Dyslexia Research

Dyslexia / Literacy-Based Disorders

There are many myths about dyslexia circulating in our culture. The most common myth I have encountered is that dyslexia causes students to write backwards. While some individuals with dyslexia do exhibit letter reversals, the presence of letter reversals is not always indicative of dyslexia, nor do most students with dyslexia exhibit this trait. Rather, dyslexia is simply difficulty with reading, writing, and/or spelling that is unexpected considering an individual’s overall intelligence and exposure to adequate reading instruction. In other words, if a student of average or above average ability is not learning to read, write, and/or spell despite having been in a learning environment that teaches these skills, dyslexia may be suspected. Dyslexia is diagnosed by a qualified psychologist who administers a range of IQ and achievement tests, as well as ruling out other underlying conditions, such as visual or hearing impairments.

Once dyslexia has been diagnosed, changes in instruction methods can result in literacy achievement at or above grade level expectations. The key to this is sequential, multi-sensory instruction based on Orton Gillingham (OG) methods. Most classroom teachers are not trained in OG methods, but many schools and communities have the resources available to help students with dyslexia. Private tutoring may also be an option.

While dyslexia never truly goes away, as it is a neurological difference that is probably genetic in origin, its effects can be significantly diminished. A student with dyslexia may have to work harder to do things that seem easy for a neurotypical student, but we are learning that there are many gifts associated with dyslexia. Many, many highly accomplished people throughout history are believed to have been dyslexic, including famous artists, musicians, inventors, entrepreneurs, writers, actors, and scientists. When seen in this light, the brain differences that lead to dyslexia can also lead to amazing creativity and outside-the-box thinking.

What the research tells us

Worldwide prevalence of dyslexia is not well documented, as there is variance in how it is defined and diagnosed. However, statistics range from 4 to 20% (International Dyslexia Association, 2008; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2010; Shaywitz, 2003). The International Dyslexia Association (2002) defines dyslexia as such:

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.

Multisensory, structured language approaches to teaching have been found to be highly effective in improving dyslexic students’ literacy skills. Nonetheless, dyslexia is persistent throughout the lifespan, and the negative psychological effects of dyslexia and related SpLDs are well-documented. A 2006 study by Lackaye and Margalit, for example, showed that students with SpLDs experienced “lower levels of achievement, effort investment, academic self-efficacy, sense of coherence, positive mood, and hope, and higher levels of loneliness and negative mood” in comparison to students without SpLDs.

Nicolson and Fawcett (2008) cite Holt’s studies of failure (1984), in which it was observed that following repeated failures, students either adopt a passive learning strategy or a coping strategy that downplays learning, a vicious cycle that results in more academic failure. Lack of motivation for students with SpLDs is such a serious problem that a 2006 study by Sideridis found that the level of motivation (as shown through self-efficacy, motivational force, task avoidance, goal commitment, or self-concept) was highly accurate in classifying students with or at risk for SpLDs.

As explained by Witzel and Mercer (2003) studies by Dweck and Elliott (1983) and Settle and Milich (1999) indicate that the repeated failures and low achievement associated with SpLDs often lead to learned helplessness, in which students attribute failures to internal causes and successes to external causes. Further studies by Grolnick and Ryan (1990) indicate that children with SpLDs were also likely to perceive academic outcomes as controlled by powerful others, such as teachers, which places the locus of control in external forces. Witzel and Mercer (2003) further cite work by Deci and Ryan (1992) in concluding that students with SpLDs have indicated that their feelings of competence tie directly into their self-esteem. Dev (1997) summarizes others’ studies (Adelman, 1978; Adelman & Taylor, 1986; Brophy, 1983; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1994; Smith, 1994) in concluding that a student who has a fear of failure or low self-esteem is less likely to develop positive motivation to learn.

Generally speaking, there are two categories of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation occurs when the student develops internally satisfying consequences during or after the behaviour. Some examples of intrinsic rewards are task completion, feedback or result, acquisition of knowledge or skills, and a sense of mastery. Extrinsic motivation takes place when the individual performs a task for the purpose of achieving satisfying consequences outside of the person during or after the behaviour. Some examples of extrinsic rewards are tangible objects, token systems, social approval, and special activities. Determining a student’s source of motivation is typically straightforward, as students do what we they are motivated to do, and thus their behaviour displays their motivation (Sprick, Garrison, & Howard, 1998 in Witzel & Mercer, 2003).

Research by Das and colleagues (Das, Schokman-Gates, & Murphy, 1985) finds that in the early grades, students with reading difficulties are as intrinsically motivated as the “normal” readers; however, even with a moderate amount of reading difficulty, they become extrinsically motivated in later years of elementary school. 2002 studies by Sideridis indicate that at-risk students exhibit significantly lower perceptions of goal importance, intention to achieve, belief strength, outcome evaluation, and normative beliefs, and eventually scored lower in language and mathematics at the end of the academic year. Further studies by Polychroni and colleagues (Polychroni, Koukoura, & Anagnostou, 2006) showed that dyslexic students displayed lower academic self-concept than low/average and high performance groups on all domains, except practical ability. Also, dyslexic students perceived reading less as a function of personal development as compared to their peers. Furthermore, the dyslexic group were found to be motivated by external motives, similar to the average/low group, while high achievers were found to have intrinsic motivation.

Dev (1997) summarizes the work of others (Adelman, 1978; Adelman & Taylor, 1986; Gottfried, 1983, 1985) in concluding that enhancing the intrinsic motivation of students with learning disabilities can result in improved learning. There is much debate, however, over how to develop intrinsic motivation that is so often lacking in SpLD students. Kohn (1991) argues that rewards only motivate children to get rewards, and that “special education teachers are using a system that treats students as pets.” The power of tangible rewards is evident in the dopamine discharge in the brains of primates who predict or expect the delivery of preferred rewards (Tremblay, Hollerman, & Schultz, 2000). Further research (Deci, Hodges, Pierson, & Tomassone, 1999 in Witzel & Mercer, 2003) found that the use of tangible rewards (i.e., tokens or stars) with tasks that the students found interesting had a negative effect on the intrinsic motivation of preschool through college students. In other words, “giving tangible rewards based on student performance to students who are already engaged in a task reduces the chance that the student will perform the rewarded task when a tangible reward is not offered” (p.90).

Since, according to Witzel and Mercer (2003), students with SpLDs require more external control and thus more extrinsic motivation to increase the likelihood of their repeating effective academic behaviour, the effect of rewards significantly depends on how they are delivered by the teacher. They explain that positive reinforcement leads to repeated performances, so that when teachers use a reward, they attempt to reinforce a desired behaviour. Witzel and Mercer (2003) further cite Newby (1991) in his finding that explaining relevance provided a fairly strong relationship to on-task performance, whereas using tangible rewards had a negative correlation with on-task performance. Newby also found that a teacher’s use of praise, an extrinsic reward, led to intrinsic motivation. Dev (1997) further summarized the work of others (Boggiano, Main, & Katz, 1988; Skinner, Wellborn, & Connell, 1990) in stating that teachers can enhance the intrinsic motivation of their students by allowing the students to feel that they are in control of their own learning and are encouraged to monitor and reinforce their progress themselves. Furthermore, proximal goal setting has been shown to be self-motivating because it cultivates a feeling of competency in learners (Brophy, 1983; Fulk & Montgomery-Grymes, 1994; Pintrich & DeGroot, 1990 in Dev, 1997).

Nicolson and Fawcett (2008) make reference to two additional elements that are relevant to improving intrinsic motivation: interest and enjoyment. According to Scully and Roberts (2002), “children who experience early literary instruction through pleasurable activities are more motivated to pursue the challenging tasks associated with learning and are more likely to develop a life-long love of reading and writing.” Fromberg and Bergen (2006) emphasize the value of play in the curriculum beyond preschool, stating, “Characteristics of play in later elementary- and early middle-school age children include intrinsic motivation, spontaneity, self-imposed goals, and active engagement.” Hidi and colleagues (Hidi, Renninger, & Krapp, 2004) further argue that interest is “a locus of integration of psychological and neuro-scientific functioning [that] might inform and support conditions for learning that would both position and enable younger students to become more focused, motivated, and successful learners.”

(the above text is from a section of the literature review of a graduate thesis titled “The Green School Effect” on Students with Specific Learning Differences by Jennipher Spector)

Works Cited in Literature Review

Abercrombie, H.C., Kalin, N.H., Thurow, M.E., Rosenkranz, M.A., and Davidson, R.J. (2003). “Cortisol Variation in Humans Affects Memory for Emotionally Laden and Neutral Information.” Behavioral Neuroscience. 117: 505–516.

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4^th Edition.Washington, DC: Author.

Barkley, R.A. (2006). Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Third Edition: A Handbook for Diagnosis and Treatment. US: The Guilford Press.

Berman, M.C., Jonide, J., and Kaplan, S. (2008). “The Cognitive Benefits of Interacting with        Nature.” Psychological Science. 19:1207-1212.

Berto, R. (2005). “Exposure to Restorative Environments Helps Restore Attentional Capacity.” Journal of Environmental Psychology. 25(3):249-259.

Carbone, E. (2001). “Arranging the Classroom with an Eye (and Ear) to Students with ADHD.” Teaching Exceptional Children. 6: 72-81.

Council for Learning Outside the Classroom. (2006). Learning Outside the Classroom Manifesto. U.K.: Department for Education and Skills.

Das, J.P., Schokman-Gates, K., and Murphy, D. (1985). “The Development of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivational Orientation in Normal and Disabled Readers.” Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. 3: 297.

Dev, P.C., (1997). “Intrinsic Motivation and Academic Achievement : What Does Their Relationship Imply for the Classroom Teacher?” Remedial and Special Education.18(1): 12-19.

Elzinga, B.M., Bakker, B., and Bremner, J.D. (2005). “Stress-Induced Cortisol Elevations are Associated with Impaired Delayed, But Not Immediate Recall.” Psychiatry Research. 134: 211-223.

Fromberg, D. and Bergen, D. (2006). Play From Birth to Twelve: Contexts, Perspectives, and Meanings, 2^nd ed. New York: Routledge.

Fuller, R.A., Irvine, K.N., Devine-Wright, P., Warren, P.H., and Gaston, K.J. (2007). “Psychological Benefits of Greenspace Increase with Biodiversity.” Biology Letters. 3:390-394.

Glomstad, J. (2004). “Burden of Proof: Occupational Therapists are Researching the Science Behind Sensory Integration.” Advance for Occupational Therapy Practitioners. http://www.atotalapproach.com/docs/SI.pdf

Greenewald, M. J. and Walsh, C. (1996). The Effect of Environmental Accommodations on Attending Behavior of an ADHD Chapter I Student: An Action Research Study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, U.S.

Grolnick, W.S. and Ryan, R.M. (1990). “Self-Perceptions, Motivation, and Adjustment in Children with Learning Disabilities: A Multiple Group Comparison Study.” Journal of Learning Disabilities. 23: 177-18.

Gulwadi, G. (2006). “Seeking Restorative Experiences: Elementary School Teachers’ Choices for Places that Enable Coping with Stress.” Environment and Behavior. 38:503-520.

Harrell, C. (1996). General Classroom Structural Interventions for Teaching Students with Attention Deficit Disorder-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADD-HD). {Microfiche}

Hartig, T., Mang, M., and Evans, G. W. (1991). “Restorative Effects of Natural Environment Experiences.” Environment and Behavior. 23:3-26.

Herzog, T. R., and Strevey, S. J. (2008). “Contact with Nature, Sense of Humor, and Psychological Well-Being.”Environment and Behavior. 40(6):747-776.

Hidi, S., Renninger, K.A., and Krapp, A. (2004). “Interest, a Motivational Variable That Combines Affective and Cognitive Functioning.” In Dai, D. and Sternberg, R. (Eds.) Motivation, Emotion, and Cognition: Integrative Perspectives on Intellectual Functioning and Development. New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Inc.

International Dyslexia Association (2008). Dyslexia Basics. viewed 28 December 2011. <http://www.interdys.org/ewebeditpro5/upload/BasicsFactSheet.pdf&gt;

International Dyslexia Association (2002). Definition of Dyslexia. viewed 28 December 2011. < http://www.interdys.org/ewebeditpro5/upload/Definition.pdf&gt;

Kaplan, S. & Berman, M.G. (2010). “Directed Attention as a Common Resource for Executive Functioning and Self-Regulation.” Perspectives on Psychological Science. 5(1):43-57.

Kohn, A., (1999). Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Kranowitz, C.S. (2005). The Out-of-Sync Child: Recognizing and Coping with Sensory Processing Disorder. New York: Penguin Press.

Kuo, F. E. (2010). Parks and Other Green Environments: Essential Components of a Healthy Human Habitat.  U.S.: National Recreation and Park Association.

Kuo, F.E. & Taylor,F. A. (2004). “A Potential Natural Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Evidence from a National Study.” American Journal of Public Health. 94(9):1580-1586.

Kuo, F.E. (2001). “Coping with Poverty: Impacts of Environment and Attention in the Inner City.” Environment and Behavior. 33(1):5-34.

Lackaye, T. D. and Margalit, M. (2006). “Comparisons of Achievement, Effort, and Self-Perceptions Among Students with Learning Disabilities and Their Peers from Different Achievement Groups.” Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39: 432-446.

Lederbogen, F., Kirsch, P., Haddad, L., Streit, F., Tost, H., Schuch, P.,  Wüst, S., Pruessner, J.C., Rietschel, M., Deuschle, M., Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2011). “City Living and Urban Upbringing Affect Neural Social Stress Processing in Humans.”Nature. 474(7352): 498-501.

Lieberman, G.A., Hoody, L.L., and Lieberman, G.M. (2000). California Student Assessment Project – The Effects of Environment-Based Education on Student Achievement. San Diego, CA: State Education and Environment Roundtable.

Louv, R. (2005). Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature Deficit Disorder. New York: Algonquin Books.

Mangeot, S. D., Miller, L. J., McIntosh, D. N., McGrath-Clarke, J., Simon, J., Hagerman, R. J., et al. (2001). “Sensory Modulation Dysfunction in Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.” Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 43: 399–406.

Matsuoka, R.H. (2008). High School Landscapes and Student Performance. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan.

Mayer, F.S., Frantz, C.M., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., and Dolliver, K. (2009). “Why is Nature Beneficial? The Role of Connectedness to Nature.” Environment and Behavior. 41:607-43.

Mayes, S.D., Calhoun, S.L, and Crowell, E.W. (2000). “Learning Disabilities and ADHD: Overlapping Spectrum Disorders.” Journal of Learning Disabilities. 33: 417-424.

Maynard, T. (2007). “Forest Schools in Great Britain: An Initial Exploration.” Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood.8(4): 320-331.

Miller, L.J., Coll, J.R., Schoen, S.A. (2007). “A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study of the Effectiveness of Occupational Therapy for Children With Sensory Modulation Disorder.” The American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 61: 228-238.

Moss, S. (2012). Natural Childhood. U.K.: National Trust.

Newcomer, J.W., Selke, G., Melson, A.K., Hershey, T., Craft, S., Richards, K., and Alderson, A.L. (1999). “Decreased Memory Performance in Healthy Humans Induced by Stress-Level Cortisol Treatment.” Archive of General Psychiatry.56: 527-533.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2010). Learning Disabilities. Viewed 28 December 2011. <http://www.interdys.org/ewebeditpro5/upload/Definition.pdf&gt;

Nicolson, R.I. and Fawcett, A.J., (2008). Dyslexia, Learning, and the Brain. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

O’Brien, L. & Murray, R. (2006). A Marvellous Opportunity for Children to Learn. U.K.: Forestry Commission and New Economics Foundation.

Ofsted. (2008). Learning Outside the Classroom: How Far Should You Go? U.K.: Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills.

Polanczyk, M.G., de Lima, M.S.,Horta, B.L.,Biederman, J.,Rohde, L.A. (2007). “The Worldwide Prevalence of ADHD: A Systematic Review and Metaregression Analysis.” American Journal of Psychiatry. 164:942–948.

Polychroni, F., Koukoura, F., and Anagnostou, I., (2006).  “Academic Self-Concept, Reading Attitudes and Approaches to Learning of Children with Dyslexia: Do They Differ from Their Peers?” European Journal of Special Needs Education. 21(4): 1469-5910.

Rickinson, M., Dillon, J., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M.Y., Sanders, D., and Benefield, P. (2004). A Review of Research on Outdoor Learning. London: National Foundation for Educational Research and King’s College London.

Ridgers, N. D. & Sayers, J. (2010). Natural Play in the Forest: A Pilot Evaluation of a Forest School. U.K.: Natural England.

Scott, W., Reid, A., and Jones, N. (2003). Growing Schools – the Innovation Fund Projects: an External Evaluation.Council for Environmental Education and University of Bath.

Scully, P. and Roberts, H. (2002). “Phonics, Expository Writing, and Reading Aloud: Playful Literacy in the Primary Grades.” Early Childhood Journal. 30: 93-99.

Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming Dyslexia: A New and Complete Science-Based Program for Reading Problems at Any Level. New York, US: Vintage Books.

Sideridis, G.D., (2006). “Predicting LD on the Basis of Motivation, Metacognition, and Psychopathology: An ROC Analysis.” Journal of Learning Disabilities. 39: 215-229.

Sideridis, G.D., (2002). “Goal Importance and Students at Risk of Having Language Difficulties: An Underexplored Aspect of Student Motivation.” Journal of Learning Disabilities. 35: 343-356.

Taylor, A.F. and Kuo, F. E. M. (2011). “Could Exposure to Everyday Green Spaces Help Treat ADHD? Evidence From Children’s Play Settings.” Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being. 3: 281–303.

Taylor, A.F. and Kuo, F.E. (2006). “Is Contact with Nature Important for Healthy Child Development? State of the Evidence.” in Spencer, C. and Blades, M. (Eds.) Children and Their Environments: Learning, Using and Designing Spaces. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Taylor, F.A., Kuo, F.E., and Sullivan, W.C. (2002). “Views of Nature and Self-Discipline: Evidence from Inner City Children.” Journal of Environmental Psychology. 22:49-63.

Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F., Sullivan, W. (2001). “Coping with ADD: The Surprising Connection to Green Play Settings.”Environment and Behavior. 33(1):54-77.

Tennessen, C. and Cimprich, B. (1995). “Views to nature: Effects on attention.” Journal of Environmental Psychology.15:77-85.

Tremblay, L., Hollerman, J. R., and Schultz, W. (2000). “Modifications of Reward Expectation-Related Neuronal Activity During Learning in Primate Striatum.” Journal of Neurophysiology. 80: 964–977.

Ulrich, R. S. (1979). “Visual Landscapes and Psychological Well-Being.” Landscape Research. 4:17-23.

U.S. Department of Education. (2012). Obama Administration Names 78 Schools in 29 States and D.C. as First-Ever U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools. <http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/obama-administration-names-78-schools-29-states-and-dc-first-ever-us-department-&gt;

van den Berg, A. E., Hartig, T., and Staats, H. (2007). “Preference for Nature in Urbanized Societies: Stress, Restoration, and the Pursuit of Sustainability.” Journal of Social Issues. 63: 79–96.

van den Berg, A.E. and van den Berg, C. (2011). “A Comparison of Children with ADHD in a Natural and Built Setting.”Child: Care, Health and Development. 37: 430-439.

Weinstein, C. (1976). The Effect of a Change in the Physical Design of an Open Classroom on Student Behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Wells, N.M. (2000). “At Home with Nature: Effects of ‘Greenness’ on Children’s Cognitive Functioning.” Environment and Behavior. 32:775-795.

Wells, N.M. and Evans, G.W. (2003). “Nearby Nature : A Buffer of Life Stress among Rural Children.” Environment and Behavior. 35: 311.

Whalen, C.K., Henker, B., Collins, B.E., Finck, D., and Dotemoto, S. (1979). “A Social Ecology of Hyperactive Boys: Medication Effects in Structured Classroom Environments.” Journal of Applied Behaviour. 12(1):65-81.

Witzel, B.S. and Mercer, C.D., (2003). “Using Rewards to Teach Students with Disabilities: Implications for Motivation.”Remedial and Special Education. 24: 88-96.

Yochman, A., Parush, S., and Ornoy, A. (2004). “Responses of Preschool Children With and Without ADHD to Sensory Events in Daily Life.” American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 58: 294–302