01 NRDC Dyslexia 1-88 update - Texthelp

Developmental dyslexia in adults: a research review 85
consisted of two one-hour sessions per week for 16 weeks. No attrition was reported.
The participants were three groups of ten university students, mostly white males, with IQdiscrepancy
diagnoses of dyslexia who had enrolled on a learning support programme. Fullscale
IQs ranged from 91 to 130, with a mean of 110. Two intervention groups had been
randomly selected from approximately 100 students currently taking part in the programme. A
third group had been randomly selected from a group of 70 students who were not currently
taking part in the programme. There is no indication that the groups were matched on either
psychometric or demographic criteria.
The ‘multisensory phonetic’ group was the only one with significantly higher pre- and post-test
mean scores. There were reported transfer effects to essay-writing for members of this group.
The investigators conclude that their findings ‘seem to point to benefits from the multisensory
synthetic phonetic [sic] approach for dyslexic students even at college age’. However, it is
unclear whether the multisensory method, the synthetic phonics, or the two in combination
conferred the benefit.
Assistive technology for postsecondary students with learning disabilities: from research to
practice (Higgins & Zvi, 1995)
The investigators set out to assess the usefulness of optical character recognition technology
with speech synthesis. In each of three formal studies, participants completed a task with
computer assistance, or with human help, or without any help.
The participants were 80 young adults of average intelligence, most of whom were white and
middle class. All had been assessed as learning-disabled according to discrepancy criteria.
Not every one of them took part in all three studies.
In reading comprehension, both assistive technology and human assistance helped students
with below-average scores in silent reading but impeded students with above-average scores.
In proof-reading, however, the assistive technology was significantly more helpful than human
assistance. In essay-writing, there was no clear advantage in either assistive technology or the
use of an amanuensis. Extra time for essay-writing did not help students who were short of
ideas or who lacked the vocabulary with which to express their ideas adequately. Nevertheless,
in the longer term, both success rates and retention rates improved in relation to those of
learning-disabled students who had not used assistive technology.
The investigators make eight recommendations based on their research and teaching
experience. First, they emphasise the assistive (rather than the remedial or instructional) use
of technology. Next, they encourage fluency and vocabulary expansion. Third, they suggest that
tutors should focus on strengths in the students’ work, leaving technology to contend with
weaknesses such as spelling and punctuation. Fourth, they recommend focusing on process
and content rather than on the mechanics of writing. Fifth, they advocate one-to-one teaching.
Sixth, they stipulate enthusiastic tutors. Seventh, they warn against the ‘heavy editing’ of
students’ work. Eighth, they limit the provision of remedial instruction to essential information.
Computer-based compensation of adult reading difficulties (Elkind et al., 1996)
This paper reports four studies. The first study sought to determine the effect of a computerreader
speech-synthesiser component upon the reading ability of dyslexic adults. The second
study sought to find a way of predicting how individuals would respond to this technology. The
third study sought to identify the practical benefits and problems associated with the use of