ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the effectiveness of an intervention for reading-delayed children in Year-1 classes. METHODS: A sample (N = 77) of children drawn from 14 schools representing those with the weakest reading skills were randomly allocated to one of two groups. A 20-week intervention group received the intervention for two consecutive 10-week periods, while a 10-week intervention group only received the intervention for the second 10 weeks of the study. The programme was delivered in daily 20-minute sessions that alternated between small group (N = 3) and individual teaching. The programme combined phoneme awareness training, word and text reading, and phonological linkage exercises. RESULTS: The children receiving the intervention during the first 10-week period made significantly more progress on measures of letter knowledge, single word reading, and phoneme awareness than children not receiving the intervention. However, the children who only received the intervention during the second 10-week period made rapid progress and appeared to catch up with the children who had been given the more prolonged intervention. Failure to respond to the intervention was predicted by poor initial literacy skills and being in receipt of free school meals. CONCLUSION: A reading intervention programme delivered on a daily basis by trained teaching assistants is an effective intervention for children who show reading delays at the end of their first year in school. However, around one-quarter of the children did not respond to this intervention and these children would appear to need more intensive or more prolonged help to improve their reading skills.
Subject(s)
Dyslexia/therapy , Group Processes , Remedial Teaching/methods , Child , Child, Preschool , Dyslexia/diagnosis , Educational Status , England , Female , Humans , Male , Phonetics , Socioeconomic Factors , Time Factors , Verbal LearningABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that the phonological deficits that characterise dyslexia persist into adulthood. There is a growing number of dyslexic students in higher education for whom sensitive diagnostic tests of their reading and reading related difficulties are required. AIMS: The main aim of this study was to compare the cognitive skills of dyslexic students with those of their non-dyslexic peers, and to ascertain the impact of cognitive difficulties on their study skills. A second aim was to produce guidelines for the assessment of dyslexia in higher education. SAMPLE: The performance of 23 dyslexic students was compared with that of a comparison group of 50 students from the same university who did not report a history of reading difficulty. METHOD: Participants completed standardised tests of IQ, reading, spelling and arithmetic and tests tapping phonological processing, verbal fluency and speed of processing. Their performance on a set of study-related tasks including proof reading and précis writing was also assessed and they completed the Brown ADD scales. RESULTS: Although dyslexic students did not differ in general cognitive ability from controls, they had deficits in reading and reading related phonological processes. Discriminant function analyses indicated that dyslexia in adulthood can be confirmed with 95% accuracy using only four tests: spelling, nonword reading, digit span and writing speed. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted the difficulties of dyslexic adults. The persisting difficulties of dyslexic students that affect their study skills need to be recognised by HE institutions so that appropriate support programmes can be put in place.
