MR and autistic...best reading approach?

I know of an autistic child whose reading benefited greatly from going through PACE (http://www.processingskills.com ). However, I don’t think she was also MR. At the time, she was unable to keep up with the other 5th graders in her special school for autistic children. After PACE, she was able to keep up.

This is the only program I can think of that would be likely to have significant positive results. However, there are no guarantees.

Nancy

I would try Stevenson Reading with this particular child. It has been used successfully with a student in my school who has Down Syndrome.

A while back there was a mother posting about the reading program being used with her son, and about how it was ineffective and was not transferring to other learning. This program turned out to be Stevenson, as I recall.
There were a lot of things about it that seemed quite difficult, notably that the kids were encouraged to move back and forth around words as they identified vowels first, then back to first letter, then jump over to last letter (and what they do with multisylables I really question); also the fact that long vowels were taught first, leading to a numebr if issues with our English variant spellings, silent letters, etc.
I would suggest any method that teaches left-to-right scanning absolutely, single letter patterns before digraphs (vowel or consonant), and has lots and lots of detail and varied activities to teach each step thotoughly before moving up to the next. This is the general approach I take with some very lost students, and given time it definitely works.

Just how limited is the verbal language of this kid? Severely autistic kids often have very poor sound symbol relationships in speech (to say nothing for reading). You need to consider this as you think about teaching reading.

I did use rebus to teach reading to a couple severely autistic kids, but my emphasis was more on language than reading. They didn’t make too much progress but I believe it was more a function of limited language/ speech skills. Two of these students had no speech and used sign language to communicate.

I don’t know anything about Stevenson, but it is worth checking out if others are so enthusiastic.

—des

Stevenson Reading has been altered a bit, and although I haven’t used the new version, I do know that it now starts teaching short vowels before long vowels. After a student has completed the program he or she is generally at about a 3rd grade reading level. Given that Psy was trying to find a program for an MR student, it might be appropriate to expect a third grade reading level.

Some of the mnemonics that the program employs are fantastic. Additionally, students are supposed to isolate vowels and vowel patterns as they’re reading, and while it may seem to slow them down at first, it actually helps them to become more fluent as the program progresses.

I think many people have a problem with this program because it lacks the shiny, glossy packaging and professional look that most other programs have. This has been rectified with one or two of the levels, and it is much more user friendly. It also has *many* supplemental materials that can be ordered from a company called “PAL” (Partners is Associative Learning). When it’s used with older children or children who have had other programs, it seems so easy at first, and this also turns off many parents. Like most other programs, if it is taught by a trained (and you definitely need some training with this one) person who sticks with it and follows the rules, it is very effective it getting a very low, struggling reader going. I’ve used it with many students successfully, and one of the biggest success stories is the boy with Down Syndrome who went through the whole program and can read quite well.

I am one parent whose child was utterly failed by Stevenson. I did not care about glossy packaging. I cared about my child learning to read.

It may well be that Stevenson works well for kids with Down’s syndrome. I know Down’s kids have a particular package of visual strengths combined with auditory weaknesses that may them different types of learners than most kids. I don’t know, however, if other kids with mental retardation necessarily fit that pattern.

I am glad though that Stevenson has changed the long vowel approach. That undoubtedly makes it a better program.

Beth

Well, Beth now makes two.
Glossy packaging had nothing to do with the issue — in fact I’m an anti-gloss person myself.
The first person whose kid was getting absolutely nowhere with Stevenson was less than six months ago, so if there has been an update, it hasn’t yet reached a lot of users.

I am totally in favour of analyzing vowel patterns — just in a consistent left-to-right pattern, very important for a kid with any visual or directionality issues.

My concern about a phonics- based program is this kid’s incredibly poor verbal processing. His verbalizations are quite limited- they are scripted and telegraphic. And yes, he also has poor symbolic capacities. I worked with a few ASD kids that had little language but were able to read pretty well if interested (never knew how they did it), but those kids did much better on nonverbal measures. It’s hard to test this student but I’m trying to find out more about his auditory processing for speech. For instance, can he even match sounds? I guess I was wondering if there was a highly visual approach to reading that uses visual mnemonics to highlight what the word means and help develop a written word - visual image association. He has learned to recognize functional signs- exit, bathroom, stop, etc. These signs provide visual and context cues.

I hope what I have to say doesn’t sound too limiting, but… It is important to choose your priorities, as you only have x amt. of time per day. A child with very limited language skills and speech skills might be better served by more intensive speech and language work than by something that might get him/her a couple grade levels in reading. Reading *can* increase skills in verbal language, but only if the words are relevant and practical.

Visual methods, emphasizing sight words, can only get someone to about a third grade level (and that is absolutely max). If you do teach reading you need to think about the functionality of what you are teaching— how will the child use these skills. *If* the child sounds are not really clear and so forth, the sound/symbol form of teaching reading— the only type that really works, can be limited. I don’t know if LiPS is useful to autistic kids, but I imagine that the conceptualization required might be difficult.
This isn’t something you just pick up and teach anyway.

You need to give some thought to the goal of reading instruction.
When working with autistic adults and teens, for example, I had them read low vocab. recipes, follow verbal directions for pre-voc tasks and that sort of thing. I used a lot of homemade type picture books and paired words with pictures or symbols in communication programs (like PECS).

BTW, if you can find a used Folkes (sp?) Sentence Builder, it might be useful. I made my own and it was tremendously useful. I can give you some ideas on this if you can’t find one.

BTW, not trying to get rid of you and you are certainly welcome to post here— but you may be more helped by a group specific to autism. Unfortunately I don’t really know of one, but a google search would be helpful.

HTH,

—des

Visual memorization, as of signs, is a highly limited skill. A student can memorize a certain number of things in this way but quickly hits a dead end.

I was wondering before; with all this student’s other issues, are you really sure he is MR, or is he just not able to communicate with the tester?
This makes a difference. If he is really MR, you would expect far slower progress and a limited final result. If he is within the normal range after you get past his difficulties, maybe reading can be a route to communication for him.

I use an old reading series from Britain. It is *highly* repetitive, which you need. It has an extremely limited vocabulary, only seventeen words in the first two books and only forty-two total (twenty-five new) in the next two. It is very visual, with realistic pictures (no purple dinosaurs or impossible cartoons), which helps ground kids who confuse easily. Unfortunately it is based on memorization, which I don’t like, so I parallel it with a strong phonics approach, also presented in a very visual and very gradual step-by-step way.
The reading series I use is the *old* Ladybird Key Words reading series, books 1a and 1b through 6a and 6b covering K-1. The workbooks if available are also highly recommended; even more visual and more repetition of the same very limited vocabulary. This set has recently been reprinted by popular demand and is available from penguin.uk (note the uk, NOT com). Don’t even try the American branch which doesn’t communicate with the parent. British postage and customs fees will raise the price but it doesn’t matter; these books are worth their weight in gold for starting off a beginner with difficulties.
Parallel with this I strongly recommend Check and Double Check Phonics from scholarschoice.ca (note the .ca, not com). They are inexpensive and deliver quickly all over North America. The consistency and repetiton and gradual buildup of this series is the best I have seen anywhere. You would want to start right at the beginning of Book 1 and spend a lot of time on every page. You can use the pictures to build vocabulary, too.
If the child is reachable for academic work at least at the low K level, this is the best approach I know.

>Visual memorization, as of signs, is a highly limited skill. A student can memorize a certain number of things in this way but quickly hits a dead end.

I agree. This was commonly taught (some 20 years ago) routinely to trainable (moderately and severely retarded) students. In some cases they would learn the signs but it was not always possible to figure out if they understood what they meant. It is quite possible that some of these are just memorized in a rote sort of way. Does he understand to stay away from a “caution” sign?

>I was wondering before; with all this student’s other issues, are you really sure he is MR, or is he just not able to communicate with the tester?

I wondered this as well, if this was a regular severely autistic student.

>This makes a difference. If he is really MR, you would expect far slower progress and a limited final result. If he is within the normal range after you get past his difficulties, maybe reading can be a route to communication for him.

The trouble is that autism is quite complex. *Some* autistic students easily memorize letter patterns and it is a valid form of possible communication. The thing is— not all do. If you see this reading ability it is often a minor savant skill, over and about other abilities. (I had students that enjoyed “reading” the financial pages— not that they understood it in the usual sense but that it provided some degree of calmness to go thru them.)

>If the child is reachable for academic work at least at the low K level, this is the best approach I know.

This is a big “if”. The time spent may also not be worth it in terms of what you get out vs what you might otherwise spend time on.

—des

Des knows autism a lot more than I do.
I know tutoring reading to a lot of really lost students.

Yes, Des is correct, that is a big, huge “if”.

I have taught reading, using the methods and materials I recommend, to a seriously language-disordered eight-year-old whom the school psychologist wrote off as functioning globally at a three-year-old level (blatantly untrue). But I started by first telling the mother that I refuse to promise anything and we would simply see what we could do; then I spent some time working with the student and finding out that he did indeed have some ideas to communicate behind his babble and that he could learn and remember simple things. He was reading and writing on a six-seven-year-old level within six months (that psychologist was very unprofessional.)

Before expecting the student to learn to read, I would look for signs, any signs, of intellectual functioning. Memorizing signs by sight is a good sign. Do you have any others that would imply he’s at least at a four-year-old level mentally? If yes, you should be able to get somewhere with time and work. If not, you may be wasting your time and his.

Sometimes, as with the language-disordered boy, I start in teaching reading and see if the student will catch on to anything. If he remembers a word or even part of a word or a letter or a story line the next time, if he shows an interest in doing the lesson, then we have something to build on. If nothing at all sticks, maybe time to do some other things like developing more language first.
This feedback approach to teaching is justifiable, especially if you don’t invest huge amounts of time and money and build up expectations. Instead of saying to yourself and the family that you are going to teach him to read now, say that you are going to see if he is ready to learn to read now. You find out if he is ready by starting, slowly and gradually, and if he is, what a great outcome, he’s reading. If not, not a big loss and you can come back to it later.

We have an autistic child in the family, so although I don’t teach autistic children myself I have followed the research and developments quite closely.

Many parents have gotten excellent results with kids such as you describe using a combination of Language for Learning (which develops the language concepts and comprehension, both receptive and expressive, in a very structured way) along with Reading Mastery (you would probably start with Level 1). You can frequently get these at a discount on Ebay. The boy’s language skills must be addressed while you work on reading, but they can be done together. It’s recommended you start with the L4L for a couple of weeks, and then add in the reading. The structure, repetition and interactivity of these programs makes them nearly ideal for autistic kids, although the progress is at a slower rate.

I am not easily impressed but I am *very* positive about the work of these people: www.fabriziomoors.com with autistic kids

A very knowledgeable parent on these issues (and their practical implementation) is Michelle at www.michellecohen.com. If you contact her she will get back to you with helpful advice.

Susan S.
Freelton, Ontario

I do think there is a cognitive deficit for this kid. His adaptive living skills are at age 4 as are the results of all structured testing- all around age 4. I observed him and interviewed everyone who knows him well and I am not seeing any signs of higher abilities or skills- he does not even have selective interests that might suggest higher cognitive skill (like schedules or weather).

I also question the usefulness of spending a considerable amount of time teaching this guy to read. I really want to pull those adaptive skills up as well as functional communication and potential work skills. I do think we need to do more work on language itself. However, his parents’ main question regards his ability to eventually read and I need to answer it as best as I can.

Actually, I posted my question on an “autism” board and people there were also perplexed. They had a lot of good thoughts about approaches to teaching him (ex, ABA) but not the actual instruction materials.

Thanks everybody for putting your 2 cents in. I really appreciate it.

>I have taught reading, using the methods and materials I recommend, to a seriously language-disordered eight-year-old whom the school psychologist wrote off as functioning globally at a three-year-old level (blatantly untrue).

Yes— a lot of times the statements by school psychologists are inane at best. (and that is at best :-)) I have taught reading to children who were in the mild range of retardation and maybe somewhat below. But with a combination of autism and retardation… Mostly this is just autism. (I have worked with kids termed autistic retarded. These are usually kids who are mostly severely retarded with autistic traits. So you really do need to know what it is you are working with. Autistic retarded kids (I mean those who are retarded with autistic traits) are generally more severely retarded, and I doubt able to learn to read signs, etc.

>Before expecting the student to learn to read, I would look for signs, any signs, of intellectual functioning. Memorizing signs by sight is a good sign. Do you have any others that would imply he’s at least at a four-year-old level mentally? If yes, you should be able to get somewhere with time and work. If not, you may be wasting your time and his.

I think that’s a pretty good guideline. Generally these kids are smart in certain ways, though maybe not in typical world senses.

>Sometimes, as with the language-disordered boy, I start in teaching reading and see if the student will catch on to anything. If he remembers a word or even part of a word or a letter or a story line the next time, if he shows an interest in doing the lesson, then we have something to build on. If nothing at all sticks, maybe time to do some other things like developing more language first.

I think this is wise. I would warn you that in most cases though I wouldn’t get into something with much of a story line. In autism, since you have severe deficits in language, something with even a simple story line, maybe be elusive. Who’s the story about? Does the child have the understanding to recognize something other than me and you (and maybe mom and dad)? What’s the character doing? Is he/she doing something that the child knows about?

That’s why I tend to recommend pretty functional reading. Reading recipes; directions to things the child knows about, reading books with pictures of real life things and that sort of thing. Story comprehension takes language skills most of us take entirely for granted.

I haven’t seen the program Sue S recommends, but the idea of language for learning sounds good and might be something to check out.
Reading CAN be a good supplemental language approach. I had a high school student who had poor articulation. She could sometimes write out what she wanted to say and it avoided all kinds of frustration for her.
The other thing is that you can then use some ideas in Carol King’s Social Stories. These are more for high functioning students, but if the child can read a bit I have used them with more severely disabled autistic students.

>This feedback approach to teaching is justifiable, especially if you don’t invest huge amounts of time and money and build up expectations. Instead of saying to yourself and the family that you are going to teach him to read now, say that you are going to see if he is ready to learn to read now.

This is also wise. I see nothing at all wrong with trying to see if he can learn to read. My point was that it is POSSIBLE to waste time doing so if the student does not have the requisite skill and requires a LOT more speech and language work. But it is true that reading can help speech and language development if done appropriately. BTW, I don’t think much of Edmark for just about anybody. Edmark is a Dolch word program. If the child does not have the requisite skills to read using a sound symbol approach, then sight reading Dolch words will get him to about 1st grade level if that. They aren’t very functional either in terms of an actual child’s life and experience. I’d prefer to stick to things the child knows and uses and wants.

—des

Concerning Psy’s reply, in your position I’d try beginning reading skills, maybe 20 minutes at a time, three or four times a week. This is appropriate for a kid at early K level as he is. If he attends and catches on to some of the skills, great, this *is* life skill. And it can be used to help develop language, to learn more vocabulary through his books.

The books which I swear by, the *old* Ladybird series, start with Books 1 and 2 aimed at four-year-olds. They are deliberately designed around a home-and-family setting, and move out very gradually into the community as the levels progress. The pictures are highly realistic, not cartoons. The story lines are extremely limited, just a listing of the kids’ activities over the day. Unlike American books, there is no adult humour or other subtleties. To an adult, this may be dreadfully boring; to a little kid on the level they are aimed at, they are good, something they can understand and relate to, a stable base. Then you grow out of them later. Des, you should realy look at them — they sound like the kind of thing you recommend.