A Response to Spafford and Grosser’s “Controversial Theories”, A Chapter in Dyslexia and reading difficulties : research and resource guide for working with all struggling readers (2005)

A Response to Spafford and Grosser’s “Controversial Theories”, A Chapter in 

Dyslexia and Reading Difficulties : Research and Resource Guide for Working with all Struggling Readers (2005)

What IS dyslexia?

 

Dyslexia--the Controversial Search for a "Cure"

    Dyslexia reminds me of psoriasis, a genetic skin condition I suffer from, in that "often parents, teachers, and other concerned persons will search for miracle cures to relieve the reading disability of a dyslexic child” (Spafford & Grosser, 2005).   I am frequently approached by people with a magic cure for psoriasis although there is NO cure.  There are, however, medicines that treat my symptoms, that make my skin and my condition better as long as I stick with them.  Everyone has their pet whack cure--Vaseline, dead sea salts, etc. for this auto-immune system deficiency; much the same as dyslexia.  Because people with dyslexia, and their parents, are so intent on “curing” the issue, many strange theories abound.  This article is an attempt by the authors to highlight the most controversial theories of dyslexia.

There are many strange, controversial theories surrounding dyslexia.  Many of these theories are based on faulty research; research that is inconclusive, the result of improper methodologies, and the like.  Many of the so-called “cures” of dyslexia were found to be effective treatments as a result of the Hawthorne Effect, “ a positive change in behavior not due to the treatment mode, but rather to the individual's sense of participation in important research or desire to please an important supervisor, mentor, teacher, etc.”  These controversial theories can be generally categorized into hypotheses concerning balance and improper motor development, altered vision, dietary imbalances, auditory impairment, toxic levels of minerals, and mood.

Improper Cerebellar Vestibular System of Balance?

Drs. Frank and Levinson (1977), psychiatrists, posited that the cerebellar vestibular system of balance does not work properly for dyslexics.  They felt that dyslexia works much the same way as motion sickness in that intake of information is too rapid for comprehensible consumption.  Since Dramamine can help slow down the flow of sensory information, it can aid dyslexics.  However, this theory has been rebutted because many people with cerebellar-vestibular disorders read just fine and because Levinson had no control group when testing Dramamine as an effective treatment for dyslexia, among other reasons.  Kephart (1960, 1971) was also a proponent of a theory of dsylexia concerning balance.  He felt that learning disabled children have perceptual-motor deficiencies such as posture, balance, locomotion, and propulsion.  In order to remedy these deficiencies, a dyslexic child could walk on balance beams, jump and hop, and do other such physical activities.  However, there is little empirical evidence to support claims that such treatments are effective.

Altered Vision?

       Another bizarre group of theories concern altered vision.  Drs. Ferreri and Wainwright (1984), chiropractors, felt that manually manipulating skull bones would cure dyslexia because this reading disability was a result of a sphenoid wing malfunction that would cause ocular lock, a condition keeping the eyes from following a moving target.  This theory has been disproved because the cranial bones don't move, and attempts to manipulate the skull bones can injure the brain, causing further impairment.  Stein and Fowler (1985) attributed dsylexia to unstable eye movement and felt that using an eye patch over the problem eye would allow dyslexics better success when tracking.  However, further research has shown that normal readers will suffer from poor vergence control just as often as dyslexics.  A final theory in this category involves the use of colored lenses to help those with reading disabilities.  Helen Irlen felt that dyslexics had scotopic sensitivity syndrome, a set of problems involving problems reading and writing, light sensitivity, and difficulty perceiving different wavelengths of light.  She felt that each reader had an optimal wavelength of light that could be used to view text successfully.  This theory lacks scientific support, but it has gained many followers.  Mary Williams riffed on this idea, but found that blue or grey lenses improved reading because reading-impaired students have a difficult time erasing the images of what they have just read, resulting in jumbled words.  These lenses slow down the sustained visual system, erasing afterimages after a saccade.  However, new research questions the validity of Williams’ theory and findings.

Audio Therapy for Dyslexics

      Johansen’s (1984) audio therapy is a treatment that uses sound.  He used a tuning fork to “screen” for dyslexia.  He built on Volf’s (1960s) findings that dyslexia was a result of an undescended testicle in males.  Johansen used audiotherapy to get the testicle to descend, thus curing dyslexia!  Even though this theory has no scientific basis, thousands of people in Scandanavia receive this treatment.  I do feel that perhaps dyslexics have some issues with auditory discrimination (dsyphonetics), but I am very unclear as to the role of testosterone in reading.  Did Johansen just leap to wild conclusions without doing any scientific research?  How are testicles related to language development?  Men don't really think with that part of their bodies, right?  My nephew, who will be a year old in April, was born with an undescended testicle that they promptly removed.  I'll let you know how the reading goes.  Equally bizarre to me is the ontogeny theory that learning disabilities develop in the womb when unwanted children or children of ill/anxious mothers fail to be exposed to its mother’s tones beginning at four and a half months.  The baby will retreat from communication, is ears won’t be trained for hearing and decoding speech, and unless there is intervention in the form of higher frequency sounds played to the child, the child will suffer reading disabilities.

Too Much Caffeine?  Lead Poisoning Leads to Dyslexia?

            Other theories seem more commonsensical, such as the idea that too much caffeine or sugar can cause learning disabilities, leading to theories of elimination diets, like Cott’s (1977) and Feingold’s.  Also likely is that high levels of lead poisoning can cause learning disabilities.  To me, it seems that professionals from a variety of fields just wildly began trying to attach their disciplines and mantras to the notion of “curing” dyslexia.  I find it strange that some of the crazier theories were ever implemented as an attempt to treat dyslexia.  

Dyslexia Word cloud

Final Thoughts

I urge anyone trying to help a reading disabled person to take to heart the advice of the authors of the article and to be sure that the treatment is reading-based.  Realize how many gains have been made in the reading field.  With science on our side, old "cures" and ways of thinking about reading disability should be discarded.  

Surely hopping and running and staring at things can’t make a person a better reader!  Therefore, make sure that your work with struggling, disabled, or even dyslexic readers is based on current research based best practices and thinking, and avoid the wild theories I have reviewed here as well as their associated wacky "cures" for dyslexia.  My recommendations:  1.  a good phonics program at students' level (Words Their Way is phenomenal), 2.  Timed repeated readings, 3. Comprehension work during guided reading with the teacher as well as during silent sustained reading with the use of learning logs. 

 I will post a link to the daily routine and homework I created in my reading program modeled off of Appalachian State University's renowned Reading Clinic where I trained.

What are your thoughts on dyslexia?