Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Oregon Branch of the International Dyslexia Association Lecture Series 2007-2008. Response to Intervention And Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses: Specific Learning Disabilities 2008. Jim Hanson, M.Ed. JaBrHanson@yahoo.com. Goals of the Presentation. Response to Intervention
Response to Intervention
Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses:
Specific Learning Disabilities 2008
Jim Hanson, M.Ed.
Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW)
Vellutino et al. (2000) p. 235
effect size .52 SD
effect size .72 SD
Fletcher, et.al. 2007
to PSW and Neurological Theory
Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurobiological 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 growth of vocabulary and background knowledge”
“The phonological model crystallizes exactly what we mean by dyslexia… a circumscribed, encapsulated weakness is often surrounded by a sea of strengths: reasoning, problem solving, comprehension, concept formation, critical thinking, general knowledge, and vocabulary” Shaywitz (2003).
“Rote memorization and rapid word retrieval are particularly difficult for dyslexics” Shaywitz (2003).
Phonological Awareness (Ga, PC)
Working Memory (WM) & Associative Memory (MA)
Processing Speed (Gs), & Naming Facility (NA)
Fletcher et. al. (2007)
Learning Disabilities: From Identification to Intervention
Keene, E. & Zimmerman, S., (1997). The mosaic of thought: Teaching comprehension in a readers’ workshop. Heineman: Portsmouth, NH.
How do we improve the educational outcome for this student?
“I would hope that the goal here is to expand the methods of assessment available to the practitioner and not to limit them. It seems possible that these two very valuable approaches can be utilized along a continuum of collecting information about a child that would culminate in a very clear and comprehensive evaluation that would be of value to all.”Huff, L. (2005, February). President’s Message. NASP Communique, 33, 2-3.