... of books i.e. black print on a white page' (Meares, 1980, p. 14). ... be a credibility issue. â Irlen as a business? .... overlays and/or lenses. The issue of MIS may ...
Suppor&ng Students with Visual Perceptual Difficul&es in Schools: Avoidance or Ignorance
Dr. Chris Boyle Senior Lecturer in Educa&onal Psychology University of New England
Background • Secondary teacher • School psychologist • Teaching teachers!
w o g s Gla a g g a W a g Wag e n r u o b l e M e l a d Ar m i
2
Ar&cle Published
3
Historical Difficul&es with vision in rela&on to reading have been documented over a number of decades and this is exemplified in the following quota&on: ‘Dick was able to recognise a word printed on a yellow sight card, but not the same word when printed on a white one, or when the print varied’. (Jansky, 1958, p. 112).
4
Original Meares Ar&cle ‘blurring, moving, jumping, flickering, print distor>ons are indeed a visual reality for many children . . . This is due to perceptual instability stemming from and induced by the conven>onal figure/ground organisa>on of books i.e. black print on a white page’ (Meares, 1980, p. 14).
5
Credibility Gap
6
Issue with Evidence
7
Research Study
Strengths
Bouldoukian et Randomised control; al., (2002) Ophtha and Physiolog Op&cs (IF2.6)
Weaknesses
Results
N=33; through a reading People with MIS clinic showed sig gains while using coloured overlays
Jeanes et al., (1997)
BJ Psych(IF3.3); N=130+; Two schools; not 8% improvement in follow up randomised; overuse of reading speed %s
Ritchie et al., (2011)
Pediatrics (IF5.29); n=61; One School; low socio-‐ sta&s&cally strong economic demographic; poor randomisa&on; no follow up
No clinical improvement in reading of poor readers
8
Ritchie et al. Ar&cle • Major reputa&onal damage from this ar&cle • No longitudinal aspect to studies – All seems to be quite short focus
• A more in depth longer term study may be more viable/credible • An Australian based study should be considered • Seems to be a credibility issue – Irlen as a business? 9
What’s in a name (label)? • Discussion from Boyle & Jindal-‐Snape (2011) considered the issue of Visual Dyslexia or MIS • However, is this debate actually important anymore? “The no&on of whether a par&cular label is actually useful or not is a moot point and may miss the important aspect which is that the underlying difficulty with reading s&ll exists no mamer the terminology that is used; ergo it is the iden&fica&on and future improvement that is key, not a label” (p. 167). 10
Labelling in Educa&on • Has been necessary to categorise in order to fund • Labelling leads to awareness raising and promotes understanding of par&cular difficul&es • Can provide explana&on to a person as to why a difficulty is thus ‘If the use of the label does not lead to improved, or more appropriate and targeted educa8onal interven8on, then one may legi8mately ques8on its value’ (Lauchlan & Boyle, p. 37). 11
Labelling – Legal Case • 2003 a English High Court Judgement • failure to label a child as ‘dyslexic’ did not necessarily mean that the child’s difficulty went unaddressed • judge found that the important aspect was that the child’s needs had been addressed irrespec&ve of an amached label • Verdict: it was not the label that was the issue, but whether the child’s needs could be met by an appropriate programme of interven>on. 12
My Concern as a Psychologist • Misdiagnosis/iden&fica&on of dyslexia instead of a visual difficulty impac&ng on reading • highlight the issues of the visual-‐perceptual aspect of reading difficul&es and to ensure that this possibility is considered when a student is having difficul&es with reading • Frustra&ng element is that simple checks could help iden&fy MIS type issues 13
Concerns (cont.) • Unlikely that the usual language-‐based dyslexia interven&ons would make any difference to students who have MIS type difficul&es, so teachers should take cognisance of this in their general prac&ce.
14
Simple Steps • The ques&on of teachers and school psychologists being fully aware of this type of difficulty and the simple methods of iden&fying and rec&fying the situa&on to a reasonable level • There is scant coverage of MIS in journals targe&ng prac&sing teachers or university lecturers working in the area of teacher training, which is clearly an issue vis-‐à-‐vis teacher knowledge of this type of difficulty 15
Big Steps • More radical approach is necessary “…there s&ll exists a clear argument that widescale screening for MIS should take place in schools, probably at an important transi&on point such as between primary and secondary.” (p. 169)
• What is done by your group to educate teachers, school psychologists, special ed teachers? 16
School Psychology Interven&on • The nature of MIS would suggest that direct interven&on by a school psychologist in conjunc&on with the class teacher is relevant and appropriate as both are best placed and qualified to iden&fy difficul&es such as visual percep&on affec&ng reading (Boyle & Lauchlan, 2009) • It should follow that school psychology services are at the forefront of assis&ng schools in screening all children at various stages of in order to pick up these types of difficul&es. 17
Amribu&ons for Learning
(Chodkiewicz &Boyle, 2015) 18
Mo&va&on • If the perceived consequences of an ac&on are good e.g. reward then the likelihood is that the ac&on will be carried out. • However, if the expecta&on is that no benefit will be forthcoming then the mo&va&on to complete the task is lowered.
19
Mo&va&on in Learning • Self-‐efficacy – nobody no&ces when I score high
• Self-‐-‐confidence – I got most of these wrong the last &me, I will get them wrong this &me too
• Self-‐mo&va&on – Why should I bother
20
Sec&on 22 -‐ Educa&on •
(1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of the person's disability: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person's application for admission as a student; or (b) in the terms or conditions on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student.
•
(2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of the student's disability: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student's access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority; or (b) by expelling the student; or (c) by subjecting the student to any other detriment.
•
(2A) It is unlawful for an education provider to discriminate against a person on the ground of the person's disability: (a) by developing curricula or training courses having a content that will either exclude the person from participation, or subject the person to any other detriment; or (b) by accrediting curricula or training courses having such a content.
In essence the DDA… Prohibits education systems and schools from refusing enrolment to a student, on the grounds of their disability, in a school. It also prohibits denial of access to any benefit provided by the school.
Disability Standards for Educa&on
To ensure that educa&on systems clearly understand their legal obliga&ons under the Disability Discriminia&on Act 1992, the Australian Government released the Disability Standards for Educa>on 2005 (referred to as the DSE) -‐ an explicit interpreta&on of the legisla&ve document for educa&on systems, schools and educators.
Media release – 15th June, 2004 The then Amorney-‐General, the Hon Phillip Ruddock MP said…
‘People with disabilities face barriers in their education which simply do not arise for other students,…The Standards, when implemented, will assist in removing these barriers and enabling people with disabilities to participate in education and training to the same extent as the rest of the community’. (SOURCE - http://www.ag.gov.au/agd/www/MinisterRuddockhome.nsf/Page/ RWP3B2F01CEEAF21280CA256EB400812BDE?OpenDocument)
Different Approach
25
Why has the Na?onally Consistent Collec?on of Data on School Students with Disability been introduced? • There hasn’t been a na&onally consistent picture
of Australian school students with disability as the type of informa&on currently collected by Australian schools has varied between each state and territory. • The Na&onally Consistent Collec&on of Data on School Students with Disability will mean for the first &me, this informa&on is transparent, consistent and reliable at a na&onal level. 26
Model for the Na&onally Consistent Collec&on of Data on School Students with Disability
27
28
29
Two Important Ques&ons What does that student
What does that student
30
The Need of the Individual • The decision is then about whether more resources are needed in order to deliver the adjustment or whether it can be delivered within the exis&ng flexible resourcing model already available to schools. • The addi&onal funding is only provided to enable students to access and par&cipate on the same basis -‐ that's it. 31
Fight’s Over • Forget the fight about funding for the category • The new fight is about what the students’ need – what can a school be reasonably expected to provide the student in terms of adjustments to enable the student to access and par&cipate in learning on the same basis as their peers?
32
Conclusions • Publicity in some form to schools and psychologists • MIS is easily iden&fiable if teachers and other professionals consider this as one criterion in their guiding hypotheses when amemp&ng to alleviate reading problems. • A heightened level of awareness of this issue is necessary when working with students who have difficul&es accessing the curriculum due to issues with reading. • Focus on adjustments not the category • Conduct a robust study on benefits to people of using overlays and/or lenses. The issue of MIS may no longer be important.
33
AVOID
Closing Statement
ANCE
O N G I
E C RAN
34
References 1.
2.
BPS (Bri&sh Psychological Society) (2004). Dyslexia – A Landmark High Court Judgement. hmp://www.psychtes&ng.org.uk.
Bouldoukian, J., Wilkins, A. J., &Evans, B. J. W. (2002). Randomised controlled trial of the effect of coloured overlays on therate of reading of people with specific learning difficul&es. Ophthalmic and Physiological Op>cs, 22(1), 55–60. 3. Boyle, C. (2014). Labelling in special educa&on: Where do the benefits lie? In A. Holliman (Ed.) The Routledge Interna>onal Companion to Educa>onal Psychology (pp. 213-‐221). London: Routledge. 4. Boyle C., & Jindal-‐Snape, D. (2012). Visual Perceptual Difficul&es and the impact on children's learning: Are teachers missing the page? Bri>sh Journal of Support for Learning, 27(4), 166-‐171. doi: 10.1111/1467-‐9604.12001 5. Boyle, C. & Lauchlan, F. (2009). Applied psychology and the case for individual casework: some reflec&ons on the role of the educa&onal psychologist. Educa>onal Psychology in Prac>ce, 25(1), 71-‐84. doi: 10.1080/02667360802697639 6. Chodkiewicz, A., & Boyle, C. (2015). Believing you can is the first step to achieving. A CBT and AUribu>on Retraining Program to improve self-‐belief in students aged 8-‐12. London: Jessica Kingsley Press. 7. Jansky, J. (1958) A case of severe dyslexia with aphasic-‐like symptoms. Annals of Dyslexia, 8(1), 8–11. 8. Jeanes, R., Busby, A., Mar&n, J., Lewis, E., Stevenson, N.,Pointon, D., & Wilkins, A. (1997). Prolonged use of coloured overlaps for classroom reading. Bri>sh Journal of Psychology, 88(4), 531–548. 9. Lauchlan, F., & Boyle C. (2007). Is the use of labels in special educa&on helpful? Support For Learning, 22(1), 36-‐42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-‐9604.2007.00443.x 10. Meares, O. (1980) Figure/background, brightness/contrast and reading disabili&es. Visible Language, 14, 1, 13–29. 11. Ritchie, S. J., Sala, S. D., & McIntosh, R. D. (2011). Irlen colored overlays do not alleviate reading difficul&es. Pediatric, 128(4), 932-‐938. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-‐0314
35