Reading Dyslexic Advantage and...

[bluemongoose]

I am wondering about a part I read.

 

It is talking about the minicolumns in the cortex. About how they are further apart in people with dyslexia than in those without. So I was interested in reading more about this study and I googled it. Dr. Casanova, who did the study and was quoted in Dyslexic Advantage, says that you cannot be on the spectrum and have dyslexia because those on the spectrum have minicolumns that are close together. However, many sites on autism all say that dyslexia is a fairly common co-morbid condition. My DS was diagnosed with Aspergers (HFA) a few years ago and recently was diagnosed with stealth dyslexia, so naturally I am curious about this study and what it is claiming.

 

Thoughts?

[OneStepAtATime]

Well, I'm no scientist but what this study and many others that have been done over the years regarding the brain tell me as a parent of kids with very complex issues and strengths is that we are only scratching the surface of our understanding of the human brain.  One size does not fit all.  Frankly any scientist that says Only X can happen in Y circumstances and Z can never happen in Y circumstances, especially with regarding the human brain and learning challenges, is on my radar as someone NOT to believe.  Not that everything they are saying is wrong but that they are too rigid in their focus/interpretation/willingness to think outside the box.  While there may be some useful info within what they espouse, it is probably not the be all and end all of truth, if that makes sense.

 

Frankly I have had too many experts and too many studies say one thing only to find that it was wrong or didn't apply to my kids or didn't take into account additional factors, etc.  Basically I read EVERYTHING with a grain of salt now.  

[wapiti]

Eh, IMO it's all way way way more complex than structure alone.  Science is only barely scratching the surface of what happens on a molecular level.  And current diagnoses of dyslexia and ASD focus on behaviors rather than underlying biology.

[bluemongoose]

Grain of salt is exactly what DH said when I brought it up to him.  :001_smile:

[Lecka]

Okay, here is my opinion..... here they are conceptualizing dyslexia as something much more than "a difficulty in reading involving specific difficulties with the learning-to-read process." 

 

They are talking about associated things where you can, with specific traits, make a compare/contrast between dyslexia and autism.  I think there are valid points there.

 

But it is a huge over-simplification and a huge over-generalization to go from there to saying that they are opposites and nobody can have both.  Especially when not everybody is using their exact definition of the word dyslexia.

 

For more fun, I can't link from my computer right now, but Temple Grandin has mentioned the mini-column thing too, and says it may be related to some strengths, and that the local connections that are strengthened (more for autism) leads to increased processing, too. 

 

Yet she manages to say that without putting down people with dyslexia! 

 

I wish I could link, I couldn't find the article I have seen before, but I just googled and found her mentioning it. 

 

Anyway -- I think this is more of an aside.  I think it is interesting, too.

 

It has been discussed here before, too, I think it strikes some people the wrong way for sure in reading Dyslexic Advantage. 

 

I have a problem with the autism chapter in their other book The Mislabeled Child, too, that I think it has gotten out-of-date in some ways, so I also don't think they are hugely specialized in autism.  They seem like they are good on dyslexia, though. 

 

Edit:  As far as bringing in brain scans, too, I like the Sally Shaywitz stuff better, and her stuff is looking at brain-activation in different regions, and not looking at mini-columns, from my understanding.  So I think the mini-columns thing is a real thing, but I think the brain activation stuff seems more tied to the reading process.

 

But when they are saying that dyslexia can be a lot more than just the reading process ------ then they are talking about a broader topic for sure, and it is their personal definition to some extent.  But I do think it is good, it's not a criticism, it is just ----- plenty of people use dyslexia to mean something a lot narrower. 

Edited December 1, 2017 by Lecka

[Lecka]

Really -- it would make more sense to limit their statement to saying that they found that usually people with a dyslexia profile have minicolums spaced one way, and usually people with autism have minicolums spaced the opposite way. 

 

B/c it seems doubtful like this is that one detail where we diagnose dyslexia or autism -- I don't think it is.

 

And then I do still like the brain scans activations of people reading that they have with Sally Shaywitz. 

[bluemongoose]

I've not read the Mislabeled Child yet. I'm just getting started on the dyslexia end of things. Thanks for warning me that the authors are more about the dyslexia and not so much up on their Autism information.

 

 

note to self: look up Sally Shaywitz  :001_smile:

[hepatica]

I think it's important to remember also that reading is an unnatural brain activity, so even those brains that read efficiently are borrowing brain circuits that evolved for other purposes to accomplish the task of reading. Most people's brains seem to use similar, efficient circuits for reading, but dyslexic brains seem to use novel circuitry, so I would guess that scientists will eventually demonstrate more fully that their are lots of ways to be dyslexic (ie to use the brain in novel ways to read). This is what the Shaywitz research gets at, and what the Stanislas Dehaene research seems to support.

 

I would presume that the brain research for autism is also a wide open frontier. So it seems premature to make definitive statements about either autism or dyslexia.

[Heathermomster]

Not everyone agrees with the Eides and their conclusions wrt mini-columns.  Geodob holds very strong opinions, and he is a researcher.  Please come out Geoff and tell us what you think. :D

[PeterPan]

I don't think anyone disputes that there is the widely-spaced mini-column thing going on. I just think their sample was way too small to answer the questions thinking people have. For instance, my ADHD, not considered dyslexic, dd fits profiles in DA and cognitively functions like someone you would assume has widely-spaced mini-columns. My ds, diagnosed with ASD and 3 SLDs (math, reading, writing) about whom multiple psychs and an OG tutor have all comfortably used the term dyslexic, doesn't really seem to fit DA. I don't read DA and go wow, thank you, I feel enlightened! But for my dd, with her ADHD and very low processing speed and word retrievals, yeah, absolutely DA fit.

 

With so many subtypes (I've been told at least 12) for autism and so many paths into it (genetic, environmental, viral, etc.), why would we possibly think that one MRI study that happened to include *some* people with ASD would include enough to answer a question of autistic brain structure conclusively? And, even more to the point, what does it matter? People say it matters because we need terms to mean something. Fine, but what really happens is that autistic kids aren't taught to read with the proper tools (OG), because they say it's autism, not dyslexia. That's some pretty nasty discrimination there. I've talked with people who are teaching 18 yo autistics to read with OG because the school systems weren't identifying it and actually teaching with the tools. That's outrageous.

 

Whatever we call it, the dc needs the tools he needs in order to learn. My ds has been screened (somewhat) for APD and does not appear to have it, per the audiologist. I have no reason to think that his reading disability is due to APD. It's clearly a reading disability, and it clearly responds to OG. And it's totally reasonable to assume there are shades and degrees. My ds is on the milder end (so to say) and responded well to Barton. However, I will tell you that he's 9, gifted, and STILL not reading anything by choice. He CAN read in theory, but he doesn't. We've worked on language and comprehension, and still he doesn't really diddley by choice and finds it hard and fatiguing, just like you would expect with any dyslexic. And that's pretty extreme even in the dyslexia community. Many times you teach a straight dyslexic to read and the door opens and they walk right through it. With my ds, it's like tiptoe, pull back. It's hard stuff for him.

 

So to take crap like what they published in DA and extend it so far as to say autistic kids shouldn't be taught would just be a TRAVESTY. Let the science (research, data) catch up with reality.

Edited December 1, 2017 by PeterPan

[PeterPan]

I think Lecka's point about the brain activation scans makes a lot of sense. THAT makes sense to me.

 

And it's also a thing in the autism community where they don't even necessarily diagnose the SLDs. They'll literally just say oh he has autism. Because we got SLD labels first, they were working backward. But if we had gone to an autism specialty clinic *first* they might have handled it differently. I've talked with people who had that happen. And to me the point then is are they getting the tools. 

[geodob]

It is unfortunate that the Eide's suggested any link between Dyslexia and mini-columns.   As their is no research to suggest this?

 

But it is an important topic in relation to Autism.

Perhaps I could try and explain it?

You would know that our brain is full of Neurons.

But these Neurons aren't just floating around.  Rather they are attached to these mini-columns.  With between 10 and 140 neurons attached to mini-column.

 

Though the crucial thing, is that each neuron develops nerves, that send recieve signals. Where these nerves can up to 4 feet long.

But with so many nerves extending from each mini-column. Within bundles of mini-columns.

The structure of each mini-column is critical.  As this effects the direction of the nerves as they develop.

The nerves are directed so that they run parallel to each other. 

 

But what has been found with Autism?  Is that the change in the mini-columns.  Cause the nerves to extend directly out from the neurons, at  a right angle. Which prevents them from running parallel to other nerves.

This causes the nerves to fuse with each other, and form a mass.  Which in turn prevents the nerves from developing long single connections.

 

So that the nerves are organised like a city with no main streets.  Without direct connections.

But a further thing, is that nerves are constantly being maintained.  Though when a nerve is no longer used, it will be removed.

When nerves run parallel, unused ones can be easily identified and removed.

Though with Autism, and the nerves fused together?  This prevents the identification and removal of unused nerves.

This in turn, causes an accumulation of the brain's White Matter, and typically causes a larger head to develop to cope. 

Where it has been long recognised, that their is an excessive amount of White Matter in Autistic brains.

Which is now being concluded, as resulting from this difference in the structure of mini-columns.

Edited December 3, 2017 by geodob

[Lecka]

Thanks, that is interesting.

[PeterPan]

Yes, my ds has a noticeably large head. It makes it hard for turtlenecks to fit, etc.

[PeterPan]

Geodob is it possible they're onto something with the spacing (that there actually is that), but that they didn't do enough studies to see whether it includes some types of ADHD people, etc.? Or are you saying that when you look at the scans there is NOT an unusual amount of spacing between the mini-columns in some of the people?

 

So you're saying one can logically have a phonological processing disorder AND autism, because the minicolumns weren't the cause of the dyslexia (duh) but rather a commonly associated pattern that didn't have to be the ONLY pattern option. I mean, it's not rocket science. Surely they know what parts of the brain are actually affected in dyslexia. 

 

It has long bugged me that people without dyslexia CLEARLY fit the Eides' paradigm of strengths but people labeled autism plus dyslexia don't. Then when people go well see, your kid must not have autism because the Eides said so, it's really just outrageous. Then they're like well if you're sure it's autism then you shouldn't call it dyslexia, even though every psych that has seen him has called it that. So the Eides have really made a muddle.

Edited December 3, 2017 by PeterPan

[Lecka]

I am someone who says that and that's not why I say it.

 

I believe (aka it's an opinion) that autism is "global" in nature.

 

And I believe dyslexia is a "specific learning disability." Not getting into the global learning styles associated with dyslexia, just difficulty with reading.

 

So to me -- autism is global, and ime peopke familiar with autism *understand* the side range of learning issues that can come along with autism. So ime the separate SLDs are included in the global autism diagnosis and don't need to be mentioned separately.

 

Now it would be a huge disservice if a child who could benefit from reading instruction didn't receive it because of misunderstandings like this.

 

But I personally am not aware of that happening.

 

And then, when students with autism don't receive appropriate reading instruction, I'm doubtful that this is why. I think it's more likely just -- reading instruction generally not being done very well.

 

At the same time; one is too many.

 

I'm more concerned about parents who have heard dyslexia thinking "okay so I can rule out autism" when maybe they shouldn't be ruling out autism. It would come across that way to me if I just came from a dyslexia direction.

 

But the thing is, this idea is found in a dyslexia book but it's not found in autism materials (ime) so I don't think parents coming from an autism direction are going to run into this idea and make too much of it.

 

Anyway -- I'm not sure exactly what you are seeing!

 

But I really don't find it necessary to have separate SLDs for my son.

 

But I also don't think there's anything wrong with the other way, especially if locally it gets kids access to better or more appropriate services.

 

I have run a tiny bit into an idea that kids with autism will read with a visual approach, but frankly that didn't last long when my son clearly didn't do well that way. But I could see that being an issue if people do have a stereotype that a visual approach is the best. Ime it was tried but it wasn't like my son was slotted into it. But I don't know.

[PeterPan]

But then what if people fit under the label autism (which remember under DSM5 is now HUGE, incredibly huge) and don't have SLDs? I get what you're saying, and I've talked with people dealing with ASD3 who say that. To them it's like oh yeah, it's just autism. But the umbrella is too big to say that you can't say both SLDs and ASD, because there are people with ASD (big umbrella) who don't have those issues. The whole point of the DSM is to discriminate and label.

 

Besides, I would think at some point people with autism would get really pissy about having things not get proper intervention because the system is saying they don't need it because they have autism. And I've been told that happens. I've been told stories about 18 yos with autism unable to read because the school didn't do OG. That's pretty tacky in my book, serious discrimination.

[PeterPan]

What you're saying still doesn't make sense. If a kid needs OG, then regular (blend of whole word and context and dabs of phonetics), no matter how nicely implemented, aren't going to get him there. OG is different, a total step up. And it IS an issue in our area. Reading tutors are getting their ASD certificates, trying to deal with the demand.

 

We have kids on the board here who have ASD diagnoses but are separated out with one SLD or two, not all three. And psychs *are* diagnosing them separately, the autism and the SLDs. It's just sort of contradictory. Are they saying it's the severity of the autism that explains the glitches? How are they explaining the kids diagnosed who DON'T qualify under those labels and don't have those issues?

[PeterPan]

It *is* necessary to separate them for my ds, otherwise the expectations are too low. Just to say well he has autism so he's not learning, that would keep us from accessing disability-specific instruction methods. It would imply he's just delayed, which he's not. He's behind on things, but he ALSO needs disability-specific instruction. And he's considered GIFTED in areas where he's also disabled, which is why it's even more important that it not be assumed he's merely delayed. To represent the full complexity, for my ds, you have to say ASD + SLD + gifted. Then you go ok, different order, different timetable, different level of supports, and different level of challenge in whatever he's doing, all at the same time.

[Lecka]

I am saying that autism is a global diagnosis and then within that it will be different for everyone. There are a ton of domains and I think it's almost silly just to pick out reading, writing, and math to have as domains for autism. When -- people are probably looking at a large number of domains anyway since that is what is needed.

 

For the students in your area: are you being told specifically why they didn't use OG methods for readin?

 

Further I don't even think OG is best for everyone with autism because of comprehension and vocabulary needing a different level of emphasis compared to other students.

 

Yes quality reading instruction, but I don't think you can say the big issue is OG instruction unless you see that.

 

Also specifically with reading -- do you know specifically what people mean when they say an 18 year old isn't reading? Do they specifically mean "not decoding, not reading out loud?" That statement could easily mean a student who can read/decode and read out loud, but who has very poor comprehension.

 

I also think, there are reasons for there to be problems with reading instruction, a lot of reasons, I am just doubtful that *this* is the big reason.

 

And on top of that I am fine with thinking that, when there is a lower comprehension level, it is okay to think about widening a splinter skill of decoding when comprehension may be really delayed. I don't think this is the worst thing ever, but I don't think it is something to ignore.

 

For plenty of kids, putting them in OG instruction would not do anything for them as far as comprehension; and when that is such a need, I don't think it is a good message to say "just get them reading with OG." I mean -- yes, but what about comprehension?

 

I do think there should be a focus on comprehension also, if that is needed by the student.

 

I think it should be specific to what will make sense for the child, really, and I don't agree that -- for a child diagnosed with autism plus dyslexia, it is always best to go full-steal with an OG program. Because OG programs are for kids who are doing fine with comprehension, so that isn't included in OG programs the way it might need to be covered for a student with autism.

 

And just because some people separate that out into "speech therapy" or "speech/language," and don't include that in "reading instruction," it is also included as part of reading instruction in other set-ups.

 

I am seeing this here with a lot of speech/language included in reading instruction, and I think it would be a real disservice to pull kids from it to do OG instruction instead.

 

I would rather see more compehensive reading instruction that included decoding and comprehension both, in whatever way is appropriate for an individual student.

[Lecka]

How, specifically, would it keep you from accessing the disability-specific materials?

 

Wouldn't you, in looking at a score sheet, see that your child had low scores in various areas and research the appropriate materials to use?

[Lecka]

Who is saying "well he has autism so he's not learning?"

 

I have never heard that. If you are hearing that it is a problem! I'm just curious where you are hearing that from.

[Lecka]

And really, I understand concerns about low expectations.

 

I just don't think the main reason is a lack of specifically listing SLDs versus not specifically listing them.

[Heathermomster]

It is unfortunate that the Eide's suggested any link between Dyslexia and mini-columns. As their is no research to suggest this?

 

But it is an important topic in relation to Autism.

Perhaps I could try and explain it?

You would know that our brain is full of Neurons.

But these Neurons aren't just floating around. Rather they are attached to these mini-columns. With between 10 and 140 neurons attached to mini-column.

 

Though the crucial thing, is that each neuron develops nerves, that send recieve signals. Where these nerves can up to 4 feet long.

But with so many nerves extending from each mini-column. Within bundles of mini-columns.

The structure of each mini-column is critical. As this effects the direction of the nerves as they develop.

The nerves are directed so that they run parallel to each other.

 

But what has been found with Autism? Is that the change in the mini-columns. Cause the nerves to extend directly out from the neurons, at a right angle. Which prevents them from running parallel to other nerves.

This causes the nerves to fuse with each other, and form a mass. Which in turn prevents the nerves from developing long single connections.

 

So that the nerves are organised like a city with no main streets. Without direct connections.

But a further thing, is that nerves are constantly being maintained. Though when a nerve is no longer used, it will be removed.

When nerves run parallel, unused ones can be easily identified and removed.

Though with Autism, and the nerves fused together? This prevents the identification and removal of unused nerves.

This in turn, causes an accumulation of the brain's White Matter, and typically causes a larger head to develop to cope.

Where it has been long recognised, that their is an excessive amount of White Matter in Autistic brains.

Which is now being concluded, as resulting from this difference in the structure of mini-columns.

Thank-you for this.

[bluemongoose]

This is all super interesting!

 

Geodob-thanks for replying! My DS does have a large head as well. My DD, who has some spectrum tendencies, does not have a big head. I am going to reread your post a few more times and think on it.  :thumbup1:

 

I do think it is helps to tease out some of the specific problems of a child with Autism and give the additional labels. At least it is helpful to me! My child is high functioning. He has many of the hallmark aspects of autism: missing social cues, having emotional regulation problems, executive function problems, fixating on a topic and talking people to death, etc. But none of those things explained his issues in writing and reading. When you read a book on Asperger's it talks most about the social, emotional, and executive function stuff...but it doesn't address a lot of the learning issues. I really found the diagnosis of dyslexia helpful. It gave me a more pointed direction to look into; a better guide to find ways to help. It also helps when explaining to people who need to work with him. If I say he is on the spectrum or that he has Aspergers, people know to expect that he may be a bit rigid, may make social errors, and may have a meltdown, but they may not expect the other learning issues or be ready to help with that. If I say he is also dyslexic, they know better how to help. (this is assuming they have worked with kids with autism or dyslexia before). Maybe it is different if a child is not at the high functioning end of the spectrum. Maybe then the extra labels don't help as much because the child is more impaired so the other delays would be expected? 

Edited December 3, 2017 by bluemongoose

[Lecka]

That's a good point, I get asked about everything. Or the paperwork they have ahead of time will have it. There's a reading section and a speech therapy on his IEP, plus information from testing, and I almost always will turn that in to people before they meet him.

 

I think another thing is that in general -- he is going to be with people who know a lot about autism, so they may be more aware that reading could be a problem. If you talk to people who are working more generally they may have only worked with kids who have autism and do read well.

Edited December 3, 2017 by Lecka

[Lecka]

Speaking of -- right now his relevant information is on his IEP. If there were more relevant information not on his IEP, I would write a note.

 

When he had more outside therapies I would write a note about his other therapies and what he was doing in them, sometimes.

 

It's something you can do if you want to drop off paperwork ahead of time with anybody. I am often (it seems like always) asked for this before a first time meeting someone.

Edited December 3, 2017 by Lecka