tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/reading-difficulties-9450/articlesReading Difficulties – The Conversation2021-11-24T14:18:03Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1722632021-11-24T14:18:03Z2021-11-24T14:18:03ZHow moving dots are helping us learn more about dyslexia in children – new research<p>Around one in ten children in the UK have <a href="https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexia/about-dyslexia">dyslexia</a>, a developmental condition which means that they struggle to learn to read.
It often causes difficulties in spelling too. </p>
<p>Reading and spelling involve <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100618772271">mapping what we see</a> on a page to correspond to spoken language and meaning. So, reading difficulties could at least in part be caused by differences in how the brain processes visual information (how the brain makes sense of what we see).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/teachers-dont-understand-the-depth-of-dyslexia-107384">Teachers don't understand the depth of dyslexia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One visual skill that has been found to differ between people with and without dyslexia time and time again is the ability to <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dys.412">perceive motion</a>, which essentially means how we work out the direction of moving objects.</p>
<p>In a display of dots moving in different directions, people with dyslexia tend to need more dots to be moving in the same direction in order to accurately judge the overall direction. But until now, we have not really understood why this ability is affected. We wanted to try to find out, to get a better understanding of how the brain develops differently in children with dyslexia.</p>
<h2>How children with dyslexia perceive motion</h2>
<p>One possibility is that a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0028393218301155?casa_token=55BSveBWbYIAAAAA:ap2zwFRrcwaXreu0kVP41_-aadjh1v5evLXMO02lGpy344eWSqJDXxS6i9qbAMJO-T66RRFH_7k">pathway in the brain</a> that is required for perceiving motion develops differently. This pathway is specialised for processing information that changes rapidly over time, such as moving objects which change in location over time, or speech sounds, which change in frequency over time. That is how we distinguish one sound from another.</p>
<p>There are many processing stages involved in making a judgement about the direction of a moving object. Not only do we have to first encode the visual information, by seeing the object. We then have to gather enough evidence about which way it is moving so that we can make a decision about it, before we can then respond. That might be moving towards a ball to catch it, for example.</p>
<p>So far, it hasn’t been clear where the differences lie in people with dyslexia. In our recent <a href="https://www.jneurosci.org/content/early/2021/11/08/JNEUROSCI.1232-21.2021">study</a>, we wanted to find out whether it is the early sensory encoding or the decision-making stages, or both, which are affected. </p>
<p>Children were presented with patterns of moving dots in child-friendly games and asked to work out their overall direction across two tasks. They had to press a button to say whether they were going “left” or “right”. We also measured children’s brain activity using an EEG cap on their heads. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tZcKT4l_JZk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">An EEG is used to measure brain activity during a particular event or task.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Then we analysed how accurate children were, and how long they took to make their responses, using a mathematical model. The results of this model showed that children with dyslexia were slower to gather evidence, and decide on the direction of the dots, compared to the children without dyslexia.</p>
<p>While an <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33021019/">earlier study</a> reached a similar conclusion, we were also able to link this behavioural difference in dyslexia to differences in their brain activity measured using EEG.</p>
<p>When making decisions on the direction of dot movement, children showed a gradual ramping up of brain activity measured by sensors positioned at the centre of their heads. Importantly, this ramping up was more gradual in children with dyslexia, which corresponded to the slower rate at which they gathered evidence in our mathematical model. </p>
<p>We also analysed the early EEG <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010945221002562">responses to visual motion</a>, from when the children first saw the moving dots. This suggested that early sensory processing – the initial seeing of the moving dots – is similar in all the children who took part in the study.</p>
<p>Taken together, our findings show that children with and without dyslexia do not seem to differ in how they initially process visual information, but instead in how they make decisions about it. They seemed to see the moving dots just as easily, but took longer to decide in which direction they were moving.</p>
<h2>Possible effect on reading ability</h2>
<p>Although words are motionless, differences in these motion tasks could influence children’s ability to read. That’s because the sounds that make up language change quickly over time – just like a moving dot – so rely on the brain processes that can detect these changes well. The ability to process the rapidly changing sounds that make up a language are involved in <a href="https://www.asha.org/Practice-Portal/Clinical-Topics/Written-Language-Disorders/Phonological-Processing">phonological processing</a>, which has been extensively <a href="https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.0021-9630.2003.00305.x">linked to dyslexia</a> and basically means using the sounds that make up a language to process spoken and written language.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-brief-history-of-dyslexia-and-the-role-women-played-in-getting-it-recognised-89055">A brief history of dyslexia and the role women played in getting it recognised</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>If children with dyslexia are slower to make decisions about the direction of movement, they may also find it more difficult to differentiate between sounds in the spoken word. In turn, this could make reading more difficult as it is so dependent on spoken language and meaning.</p>
<p>We now want to find out whether children with dyslexia are slower to make decisions for other types of information which we collect through our senses, or whether the differences just relate to visual motion. </p>
<p>Another area of interest, is whether other skills – such as general processing speed and cognitive ability – are related to both the decision-making and reading difficulties.</p>
<p>These studies are helping us to build a better picture of how the brain develops differently in children with dyslexia. Our findings demonstrate that dyslexia could affect more than just a child’s reading and spelling abilities. It is important that we all bear this in mind when supporting children with dyslexia.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/172263/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Catherine Manning receives funding from the Wellcome Trust.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gaia Scerif receives funding from the Nuffield Foundation and the British Academy. Gaia is a Trustee of the Fragile X Society.</span></em></p>Children with dyslexia seem to find it more difficult to judge the direction of moving dots - this could explain why reading is also more challenging.Catherine Manning, Lecturer in Psychology, University of ReadingGaia Scerif, Professor of Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1590582021-04-29T20:06:55Z2021-04-29T20:06:55ZStarting behind: more than half of young Australian kids living in adversity don’t have the skills they need to learn to read<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/397742/original/file-20210429-24-1s94rpc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/teacher-helping-female-pupil-practising-writing-284502038">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/47/4/1307/5033474">Around one in three (36%) Australian children</a> grow up in families experiencing adversity. These include families where parents are unemployed, in financial stress, have relationship difficulties or experience poor mental or physical health. </p>
<p><a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1460-6984.12611">Our recent study</a> found one in four Australian children experiencing adversity had language difficulties and around one in two had pre-reading difficulties. </p>
<p>Language difficulties can include having a limited vocabulary, struggling to make sentences and finding it hard to understand what is being said. Pre-reading difficulties can include struggling to recognise alphabet letters and difficulties identifying sounds that make up words.</p>
<p>Learning to read is one of the most important skills for children. How easily a child learns to read largely depends on both their early <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.41.1.225">oral language</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2005/029)">pre-reading skills</a>. Difficulties in these areas make learning to read more challenging and can affect general academic performance.</p>
<h2>What are language and pre-reading difficulties?</h2>
<p>International <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00036.x">studies show</a> children experiencing adversity are more likely to have language and pre-reading difficulties when they start school.</p>
<p>Language difficulties are usually identified using a standardised language assessment which compares an individual child’s language abilities to a general population of children of the same age. </p>
<p>Pre-reading difficulties are difficulties in the building blocks for learning to read. For example, <a href="https://raisingchildren.net.au/preschoolers/play-learning/literacy-reading-stories/literacy-difficulties">by the age of five</a>, most children can name at least ten letters and identify the first sound in simple words (e.g. “b” for “ball”). </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Boy pointing out letters." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397737/original/file-20210429-19-6ifih4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Most five year old children can name at least ten letters and identify the first sound in simple words.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/56-years-old-boy-class-room-5569378">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Children who have not developed these skills by the time they start school are likely to require extra support in learning to read. </p>
<h2>1 in 4 children in adversity had language difficulties</h2>
<p>We examined the language, pre-reading and non-verbal skills (such as attention and flexible thinking) of 201 five-year-old children experiencing adversity in Victoria and Tasmania. </p>
<p>We defined language difficulties as children having language skills in the lowest 10% compared to a representative population of Australian 5-year-olds. By this definition, we would expect one in ten children to have language difficulties. </p>
<p>But our rates were more than double this — one in four (24.9%) of the children in our sample had language difficulties. </p>
<h2>More than half couldn’t name alphabet letters</h2>
<p>Pre-reading difficulties were even more common: 58.6% of children could not name the expected number of alphabet letters and 43.8% could not identify first sounds in words. </p>
<p>By comparison, an Australian population study of four year olds (children one year younger than in our study) found <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jpc.12126">21% could not name any alphabet letters</a>. </p>
<p>Again, our rates were more than double this. </p>
<p>Interestingly, we didn’t find these differences for children’s non-verbal skills. This suggests language and pre-literacy skills are particularly vulnerable to adversity.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/1-in-5-kids-start-school-with-health-or-emotional-difficulties-that-challenge-their-learning-131134">1 in 5 kids start school with health or emotional difficulties that challenge their learning</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There are several reasons that could explain this. Early speech and language skills develop through <a href="https://doi.org/10.2471/blt.06.030163">interactions children have with their parents</a>. These interactions can be <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1602387">different in families experiencing adversity</a>, due to challenges such as family stress and having fewer social supports. </p>
<p>Families experiencing adversity may also have fewer resources (including time and books) to invest in their children’s early language and learning.</p>
<h2>Why is this important?</h2>
<p>It is really challenging for children starting school with language and pre-reading difficulties to catch up to their peers. They need to accelerate their learning to close the gap. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Teacher reading a book to young kids." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/397739/original/file-20210429-15-1up5uqq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It is challenging for children entering school behind their peers to catch up.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/group-elementary-school-pupils-sitting-on-1448152262">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Put into context, if a child starts school six months behind their peers, they will need to make 18 months gain within a year to begin the next school year on par with their peers. This is not achievable for many children, even with extra support, and a tall order for many schools. </p>
<p>Early reading difficulties often continue throughout the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.41.1.225">primary school years and beyond</a>. Sadly, we also know that the long-term impacts of language and pre-reading difficulties don’t just include poor reading skills, but <a href="https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0142)">problems which can carry into adulthood</a>. </p>
<p>These can include struggling academically, difficulties gaining employment, antisocial behaviour and poor well-being.</p>
<h2>What can we do?</h2>
<p>These results should be concerning for us all. There are <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/123261">clear and extensive social costs</a> that come with early language and pre-reading difficulties, including a higher burden on health and welfare costs and productivity losses.</p>
<p>These impacts are particularly worrying given the significant school disruptions experienced <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-close-schools-every-time-theres-a-covid-outbreak-our-traffic-light-system-shows-what-to-do-instead-158214">due to the COVID-19 lockdowns</a>. School closures will have substantially reduced children’s access to additional support and learning opportunities, particularly for those experiencing adversity, further inhibiting opportunities to catch up.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/victoria-and-nsw-are-funding-extra-tutors-to-help-struggling-students-heres-what-parents-need-to-know-about-the-schemes-153450">Victoria and NSW are funding extra tutors to help struggling students. Here's what parents need to know about the schemes</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Our best bet is to ensure as many children as possible start school with the language and pre-reading skills required to become competent early readers. </p>
<p>For example, ensuring all children have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.263">access to books at home</a> has shown promise in supporting early language skills for children experiencing adversity. </p>
<p>We know which children are at greatest risk of struggling with their early language and pre-reading skills. We now need to embed this evidence into existing health and education services, and invest in supports for young children and families to address these unequal outcomes.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/159058/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sharon Goldfeld receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council and Philanthropy</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hannah Bryson and Jodie Smith do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>By the age of five, most children can name at least ten letters. In our study, 58.6% of children living with disadvantage could not name the expected number of alphabet letters.Sharon Goldfeld, Director, Center for Community Child Health Royal Children's Hospital; Professor, Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne; Theme Director Population Health, Murdoch Children's Research InstituteHannah Bryson, Postdoctoral Researcher, Murdoch Children's Research InstituteJodie Smith, Research Fellow, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/282882014-06-23T05:05:39Z2014-06-23T05:05:39ZPupils struggling with reading need early intervention, not a three-month summer school<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/51793/original/r5nfb8py-1403280241.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The writing's on the wall – and they can't read it.</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Reading capability is vital for young people to be able to access and engage with the curriculum by the end of primary school and even more so at secondary school. But the data we have indicates that a substantial proportion of pupils have not reached a high enough level to succeed in their studies – with significant implications for their lives after they finish school.</p>
<p>In 2013, 75,000 children (about one in seven) did not achieve the minimum expected level on national assessments for reading by the end of primary school (Level 4). If these pupils perform in a similar way to those who did not achieve Level 4 in English in 2008, only one in ten of these pupils will achieve five grades at A*-C, including English and Maths, at GCSE.</p>
<p>That problem is only compounded by England’s unequal education system, which does a bad job serving disadvantaged children and young people: on average, struggling readers who are eligible for free school meals are less likely to achieve Level 4 than their peers. Those who are behind are likely to be even further behind than other struggling readers. In 2013, 27% of white British pupils eligible for free school meals did not achieve Level 4.</p>
<p>Our aim in producing “<a href="http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/toolkit/reading-at-the-transition">Reading at the Transition</a>”, with the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), was to review the effectiveness of different approaches to helping struggling readers catch up with their peers. It is based on the framework of the Sutton Trust/EEF <a href="http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/toolkit/">Teaching and Learning Toolkit</a>, a comparative analysis of different research-based approaches to improving attainment, together with an overview of the costs, to help schools make decisions about how to allocate their funds (particularly the pupil premium).</p>
<p>But the most important point the research makes, in my view, is that the challenge is far greater than most people realise. </p>
<h2>Stick with it</h2>
<p>Even the most effective approaches identified in the “toolkit”, on average, only achieve eight months of improved results – and that’s in research often conducted under ideal conditions. Many of these struggling readers will be as much as two years behind their peers; a summer school between years six and seven, with a typical benefit of about three months’ gain, is nowhere near enough to make a meaningful difference. </p>
<p>Even if these young people were to benefit from a typical summer school every year for the next five years, they would still be about nine months behind with their reading at age 16. Schools therefore need to plan a more intensive and more sustained approach to tackling the literacy difficulties of their struggling readers at the transition between primary and secondary school.</p>
<p>Other important findings relate to the range of approaches to support reading and they types of reading support that research indicates are likely to be beneficial. Both one-to-one and small-group tuition can help pupils catch up. One-to-one teaching has a slightly higher average impact and a more secure evidence base, but in some cases small group tuition with a skilled teacher can be as effective.</p>
<p>Given its lower cost, schools should consider trialling small group tuition as a first option, before moving to one-to-one tuition if small groups are ineffective. Recent EEF findings indicate that effective deployment of teaching assistants who are trained in specific catch-up approaches can be successful in supporting improvement in reading for those who are behind.</p>
<h2>Sound is not enough</h2>
<p>One of the key debates in reading is about the <a href="http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2013/04/07/a-very-short-summary-of-the-phonics-debate/">value of phonics</a>. It is certainly the case that there is a robust evidence base for the benefits of developing learners’ phonemic awareness or their skills in hearing, identifying and manipulating phonemes so that they can learn the correspondence between these sounds and the written patterns which represent them in English. However we think that on average, reading comprehension approaches will be more effective for low-attaining older readers. This is for two reasons. </p>
<p>Mastering phonics is necessary for reading, especially decoding and basic reading fluency – but it is not enough to ensure children can actually read, in the full sense of the word. Learners must also develop understanding of the meaning of a range of different texts in different areas of the curriculum. </p>
<p>Compare the relative difficulty of interpreting a poem in English and deciphering a description of how plants derive energy from the sun in biology. It is all very well being able to pronounce “photosynthesis”, but this won’t help understand the meaning of the word (never mind the whole text). </p>
<p>Additionally, children who have not yet succeeded in learning to read using phonics previously will benefit from approaches that place a greater emphasis on meaning and context. At the very least, they’re almost certain to benefit from a change of approach. </p>
<h2>Start ‘em young</h2>
<p>Diagnosis is the key here: if learners are not making progress, we must find out why not. If they still have difficulties with word-level fluency, then additional support with phonics may still help. But in practice, a mixed approach is probably beneficial for most pupils, targeted according to need. If phonics is used with older children, age-appropriate materials delivered by trained professionals appear to be most effective.</p>
<p>The implications are twofold. Secondary schools must not underestimate the challenge of helping their struggling readers; one intervention will not be sufficient. These pupils are likely to need sustained support for several years and their teachers will need good diagnostic skills to ensure any support they give is meeting their needs. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, primary schools must redouble their efforts to ensure these children do not fall so far behind in the first place. This indicates that earlier intervention and closer monitoring of reading progress are essential.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28288/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steve Higgins does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Reading capability is vital for young people to be able to access and engage with the curriculum by the end of primary school and even more so at secondary school. But the data we have indicates that a…Steve Higgins, Professor of Education, Durham UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/267252014-05-30T12:26:23Z2014-05-30T12:26:23ZThe secrets of designing a good typeface: it’s all in the tuning<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48735/original/7rwn9tq9-1400249793.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">And how do you read your typeface?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/rachelpasch/2249021588/sizes/l">Justmakeit</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When we want what we write to be clearly communicated to a reader, we generally try to use a typeface that is clear to read. But few people realise how quickly your choice of typeface affects that process. If we can understand it better, we can design typefaces more effectively.</p>
<p>Readers like expending as little effort as possible when identifying individual letters and recognising words, so that they are left with more capacity to focus on understanding the meaning of the text. </p>
<p>Today we have many legible typefaces, each of which has its own visual style. Futura, for example, has no contrast of thick and thin strokes whereas Bodoni has substantial contrast.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/49385/original/wckqxvqc-1400948384.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/49385/original/wckqxvqc-1400948384.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49385/original/wckqxvqc-1400948384.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49385/original/wckqxvqc-1400948384.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49385/original/wckqxvqc-1400948384.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49385/original/wckqxvqc-1400948384.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49385/original/wckqxvqc-1400948384.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How contrast can vary.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Other characteristics include the slant, the weight and the angle of stress. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=287&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=287&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=287&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48736/original/bp5w9r6j-1400250150.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">So many Bs.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Despite this variation, fluent readers can, apparently without undue effort, identify quite different shapes as all being the same letter. An “a” in Comic Sans looks very different from an “a” in Times New Roman but they are still instantly understood as an “a” to the reader.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/49386/original/x6ymphpv-1400949538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/49386/original/x6ymphpv-1400949538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49386/original/x6ymphpv-1400949538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49386/original/x6ymphpv-1400949538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49386/original/x6ymphpv-1400949538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=598&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49386/original/x6ymphpv-1400949538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=598&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49386/original/x6ymphpv-1400949538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=598&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Challenges of identifying letters.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It can be relatively difficult to differentiate between some fairly similar letterforms, though. On the face of things, a “c” and an “e” have very similar shapes, as do an “i” and an “l”. A comparable problem occurs in speech perception, where we need to identify vowels from different speakers. This is a challenge because the acoustic pattern of a vowel from one speaker is distinct from their other vowels but overlaps with the acoustic pattern of a different vowel spoken by someone else.</p>
<p>In designing typefaces, there is a tension between making sure there is a uniformity of style, which is achieved through commonalities in the shape, proportions, and other attributes of letters within a typeface and ensuring that each letter is distinct. For typographer <a href="http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Typographic_Opportunities_in_the_Compute.html?id=4hncNwAACAAJ&redir_esc=y">Jan Tschichold</a>, “legibility has its roots simply in the comfortable recognisability of thoroughly distinctive yet congruent letter forms”.</p>
<p>There are even <a href="http://bdatech.org/what-technology/typefaces-for-dyslexia/#dyslexie">typefaces designed</a> specifically for dyslexic readers. Among other things, these tend to <a href="http://bdatech.org/what-technology/typefaces-for-dyslexia/">increase the distinctions</a> between confusable letters. Dyslexic readers, it seems, prefer “p” and “q” to have distinct shapes rather than just be mirror images of each other, for example in the typeface Lexia Readable. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/49176/original/3sdqhw5t-1400695472.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/49176/original/3sdqhw5t-1400695472.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49176/original/3sdqhw5t-1400695472.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49176/original/3sdqhw5t-1400695472.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49176/original/3sdqhw5t-1400695472.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=595&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49176/original/3sdqhw5t-1400695472.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=595&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/49176/original/3sdqhw5t-1400695472.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=595&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Irregularities of style.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At the same time, there is psychological evidence that the shared traits between letters can help a reader identify them more efficiently. This has been explained as the reader’s <a href="http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/25604/1/SanockiDyson2011.pdf">perceptual processing system tuning to the regularities across letters.</a></p>
<p>Type designers add stylistic features to the basic forms of letters, whereas the reader considers the letter the other way round. They identify which stylistic forms have been added and remove them to find the basic form beneath it. </p>
<p>This process happens within a fraction of a second, when our eyes first fix on letters. If we focus on this process, we might be able to better understand how we process typefaces.</p>
<p>By collaborating with typeface designer Sofie Beier, we’ve identified some of the outstanding questions that need to be answered.</p>
<p>We don’t yet know exactly when we retune so we don’t know how the level of distinctiveness between typefaces affects timing. We don’t know if retuning is a default process and we don’t know if it happens gradually or rapidly. Nor do we know exactly what triggers it – is it that we have noticed that the letters are in a different typeface or that we struggle to identify certain letters? We don’t know if it happens more in some readers or reading contexts than others.</p>
<p>These are all important questions that could help us design better typefaces. We might even try to see if some irregularities, such as one or two particularly quirky letters in a typeface prevent us from tuning, making reading it more difficult. </p>
<p>This last question links to the contradictory objectives of distinctive yet congruent forms. If we know the answers, we could make better decisions about the optimum degrees of uniformity and distinctiveness in our typeface and about whether uniformity across some features, such as width, placement of <a href="http://www.typographydeconstructed.com/serif/">serifs</a> are more important than others. </p>
<p>Once these issues have been addressed, we could have a firmer basis for supporting people who have more difficulty reading – but we could also choose typefaces for specific purposes and design new typefaces that optimise legibility.</p>
<p>We may never be able to resolve the difficulties we have understanding the nuances of speech because we can’t choose what people’s voices or accents sound like but we do have control over what we read and how we present words to each other. With a little more understanding, we could develop typefaces that are not only visually pleasing but also highly functional.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/26725/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mary Dyson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When we want what we write to be clearly communicated to a reader, we generally try to use a typeface that is clear to read. But few people realise how quickly your choice of typeface affects that process…Mary Dyson, Associate Professor, Typography & Graphic Communication, University of ReadingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/240272014-03-19T19:37:20Z2014-03-19T19:37:20ZShould we do away with ‘dyslexia’?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44046/original/nhn565hz-1395018246.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Many children have difficulty reading, but should we label this dyslexia?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/downloading_tips.mhtml?code=&id=127788884&size=medium&image_format=jpg&method=download&super_url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.shutterstock.com%2Fgatekeeper%2FW3siZSI6MTM5NTA0Njk5NywiYyI6Il9waG90b19zZXNzaW9uX2lkIiwiZGMiOiJpZGxfMTI3Nzg4ODg0IiwicCI6InYxfDEwMTI3NTg4fDEyNzc4ODg4NCIsImsiOiJwaG90by8xMjc3ODg4ODQvbWVkaXVtLmpwZyIsIm0iOiIxIiwiZCI6InNodXR0ZXJzdG9jay1tZWRpYSJ9LCJDMVlNcU9aeVBXRkYwQ1kvRHBuaFhFMG5iWDQiXQ%2Fshutterstock_127788884.jpg&racksite_id=ny&chosen_subscription=1&license=standard&src=CUD7wsnA2_1lGH7acbQZNw-1-4">shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In their recently published book, <a href="http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/psychology/educational-psychology/dyslexia-debate">The Dyslexia Debate</a>, Joe Elliott and Elena Grigorenko controversially call for the term “dyslexia” to be abandoned. They argue it is an imprecise label that does nothing to assist the children to whom it is applied. </p>
<p>So what is wrong with the term “dyslexia”? </p>
<p>No-one is denying the reality of children’s reading difficulties, or that these need to be identified and treated as early as possible. What is in question is whether we should give the label of “dyslexia” to children with reading difficulties. </p>
<p>It is important to note that reading ability falls on a continuum in the population; it is normally distributed like height or weight. Thus, deciding whether a child does or does not have dyslexia will always involve applying an arbitrary cut-off. </p>
<p>In this sense, a diagnosis of dyslexia is similar to a diagnosis of obesity. It is quite different from a diagnosis of, say, measles where it is clear when someone has it and when they do not.</p>
<h2>No agreement on diagnosis</h2>
<p>Elliott and Grigorenko argue that applying the label of dyslexia is unscientific because there is no universally agreed set of criteria for its diagnosis. What one clinician might call dyslexia, another might not.</p>
<p>Some apply the label to any child who struggles with learning to read. Others apply it only when the reading difficulty is accompanied by strengths in other intellectual domains. Still others diagnose dyslexia when the reading difficulty is associated with particular cognitive “markers” such as phonological or visual deficits. </p>
<p>Even within these different definitions, there is variability associated with where the cut-off for an impairment is applied. Consequently, estimates of the prevalence of dyslexia range from 3% to 20% of the population.</p>
<p>It is true that the term “dyslexia” has been used in a wide variety of contexts over the years, and this has led to considerable confusion. We think three particular factors have contributed to the problem:</p>
<p>First, there has been a failure to distinguish between <em>research</em> and <em>clinical</em> uses of the term. Researchers often select samples of “dyslexics” with very specific profiles. They do so in order to answer particular research questions, or to control for non-relevant factors.</p>
<p>They may select their sample to have average or above IQ, so that this factor does not influence their results. Similarly, researchers may decide that, for their experimental purposes, “dyslexia” will be defined very generously, as those students scoring below one standard deviation from the mean on a test of reading (approximately 16% of the population). This does not mean that any of these criteria should necessarily inform a clinical diagnosis of dyslexia. </p>
<p>Second, there has been a tendency to conflate symptoms and causes within definitions of dyslexia. Sometimes it is defined purely in terms of the presenting problem – a reading difficulty – with the diagnostician remaining agnostic as to its underlying cause. In other cases, the definition incorporates a theoretical position as to why the reading difficulty arose in the first place. With a wide range of possible causes of dyslexia, there are consequently many definitions.</p>
<p>Third, the term is widely used, and very frequently misused, by non-experts in the field and by the mainstream media. The label is particularly popular with promoters of unproven dyslexia “cures”, including nutritional supplements, exercise regimes and coloured glasses. This only adds to the confusion. </p>
<p>So is it the case that there is no agreed set of criteria for the clinical diagnosis of dyslexia? This may be an overstatement. Experts in the field have reached a substantial degree of consensus about what is meant by the term and how it should be defined in a clinical context. Dyslexia is widely viewed as <em>a severe reading difficulty that persists despite high-quality evidence-based instruction</em>. This is enshrined in documents such as the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/0201-2006pdf-EN-01.pdf">Rose Report</a> in the UK, and the <a href="http://www.dyslexiaaustralia.com.au/DYSWP.pdf">Australian Dyslexia Working Party</a> report.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1134&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1134&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44048/original/k7zqh7gw-1395018785.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1134&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">There have been many different definitions of dyslexia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/downloading_tips.mhtml?code=&id=175074977&size=medium&image_format=jpg&method=download&super_url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.shutterstock.com%2Fgatekeeper%2FW3siZSI6MTM5NTA0NzUxMSwiYyI6Il9waG90b19zZXNzaW9uX2lkIiwiZGMiOiJpZGxfMTc1MDc0OTc3IiwicCI6InYxfDEwMTI3NTg4fDE3NTA3NDk3NyIsImsiOiJwaG90by8xNzUwNzQ5NzcvbWVkaXVtLmpwZyIsIm0iOiIxIiwiZCI6InNodXR0ZXJzdG9jay1tZWRpYSJ9LCJKWU4rTjJOdkFVNm4yOFB1QmZzcEFZcG9qRzAiXQ%2Fshutterstock_175074977.jpg&racksite_id=ny&chosen_subscription=1&license=standard&src=dt_last_search-3">shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This definition has two key features. First, it makes a distinction between children who are struggling with reading because they have not had appropriate instruction, and those who are struggling despite having had sufficient opportunities. Second, it focuses the diagnosis at the level of reading itself.</p>
<p>Scientists have come a long way in developing detailed theories of the reading process. These have been translated into reliable clinical assessment tools. Armed with these tools, clinical experts are in a position to provide a scientific diagnosis of dyslexia. Whether the term “dyslexia” or another label is used, this small group (perhaps 3-5% of the population) exists and can be identified.</p>
<h2>Diagnosis doesn’t alter the remedy</h2>
<p>Elliott and Grigorenko’s second key point is that a diagnosis of dyslexia does not have any implications for treatment. Again, they are broadly correct.</p>
<p>Let’s say two children present at a clinic: one has fallen behind in reading because of extended school absences; the other is struggling despite high-quality instruction. The latter child might well be diagnosed with “dyslexia” and the former most likely not. Yet the programs of intervention put in place for each child would probably differ very little. </p>
<p>The most effective thing we can do for each of these children is to provide them with systematic, intensive evidence-based reading remediation, targeted at the gaps in their reading skills.</p>
<p>So does this mean that a diagnosis of dyslexia (or some other label) is unnecessary and redundant? Again, this may be an overstatement. Although the nature of the treatments provided to these children will be similar, their length and intensity may well be quite different. Our first child should respond quickly and well once the required intervention is given; our second child may need intensive and ongoing support. </p>
<p>That treatment is similar across the spectrum of a condition does not mean there is no justification for giving a label to those at the extreme end. Doing so can identify the most severe and at-risk cases, in the same way that a diagnosis of “obesity” can identify the most severe and at-risk cases along the continuum of weight, and a diagnosis of “hypertension” can identify the most severe and at-risk cases along the continuum of blood pressure. Such labels focus attention and resources where they are most urgently needed.</p>
<p>The quibbles about terminology remain. Many clinicians do not like the term “dyslexia” because it medicalises the condition. They prefer terms like “reading disability” or “reading impairment”. </p>
<p>Others counter that medical terms are more visible and attract resources to a problem that may be less forthcoming if other labels are used. Professor Dorothy Bishop from Oxford University notes this concern seems to be borne out in the case of the much less visible condition of “<a href="http://deevybee.blogspot.com.au/2010/12/whats-in-name.html">Specific Language Impairment</a>”.</p>
<p>Finally, the diagnosis of dyslexia can have a positive effect on the parents and children involved, validating their concerns. </p>
<p>For these reasons, there is considerable divergence in the field as to which label is preferred, even among the authors of this piece. However, ultimately, deciding what label to use to identify children who struggle with learning to read is not nearly so important as ensuring they receive the support that they need.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24027/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anne Castles receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Health and Medical Research Council</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kevin Wheldall is Chairman of, and owns shares in, MultiLit Pty Ltd. He has received funding from the Exodus Foundation, Cape York Partnerships and the federal government</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mandy Nayton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In their recently published book, The Dyslexia Debate, Joe Elliott and Elena Grigorenko controversially call for the term “dyslexia” to be abandoned. They argue it is an imprecise label that does nothing…Anne Castles, Deputy Director, ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Macquarie UniversityKevin Wheldall, Emeritus Professor of Education, Macquarie UniversityMandy Nayton, Executive Officer / Educational and Developmental Psychologist; Adjunct Research Fellow, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.