Question for experienced Phono-Graphix teachers

Janis,

If it’s auditory processing, don’t do an O-G program. They tend to start at about one level ABOVE where the real problem is. I know the Reading Reflex folks will tell you to do R/R. And I’m sure it’ll help your daughter. But depending on how severe it is, R/R may not be intensive enough. In that case, I’m making (again!) my pitch for LMB’s LIPS program.

I’m certified in PG. The 9yo neighbor boy I am working with was diagnosed with CAPD. I haven’t seen his CAPD evaluation, but his mother told me his major problem is auditory integration.

I just pulled the RR pre-tests I did with him in September: 93 blending, 93 segmenting, 70 auditory processing, 88 code knowledge. He was reading on a dysfunctional 3rd grade level when we started — many phonological errors, substitution errors, bad guesses, etc. He had received small-group OG tutoring for two summers, and had spent one year with a classroom teacher trained in OG who used it in the classroom. I’ve worked with him for about 10 hours total using PG, and he’s now reading on a fluent 4th grade level. The improvement has been very significant. I would estimate he’s gained 1.5 grade levels, and we haven’t finished multi-syllable word management yet.

Personally, I would try Reading Reflex and see what happens. It won’t take you long to figure out if it is working or not. After giving RR a try, if blending is still a big problem, I would definitely consider FastForWord. Was your daughter diagnosed with the “auditory decoding deficit” subtype of CAPD? If so, FFW is usually very helpful. One of the characteristics of this subtype of CAPD is poor blending. The neighbor boy I am working with does not have “auditory decoding deficit”, so blending was not a problem with him. His lower auditory processing score was due to his auditory integration problems. The audiologist said PG would be very suitable for him, but not to waste money on FFW.

LMB is a good program too, but I probably wouldn’t consider it until after first trying PG and (for blending problems) FFW.

You might also want to consider NeuroNet (http://www.neuroacoustics.com), which seems to help with auditory integration.

Mary

Thanks, Joan! As I look at these materials more closely, I can begin to narrow down what I think she really needs. I am certain she would not need the whole LiPS program, as she gets the basic code well. She has been taught phonics and can handle shorter words just fine. It is those 5 letter/sound words that will trip her up because I think she is not able to retain the first sounds by the time she gets to the fifth. It may be that no program will help her optimally until we get some improvement in auditory integration/memory (which is questionable). However, I like what I have read so far in RR. The main thing I like vs. O-G is no rules to remember! She has had some ridiculous rules in the Saxon Phonics…like 4 rules for /k/ endings! This is first grade…I can’t even remember those rules and I certainly know how to spell works that end in -ck, -k, and -ke!

All that said, I probably will eventually do all the LB training. V/V has been recommended for my child definitely and she might benefit from some of the other programs. And I believe I can use all of these things with my own hearing impaired students.

Janis

Janis,

I am not an experienced teacher bur rather a parent whose child also has auditory integration and auditory memory problems who has done PG. My child really needed LIPS last year but the school wouldn’t provide it and it was not easily available privately. We did PG, including an intensive, which got him reading. But , I will tell you, that PG really wasn’t enough for him. Now the new resource teacher knows both PG and LIPS and says he is beyond needing LIPS. I would attribute that to the auditory portion of PaCE which we did over the summer. So we got to the same point through a different route.

Still, if I were in your shoes, I’d try PG out. It is much cheaper and works for vast majority of kids. If your child doesn’t seem to be making adequate progress, I’d turn to LIPS instead of OG. LIPS really is designed for kids with AP problems. We got the blending and segmenting down through PACE, which would be another option. He just needed the “kill and drill” approach.

My son did not do nearly as well as yours on pretests on PG. So your child may not be as severe as you fear.

Beth

Mary,

The terminology used in diagnosing varies from audiologist to audiologist depending on the model they use (which makes things more than a little complicated!). In the APD eval., she was diagnosed as having some characteristics of a prosodic deficit and output/organization deficit, but she really fits neither profile well. I had all her testing analyzed by another APD specialist who is an audiologist and SLP (mainly to get therapy recommendations), and he said she fit the auditory integration profile (which is in another model altogether). I can recall that she did fine on the APD test where she had to listen to sounds and then blend them into words. She is very good at that up through 4 sound words. She did miss a couple of the longer words on the blending test, but I don’t think that is a significant deficit for her. (Scored 87 on RR blending test). She seems to be a slow processor which combined with some auditory memory issues, probably results in the integration difficulty. She scored a 30 on the audotory processing test, but she is only half-way through the first grade and they like you to give that test no earlier than first grade sixth month (which would be February), so the results may not be valid. It really helps me to know what she can’t do, though.

The second audiologist is very particular when it comes to recommending FFWD, but he does think it might help my child (maybe for the temporal processing issues?). Crosstrain is on sale now for $49, so I will probably order it and then hope the FFWD program goes on sale if I decide to use it. I do hesitate because I hear such conflicting information about it.

I am delighted to hear that the boy you are tutoring has benefitted so much from PG! That is an encouragement to me! What do I need besides the book? The set of worksheets, etc.? I don’t want to cut up my book and I also want to save time, so I’d rather purchase the necessary materials than make them.

I have talked to a friend on the CAPD board a good bit about Neuronet. With limited knowledge, I will just have to say that at this point I can’t see it being right for my child. I can’t see a connection with vestibular function and her problems. She has great motor skills and seems to only have the auditory processing issues.

Don’t you also use Audiblox, Mary? Do you think the AP portions of that might be useful?

Thanks!!!!
JanisMaryMN wrote:
>
> I’m certified in PG. The 9yo neighbor boy I am working with
> was diagnosed with CAPD. I haven’t seen his CAPD evaluation,
> but his mother told me his major problem is auditory
> integration.
>
> I just pulled the RR pre-tests I did with him in September:
> 93 blending, 93 segmenting, 70 auditory processing, 88 code
> knowledge. He was reading on a dysfunctional 3rd grade level
> when we started — many phonological errors, substitution
> errors, bad guesses, etc. He had received small-group OG
> tutoring for two summers, and had spent one year with a
> classroom teacher trained in OG who used it in the
> classroom. I’ve worked with him for about 10 hours total
> using PG, and he’s now reading on a fluent 4th grade level.
> The improvement has been very significant. I would estimate
> he’s gained 1.5 grade levels, and we haven’t finished
> multi-syllable word management yet.
>
> Personally, I would try Reading Reflex and see what happens.
> It won’t take you long to figure out if it is working or
> not. After giving RR a try, if blending is still a big
> problem, I would definitely consider FastForWord. Was your
> daughter diagnosed with the “auditory decoding deficit”
> subtype of CAPD? If so, FFW is usually very helpful. One of
> the characteristics of this subtype of CAPD is poor
> blending. The neighbor boy I am working with does not have
> “auditory decoding deficit”, so blending was not a problem
> with him. His lower auditory processing score was due to his
> auditory integration problems. The audiologist said PG would
> be very suitable for him, but not to waste money on FFW.
>
> LMB is a good program too, but I probably wouldn’t consider
> it until after first trying PG and (for blending problems) FFW.
>
> You might also want to consider NeuroNet
> (http://www.neuroacoustics.com), which seems to help with
> auditory integration.
>
> Mary

Beth,

When I had Anna tested for language/reading at U of FL, they told me they thought she had enough phonemic awareness that she would not need LiPS (85 std. score). But I know she needs something since 85 is not good. I am hopeful PG will do the trick. I actually did not give her RR scores which I should have done…Blending 87, Segmenting 83, AP 30, Code Know. 76. I really do not consider her severe, just at a “fall through the cracks” level. (As in I’ll have to provide any remediation because she doesn’t qualify LD, just S/L).

Did you do FFWD or just PACE? I’ve gotten such conflicting information about FFWD that I want to pull my hair out or something!

We are having some success with Earobics now which she absolutely could not do a year ago. So I have to think that developmental maturity is also on our side.

Thanks!
Janis

Janis,

I replied to your message about FFW below. We did FFW after first grade, then a PG intensive, we started Neuronet in January of second grade, and added PACE in the summer after second grade. We finished PACE, at least for now, and are still doing Neuronet and have just started The Listening Program. We have kept up with the reading all the way.

For us, I think Neuronet has had the biggest, most fundamental impact on my son.
I saw very clearly that my son was only able to progress in PACE where we had already laid the foundation with Neuronet. We may return to PACE after we finish Neuronet. FFW gave us good, very specific gains but they have not been as life changing as Neuronet.

Beth

Okay, let’s see if I can answer all of your questions.

For Reading Reflex, you can go to the website (http://www.readamerica.net) and order a set of manipulatives for about $15. These are the same ones as in the book but are on cardstock so are a little nicer to use, and then you don’t have to cut up your book. You don’t really need the parent support manual in order to do Reading Reflex, but it’s really handy because of all the worksheet pages in it, so I would recommend getting it. It’s $59 at the website. What I would suggest is perhaps just getting the manipulatives first and see how it goes before investing in the manual, or talk to someone at Readamerica first.

Slow processing is characteristic of children with vestibular issues. What several of us have found with Balametrics (which is a standalone therapy incorporated into NeuroNet, http://www.balametrics.com) is that even simple exercises using the balance board can have a significant impact on processing speed. Even if NeuroNet is not for you, I would look into Balametrics. Perhaps your school could invest in a set and then lend it out to families to try. I know a couple of PACE providers who have had children with severe deficits do some of the exercises on the Balametrics board, and it really helped with speed.

FFW is not that hard to do. The hardest part is the daily grind for the child, because it is a lot of training minutes per day for a lot of days in a row. Personally, I would go ahead and do it, but I would be careful to schedule it during summer months or during some period where it won’t add too much stress to anyone’s scheduling.

It’s possible that your daughter doesn’t blend well past 3 sounds because of poor short-term auditory memory. FFW should help with that. Audiblox would also help with that. I would do the Audiblox after FFW, though. Cognitive skills build on sensory/motor development, and FFW is more of a sensory/motor level therapy. By doing Audiblox after FFW, you would optimize gains from Audiblox.

Different people use AP to mean different things too, which is confusing. Reading Reflex uses it to mean phoneme manipulation. In that sense, Audiblox does not have any AP exercises. However, Audiblox does have exercises that work on developing short-term auditory memory skills. We did PACE (http://www.learninginfo.com) but, because it is so expensive, I recommend waiting until a child is a little older (9 and older is good) and has completed all therapies that reduce deficits on the sensory/motor level. Again, this is to optimize gains. A lot of these therapies take considerable amounts of time and energy (and money), so it makes sense to optimize. It also helps the child to feel more successful.

I should mention that the 9yo boy with CAPD also has neurological issues — ADHD and probably beginning Tourette’s — but has been through PACE. His ADHD testing was interesting. He came out atypical because of his ability to pay attention — a skill we figure was the result of going through PACE. PACE did not help his reading much, primarily because he needed phonological instruction — which is what the PG is providing.

Mary

Mary,

You are a wealth of information, thanks! I will have to check out Balametrics and do a little more research in that area.

Anna does have auditory memory issues beyond phonemes. One thing that clued me into her problems early on was that she couldn’t sing all the words to little songs correctly. It takes many, many repetitions for her to memorize a poem, verse, or song. I guess if FFWD helps auditory memory it might be worth it. We’ve been using Earobics, and it is just hard for me to imagine that FFWD is worth almost 15 times as much as Earobics. But I suppose I will understand it better if I do the Crosstrain.

Janis

Thanks again, Beth. Maybe when life settles down a bit after the holidays I can call Nancy Rowe and see what she thinks about my child.

Janis

Janis,

If your daughter can successfully do Earobics, then you probably don’t need FFW. FFW artificially slows speech down and thus enables a child who has a difficult time with speed of processing to succeed. My son was able to go much further on Earobics after doing FFW. The only problem, after FFW, were the memory ones when they added background noise.

Beth

Janis,

Just one more thing. Nancy Rowe once told me that she thought a lot of the same gains from FFW could be had much less painlessly thorugh Neuronet. I can certainly see how this is true for the memory gains (we have had additional memory gains through NN) but less clear to me how NN would have got us the receptive language gains. We had already done FFW so I didn’t question her about her logic and experience but you might ask her, if you are considering NN.

Beth

Beth,

You know, she could not do Earobics at all when I first received it a year ago. She is now doing all the exercises independently (at the beginning levels) except Karloon’s Ballons, which is the exercise she needs most. That is the one that involves memory and quick processing. I need to sit down and show her how to do it in the guest mode. It was too frustrationg for her when she was successfully doing other parts and then I tried to help her with that one. I think I just need to model how it works several times before she starts with it. I am still uncertain about FFWD for her.

Maybe if we use Earobics for strengthening phonemic awareness and memory, something like Audiblox for the auditory memory exercises (and maybe some of the visual ones since one evaluator did say that her visual integration was her lowest visual processing area although not as low as auditory), and do Phono-Graphix to strengthen her reading, perhaps that is really all she needs for now. I plan to do V/V probably this summer if we don’t do FFWD. She was not receiving any therapy during the past year, so the sudden success on Earobics must be accounted for by normal learning (she has a strong phonics program at school) and maturity. She will begin Speech/Language therapy after the holidays since we finally have all the testing done. But I will be providing most of her remediation. The school just can’t give her the individualized instruction that she needs.

Janis

Janis,

My son could do all of Earobics, including Karloon’s balloons, in the beginning mode at age 7 but not at age 6 when we first bought it. Even at age 7 though, he just couldn’t get past a certain point in the exercises that required distinguishing between sounds (the train and the farmer) and past remembering two sounds with Karloon balloons. Even after Earobics, I had to sit with him to get him through those exercises. Otherwise, he’d get mad and quit (I had to sit beside him when he did FFW too.) If she can make it through the program without stalling, I’d skip FFW.

BTW, my nonLD four year old son can do Earobics without any problem. It is amazing.

Beth

Beth,

That is amazing (about your 4 year old), and it is something that I had wondered (can any child do this?). What I am afraid of is that Anna won’t be able to do the more difficult levels of Earobics. (Just like she can sound out 3 letter words pretty well but not longer ones). She also gets very upset and imptient when trying one that is too difficult for her. That’s why I had to put it away for a year because she knew she did not like it. That test on the PG that requires the child to remember and blend five sounds into a word is extremely difficult for her (couldn’t do any of them). I’m afraid that there is a ceiling in the Earobics that she will reach. I’m just not certain that FFWD will raise that ceiling.

Janis