Sunday 30 September 2012

The New Science of Dyslexia


http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2047912,00.html   TIMES article

The New Science of Dyslexia



Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2047912,00.html#ixzz27zUSLvaf


When Sean Slattery, 17, looks at a page of text, he can see the letters. He can tell you the letters' names. He can even tell you what sounds those letters make. But it often takes a while for the articulate high school student from Simi Valley, California, to tell you what words those letters form. "I see a wall," he says. "I see a hurdle I have to get over." Some words are easier for Slattery to figure out than others. "I can get longer words, like electricity," he says. "But I have trouble with shorter words, like four or year."
Slattery has dyslexia, a reading disorder that persists despite good schooling and normal or even above-average intelligence. It's a handicap that affects up to 1 in 5 schoolchildren in the U.S., and which is also common among Asians. Though the statistics for Asia are often sketchy, researchers in Japan estimate that as many as 5% of Japanese schoolchildren have dyslexia. Yet the exact nature of the disorder has eluded doctors, teachers, parents and dyslexics themselves since it was first described more than a century ago. Indeed, it is so hard for skilled readers to imagine what it's like not to be able to absorb the printed word effortlessly that they often suspect the real problem is laziness or obstinacy or a proud parent's inability to recognize that his or her child isn't that smart after all.
The mystery�and perhaps some of the stigma�may finally be starting to lift. The more researchers learn about dyslexia, the more they realize it's a flaw not of character but of biology�specifically, the biology of the brain. No, people with dyslexia are not brain damaged. Brain scans show their cerebrums are perfectly normal, if not extraordinary. Dyslexics, in fact, seem to have a distinct advantage when it comes to thinking outside the box.
But a growing body of scientific evidence suggests there is a glitch in the neurological wiring of dyslexics that makes reading extremely difficult for them. Fortunately, the science also points to new strategies for overcoming the glitch. The most successful programs focus on strengthening the brain's aptitude for linking letters to the sounds they represent. (More later on why that matters.) Some studies suggest that the right kinds of instruction provided early enough could rewire the brain so thoroughly that the neurological glitch disappears entirely.
The new science may even be starting to change public policy. When the U.S. government launched an education initiative in 2001 called No Child Left Behind, its administrators made clear that their funding would go only to reading programs that are based on solid evidence of the sort that has been uncovered in dyslexia research. "In education, the whole idea that there is evidence that some programs are more effective than others is new," says Dr. Sally Shaywitz, a Yale University neuroscientist who has written a fascinating new book, Overcoming Dyslexia, that details the latest brain-scan research�much of it done in her lab. "The good news is we really understand the steps of how you become a reader and how you become a skilled reader," she says.
Along the way, a number of myths about dyslexia have been exploded. You may have heard, for example, that it's all about flipping letters�writing them backward, Toys "R" Us-style. Wrong. Practically all children make mirror copies of letters as they learn to write, although dyslexics do it more. You might believe that more boys than girls are dyslexic. Wrong again. Boys are just more likely to get noticed because they often vent their frustration by acting out. You might think that dyslexia can be outgrown. This is perhaps the most damaging myth, because it leads parents to delay seeking the extra instruction needed to keep their children from falling further behind. "The majority of students who get identified with learning disorders get identified between the ages of 11 and 17," says Robert Pasternack, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services at the U.S. Department of Education. "And that's too late." They can still learn to read, but it will always be a struggle.
This is not to say dyslexics can't succeed despite their disability. In fact, dyslexics are overrepresented in the top ranks of artists, scientists and business executives. Perhaps because their brains are wired differently, dyslexics are often skilled problem solvers, coming to solutions from novel or surprising angles and making conceptual leaps that leave tunnel-visioned, step-by-step sequential thinkers in the dust. They talk about being able to see things in 3-D Technicolor or as a multidimensional chess game. It may also be that their early struggle with reading better prepares them for dealing with adversity in a volatile, fast-changing world.
But that struggle can cut both ways. Dyslexics are also more likely than nondyslexics to end up in prison. According to Frank Wood, a professor of neurology at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, new research shows that children with dyslexia are also more likely to drop out of school, withdraw from friends and family or attempt suicide.




The stakes have never been higher. Right now in the U.S. there are almost 3 million students in special-education classes specifically because they can't read. Most of them are probably dyslexic. But there are other slow readers who are simply overlooked�ignored in crowded classrooms or dismissed as discipline problems. Unless corrective action is taken, their self-confidence often crumbles as they see other students progressing. Even worse, their peers might taunt or ostracize them�a situation that Sean Slattery's mother, Judy, remembers all too well. "Sean cried for four hours every day after kindergarten," she says. "He was so unhappy."
In Asia, research on dyslexia suggests its incidence might be significantly lower than in the West due to the differences in how Asian scripts are processed by the brain (). The bad news is that Asians with dyslexia are far more likely than Westerners to go undiagnosed, unaided and branded as lifetime losers. Growing up in Malaysia, Ahmad Fitri Isahak was taunted by friends and felt cold-shouldered by teachers because he failed most of his tests. It was only at the age of 25, while studying computer and software engineering at university in England, that a professor told him he was probably dyslexic. "I was devastated and failed that year," he recalls. But he got back in the saddle, finished his degree, and Fitri is now an IT consultant in Kuala Lumpur�a happy ending that he admits is unusual for dyslexics in his homeland. "For now, they are a lost lot," he says.
To be sure, researchers still don't understand everything there is to know about learning disabilities. Dyslexia, for one, might consist of several subtypes. "It would be very dangerous to assume that every child with reading problems is uniform and has the same kinds of breakdowns preventing him from learning to read," says Dr. Mel Levine, a pediatrician and author of several influential books about learning disabilities and dyslexia, including A Mind at a Time. But whatever the exact nature of the deficit, the search for answers begins with the written word.
When you think about it, that anyone can read at all is something of a miracle. Reading requires your brain to rejigger its visual and speech processors in such a way that artificial markings, such as the letters on a piece of paper, become linked to the sounds they represent. It's not enough simply to hear and understand different words. Your brain has to pull them apart into their constituent sounds, or phonemes. When you see the written word cat, your brain must hear the sounds /k/ ... /a/ ... /t/ and associate the result with an animal that purrs.
Unlike speech, which any developmentally intact child will eventually pick up by imitating others who speak, reading must be actively taught. That makes sense from an evolutionary point of view. Linguists believe that the spoken word is 50,000 to 100,000 years old. But the written word�and therefore the possibility of reading�has probably been around for no more than 5,000 years. "That's not long enough for our brains to evolve certain regions for just that purpose," says Guinevere Eden, a professor of pediatrics at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., who also uses brain scans to study reading. "We're probably using a whole network of areas in the brain that were originally designed to do something slightly different." As Eden puts it, the brain is moonlighting�and some of the resulting glitches have yet to be ironed out.
To understand what sorts of glitches we're talking about, it helps to know a little about how the brain works. Researchers have long been aware that the two halves, or hemispheres, of the brain tend to specialize in different tasks. Although the division of labor is not absolute, the left side is particularly adept at processing language and the right is more attuned to analyzing spatial cues. The specialization doesn't stop there. Within each hemisphere, different regions of the brain break down various tasks even further. So reading a sonnet, catching a ball or recognizing a face requires the complex interaction of a number of different regions of the brain.
Most of what neuroscientists know about the brain has come from studying people who were undergoing brain surgery or had suffered brain damage. Clearly, this is not the most convenient way to learn about the brain, especially if you want to know more about what passes for normal. Even highly detailed pictures from the most advanced computer-enhanced X-ray imaging machines could reveal only the organ's basic anatomy, not how the various parts worked together. What researchers needed was a scanner that didn't subject patients to radiation and that showed which parts of the brain are most active in healthy subjects as they perform various intellectual tasks. What was needed was a breakthrough in technology.
That breakthrough came in the 1990s, with the development of a technique called functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Basically, fMRI enables researchers to see which parts of the brain are getting the most blood�and hence are the most active�at any given point in time.
Neuroscientists have used fMRI to identify three areas of the left side of the brain that play key roles in reading. Scientifically, these are known as the left inferior frontal gyrus, the left parieto-temporal area and the left occipito-temporal area. But for our purposes, it's more helpful to think of them as the "phoneme producer," the "word analyzer" and the "automatic detector." We'll describe these regions in the order in which they are activated, but you'll get closer to the truth if you think of them as working simultaneously, like the sections of an orchestra playing a symphony.
Using fMRI, scientists have determined that beginning readers rely most heavily on the phoneme producer and the word analyzer. The first of these helps a person say things�silently or out loud�and does some analysis of the phonemes found in words. The second analyzes words more thoroughly, pulling them apart into their constituent syllables and phonemes and linking the letters to their sounds.
As readers become skilled, something interesting happens: the third section�the automatic detector�becomes more active. Its function is to build a permanent repertoire that enables readers to recognize familiar words on sight. As readers progress, the balance of the orchestra shifts and the automatic detector begins to dominate. If all goes well, reading eventually becomes effortless.
In addition to the proper neurological wiring, reading requires good instruction. In a recent study published in Biological Psychiatry, neuroscientist Shaywitz and her colleagues identified a group of poor readers who were not classically dyslexic, as their phoneme producers, word analyzers and automatic detectors were all active. But the three regions were linked more strongly to the brain's memory processors than to its language centers, as if the children had spent more time memorizing words than understanding them.
The situation is different for children with dyslexia. Brain scans suggest that a glitch in their brains prevents them from easily gaining access to the word analyzer and the automatic detector. In the past year, several fMRI studies have shown that dyslexics tend to compensate for the problem by overactivating the phoneme producer.




Here at last is physical evidence that the central weakness in dyslexia is twofold. First, as many dyslexia experts have long suspected, there is an inherent difficulty in deriving sense from phonemes. Second, because recognizing words doesn't become automatic, reading is slow and labored. This second aspect, the lack of fluency, has for the most part not been widely appreciated outside the research community.
Imagine having to deal with each word you see as if you had never come across it before, and you will start to get the idea. That's exactly what Abbe Winn of Atlanta, Georgia, realized that her daughter Kate, now age 9, was doing in kindergarten. "I noticed that when her teacher sent home a list of spelling words, she had a real hard time," Abbe says. "We'd get to the word the and come back five minutes later, and she had no idea what it was."
So much for what dyslexia is. What many parents would like to know is, what can be done about it? Fortunately, the human brain is particularly receptive to instruction. Otherwise practice would never make perfect. Different people respond to different approaches, depending on their personality and the nature of their disability. "The data we have don't show any one program that is head and shoulders above the rest," says Shaywitz. But the most successful programs emphasize the same core elements: practice manipulating phonemes, building vocabulary, increasing comprehension and improving the fluency of reading.
This kind of instruction leaves nothing to chance. "In most schools the emphasis is on children's learning to read sentences," says Gina Callaway, director of the Schenck School in Atlanta, which specializes in teaching dyslexic students using the Orton-Gillingham approach. "Here we have to teach them to recognize sounds, then syllables, then words and sentences. There's lots of practice and repetition." And a fair number of what the kids call tricks, or rules, for reading. (Among the most important and familiar: the magic e at the end of a word that makes a vowel say its name, as in make or cute.) A particularly good route to fluency is to practice reading aloud with a skilled reader who can gently correct mistakes. That way the brain builds up the right associations between words and sounds from the start.
It helps to tap into a student's interests. For Monique Beltran, 13, of Los Angeles, the turning point came with the computer game Pok�mon. "I had to read to get to more levels," she says matter-of-factly. The computer game also showed Monique the value of reading outside of schoolwork, and she is eagerly devouring the latest Harry Potter book.
As you might expect, early intervention gives the best results. Ideally, all children should be screened in kindergarten�to minimize educational delay and preserve self-confidence. How do you know someone has dyslexia before he or she has learned to read? Certain behaviors�like trouble rhyming words�are good clues that something is amiss. Later, you might notice that your child is memorizing books rather than reading them. A kindergarten teacher's observation that reading isn't clicking with your son or daughter should be a call to action.
If caught soon enough, can a child's dyslexia be reversed? The evidence looks promising. In her book, Shaywitz reports that brain scans of dyslexic kindergartners and first-graders who have benefited from a year's worth of targeted instruction start to resemble those of children who have never had any difficulty reading.
That doesn't mean older sufferers need despair. Shaywitz's brain scans of adult dyslexics suggest they can compensate by tapping into the processing power on their brains' right side. Just don't expect what works for young children to work for adults. "If you're 18 and you're about to graduate and you don't have phonemic awareness, that may not be your top priority," says Chris Schnieders, director of teacher training at the Frostig Center in Pasadena, California. "It's a little bit late to start 'Buh is for baby' at that point."
Technology can play a supporting role. Some dyslexics supplement their reading with books on tape. Because their condition affects the ability to write as well as read, a growing number of dyslexics are turning to voice-recognition software for help in preparing term papers, memos and reports. A couple of small studies have shown that the software can also bolster the ability to read. "We found improvement in word recognition, in reading comprehension and spelling," says Marshall Raskind, director of research at the Frostig Center. He suspects that the ability to say, hear and see words almost simultaneously provides good training for the brain.
There are, alas, no quick fixes. Dyslexic students often have to put many more hours into their course work than naturally skilled readers do. But the results are worth it. In the seventh grade, Sean Slattery was barely reading on a first-grade level. Now, after four years at the Frostig Center, he has nearly caught up to where he should be. In May, on his third try, Slattery passed California's high school exit exam.
That's another thing about dyslexics: they learn to persevere. Now Slattery has his eye on a career as an underwater welder. "There's a lot of reading involved" between the course work and the instruction manuals, he says. "But I'm looking forward to it, actually." The written word is not going to hold him back anymore.



Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2047912,00.html#ixzz27zUM7UHo

Dyslexia in different languages


http://healthland.time.com/2009/10/13/dyslexia-in-different-languages/    TIME article

Dyslexia in different languages



Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2009/10/13/dyslexia-in-different-languages/#ixzz27zTcPdw5

Dyslexia may manifest itself differently for speakers of different languages, according to a study published online in the October 12 issue of Current Biology. Using visual and audio tests, as well as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scans, researchers from the University of Hong Kong determined that, while dyslexia in English-speakers is primarily due to a sound-related processing problem, among Chinese language speakers, it is likely driven by both visual and sound processing disorders.
Dyslexia among English-speakers is generally attributed to the presence of a phonological disorder—or the struggle to separate and keep track of specific, individual sounds. Very broadly, this leading theory holds that dyslexics have trouble with the written word as an extension of their struggle to innately process phonemes, or snippets of verbal language. (When asked to decouple the “r” sound from the word “rock,” dyslexic children would struggle significantly more than non-dyslexic children, for example.) As a result, dyslexics get tangled up during reading because the process requires them to connect the phonics—or specific utterances associated with written letters or groups of letters—to the phonemes.
Yet, whereas in English readers can use letters to sound words out, pronunciation of specific characters in Chinese languages is dependent on rote memorization, the researchers point out. And knowing which character’s pronunciation to pull up is dependent on a complete understanding of the intricate combination of strokes included in each character. In the analysis of 12 Chinese children with dyslexia, researchers found that, in addition to struggling with phonological processing exercises, the children also had trouble with exercises in which they were asked to judge the dimensions of images, as compared with non-dyslexic children. What’s more, while performing visual identification tasks, brain scans revealed that dyslexics had less activity in the part of the brain associated with visuospatial processing, as compared with non-dyslexics.
The findings, the researchers say, suggest that dyslexia among Chinese language speakers may be more complex and multifaceted than that of English speakers. Or, as they put it, “[D]evelopmental dyslexia in Chinese is typically characterized by the co-existence of visuospatial and phonological disorders…” In English, however, it “is generally associated with a core phonological deficit in the absence of abnormal visual processing.”


Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2009/10/13/dyslexia-in-different-languages/#ixzz27zTYVqub

Using Brain Scans to Diagnose Dyslexia Better


http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/20/diagnosing-dyslexia-better/  TIME articles


Using Brain Scans to Diagnose Dyslexia Better



Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/20/diagnosing-dyslexia-better/#ixzz27zT1H0nz

Dyslexia, the underlying biology of which is not well understood, affects somewhere between 5% and 17% of the population. About one-fifth of dyslexics will eventually go on to read as well as a typical reader, while others will need extensive intervention. Now a new study out of Stanford University uses artificial intelligence to predict who might fall into which group.
Dyslexics do not, as many people think, see everything backwards; they have a problem with reading, particularly with reading aloud, often because they have difficulty recognizing the letters or group of letters associated with a sound. Typically they may see a “d” when there’s a “b” or be unable to distinguish words like “for” and “from.”
Sometimes this disability does not hold them back — Tom Cruise, Richard Branson, Whoopi Goldberg, Steven Spielberg and Charles Schwab are among the many famous and accomplished dyslexics. Other people, especially those who go undiagnosed, flounder in school and struggle in life. So far nobody has been able to explain the difference. “It has been a mystery why 20% or so of the dyslexic children learn to compensate by adulthood,” says Stanford psychiatrist Fumiko Hoeft. (More on Time.com: Study: Breast-Feeding Improves Academic Performance, Especially for Boys)
Finding the other 80% early enough, and giving them intensive help with reading, could be a key part of treating dyslexia and illiteracy more effectively. At the moment, children are diagnosed through a battery of standardized tests. But while these tests can measure reading ability, they can’t predict whether or not a child with dyslexia will be able to compensate for or overcome his or her difficulties in time.
In a study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Hoeft suggests that brain imaging could be a much more effective diagnostic tool than reading tests. She gathered data on 25 adolescent dyslexics, using standardized tests and two different kinds of brain imaging scans. Two and a half years later she would look at the children again. (More on Time.com: Free Play Won’t Make Your Child Smarter)
In the meantime, she took the data from the brain scans and crunched them through an algorithm used in artificial intelligence (AI) to program devices like smartphones to “learn.” Using the same predictive methods as in AI, she discovered that the presence of activity in certain parts of the brain were far more accurate in predicting whether a dyslexic would learn to read without major intervention. (More on Time.com: 10 Questions with Ray Kurzweil)
Her studies found that dyslexic readers who show more activity in the inferior frontal gyrus region of the right hemisphere, the bit right near the temple, while reading were more likely to eventually read as fluently as non-dyslexics. The corresponding part of the brain on the left hemisphere, it’s believed, is usually what is doing the work when we read. Hoeft found that when the left hemisphere doesn’t carry its load, if the right side of the brain steps up to compensate, the dyslexic child will eventually read normally 90% of the time. If not, it’s time for Plan B.
All of this, of course, raises a whole lot more questions: can we stimulate the brain, or use feedback systems to get it to compensate? (Hoeft says maybe.) If a dyslexic’s brain is not predisposed to compensate, are any of the extensive — and expensive — interventions currently being practiced going to make any difference? (Hoeft says her studies can’t tell what’s genetic and what’s been learned, so she can’t say.)
And finally, the big question for parents who want to spare their children the anguish of dyslexia, can we diagnose the condition any younger? Hoeft thinks that might be possible. “Although we still have to do the research and likely modify our models, it is the hope that we can identify children who will later develop dyslexia much earlier and more accurately,” she says, “so we can provide necessary interventions A.S.A.P.”


Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/20/diagnosing-dyslexia-better/#ixzz27zSxEM00

Is English Making Us Dyslexic?


http://ideas.time.com/2011/11/02/are-americans-more-dyslexic-than-italians/     TIME articles

Is English Making Us Dyslexic?

Why it might be time to revamp our native tongue


Read more: http://ideas.time.com/2011/11/02/are-americans-more-dyslexic-than-italians/#ixzz27zSIMn6w

At my house, the mealtime implement used for cutting is called a ka-nife. The joint located between thigh and calf is called a ka-nee. And the medieval warriors who wore suits of armor are called ka-ni-guh-ts.
We adopted these unusual pronunciations after my 5-year-old son, Teddy, noticed something odd about the English language. While sounding out words on the page in the way we’d taught him, he realized that many words didn’t sound at all the way they looked. Yacht. Trough. Colonel. And what was that letter k doing at the start of words that sounded like they began with n?
Such irregular spellings, my husband and I explained, were the result of the English language’s long, rich history: a mix of Anglo-Saxon, Latin, Greek, French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese, among other languages, melded over centuries of use. Teddy was unimpressed. Words should sound the way they look, he insisted: hence, ka-nife.
As anyone who’s lost a spelling bee or failed a spelling test will affirm, the English language is more ornery than most. About 25% of its words employ irregular spellings, and many of these terms are among the most frequently used in the language. Cross-cultural research demonstrates that the trickiness of English affects how quickly American children learn to read and write. After just a few months of instruction, for example, children living in Italy are able to read and write any word they encounter, because their language is almost perfectly regular: each letter or combination of letters maps reliably onto a particular sound. Children in the U.S., on the other hand, must endure years of drills before they have mastered the intricacies of bough and bow, weigh and way. (American pupils can console themselves with the knowledge that kids in China have it even harder: there, lessons on reading and writing the thousands of symbols in the Chinese language extend into students’ teenage years.)
Big deal, you might think — so it takes a few years to learn written English. With practice, our peculiar spellings become second nature. But there is evidence that for some English users, the knottiness of the language leads to lasting problems with reading. About twice as many Americans as Italians fit the definition of dyslexic, even though brain-scan studies suggest that the two populations have similar proportions of people with the mental processing deficit associated with the disorder. The irregularity of English ruthlessly exposes this brain anomaly, while the consistency of the Italian language allows readers to compensate for it. Dyslexia, remarkably enough, may be partlyculturally induced.
So what can be done about the quirks of our native tongue? Are we stuck with English’s ungainly spellings?
Not necessarily. The way words are spelled could be changed. Dictionary author Noah Webster did it in 1806, removing the u from words like colour and honour and changing the c in words like offence and pretence to an s. In general, however, top-down spelling reforms have met with little success. Steel magnate and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie helped found the Simplified Spelling Board, and President Theodore Roosevelt directed his government to use plainer spellings in its publications. Neither effort amounted to much.
Language change is largely a bottom-up affair — and the moment is ripe for a mass movement to simplify English spelling. Digital communication by email, text and tweet has nudged our staid language into its most dynamic state of flux since the invention of the printing press. Linguists even have a name for the pared-down language we employ when using digital devices: chatspeak. It is, effectively, a newly created dialect of English, and chatspeak will surely shape in turn its more conventional progenitor.
This may already be happening, especially among the young. Naomi Baron, a professor of linguistics at American University, reports that teachers of elementary school children increasingly “tolerate IM novelties in classroom written assignments.” While some of these Internet-age innovations are frivolous or trivial — Shakespeare managed to amuse his audiences without recourse to LOL — other shifts may prove more meaningful. Beverly Plester is a psychologist at Coventry University in England who has conducted research on how young people express themselves in electronic media. “When using text language, or ‘textisms,’ children revert to a phonetic language,” she observes, spelling words the way they sound. Such streamlining is similar to the way in which the simplified coinages of commercial English have slipped into wider use — donut for doughnutnite for nightthru for through.
As an avid reader and a longtime Anglophile, I’ll admit that I’m fond of English’s odd spellings — and that words like nite and thru make me wince. But watching my son and his kindergarten classmates labor to learn English’s many idiosyncrasies, I wonder if it wouldn’t be better for them to fall by the wayside. We might have fewer cases of dyslexia and illiteracy. Students could spend their time thinking about the meanings of words instead of their treacherous spellings. And during dinner at my house, a ka-nife could be just a nife.
Paul is the author of Origins and the forthcoming book Brilliant: The Science of Smart. The views expressed are solely her own.


Read more: http://ideas.time.com/2011/11/02/are-americans-more-dyslexic-than-italians/#ixzz27zS9kspF