education.
I just wonder if teachers are even getting adequate instruction in school on how to evaluate the efficacy of programs by adequately understanding the meaning of good and bad scientific studies.

One example of this is a program called reading recovery that has failed the test of science miserably, yet, is clung too by many educators.
This is not meant as a critisism of your methods. It is just a call to objectively evaluate your own methods using science as your guide.

In my struggles in how to help my son, I too, have had to look at those $2000 programs and wonder. You know we would spend the money if there was some feeling that it would help, but too often it is all very vague. In my struggles to decide I refered to some of the books I have bought. One book was “Helping Children Overcome Learning Differences” by Jerome Rosner. Through the wonder of the internet, I emailed him and got a response. While I don’t have it right in front of me right now, the gist was STICK TO SOUND INSTRUCTION. It is that consistent instruction that will make the biggest difference even if the pace is slower. I do not, though, believe in reinventing the wheel, or pretending that I have the kind of scientific or linguistic skill to make up my own program. I believe in learning a solid program and using it responsibly. Of course, you tweak things for a particular child, but that is the art of teaching.

I agree with the consistent instruction concept but one must realize there are all kinds of experts with very different types of understanding of what works and how various interventions affect the brains functioning.

For example a teacher no matter how good her instruction can not adequately address the specific needs of a child with sensory integration all by herself. She can instruct 6 hours a day 5 days a week and the child will still fail unless the child’s specific sensory integration deficts are dealt with by an OT who fully understands the deficit and the treatment options.

There is so much information out there that it is next to impossible for one person to gain all the expertise needed to address all the different types of very specific ld’s and combinations of ld’s that can present themselves.

I have a friend who is an opthamoligist who specializes in dysfunctions of the retina if you ask him a question about the cornea he will refer you to an expert in that area.
Instuction has it’s place but so does remediation. It is a cumbersome process of identifying specific deficits (I am not talking about broad labels like dyslexia) Identifying specific deficits like dyspraxia which can be an underlying a cause of speech and writing difficulties, is extremely important. This motor issue can only be addressed if it is identified by someone who is truely qualified to do so.

Specific kinds of help is what is so hard to find. We have been far and wide and disappointed each time about what to do to help our son. It has always seemed to me that in a medical situation with a life altering illness, you are directed to specialists who recommend the most common treatment and if that is not successful on to less common and finally experimental treatments. Not so in education. The school denies you are sick at all because they don’t want to pay for anything. Many teachers go right to their own “homegrown” remedies. Specialist only see their one little corner. Your child still can’t read and no one seems to care!!

I think this is because reading difficulties are poorly understood. The same symptoms may have different causes. And there is little agreement on how to proceed, unlike medicine. I hope for a day in which there is a flow chart of all possibilities and what should be done both in terms of possibily remediating underlying deficits and academic programs.

For my child, the lack of reading seems to have underlying sensory-motor causes which we’ve had a fair amount of success at remediating. This has major carry over into “real life” activities as well as academics. We haven’t always done things in the right order—because there is so little knowledge out there and it is often fragmented among different specialitists. But still, I could tell you exactly what I have done with my son and it might not help your son, even though both have trouble with reading.

There is a danger of being gullible to the latest treatment or fad which may not have adequate scientific testing. We don’t always know who programs will or will not help. I did FFW, for example, with my son only after two different specialists (audiologist and speech and language therapist) recommended the same program. But I think that parents cannot necessarily wait until all the proof is in.

The most useful program my son has done is Neuronet therapy, developed by an audiologist. She is a clinician, not a academic. There are no controlled studies. Just case studies. She documents everything but has published nothing. I decided to do it, despite the lack of scientific evidence, because the profile of the type of kid she worked with was similar to my kid. I don’t regret it.

Beth

I had the same experience with my son in first grade. 1 year of reading recovery and he could barely read the word CAT.

I did some research and found a book called reading reflex. The writer presented what I thought was credible evidence that their program worked. When I presented my findings to the school they could provide me with no support for the use of reading recovery. I am still angry about the fact that the head of curriculum sat down with me and spoke to me with such a condecending tone.

I am glad I bucked the system and taught him myself using that program. If I had left my sons reading education up to the school I have no doubt he would still not know how to read.

My son will be entering 3rd grade next year. He currently reads well above grade level with excellent comprehension.
Again, I ask anyone who critisizes such programs to make sure they are not throwing stones from glass houses.

I actually don’t think any of the teachers on these boards would criticize the use of Reading Reflex. (which are a self selected bunch) Some will say that many kids need more. I think that criticism is being leveled at programs like my son has done—Fast Forward, Interactive Metronome, PACE, Neuronet—which are not reading programs but claim to impact academics. Clearly, as your example shows, sometimes all a kid needs to be is taught correctly. But Reading Reflex was not enough for my son who has more complex problems.

My son has what some have termed multiple deficits related to reading. Conventional approaches, even very good ones, aren’t that successful with such kids. Knowing that, I have sought to remediate underlying deficits with some success.

Beth

At the risk of sounding argumentative, I think I was the person that your comment about learning a solid program was intended for.

I was fortunate to get my master’s in reading and I was further fortunate to learn a good multi-sensory teaching approach, albeit one not used much at this time. It was easy to piggyback on what I knew to expand things.

At the present time I don’t use A program. I have and use: Great Leaps (several children), Read Naturally (several children), reissued Sullivan Programmed Readers (several children, really making a huge noticeable difference), Project Read (I use little anymore but the scope and sequence/vocabulary as the basis for my phonology instruction). I also have assorted additional things to deal with specific skills of different kinds. And, I have a huge classroom library of many things to choose from, several kinds of decodable readers suitable for first-second grade reading levels. Did I miss anything? Probably.

If you don’t have either umpteen years of teaching experience at the level you are working and/or very good training in teaching reading, then you SHOULD purchase a sound O-G program and use it. Meanwhile, you may then want to continue educating yourself on the issues and techniques. Eventually you will have enough of a grasp of the issues and the needs of your students that you can follow a good scope and sequence and plug in appropriate teaching methods and practice materials. In all cases, you still need the scope and sequence.

My area of struggle at this time is teaching writing skills. I do need a good program here at this point and may always.

No argument from me at all! I have always been impressed with your knowledge and skill. In my experience, though, you are an exception. Knowledgable and able to pull instructional pieces to fit your students. Too many teachers with good intentions, think they can just do the same thing that already didn’t work. When the child doesn’t make progress they and their administrators blame the child and the parents. Or they just give you this patronizing smile that you should be happy your 13 year old reads at 2.0 rather than 1.5. That based on the fact that you know personally they have NOT used any of the programs you draw from. Sometime special ed kills us with kindness!! Children in your program are getting the best of what is out there. I just wish other teachers would get the proper training, materials and support to provide a reading program that might make a difference.

That was my point. Thank you for explaining it better than I could.

I would truely like to see better methods for identifying underlying problems (not broad labels) that are based on the latest research. I feel as a parent this is a task I had to take on myself. Also once underlying problems are identified specific research driven treatments or teaching methods should be used. I know that like medicine this is a mix of both art and science. I just am advocating more research, more science.

I think that most of the teachers who would take the time to visit a board such as this are interested in the latest research.

I just would like to see a more multidisciplinary approach. A multidisciplinary approach where each expert brought something to the table. I am amazed that any teacher would not get OT involved with a child who has handwriting difficulties (this was my own personal experience) just as I am sure most would not try to address speech problems on their own.

Even the best teacher can not understand or address all the needs of a child with a handwriting problem. There are just so many underlying deficits that could be affecting a childs handwriting problem.

I think much of the misunderstanding between teachers and parents is that parents expect the teachers to have all the answers for all children. Some teachers even claim too. (another personal experience)

That is quite impossible.

I have been a special ed teacher for over 20 years. I used to wonder how kids got to me in the 8th grade unable to read and their parents unwilling to come in. When my own son could not read I got the full picture. I had always tried to be a good teacher, but there was so much new research and so many programs. I tried to learn and pass on what I found to my colleagues. Please can we do something consistently and intensively. I got some training, but it is hard to teach some of these programs when you have little background in phonics etc. My old district and my old colleagues never really got the idea. Thankfully, in my new position people are using a multidisciplinary approach to problem solve and plan and really try to help the child make some gains.

Angela is right, most teachers are not interested in research. I am an an anomoly for research and trying techniques to see if they work and how well has been my interest, always. I was told that most people of my type (Myers-Briggs) leave teaching.

Not to pat myself on the back. I have a really keen interest in teaching language arts, I am far from being where I would like to be. I am weaker in teaching writing than reading and I am far weaker in dealing with nonacademic special ed. issues (like the majority of the issues that surface with ADHD and now autism spectrum). I am a marginal classroom/behavior manager (enough to get the job done).

As I write this I can’t help but think. I love to teach language arts and I like teaching math. I DISLIKE managing behavior plans, getting work completion up, homework completion up, teaching organizational skills in any meanngful way……………these are the hardest things in the world for me.

We expect special ed. teachers to be able to do it ALL, we expect classroom teachers to do almost all of it (with regard to disabilities in the classroom). We think nothing of demanding that this teacher or that be the quintessimal reading teacher and behavior manager to the severely behavior troubled child and an autism “expert.”

Doctors specialize, most lawyers specialize. Did it ever occur to us that teacher maybe should specialize? Where did we get the idea that teachers can be these across the board highly competent individuals we think they should be?

there are many small schools that could not possibly have all those specialists available. To have one special needs teacher now is great, and they do need to cover all areas.

Anitya,
At the risk of sounding like a broken record (that it appears no one wants to listen to), for writing skills I would encourage you to take a look at the Institute for Excellence in Writing. I have been very dissatisfied about my son’s writing skills, which I think, now that we’ve done a lot of remediation on his receptive and expressive language problems, are suffering more from dysteachia (as Victoria would put it), or possibly ateachia, than anything else.

I did a lot of searching on the homeschool boards on the subject of teaching writing, and this was the program that was most recommended. Homeschoolers simply won’t stick with something that isn’t working. I must say, I am very impressed with the approach it takes to structure and style and have gotten some very good bits of writing out of my son using it.

The basic building block is the key word concept which is described very well on the website (writing-edu.com) in an article in the newsletter section called “Writing Without Tears.” (Website BTW is difficult to navigate and overall could be a lot more informative.) The key word concept is a great and useful tool for easing reluctant and unconfident students into writing.

IEW’s basic product is a series of videotapes aimed at teaching teachers to teach writing. I think the set of seven tapes costs something like $135, but there is a starter set of four tapes covering the fundamentals you would need through about seventh grade for $89. IEW is based in California, and there are often two-day seminars available there that go through all the stuff on the tapes (which are just taped seminars). I would urge you to look into IEW. Samples of the videos are available on the website, and I know there are free demo CDs available as well.

I think we have to take certain aspects of this and take certain burdens away from teachers and schools. Teachers should teach.

We should have a standardized method of diagnosing specific deficits. Again, not broad labels. This is best done by a group of practitioners from varying fields with specific sets of expertise. Many children’s hospitals have such programs. Yet, most insurance companies won’t pay for testing and many parents can’t afford it. I don’t think it is within the realm of the school to diagnose. I think it is supposed to happen by the school but everyone knows that system is beyond broke.
Many teachers don’t even read the IEPs because despite the time and effort put into them they are meaningless bureacratic pieces of paper.

I think health insurance companies need to shoulder some of the burden. states should mandate coverage. Often these are real neuroligical issues but insurance companies dodge responsibility by calling these neurological deficits “developmental”

So if we could just get a better system to identify problems it would be much easier to design effective interventions both educational and therapeutic for specific deficits.

It would be easier for all involved.

Their approach makes sense. Students need time to develop writing. I agree that we should provide models and let them imitate. He is absolutely correct that art is (or was) taught in a structured format. Dance certainly is very disciplined and structured. Eventually the student masters the task and can become creative and express individuality.

I also agree that the standards are ridiculous. We cannot effectively teach all tat is laid out each year. We must move too quickly and lack the time to thoroughly develop concepts, for other things must be taught. So what happens, the “naturals” shine (but they didn’t need the teacher anyway) and the rest fall where they may.

I believe that good teaching requires that we identify the essential things that must be learned…..teach a manageable number of skills and concepts in a year so that teachers can teach to mastery, for most students. The pace of our instruction these days is suited to GATE students.

Yes, I ramble.

This is an interesting thread. Lot’s of programs have been mentioned,lots of thoughts on how to determine the program,and how to determine progress has been mentioned.

The one thing that I find missing, knowing the kid. Getting to know the kid,sitting and watching the kid,talking and discussing it with the kid.

Again,I believe there is no cure,there is no program that will make a special ed. kid and regular ed kid.It is all in the way the kid,NEEDS to learn.

Any program will fail if it is placed in such high priority as being THE program that will make them “normal”. There are just way too many variables in regards to HOW this kid learns.

It is interesting to discuss testing,and scores,and determining progress. Okay,maybe interesting is not the word. Frustration is a better term.
Ironicly both of my kids LAC scores were low,showing signiciant impairment. Both scored way above grade level in reading achievment tests. My oldest finds language arts so incredibly boring,he has trouble staying on task. In regards to remediation,no program unless it is on a one on one basis,in my opinion,would be ultimately successful,becaues the variable in it that is missing is KNOWING the kid.

Socks, you are over reacting, in my opinion here. Many of us are teachers and we fully understand this issue. We take this as a given in this discussion. We are interested in HOW to BEST teach these youngsters we work with EVERY day and often get to know very well.

Yesterday I watched one of my most favorite sixth grade classes leave. I know those students, since K (in one case) and second in others. I have helped to take these fellows from nonreaders to being close to grade level. I am so proud of them and they mean very much to me. I am sad to lose them, happy they can move on to junior high school, a big step in their lives.

My point, was in regards to choosing a program. Over reacting or not,how many of those kids who went on after becoming successful in your class,did you really know well. All of them right? It wasn’t about the program you used,it was about getting to know how they learned each one individually, wasn’t it?

Yes, Socks, this is the case. This is why we start with individualized psychoeducational evaluations, this is why I do a number of things myself while the psych. tests. Then as I work with the child, this is further refined. BUT, there are better ways to do and approach things than others, this is what we seek.

I felt many teacher knew my son, but they didn’t know a thing about teaching him to read!! I wanted him to learn to read!!! What makes Ms. ??? think her game are going to teach my kid. I say go with the experts, the Lindamood, the Wilsons, the Ortons, etc.

Well, we obviously need both. It’s why I love Montessori. We get to keep kids in our class for a full 3 years so we really get to know them well. Our system is set up for individualized learning. It’s our job to figure out what makes every child tick and to teach to their strengths. It’s also our job to recognize when we’re stuck and can’t figure out a kid so that’s when we call in the specialists.

At our Montessori school, there’s a daily OT program with specialists trained in sensory integration issues. There’s an SLP. There are various and sundry reading specialists whose expertise is in Lindamood-Bell. It’s not a perfect system but we’re working hard to get it to be the best possible.

Unfortunately it’s a private school and out of the economic reach of most families.

I really do think that it can be used as a model for public schools but unfortunately they’d have to fire a lot of their teachers first. Too many wouldn’t be able to handle teaching in such a multi-disciplinary fashion.

Getting to know is so difficult.

One needs expertise in so many areas.

My son has bilateral motor issues. One of the ways this manifests is in mixed handedness (varying right and left hand use for different things) He also seems to ignore the left side of the page when he writes with his right hand. Some kids with bilateral motor issues will stand at an easel and paint with their left hand when they are painting the left side of the picture and use their right hand to paint the right side of the picture. These kids have trouble crossing the midline and performing tasks that requires the left hand and right hand to meet in the midlline like catching a ball.
I also have mixed handedness but never recognized it as a problem. The other day I caught myself taking notes on something and writing straight down the right side of the page using my write hand.

Apparently this type of issue affects sequencing which in turn affects organizational issues.
Both things my son and I have trouble with.

My point in all of this is that this is just one subset of a subset of his ld (and I am just figuring out apparently mine) He has other issues.

It is far more complex than I believe most realize. I can’t figure out how a teacher with 20 kids is going to figure out each specific deficit in each child when there is no 2 children who will have exactly the same thing.

I didn’t invent “dysteachia”, picked it up from someone else on this board, but thanks for the plug anyway.

Your right! How is that possible? probably isn’t. LMB,OG both are one on one programs,the main reason these programs would not be offered,how can it? God I wish I knew the answer,but I don’t. All I do know is all of these very small factors can make up one child,and the only way to know these factors exist,or at least which are effecting their learning is by looking,watching, and talking to the kid.

Would hate for a teacher or a parent to make a decision on a program and assume it is THE ONE for ALL kids in the class.You just can’t fit a square peg into a round hole,it isn’t possible. Now that is NOT to say this is what ALL teachers or previous posters are saying,my only thought is something that wasn’t mentioned before.

I happen to be fairly ambidextrous. When painting a room, I use whichever hand will fit in the corner. When painting watercolour miniatures, I switch hands to reach fine detail. Over the years I have become more right-handed because it fits in social expectations, from tools to doorknobs, but I still use either hand for many things.

I also have messed-up vision, untreated amblyopia and a non-functional left eye.

Add on balance problems, a stutter, spasming muscles under stress, an ordering problem, some odd memory blips, great difficulty seeing and remembering faces, and all sorts of other stuff.

I’ve heard every one of these listed as a couse for reading disability.

Funny thing is, I’m an excellent reader; keep topping out on tests. I also write pretty well, although with all of the above it took four years after I could read to get a legible sentence out of me, and I was an adult before I could type. But once the physical stuff improved to below average, I was able to learn to write very well.

All of those things may be *part* of a learning disability, and they certainly need to be addressed to help the child in very many ways; but please don’t look for one of these as a simplistic single answer as to why a child can’t read. In a very large number of cases, good teaching can get a child reading whether or not one of these other issues is present.

Yes,it can be a subtest score indicating a disability,but not effecting their educational performance,or a subtest score not meeting criteria for eligibility and but causing appalling detriment.

This is the point. Even though you got scores,even though you got programs if you DON”T know the kid,if you don’t KNOW what IT is that is causing the problem,well….

I too am ambidexterious,okay not sure if I truely fit the definition,I am left hand dominant. Left handed people have to learn to use their right hand,because it is a right hand world. So I use my right hand for most tasks except to write.
I did not learn to read until I was 12 years old. Many reading programs were tried,many weren’t. I participated in vision therapy,years of it.
It wasn’t until I turned the book sideways did I figure out how to read. No teacher noticed this,no teacher ever thought to ask me about it. When I would turn my head,or cover one eye to read,I was told to stop. Copious amounts of worksheets,and reading primers later,I suppose I taught myself. My point,and effort to explain what I am saying here is strictly from a personal viewpoint. Any program is only as good as the teacher using it,AND if it is the program that the kid needs,not the class.

Wondering where your school is. What state?

I’ve always wanted to put my dyslexic son into Montessori schools — he can only learn hands on. My older non LD son has gone to Montessori for several years. The Montessori teachers always tell me that public school is the best place for him — and it wasn’t.

A Montessori school with LIPs and OT is my dream.

I live in CT.

Did the Montessori school say your LD son would be better off in public school? Or your non-LD son? Many Montessori schools aren’t equipped with special services for LD kids so maybe that’s what they meant. You’d have to pay extra for any services, even if they have someone on staff. Some are so small that they just don’t have even a learning specialist on board so the students get referred to outside tutors. The school I work for is a large Montessori school and runs through 8th grade. The teachers are well-trained in various learning styles; many have taken Lindamood-Bell training.

A couple of thoughts:

You say that people of your personality type seem to quit teaching. Hmmm. as soon as I entered teaching I found that I was the wrong kind of person for the system as it existed, and after getting forced out of a number of jobs, I left the system and now work privately and on contract. Having looked at the system as it has been since the mid-seventies, with ever-lower results even on its iwn tests, ever-increasing scandals, and so on, I think that being the wrong kind of person for the system may not be all bad. In my youth in the dark ages, I had several excellent and memorable teachers; none of them would be hired in the present system because they lacked the paper qualifications, or had too strong and vibrant opinions and personalities, or both. Be proud that you’re not another colourless mindless robot practicing double-think.

You say that you joined the Association of Educational Therapists. I really wanted to do that too, but the requirement for 1500 hours of supervised therapy stymied me, as I do almost all my tutoring work independently, and I’ve returned to Montreal where it would be hard to find someone to supervise me anyway. Besides which I’m getting old and cranky and set in my ways (not really, but if one more person gives me the “whole language” party line, they’ll get some really ripe whole language in return …) If you happen to be talking to people in the organization, perhaps you could ask them if there is any way around this issue. If there is, please email me as the application disappeared in the move.

Hope your summer goes well. We’re thinking about building a few arks up here right now.

There ARE a _few_ public Montessori programs. My second child is “graduating” from his 6-9 public Montessori class today. Between 2 kids, I’ve spent 5 years with this class room. I’m going to miss it more than the kids!

My older son is NLD, and we are suspecting NLD or Asperger’s with the younger one. I think Montessori with the right teacher/s is an idea setting for a lot of children with LD’s.

Karen

Socks, O-G programs can and are done with groups. They work as well as any program that is NOT done 1:1 can work with groups, really pretty well.

I see what you mean about watching the child and getting to know them. It is truely important. I like the montessori idea of three years with the same teacher.

It seems every year around April my son’s teacher says to me “I see what you mean about his gift’s he truely has some amazing ideas” sigh. Then the school year ends and we start again.

I wish that it could all be spelled out for them in a way that they could understand and buy into in the beginning of the year. I just wish the whole system was organized in such a way the gifts and weaknesses were truely spelled out in a more concrete definitive way.

We both worked as nurses so you’ll understand this analogy. Imagine picking up a group of patients and being told they have cancer. You aren’t told if they have renal tumors, brain tumors or lung ca. Now go and care for them. Huh now which one might need 02 sats and which one do I need to check their neuro status and which might need to have their urinary output monitered.

It just seems that teacher are up against this type of problem. Why isn’t their a better defined system of understanding specific types of ld? Why isn’t there more time spent figuring this all out before they even get to the classroom?

It just seems as though the teachers must reinvent the wheel every year. But I agree even after things are spelled out teachers would have to watch and modify things. They are little people with a wide variety of ever changing strengths and weaknesses.

You misunderstood my post. I was just saying that this is only one problem he has. I was explaining this to show why it is so complex. This is just one of many things affecting his ability to perform well in school. I think if this was his only problem it would be fairly easy to remediate. He has already made great strides now that I know what it is and how to address it. He received sensory integration ot at school and I think without it he would not be on the swim team this summer. You should have seen my face the first time he swam the length of the pool. He still needs work at this but it is an amazing feat for a child who has been taking swim lessons his whole life to finally do something like that.

Just because you have mixed handedness does not mean you have bilateral motor deficits. It is just one of the things you see in kids who have it. He has had other things like ignoring the left side of the page when he writes and trouble with ball handling skills and as mentioned above swimming. He does well in some sports but has trouble with sports that require he use both sides of his body in a synchronized way.

He was diagnosed with this by an OT who specializes in sensory integration.

He has other sensory integration issues.

He also reads very well but has trouble writing. This is just one thing affecting his writing.

I have never been diagnosed with LD and always did well in school. I never had trouble learning to read and write. Yet I know I have some bilateral motor deficits and I can see how it has affected me in subtle ways. I think I just naturally compensated. But I do understand why certain activities took more work for me than others. It was a very interesting eye opener for me when I wrote down the right side of the page like that. A few things just made sense that never made sense before.

No, I don’t thing just teaching is enough although it is one important component. Remediation through a good therapist is key.

If you can find a good therapist and teacher who can work together even better.

Ahh,so it’s possible to do it in a group? I was always under the impression that it was reccomended one on one?

O-G was created for one on one teaching. Trainees usually first work one on one. Most tutors work one on one. But it can be used in classrooms by experienced O-G teachers with groups. I have worked with groups as large as 8 students. They must be at the same level, of course!

are you in West Harford?

Anitya,
A friend of mine is developing a writing program, we have field tested it and will soon publish it. When a student masters a story through oral timed readings, we then give that student a pack of words from which to work. The student workbook guides activities with those words.

Examples of cards: on one side - is on the other - are
on one side - child on the other - children
on one side - he on the other - him

on one side - Newtonian on the other - Quantum : )

and so forth

Ken