Dyslexia - an alternative perspective

[Haphazard]

Aren't visual-spatials the majority though?

 

[Betty Blue]

Aren't visual-spatials the majority though?

In Dyslexia-absolutely
In neurotypicals-absolutely not

 

[Betty Blue]

Source Visual thinking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Dyslexia

Individuals use a variety of learning styles or strategies, among these are auditory, kineasthetic and visual-spatial learning, which are associated with the sensory organs (receptors), sensory system and sense, respectively ears with hearing, eyes with sight, skin, limbs and bodily movements with touch and body gestures. Research suggests that dyslexia is a symptom of a predominant visual/spatial learning from the earliest studies, circa 1896 -1925 by Morgan (1896), Hinselwood (1900) and Orton (1925). Morgan used the term 'word blindness,' in 1896; Hinselwood expanded on 'word blindness' to describe the reversing of letters and similar phenomenon in 1900s; Orton suggested that individuals have difficulty associating the visual with the verbal form of words, in 1925. Further studies using technologies (PET and MRI) and wider and varied user groups in various languages support the earlier findings. see dyslexia. Visual-spatial symptoms (dyslexia, dyspraxia, Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) and the like) arise in non-visual and non-spatial environments and situations; hence, visual/spatial learning is aggravated by an education system based upon information presented in written text instead of presented via multimedia and hands-on experience.

 

[Haphazard]

In Dyslexia-absolutely
In neurotypicals-absolutely not

No, I'm pretty sure research says that visual-spatials are the majority, and auditory learners are the minority. I think the breakdown went something like 45% visualspatial 35% audial and the rest kinesthetic. Then again in that case it might depend on your definition of majority.

 

[Betty Blue]

No, I'm pretty sure research says that visual-spatials are the majority, and auditory learners are the minority. I think the breakdown went something like 45% visualspatial 35% audial and the rest kinesthetic. Then again in that case it might depend on your definition of majority.

I'm talking of right or left brained dominance, i'll refer back to wiki


"Brain function lateralization is evident in the phenomena of right- or left-handedness and of right or left ear preference, but a person's preferred hand is not a clear indication of the location of brain function. Although 95% of right-handed people have left-hemisphere dominance for language, only 18.8% of left-handed people have right-hemisphere dominance for language function. Additionally, 19.8% of the left-handed have bilateral language functions.[5] Even within various language functions (e.g., semantics, syntax, prosody), degree (and even hemisphere) of dominance may differ[6]."


Lateralization of brain function - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Do you have a link for the stats you quoted?

 

[ragashree]

No, I'm pretty sure research says that visual-spatials are the majority, and auditory learners are the minority. I think the breakdown went something like 45% visualspatial 35% audial and the rest kinesthetic. Then again in that case it might depend on your definition of majority.

I've seen this as well - in fact I've seen visual learners quoted as high as 60-65 percent of the population. I think we need to bear in mind though that the definitions are not consistent at all, and are probably being established by completely different means. At minimum, a clear distinction needs to be drawn between the high frequency in the population of visual learners (those who prefer to use the sensory modality of sight in order to take in information) and the much less common visual thinkers - those who formulate thoughts predominantly according to the organisation of visual images. Visual learning encompasses the capability for translating visual imagery into other forms they are comfortable with and can then retain, such as the auditory/sequential modality (which corresponds with the sequential/linear process I described earlier). Visual thinking , regardless of how the information is taken in, prefers to organise it as imagery and relate the imagery to concepts. Now for a little of the promised scientific evidence:

The neurological origins of visual and spatial thinking as a perceptual process, rather than a sense-input process, appear to be closely linked, and a clear distinction difficult to draw between the two; this corresponds to my conflation of the likely preference for 2 and 3 dimensional perception in dyslexic people in my earlier posts.

Both visual and spatial thinking appear to be associated with the right frontal regions of the brain, particularly the right frontal cortex and right temporal lobe. This area, along with Broca's area in the left frontal cortex (which particularly governs speech production) are known to be strongly activated in many dyslexic individuals who are attempting to read, whereas in non-dyslexic individuals the typically activated areas are in the left brain; particularly an area commonly referred to as the Visual Word Form Recognition area in the left occipital region near the eyes (which directly processes visual input), and Wernicke's area (which is linked with word/meaning association and auditory comprehension) in the left temporal lobe of the midbrain.

This is to say that it appears that the typical non-dyslexic reading strategy is to recognise the visual elements of words and associate them with sounds and their meanings in a sequential manner, as when listening to speech; wheras the typical dyslexic strategy is to process as visual or spatial information and link it not to sounds, but concepts. This may (hypothetically) be an image or spatial/textural forming process in relation to the words and symbols read. What's interesting in this regard is that although diagnosed dyslexic readers can with practice at phonetics and word recognition learn to increase their activation of the VWFR region and Wernicke's area, so crucial to reading comprehension in non-dyslexics, this does not seem to bring about a corresponding improvement in reading ability - in line with what would be expected, for instance, in poor non-dyslexic readers who also show reduced activation of these areas and can increase them through practice. The typical pattern for dyslexic individuals who learn to read fluently is instead to show increased activation of the areas they naturally use; increased reliance on left brain regions that would usually be essential in non-dyslexic readers is actually negatively correlated with improved reading skills.

I think this issue therefore transcends how information is taken in (after all, everyone uses visual means to process written language) and has more to do with the preferential method by which information is actually organised in the brain.

 

[Betty Blue]

I've seen this as well - in fact I've seen visual learners quoted as high as 60-65 percent of the population.

I think this only emphasizes the fact that a multi-sensory learning approach, if adopted by schools, would benefit everyone.

I think we need to bear in mind though that the definitions are not consistent at all, and are probably being established by completely different means. At minimum, a clear distinction needs to be drawn between the high frequency in the population of visual learners (those who prefer to use the sensory modality of sight in order to take in information) and the much less common visual thinkers - those who formulate thoughts predominantly according to the organisation of visual images. Visual learning encompasses the capability for translating visual imagery into other forms they are comfortable with and can then retain, such as the auditory/sequential modality (which corresponds with the sequential/linear process I described earlier). Visual thinking , regardless of how the information is taken in, prefers to organise it as imagery and relate the imagery to concepts. Now for a little of the promised scientific evidence:

The neurological origins of visual and spatial thinking as a perceptual process, rather than a sense-input process, appear to be closely linked, and a clear distinction difficult to draw between the two; this corresponds to my conflation of the likely preference for 2 and 3 dimensional perception in dyslexic people in my earlier posts.

Both visual and spatial thinking appear to be associated with the right frontal regions of the brain, particularly the right frontal cortex and right temporal lobe. This area, along with Broca's area in the left frontal cortex (which particularly governs speech production) are known to be strongly activated in many dyslexic individuals who are attempting to read, whereas in non-dyslexic individuals the typically activated areas are in the left brain; particularly an area commonly referred to as the Visual Word Form Recognition area in the left occipital region near the eyes (which directly processes visual input), and Wernicke's area (which is linked with word/meaning association and auditory comprehension) in the left temporal lobe of the midbrain.

Yes, it is beneficial to get a clear idea of exactly which brain regions we are talking about, do you have that link with the brain imaging? or could you post the images?

This is to say that it appears that the typical non-dyslexic reading strategy is to recognise the visual elements of words and associate them with sounds and their meanings in a sequential manner, as when listening to speech; wheras the typical dyslexic strategy is to process as visual or spatial information and link it not to sounds, but concepts. This may (hypothetically) be an image or spatial/textural forming process in relation to the words and symbols read. What's interesting in this regard is that although diagnosed dyslexic readers can with practice at phonetics and word recognition learn to increase their activation of the VWFR region and Wernicke's area, so crucial to reading comprehension in non-dyslexics, this does not seem to bring about a corresponding improvement in reading ability - in line with what would be expected, for instance, in poor non-dyslexic readers who also show reduced activation of these areas and can increase them through practice. The typical pattern for dyslexic individuals who learn to read fluently is instead to show increased activation of the areas they naturally use; increased reliance on left brain regions that would usually be essential in non-dyslexic readers is actually negatively correlated with improved reading skills.

Yes increased reading ability in dyslexics shows a higher activation in the right hemisphere rather than in the left which is how it shows in non-dyslexics. Showing that dyslexics infact use their own methods of memorising text visually as opposed to the linear sequential left brain style.

I think this issue therefore transcends how information is taken in (after all, everyone uses visual means to process written language) and has more to do with the preferential method by which information is actually organised in the brain.

You know what surprises me more than anything is that the majority of dyslexic individuals i have meet/know, probably because their talents have been largely ignored or mis-understood, do not actually realise they they think so differently (and often in more advanced ways) than non-dyslexics.
The classic response is that they believe everyone is a picture thinker but they are inherently incapable of learning as much as non-dyslexics. This saddens me greatly and is one of the fundamental reasons for my interest in dyslexia.

I am happy to find that most dyslexia organisations do now take the stance that dyslexia is a learning difference, and affects "average to above average intellegence" individuals. Of course i don't agree entirely, i personally think there is much more to it (since iq tests do not take into account the learning differences), but at the very least there seems to be movement, albeit slow, in recognising the positives.

For example, my son who is severely dyslexic, tests as above average intelligence on a full psychological iq test. This is because the results of all the subtest are combined to form a whole. If sequencing, phonic awareness, spelling, word recognition are added to areas such as block design, visual spatial reasoning, non verbal reasoning etc then the whole will reflect a somewhat lower score than his actual intelligence. This is because the test is biased towards individuals who typically learn in a non-dyslexic way.
If you take all the parts of the test that rely on the areas of the brain that typical dyslexics use then you will have a result in the gifted range.

This however does not solve the problem of how to help dyslexic individuals learn how to read and write at primary school age or indeed the daily difficulties non-school related such as time management, short term memory and low self esteem due to awful treatment at schools/work etc.

For this we need to switch to a mode of education that will actually benefit dyslexic individuals and cater to their learning style. And to do that we need an overhaul of the education system as it stands, or at least the curriculum.

In short we need to bring about change.

 

[Betty Blue]

I just found an interesting scientific article recognising abilities in dyslexia

quote

"This finding suggests that dyslexia is associated with a particular type of visual-spatial talent—enhanced ability to process visual-spatial information globally (holistically) rather than locally (part by part)."


Source

ScienceDirect - Brain and Language : Dyslexia linked to talent: Global visual-spatial ability*1

 

[Redbone]

I haven't had time to read this whole thread (yet) but I'm affected by dyslexia, too. My oldest has dyslexia and my daughter has auditory processing disorders. I started using the internet back in '95 b/c I was trying to seek out more information about (there wasn't a lot available but it rapidly increased...those were the days when you could email and talk to specialists on forums without worrying about spam, being charged a fee, viruses...I digress). There was a wealth of information coming out at that time about phonemic awareness and dyslexic students lacking in this and what to do about it.

Anyway, we were able to get him a partial scholarship to a private school and they used the Wilson program and they also used Lindamood-Bell LiPS program. I have noted that people with accents or learning foreign language would benefit from using a system like that. Even so, he does not read to this very day without putting a good bit of effort in to it. It is nice to see him pick up a book to read but he doesn't do it often.

My daughter was a little more complicated. Her auditory processing test showed that she had right-ear dominance (despite being firmly right-handed). Her results were so unusual that a doctor at Howard U asked me to get the raw data from the test and send it to him. He looked over it carefully and let me know that one of her biggest problems was going to be sound-to-symbol and symbol-to-sound understanding. He also said that even after this was overcome that she would always be a few steps behind when she had to process auditory information. It would improve with age (she was close to 8 at the time of the test) but it would always be a little off.

One of the biggest tip-offs for both of them was their speech. Late talkers, problems with articulation, problems with following directions, lack of interest in books or being read to, using me as a translator when speaking to or more importantly, when someone is speaking to them.... A lot of parents, me included, are told that they will grow out of it...not necessarily true. And it needs to be jumped on early. The old principal of my son's school is now a director over a screening program at a children's hospital. They screen high-risk children for dyslexia and other processing problems ages 3-5. I wish they had had something like that when my son and daughter were little. FWIW, the other two show absolutely no signs of any type of processing problem at all.

Let me stop here...I could go on for days about this.

 

[Betty Blue]

I haven't had time to read this whole thread (yet) but I'm affected by dyslexia, too. My oldest has dyslexia and my daughter has auditory processing disorders. I started using the internet back in '95 b/c I was trying to seek out more information about (there wasn't a lot available but it rapidly increased...those were the days when you could email and talk to specialists on forums without worrying about spam, being charged a fee, viruses...I digress). There was a wealth of information coming out at that time about phonemic awareness and dyslexic students lacking in this and what to do about it.

Although i was aware of dyslexia, my knowledge was very basic at this stage, it wasn't until 2005 (a whole 10 years after yourself) that i started to do some research myself.

Anyway, we were able to get him a partial scholarship to a private school and they used the Wilson program and they also used Lindamood-Bell LiPS program. I have noted that people with accents or learning foreign language would benefit from using a system like that. Even so, he does not read to this very day without putting a good bit of effort in to it. It is nice to see him pick up a book to read but he doesn't do it often.

From what little i know the wilson program is not too bad, it has a strong emphasis on multisensory learning and visual imagination. Of course it depends on who is teaching it and how well they teach it, but it certainly sounds like you did very well for him at the time. I'd certainly chose the wilson program over jolly phonics.

I'm not familiar with the Lindamood-bell lips program, was this for your daughter? It seems to have a strong emphasis on phonics (based on a quick look at their site), which always worries me with dyslexia as, for the majority of dyslexic individuals, it frustrates rather than helps their progress.

My daughter was a little more complicated. Her auditory processing test showed that she had right-ear dominance (despite being firmly right-handed). Her results were so unusual that a doctor at Howard U asked me to get the raw data from the test and send it to him. He looked over it carefully and let me know that one of her biggest problems was going to be sound-to-symbol and symbol-to-sound understanding. He also said that even after this was overcome that she would always be a few steps behind when she had to process auditory information. It would improve with age (she was close to 8 at the time of the test) but it would always be a little off.

I can offer nothing on auditory processing differences, i do know though that it can affect dyslexic individuals too, and it does sound partly similar in description. I rather suspect that you have done the best for her also. I do wonder if having this alone would also affect brain dominance, and think that a multisensory approach would be helpful. Did she have any specilaist programs to help?

One of the biggest tip-offs for both of them was their speech. Late talkers, problems with articulation, problems with following directions, lack of interest in books or being read to, using me as a translator when speaking to or more importantly, when someone is speaking to them.... A lot of parents, me included, are told that they will grow out of it...not necessarily true. And it needs to be jumped on early.

I wonder if you noted any things which seemed to indicate they had high intelligence befor reading/nursery age? For example were they unusually good at lego, puzzles, problem solving, visual memory in card games such as pairs, making things.
There are often signs of good visual imagination as well as the negatives which get picked up on when they start nursery or school.

The old principal of my son's school is now a director over a screening program at a children's hospital. They screen high-risk children for dyslexia and other processing problems ages 3-5. I wish they had had something like that when my son and daughter were little. FWIW, the other two show absolutely no signs of any type of processing problem at all.

Let me stop here...I could go on for days about this.

Thats fantastic, where is that?
And do go on, thats what this thread is for.

 

[Walking Tourist]

I have auditory processing disorder.
For me, it meant that I had difficulty with phonics. There are certain sounds that I don't perceive at all. My reading skills are visual in nature. I can recognize entire words almost as if they were word pictures. When they are broken apart into sounds, they become meaningless to me.
Also, I can't do the thing that is called "selective listening." If I am in a noisy place with multiple conversations, I cannot tune out the background noise to listen to the person who is speaking to me. It all sounds as if it is at the same volume (excessively loud).
Although I sometimes seem as if I have hearing loss, that is not true. My hearing is better than normal. I just can't filter out anything at all so I respond to everything or I get a monster sized headache and have to get away before I start responding like a wild animal!
Oddly enough, however, my auditory processing problems have not affected whatever part of the brain is responsible for understanding music. I have had dreams in four-part harmony and my thoughts are frequently musical. If school had been sung, I would have been a very happy camper.
As for brain dominance, I don't know what all of this means. I am not a visual thinker. I think in melody and harmony and rhythm. But I learn with the help of music and art!

I can offer nothing on auditory processing differences, i do know though that it can affect dyslexic individuals too, and it does sound partly similar in description. I rather suspect that you have done the best for her also. I do wonder if having this alone would also affect brain dominance, and think that a multisensory approach would be helpful. Did she have any specilaist programs to help?

 

[Redbone]

From what little i know the wilson program is not too bad, it has a strong emphasis on multisensory learning and visual imagination. Of course it depends on who is teaching it and how well they teach it, but it certainly sounds like you did very well for him at the time. I'd certainly chose the wilson program over jolly phonics

.

If they would have had it here, I would have put him through the Scottish Rite program.

Susan Barton's program is excellent. I have looked at a lot of programs and hers is terrific.

I'm not familiar with the Lindamood-bell lips program, was this for your daughter? It seems to have a strong emphasis on phonics (based on a quick look at their site), which always worries me with dyslexia as, for the majority of dyslexic individuals, it frustrates rather than helps their progress.

My son did this at his school. LiPs is an excellent program (it is terribly expensive, though, through a private provider). It directly teaches phonemic awareness. For example, to someone with poor phonemic awareness, short 'i' and 'e' sound a lot alike--pen and pin. The program taught the difference between the two by showing the placement of the mouth when saying the two sounds, which is very different. They do this by having pictures of a woman with a lovely mouth saying the sound. The teachers do it and they get the kids to do it.

Susan Barton's program had a screening video to see if a person would benefit from her reading program. If your child fails the screening (like mine did), then LiPS is the best thing for them. Mine had to go through the LiPS program and then go through a reading program.

I can offer nothing on auditory processing differences, i do know though that it can affect dyslexic individuals too, and it does sound partly similar in description. I rather suspect that you have done the best for her also. I do wonder if having this alone would also affect brain dominance, and think that a multisensory approach would be helpful. Did she have any specilaist programs to help?

I used Earobics and Sound Reading for her. I also just waited a little longer to teach her reading. Once she caught on to the sound/symbol relationship, she went through several reading levels--from late pre-K to early 3rd grade--in a few months. It was hard but she was really determined to do it. She actually did better with learning to read than her brother.

I wonder if you noted any things which seemed to indicate they had high intelligence befor reading/nursery age? For example were they unusually good at lego, puzzles, problem solving, visual memory in card games such as pairs, making things.

Not really for my son until he got older. He has an excellent and extremely sharp wit. I know that this isn't thought of as a mark of intelligence but it really is.

My daughter showed strong and early signs of visual strengths. She learned early to play games or operate software on the computer without knowing how to read. I have a hard time explaining this but it's like she had this system of rapid trial and error when learning something.

Even though my 3rd child didn't have any of those difficulties, he is unusually gifted. He could speak over 600 words by the time he was 18 months, play and beat his brother and sister at games before he was 2, and potty-trained himself.

There are often signs of good visual imagination as well as the negatives which get picked up on when they start nursery or school.

There are but sometimes they can be too subtle for parents to catch. There's a reliance on measuring verbal intelligence/expressive/receptive language to gauge intelligence in young children. If they have problems in that area, it can take a skilled tester to get a good measure of their intelligence/potential.

Thats fantastic, where is that?

Sent you a PM.

 

[Betty Blue]

.

If they would have had it here, I would have put him through the Scottish Rite program.

I can't seem to find anything that actually explains what the program consists of, what methods are used, so i'll refrain from commenting on this. I'm in the U.K so i'm a little naieve of all the programs available in the states. Is it available in the U.K?

Susan Barton's program is excellent. I have looked at a lot of programs and hers is terrific.

Really? I'm not so sure actually, i always have a problem with programs that introduce phonics as a learning strategy for people with dyslexia. Although i am not sure of how it works exactly, i did note this on her site...
* Phonemic Awareness is the first step. You must teach someone how to listen to a single word or syllable and break it into individual phonemes. They also have to be able to take individual sounds and blend them into a word, change sounds, delete sounds, and compare sounds -- all in their head. These skills are easiest to learn before someone brings in printed letters.

I have a really hard time imagining how the bolded could help, since dyslexics are not suited to learning in this style (for the main), i find it very frustrating when programs offer this as a solution in a language that is so irregular at it's core.

My son did this at his school. LiPs is an excellent program (it is terribly expensive, though, through a private provider). It directly teaches phonemic awareness. For example, to someone with poor phonemic awareness, short 'i' and 'e' sound a lot alike--pen and pin. The program taught the difference between the two by showing the placement of the mouth when saying the two sounds, which is very different. They do this by having pictures of a woman with a lovely mouth saying the sound. The teachers do it and they get the kids to do it.

Unfortunately i just don't see how this would help someone with dyslexia, unless corraborated with a 3d image of each sound simultaneously.
I do think it would be helpful to anyone with speech difficulties though.

Susan Barton's program had a screening video to see if a person would benefit from her reading program. If your child fails the screening (like mine did), then LiPS is the best thing for them. Mine had to go through the LiPS program and then go through a reading program.

Gosh, he had to go through a lot, did he benifit greatly from these pprograms?

I have done the Davis dyslexia program with my son, which is also nighty expensive, but i really do understand how it is working and give it a lot of credit. I don't think it's perfect but i do think it is the best program i have come across as yet.

Not really for my son until he got older. He has an excellent and extremely sharp wit. I know that this isn't thought of as a mark of intelligence but it really is.

I do believe it is a sign of intelligence, not many can boast an excellent extreamly sharp wit.

My daughter showed strong and early signs of visual strengths. She learned early to play games or operate software on the computer without knowing how to read. I have a hard time explaining this but it's like she had this system of rapid trial and error when learning something.

It's funny you should mention this, my son knows very well how to find his way around visual sites without reading any of the text because his visual skills are advanced so he will memorise icons and picture links etc.

Even though my 3rd child didn't have any of those difficulties, he is unusually gifted. He could speak over 600 words by the time he was 18 months, play and beat his brother and sister at games before he was 2, and potty-trained himself.

So he is classically gifted, in the academic, how old is he now?

There are but sometimes they can be too subtle for parents to catch. There's a reliance on measuring verbal intelligence/expressive/receptive language to gauge intelligence in young children. If they have problems in that area, it can take a skilled tester to get a good measure of their intelligence/potential.

Yes it needs to be a tester who looks for the strengths and well as the weaknesses, which can be difficult to find as most tests are inclined towards academia they do not give a true indication of intelligence.
e.g if my son see's something, understands it, can manipulate it in his mind and make new things with it...does the fact that he can't write it down in a test make it invalid.
Has your son ever had a full educational psychological assessment by an independant dyslexia assessor?

It is only in my sons most recent report (at his new school) that they have recognised his intelligence and stated that he has exceptional visual skills.
I had been fighting (his old school) for years over this, they were hell bent on forcing the idea that he achieved poorly in everything and was below average intelligence-mighty frustrating!



I am going to a talk/lecture on monday evening by Ron Davis (the gift of dyslexia), i will post later about it, if anyone has any questions they would like me to ask, let me know.