10/20/2014
What Is Dyslexia?
Understanding Dyslexia Jeanne Wanzek, Ph.D. Florida State University Florida Center for Reading Research WANZEK 2014
Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience that can impede the growth of vocabulary and background knowledge. International Dyslexia Association
WANZEK 2014
Myth or Fact? Individuals with dyslexia have low intelligence
Dyslexia: Myths and Facts
Myth: People with dyslexia have average or above average intelligence
National Center on Learning Disabilities WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
Myth or Fact?
Myth or Fact?
Dyslexia cannot be cured
Dyslexia is the only kind of learning disability
Fact: Dyslexia is lifelong and cannot be cured. However a proper mix of intervention and support can help students succeed in school, work, and life.
Myth: Dyslexia and reading disabilities are the most common learning disabilities, but there are other LDs like dysgraphia (handwriting) and dyscalculia (math)
National Center on Learning Disabilities WANZEK 2014
National Center on Learning Disabilities WANZEK 2014
1
10/20/2014
Myth or Fact?
Myth or Fact?
Visual therapy or correction is an effective treatment for dyslexia
Dyslexic children write letters and/or words backwards
Myth: Decades of research have shown dyslexia is not a vision problem. Instead it’s a problem of language processing in the brain. There is no evidence that therapies such as vision therapy are effective.
Myth and Fact: Many children reverse their letters when learning to write, regardless of whether or not they have dyslexia. Reversing letters is not a sure sign of dyslexia. It is common for students with early reading skills (whether young children or children with reading problems) to make these errors. A child can also be highly dyslexic and not reverse letters just like some beginning readers don’t make these errors.
National Center on Learning Disabilities WANZEK 2014
Yale Center for Learning Disabilities WANZEK 2014
Myth or Fact?
Myth or Fact?
Dyslexia is treatable
Dyslexia affects mostly boys
Fact: There are successful treatments for dyslexia. While dyslexia is a lifelong learning disability, early and effective intervention can help a student keep-up and retain his grade level in school, as well as minimize the negative effects dyslexia can have such as low self-esteem. Academic and workplace accommodations promote full participation and help for individuals with dyslexia.
Myth: Both males and females can be dyslexic. There are studies that have found more males are referred for dyslexia, but in objective testing there was no ratio in favor of boys (Shaywitz et al. 1990). However, there are studies that have also found a true ratio of almost 2:1 in favor of boys (Liederman et al., 2005; Quinn & Wagner, in press)
International Dyslexia Association and Yale Center for Learning Disabilities WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
General Signs and Symptoms of Dyslexia •
Learning to speak
•
Learning letters and their sounds
•
Organizing written and spoken language
•
Reading quickly enough to comprehend
•
Keeping up with and comprehending longer reading assignments
•
Spelling
•
Learning a foreign language
WANZEK 2014
Dyslexia Intervention WANZEK 2014
2
10/20/2014
Intervention • How is intervention different than core instruction? • What is intensive intervention?
Intensive Interventions Intensive interventions are designed to address severe and persistent learning or behavior difficulties. These interventions are characterized by increased intensity (e.g. smaller group, expanded time) and individualization of instruction and behavioral intervention for students who have been nonresponsive to traditional approaches. intensiveinterventions.org
WANZEK 2014
What is Intensive? •
Do you know how your interventions are performing? • • •
Across a grade Across a school Across the district
WANZEK 2014
Continued Issues in General and Special Education Instruction •
Special education instruction often provided to large groups of students with disabilities; little individualization or differentiation (Vaughn et al., 2002)
•
Lecture as the dominant activity in secondary general education (Bolinger & Warren, 2007)
•
Very little opportunity to read print in special or general education settings (Kent et al., 2012; Vaughn et al., 2002)
•
Low levels of opportunity for active responding for students with reading difficulties and disabilities during general education suggesting large majority of time spent passively learning (Wanzek, Roberts, & Al Otaiba, 2013)
•
Most common comprehension instruction activities in special education were asking students questions about what they read and independent work (Swanson & Vaughn, 2010)
WANZEK 2014
Current Progress for Students with Disabilities •
•
•
Reading comprehension standard scores in fourth and fifth grade rose on average.02-.04 standard deviations in a school year for students with learning disabilities in special education (Hanushek, Kain, and Rivkin, 1998)
Characteristics of Intensive Interventions •
Frequent and continuous
•
Small group or 1:1
Reading gains for students with learning disabilities have been consistently lower than gains for students without disabilities across grades on multiple measures, with an overall decelerating quadratic trend in achievement (Judge
•
Explicit, systematic instruction
•
Active engagement and responding from students with disabilities
& Bell, 2011; Wei, Blackorby, & Schiller, 2011)
•
Targeted, immediate feedback
•
Decision-making based on ongoing monitoring and data
•
Highly trained personnel
Even when gains in reading have been noted for students with disabilities, there’s little evidence these students are accelerating learning to meet grade level expectations even with years of special education services (Morgan, Farkas, & Wu, 2001; Wanzek, Al Otaiba, & Petscher, 2014)
•
WANZEK 2014
The disability subgroup is the most common reason schools fail to make adequate yearly progress (Eckes and Swando, 2009) WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
3
10/20/2014
Research on Intensive Reading Interventions What does the research say about intensive reading interventions and their effects for students at for reading difficulties/ disabilities at the elementary and secondary levels.
K-3 Interventions
Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36, 541-561. Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Scammacca, N., Metz, K., Murray, C., Roberts, G., & Danielson, L. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for older struggling readers: Implications from research. Review of Educational Research.
WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
Study Inclusion
Findings by Duration of Intervention
• Studies published in peer-reviewed journals • Students with learning disabilities or identified as atrisk for reading difficulties • Students in grades K-3 • Interventions: • • •
Early literacy 100 sessions or more Not part of general education curriculum
Intervention Duration
Mean Effect Size Range (Treatments vs. School Comparisons)
5-7 months
.50-.67
8-9 months
.23-.84
More than 1 school year
.22-.64
• Reading outcomes measured
WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
Effects by Instructional Group Size Instruction
Effects by Grade Level Grade Levels
Mean Effect Size Range (Treatment vs. School Comparisons)
Mean Effect Size Range (Treatment vs. School Comparisons)
One-on-One
.22-.84
K-1
.22-84
Group Instruction
.27-.39
2-3
.23-.27
WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
4
10/20/2014
Effects by Intervention Protocol Protocol
Mean Effect Size Range (Treatment vs. School Comparisons)
High Standardization
.22-67
Low Standardization
.22-84
Summary of Early Elementary Findings •
Positive outcomes found for students with reading difficulties and disabilities participating in intensive interventions
•
1:1 instruction yielded high effects; small group trends were higher than large group
•
Earlier intervention has higher effects
•
Few differences in outcomes related to level of standardization in intervention protocol
WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
Study Inclusion Studies Reviewed
4-12 Reading Interventions
•
Studies published in peer-reviewed journals (1995-2011)
•
Students in grades 4-12
•
Students with learning disabilities or reading difficulties
•
Interventions • • •
Reading 75 sessions or more Not part of core, general education curriculum
Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Scammacca, N., Metz, K., Murray, C., Roberts, G., & Danielson, L. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for older struggling readers: Implications from research. Review of Educational Research.
WANZEK 2014
Study Features •
11 treatment-comparison 1 multiple treatment 1 single subject 6 single-group
Largely grades 6-8 (n=10) • • •
•
Student Reading Outcomes Outcome
19 studies • • • •
•
WANZEK 2014
6 studies included lower grades 3 studies included students in 9th grade No studies at 10th-12th grade
Most multicomponent implementations with 3 or more components
Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Scammacca, N., Metz, K., Murray, C., Roberts, G., & Danielson, L. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for older struggling readers: Implications from research. Review of Educational Research.
WANZEK 2014
Number of Measures
Effects
Confidence Interval
Comprehension
22
.10
.06-.19
Reading Fluency
9
.16
.05-.26
Word Reading
12
.15
.05-.24
Word Reading Fluency
11
.16
.06-.26
Spelling
5
.15
.03-.27
Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Scammacca, N., Metz, K., Murray, C., Roberts, G., & Danielson, L. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for older struggling readers: Implications from research. Review of Educational Research.
WANZEK 2014
5
10/20/2014
Effects on Comprehension
Intensity Variables • Relative group size (1-5 vs. 6 or more)
Moderator
• Hours of intervention (less than 115 vs. 115 or more)
Level
Number of effect sizes
Mean effect size
SE
< 115
9
0.09
0.03
115+
7
0.25
0.08
1–4
8
0.24
0.10
5+
11
0.08
0.03
5–6
5
0.10
0.08
6–8
8
0.31
0.09
Hours
• Grade level (elementary vs. middle)
0.07
Group size
• Learning disability
0.13
Grade level Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Scammacca, N., Metz, K., Murray, C., Roberts, G., & Danielson, L. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for older struggling readers: Implications from research. Review of Educational Research.
p value
0.10
Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Scammacca, N., Metz, K., Murray, C., Roberts, G., & Danielson, L. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for older struggling readers: Implications from research. Review of Educational Research.
WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
Elementary and Secondary Findings: Connections Study characteristic
Early elementary (Wanzek & Vaughn, 2007) Mean ES
Upper grades (Wanzek et al., 2013) Mean ES
0.46 0.34 0.56 0.56 0.40
ES range -0.120.92 0.000.56 -0.181.33 -0.090.91 -0.180.88
0.09 0.12 0.20 0.16 0.20
ES range -0.230.84 -0.010.35 -0.061.02 -0.100.48 0.010.39
5–7 months
0.63
0.311.11
0.07
-0.110.35
8–9 months
0.45
-0.181.33
0.14
-0.231.02
More than 1 year
0.45
-0.121.21
0.29
0.030.70
0.14
-0.231.02
Comprehension outcomes Reading fluency outcomes Word reading outcomes Word fluency outcomes Spelling outcomes Duration
Summary of Secondary Findings • Most studies on extensive interventions published in last 3 years • High quality studies demonstrating small effects for extensive interventions on several reading outcomes • Continued research needed on intensity variables for secondary grades • Caution in assuming elementary RTI reading practices apply at the secondary level
Instructional group size Group instruction
0.35
0.05.73
1:1
0.51
-0.181.33
Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Scammacca, N., Metz, K., Murray, C., Roberts, G., & Danielson, L. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for older struggling readers: Implications from research. Review of Educational Research.
WANZEK 2014
Example: Vaughn et al., 2011 • •
7th and 8th grade students who did not respond adequately to a previous year’s intervention Received: • • •
•
Multi-Component Intervention • • • •
•
Standardized treatment (time and lessons standardized for all) Individualized treatment (time and lessons based on student needs) Typical school intervention Fluency Word Study Vocabulary Comprehension
Findings • •
Both interventions led to significantly higher outcomes in comprehension No differences in outcomes between standardized and individualized
Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Roberts, G., Barth, A., Cirino, P. T., Romain, M. A. … Denton, C. A. (2011). Effects of individualized and standardized interventions on middle school students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77, 391-407.
WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
Example: Vaughn et al., 2010 • •
7th-8th grade students with reading difficulties Received: • • •
•
Multi-Component Intervention • • • •
•
Large group treatment (10-15 students) Small group treatment (3-5 students) Typical school intervention Fluency Word Study Vocabulary Comprehension
Findings • •
Group Size was not powerful enough to significantly alter outcomes for students Few differences to suggest 50-min, 1 year intervention was enough to alter outcomes
Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Barth, A., Cirino, P., Fletcher, J., . . . Francis, D. (2010). The relative effects of group size on reading progress of older students with reading difficulties. Reading and Writing, 23, 931–956.
WANZEK 2014
6
10/20/2014
Example: Torgesen et al., 2001 • •
Upper elementary students with learning disabilities Received: • •
•
• • •
•
Auditory Discrimination in Depth Embedded Phonics
Multi-Component Intervention (2, 50-min sessions daily; 8-9 weeks; 1:1) Fluency Word Study Comprehension
Accelerating student learning for students with dyslexia requires: Sustained, persistent research-based intervention with data-based decision-making that accumulates over time to allow students access to general education curriculum and achieve grade level expectations
Findings • •
Large changes in student standard scores across decoding, word reading, spelling, fluency, and comprehension No differences between interventions
Torgesen, J., Alexander, A., Wagner, R., Rashotte, C., Voeller, K., & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58.
WANZEK 2014
Reading Interventions and the Common Core •
Foundational phonemic awareness, phonics and word analysis, word recognition, and fluency standards are grade-level expectations for K-5
•
Language and vocabulary are grade-level expectations K-12
•
Comprehension and reading of both informational and literary text, building in complexity K-12
•
Literacy in social studies, science, and technical subjects targeted in 6-12
•
Reading interventions based on student need provide students with dyslexia ACCESS to these standards
WANZEK 2014
WANZEK 2014
• What does your dyslexia instruction look like: • • • •
Do students have access to intensive interventions? Does the level of intensity match student needs? Is instruction individualized to meet student needs? Are research-based practices in place in all settings serving students with dyslexia?
WANZEK 2014
7
