Anyone here NOT convinced that Vision Therapy works?

[renabeth]

We have been at it for nearly a year...the results are more or less okay. But honestly, I can't tell if he is just growing up or it is actually helping. I am curious about other opinions. Also, how long did it take before your Dr. said you were done? Thanks. :)

[JessicaLady]

I have yet to find anyone who didn't recommend VT after having completed the program. We were recommended to do weekly 1 hr. sessions for 10mos. We're 3 mos in and I'm seeing tremendous results so far.

[rafiki]

.

[renabeth]

Thanks for the replies, I need some encouragement that I am not wasting his time (and mine.) VT Doc diagnosed him with a bunch of different things. Convergence insufficiency was one of them. We have been doing the homework and it has changed throughout the program. I saw some improvement at first but it has really slowed. But then, I question whether it was all in my head. The reason we are in VT is reading delays and he is 9. We never got an estimated time of treatment, so I don't know about that. He is reading better. But I have read lot of children are just slow getting started with reading. I still wouldn't say he isn't a good reader. No where near where I would like him to be. I think I anwered all your questions. :)

[PeterPan]

Renabeth, just because VT can work doesn't mean all doctors doing it are equal or equally good. I've heard some distinctly NEGATIVE stories from a practitioner near me in fact. If you've been doing it a YEAR and aren't satisfied, I would be asking some serious questions. How many times a week are your sessions? How much homework are you doing? How much are you paying? Why no estimated time of treatment? I got IN WRITING an estimated time of treatment. I could understand if you had a child with severe, severe problems, retained primitive reflexes, severe SPD, and there was just no end in sight. (That can happen, I've met one.) But really, for just run-of-the-mill, things should be a bit more concrete. You should have homework, you should be working your butts off, and you should be seeing progress.

 

Oh, and our place had monthly reassessments where the doctor checked your progress to give the therapist feedback. In your case, I'd be asking a lot of questions about your set-up and whether your doctor is cutting the mustard. Have you thought about looking for a new developmental optometrist to get a fresh evaluation? Is it a COVD doc or opthamalogist or OT doing your VT?

[laundrycrisis]

You should have homework, you should be working your butts off, and you should be seeing progress.

 

 

This is what our experience was like. It was hard, hard work between sessions. At the end of each session the therapist went over what she did and which problem it was for and how he was progressing in each specific problem area he was being treated for. The homework assigned was different each week and I knew exactly what it was for.

[rafiki]

.

[LizzyBee]

We have been at it for nearly a year...the results are more or less okay. But honestly, I can't tell if he is just growing up or it is actually helping. I am curious about other opinions. Also, how long did it take before your Dr. said you were done? Thanks. :)

 

I've heard everything from VT was life-changing to the doctor was dragging us along for the money. The most life-changing stories seem to come mostly from people whose kids ran into doorways and furniture, couldn't do puzzles, couldn't ride bikes, etc. The "waste of time" stories seem to come from people whose kids have just dyslexia. VT doesn't remediate dyslexia.

 

Here is a long article from the AAP you might find interesting: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/3/e818.full I downloaded it in .pdf format because it is 41 pages long, so I don't have time to read it in one sitting. The article includes some interesting information about the history of dyslexia as well as the info about the VT studies.

 

Approx 70-80% of dyslexia is caused by auditory processing problems. You might want to give your son the free student screening at http://www.bartonreading.com as a quick check of whether he has sufficient auditory skills to be successful with phonics. You might also want to look at http://www.dys-add.com to learn more about dyslexia and how to teach dyslexic students.

Edited May 25, 2011 by LizzyBee

[renabeth]

We have used the metronome for six months. Is that not usually part of VT?

 

I'm not sure it's the office. They seem pretty adept and it is the only gig in town if you catch my drift. I still drive an hour. I wouldn't say we are working our butts off. We do our therapy as required.

 

I think I am going to ask them to ramp it up. And give more homework and see if that helps.

 

This is our homework. Randot duction jump with 3d glasses (vision builder). He scored in the 50's. Deletions (I say scat take away /s/, he says cat) Automaticity (this is a PowerPoint exercise, he reads numbers at the pace set by the metronome) Hart Chart (I read 3 letters, he reads 3). Reading for 20 minutes. We use Pathway readers.

[renabeth]

I've heard everything from VT was life-changing to the doctor was dragging us along for the money. The life-changing stories seem to come mostly from people whose kids ran into doorways and furniture, couldn't do puzzles, couldn't ride bikes, etc. The "waste of time" stories seem to come from people whose kids have dyslexia. VT doesn't remediate dyslexia.

 

Here is a long article from the AAP you might find interesting: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/3/e818.full I downloaded it in .pdf format because it is 41 pages long, so I don't have time to read it in one sitting. The article includes some interesting information about the history of dyslexia as well as the info about the VT studies.

 

Thanks for the article. I'm going to read it when I get a chance. It looks like something I need to read. :)

[momtotkbb]

I would be concerned about not having a written plan of x number of weeks or sessions. Our VT sat down w/ us and gave us a set number of sessions that our dc would need - we paid up front so if they needed to go beyond that or did a re-eval after we'd "graduated" VT and needed more it was all included.

 

While VT has helped tremendously - I can honestly say that w/out the other methods we used in addition to VT I don't believe my dc would have made the progress.

[PeterPan]

We have used the metronome for six months. Is that not usually part of VT?

 

I'm not sure it's the office. They seem pretty adept and it is the only gig in town if you catch my drift. I still drive an hour. I wouldn't say we are working our butts off. We do our therapy as required.

 

I think I am going to ask them to ramp it up. And give more homework and see if that helps.

 

This is our homework. Randot duction jump with 3d glasses (vision builder). He scored in the 50's. Deletions (I say scat take away /s/, he says cat) Automaticity (this is a PowerPoint exercise, he reads numbers at the pace set by the metronome) Hart Chart (I read 3 letters, he reads 3). Reading for 20 minutes. We use Pathway readers.

 

I'd still look for a 2nd opinion. http://www.covd.org It would be worth it to drive much farther to find a better place. I mean mercy, we paid $150 an hour when you think about it. At those prices, it's better to drive 2-3 hours and do it less often. A metronome is for processing speed and working memory. Sometimes they'll do it to create a distraction. Are you sure the place isn't doing *PACE* with you, not VT?

 

These places are NOT all equal. I wouldn't keep plunking out money if you're not seeing results. If they're working on working memory and not getting results, you need to are referral to find out why (sensory, whatever).

 

As far as it only being kids who run into tables, that's not accurate. Michele's boys didn't run into tables, and they had quite a few issues turn up with their eyes. But as far as all the VT docs not being equally, I TOTALLY grant that. *I* wouldn't be happy with what you're describing. I'd look for a 2nd opinion with another COVD doc.

[renabeth]

OhElizabeth, what is pace? I've never heard of it.

[SonshineMama]

I was about to ask what PACE is. . . and what does COVT stand for?

[PeterPan]

PACE cognitive enhancement therapy. Google it. Our VT place also does it. They do paced (haha, pun intended) activities with a metronome to build working memory. During our VT they brought out some sheets. In regular VT they want *some* noise and distraction simply to make sure the person will be able to apply their skills in a real life situation, not only the quiet therapy room.

 

See here's what you need to understand. There's basic, boring paper therapy, and there's all the rest that experienced therapists bring to the table. The more they do, the more they innovate, the more they customize, the better the results for your child. Our place integrated lots of modalities and methods. They would use objects and bubble machines and games and toys and computers and balls and light-up things on the wall and all sorts of stuff. We worked HARD, and we got results fast. 3 months of basic therapy. Then 3 months of working on visual processing. So to me, when someone says they have a couple things carried over for occasional homework and they're not seeing progress and it's dragging out and they're not getting results... Those to me are just red flags. It costs WAY too much money to stick with someone just because you like them. I would get the 2nd opinion.

[SonshineMama]

Thank you -- I already realized that there was a link explaining COVT :) I missed it during my first read of this post ;)

[peacefully]

.

[rafiki]

.

[Mom0012]

I definitely believe it can work and even be a miracle for some kids. But, as with anything, I also think there are a lot of practitioners who will see vision therapy = $$$$ and recommend it for everyone who comes walking in the door.

 

Lisa

[NCW]

Are you concurrently doing OT, or has your VT included reflex integration and movement exercises, especially with the head in different planes? If the primitive reflexes are still very active or the vestibular system isn't supporting the vision work, you will not see the kind of progress in VT that is otherwise possible. When the visual/vestibular systems are underperforming, some therapists add an auditory treatment program to maximize effectiveness as quickly as possible.

 

Some kids, like our son, just have subtle but complicated issues that just simply take longer to address...and we're limited to what is available in our area. We have also found cranio-sacral adjustments help make a jump ahead at times.

[PeterPan]

Elizabeth would probably not approve of the type of VT we received either :D

 

Hehehe... The only thing that irks me is practitioners who take people's money and don't give results. As far as your experience being more pleasant than ours, well I think you'll understand in about 5 years. Or else I have a very cantankerous kid or something. Dd was older, so her brain had a lot of established habits of processing it had to break. The VT told us that repeatedly, that some of the symptoms she was having were because the brain would fight to maintain its current processing rather than learn a new way. And she had been having a lot of headaches. There was just a lot of mess to sort through. Opinionated 11 year olds aren't going to be the same as sweet 6 yo's. 6 yo's you can still sit on and get them to do what you want. :)

 

Or just conclude I'm a bad parent. But I think *everyone* we've talked with has the commonality of having worked consistently and felt they were making progress. The op is sort of in the inverse position.

[RamonaQ]

My personal opinion, and I am sure many will disagree, is that VT should be short-term. The stories I have heard, and our experience, is 3 months or less.

 

Honestly, for us, the greatest gain was at 6 weeks-- and I wish I would have stopped there, however, we progressed for a year and did a VT integrated phonics program, which the gains for reading were kinda ok-- there were some. I wish we would have spent that time using a known program to re-mediate reading, as we have now done, where the gains have been HUGE in a far shorter period.

[PeterPan]

Yup, our basic VT stuff (convergence, focusing, tracking, depth perception, etc.) was in 3 months. Our written estimate had been 3-4. The stuff we did after that was for visual processing. Some kids will have that naturally kick in, and some need to go back and work on it specifically. So did things like tanagrams, Blink, Set, digit spans, distractions. They did physical activities like working with a swinging ball coming toward you, because she had a fear of it hitting her even once her eyes could see it correctly. But some kids don't even need that stage. But for us it was a separate thing, separate contract, separate time estimate. But that 2nd stage was really important for us, because it was building her ability to visualize. Visualization is an important part of learning (spelling, math facts, etc.), so it was huge for us to get this aspect up.

[CalicoKat]

dd 10 did 12 weeks intense of vision therapy last spring. Yes it worked. Her reading and comprehension scores have soared. Her ability to do math is there. Still working on her ability to concentrate enough to get from the start to finish of a math problem though.

 

Overall, we're very happy to have done this for her.

[VinNY]

VT here from last week in November to mid_May. The first 4 months we went 2X a week. Then we switched to 1X a week. We finished up a month or so early in -office therapy. My dtr was very compliant. Immediate results were seen with her ability to track and her desire to approach the written word. Her stamina for school work increased immensely because her eyes were tracking and converging. Now we are on strictly home based therapy using a computer program for perceptual skill building. My dtr has severe issues with visual and auditory memory.

 

The eye dr checked her after every 8 visits and we were given home work. It was expensive for us but worth it. I still have to teach her but atleast she isn't fighting the page, yawning constantly, crying and getting headaches. We pealed a lot of the onion but she is language impaired so I didn't expect miracles.

[peacefully]

Hehehe... The only thing that irks me is practitioners who take people's money and don't give results. As far as your experience being more pleasant than ours, well I think you'll understand in about 5 years. Or else I have a very cantankerous kid or something. Dd was older, so her brain had a lot of established habits of processing it had to break. The VT told us that repeatedly, that some of the symptoms she was having were because the brain would fight to maintain its current processing rather than learn a new way. And she had been having a lot of headaches. There was just a lot of mess to sort through. Opinionated 11 year olds aren't going to be the same as sweet 6 yo's. 6 yo's you can still sit on and get them to do what you want. :)

 

Or just conclude I'm a bad parent. But I think *everyone* we've talked with has the commonality of having worked consistently and felt they were making progress. The op is sort of in the inverse position.

 

Oh my goodness, did I imply that our experience was pleasant? If I did, that certainly was not the case! I simply meant that our VT office was pretty ho-hum compared to your descriptions of how thorough and professional your office was. And of course, if you and Michele hadn't posted about your sessions and homework, I would have no idea how mediocre our experience really was, because we did get results.

 

Obviously, we are not a big enough sample to mean anything significant, but I tend to agree with Ramona's observation that effective VT should see results in a relatively short period of time, several weeks, not months.

[laundrycrisis]

Yup, our basic VT stuff (convergence, focusing, tracking, depth perception, etc.) was in 3 months. Our written estimate had been 3-4. The stuff we did after that was for visual processing. Some kids will have that naturally kick in, and some need to go back and work on it specifically. So did things like tanagrams, Blink, Set, digit spans, distractions. They did physical activities like working with a swinging ball coming toward you, because she had a fear of it hitting her even once her eyes could see it correctly. But some kids don't even need that stage. But for us it was a separate thing, separate contract, separate time estimate. But that 2nd stage was really important for us, because it was building her ability to visualize. Visualization is an important part of learning (spelling, math facts, etc.), so it was huge for us to get this aspect up.

 

Our DS also needed a second stage of treatment just for visual processing. He had extremely poor visual sequential memory, form constancy, and visual closure. The combined effect was that he did not have any stored consistent mental images of letters or words, or sequences of letters or words. So reading, writing and spelling were not even getting off the ground until we did the second stage of treatment because his brain just did not compute those images. He had also been unable to remember our phone number or address even though I had been working on those with him for a year an a half. The second stage of VT that was specifically for visual processing made a huge improvement for him. The first doctor he had been with didn't do this second stage, just the eye teaming stuff. I am so thankful we were forced to switch doctors when she moved - because if we hadn't gone on to the second one, and never done the visual processing stage of the therapy, it would have seemed like VT overall hadn't helped all that much...because he still wouldn't have been able to make sense of or retain the letters and words he saw, or build any reading fluency, or remember how to write anything.

[VinNY]

Oh my goodness, did I imply that our experience was pleasant? If I did, that certainly was not the case! I simply meant that our VT office was pretty ho-hum compared to your descriptions of how thorough and professional your office was. And of course, if you and Michele hadn't posted about your sessions and homework, I would have no idea how mediocre our experience really was, because we did get results.

 

Obviously, we are not a big enough sample to mean anything significant, but I tend to agree with Ramona's observation that effective VT should see results in a relatively short period of time, several weeks, not months.

:iagree:

 

Visual memory and perceptual skills will take longer,but there are home-based programs for that.

[mommyrooch]

We di vision therapy with my daughter for almost a year and it was probably the biggest waste of money I ever spent. She was having reading problems and the Developmental Opt. said she had tracking issues. We did eye strengthening excercises, crossing the midline techniques etc. You name it, we tried it. We were also VERY strict in doing our excercises at home. In the end, we say very little improvement. Looking back, I wish I new now what I new then. My daughter ended up having dyslexia and that almost $3000 we wasted on Vision Therapy could have been much better spent on helping here where she really needed the help. BTW, our vision therapist wasn't just a run of the mill doc. He was even recommended through COVD and it highly trained in this area. It is his "speciality". BEWARE! This might help many people but for others like my daughter it might just mask something bigger going on. I wish I had all that money back and the year we wasted. My daughter would have been the better for it.

[laundrycrisis]

My personal opinion, and I am sure many will disagree, is that VT should be short-term. The stories I have heard, and our experience, is 3 months or less.

 

 

Our DS took a full year of weekly appointments and he was improving the entire time.

[Storm Bay]

Renabeth, just because VT can work doesn't mean all doctors doing it are equal or equally good.

:iagree: From what my VT has told me, I have come to the conclusion that a VT needs to be very perceptive, etc, because you tailor the exercises to the patient.

 

I've heard everything from VT was life-changing to the doctor was dragging us along for the money. The most life-changing stories seem to come mostly from people whose kids ran into doorways and furniture, couldn't do puzzles, couldn't ride bikes, etc. The "waste of time" stories seem to come from people whose kids have just dyslexia. VT doesn't remediate dyslexia.

.

 

Apparently only 10 percent of dyslexia stems from vision problems, but I don't remember where I read this, so I'm using "apparently." It can help with certain issues that can appear in clusters used to diagnose dyslexia (eg poor spelling), depending on what the problem is, but I don't think it's going to fix it all for the most part.

I definitely believe it can work and even be a miracle for some kids. But, as with anything, I also think there are a lot of practitioners who will see vision therapy = $$$$ and recommend it for everyone who comes walking in the door.

 

Lisa

 

:iagree: Our vision therapist, who is one of the originals, (he's been doing this for 60 years and was one of a number of people who were testing things out & writing papers on what they found, sharing exercises, etc) is not in it for the money (not expensive for the time) said that while everyone can benefit from vision therapy, he tests to see if it's actually needed. He often tells me I'm free to do this with my dd's if I like; he never askes to have them come in for an evaluation.

 

Ours works in three month chunks. I already know that we can't pay for more than three months' worth of visits this year, but haven't told him yet. Ds is seeing improvement, though, in various areas. He is finding that his eyes are working more and more together. I do want to say that this doesn't mean in physical motion because that was already happening. His brain is learning to put the images together properly (he used to read with one eye at a time, alternating back and forth, etc). I don't see the changes as a coincidence or just because he's growing because we know what each exercise is doing for him.

[laundrycrisis]

We di vision therapy with my daughter for almost a year and it was probably the biggest waste of money I ever spent. She was having reading problems and the Developmental Opt. said she had tracking issues. We did eye strengthening excercises, crossing the midline techniques etc. You name it, we tried it. We were also VERY strict in doing our excercises at home. In the end, we say very little improvement. Looking back, I wish I new now what I new then. My daughter ended up having dyslexia and that almost $3000 we wasted on Vision Therapy could have been much better spent on helping here where she really needed the help. BTW, our vision therapist wasn't just a run of the mill doc. He was even recommended through COVD and it highly trained in this area. It is his "speciality". BEWARE! This might help many people but for others like my daughter it might just mask something bigger going on. I wish I had all that money back and the year we wasted. My daughter would have been the better for it.

 

VT is not a cure-all. If there are problems beyond what VT can address, those will have to be treated with other therapies. Also all COVD optometrists are not equal. The first one we went to only addressed eye teaming, not visual processing. The second one also treated visual processing, and if he hadn't had that part of the therapy too, it would have seemed like VT didn't help much because there would have been these huge processing problems that hadn't been treated. In hindsight, I would not spend time or money on VT with a doctor unless he/she could deal with the visual processing part of it, and that is something someone would have to specifically ask about.

 

Apparently only 10 percent of dyslexia stems from vision problems, but I don't remember where I read this, so I'm using "apparently." It can help with certain issues that can appear in clusters used to diagnose dyslexia (eg poor spelling), depending on what the problem is, but I don't think it's going to fix it all for the most part.

 

 

It can help with the visual parts. Not the auditory/phonics parts. Our son could easily have been dx'd with dyslexia because he had no mental images of letters or words, no retention, no recognition, no fluency building, etc. Every single time he saw the word "dog" for example, he had to start all over figuring out what the letters were, remember the sounds, and finally figure out the word. Every single time. Even on the same page. And he often got it wrong, even if he got it right just minutes ago. Even with a Bob book ! This went on for over a year before he got into the visual processing VT that finally helped. His problems turned out to be all visual processing, with no auditory processing problems. His symptoms were all helped immensely by VT alone. If he had also had auditory components of dyslexia - problems with letters standing for sounds and making sense of sounds going together into words - he would have needed separate help for that too. That part wouldn't have been touched by VT.

Edited May 25, 2011 by laundrycrisis

[PeterPan]

Our DS also needed a second stage of treatment just for visual processing. He had extremely poor visual sequential memory, form constancy, and visual closure. The combined effect was that he did not have any stored consistent mental images of letters or words, or sequences of letters or words. So reading, writing and spelling were not even getting off the ground until we did the second stage of treatment because his brain just did not compute those images. He had also been unable to remember our phone number or address even though I had been working on those with him for a year an a half. The second stage of VT that was specifically for visual processing made a huge improvement for him. The first doctor he had been with didn't do this second stage, just the eye teaming stuff. I am so thankful we were forced to switch doctors when she moved - because if we hadn't gone on to the second one, and never done the visual processing stage of the therapy, it would have seemed like VT overall hadn't helped all that much...because he still wouldn't have been able to make sense of or retain the letters and words he saw, or build any reading fluency, or remember how to write anything.

 

This is a concern I have with some of the "failures" and even just in general. Our scores on visual processing (those categories you listed) didn't go up till we specifically worked on them.

[PeterPan]

We di vision therapy with my daughter for almost a year and it was probably the biggest waste of money I ever spent. She was having reading problems and the Developmental Opt. said she had tracking issues. We did eye strengthening excercises, crossing the midline techniques etc. You name it, we tried it. We were also VERY strict in doing our excercises at home. In the end, we say very little improvement. Looking back, I wish I new now what I new then. My daughter ended up having dyslexia and that almost $3000 we wasted on Vision Therapy could have been much better spent on helping here where she really needed the help. BTW, our vision therapist wasn't just a run of the mill doc. He was even recommended through COVD and it highly trained in this area. It is his "speciality". BEWARE! This might help many people but for others like my daughter it might just mask something bigger going on. I wish I had all that money back and the year we wasted. My daughter would have been the better for it.

 

We have dyslexia *and* needed the VT. VT doesn't get rid of the dyslexia, and dyslexia doesn't excuse the tracking problems. I'm not sure why you say it was a waste. If you're frustrated because your overall situation didn't change (she's still dyslexic, still has problems, still hard to teach), THAT I understand. But with us, everything we did (activities crossing the mid-line, vision stuff, etc.) brought very quick changes. Even simple stuff like the mid-line activities got change in just a few attempts.

[merry gardens]

We have been at it for nearly a year...the results are more or less okay. But honestly, I can't tell if he is just growing up or it is actually helping. I am curious about other opinions. Also, how long did it take before your Dr. said you were done? Thanks. :)

I am not convinced that VT will help everyone with reading problems, and I think some people who might benefit from VT don't even have any reading problems.

 

I read fine. I have poor depth perception and my eyes don't always work together. I've done some VT exercises with my children at home. My son with serious reading problems does the VT exercise fine. My child who is an outstanding reader is the one who says they makes her eyes tired.

 

I've also used some educational programs/methods at home that work with "mental images" and visual memories for words. I gather that some vision therapists use similar techniques in some areas of VT. Those techniques can help and I've used them, but they seem more like educational techniques and less like "therapy" to me.

 

I'm something of a skeptic of VT overall, but I don't doubt that some people benefit from it.

[renabeth]

UPDATE-Thanks for all the replies. I think healthy skepticism is okay of anything that costs as much as VT. I a skeptic by nature. We went to therapy today, and his therapist came out before we even started and said that we were going to cut back sessions to 30min once every two weeks. She said he only had two skills left to work on. I was shocked! I think they read here. :)

 

I started asking some questions. I should have been doing this from the start, but that is my own fault. Anyway the main skill we need to work on is visual processing??? So now his new homework is that I make up some flash cards that say for example... a 7 1

 

Then I flash them at him and he is to recite them back and then recite them backward without looking.

 

Also, she has assigned Moving Windows stories on the Vision Builder. If anyone know what this is.

 

So hopefully, we are coming to an end.

 

However, I'm still not convinced this has translated to his reading ability.

 

I am going to start a new thread on remediating phonics after VT. I would love it if any of you could tell me how you do this. :bigear:

 

I think that is where we are at right now. Thanks so much!

[laundrycrisis]

Visual processing has different parts. Ask which parts you are working on. Our DS had to do the backwards-forwards memory thing for visual sequential memory. He still needs to do it. It helps him to write the sequence in alternating red and blue marker. The moving windows thing might be an exercise for visual closure - having a mental image of an entire picture so that individual parts of the picture make sense with the whole.

 

If he had testing done for visual processing they should be able to give you the scores for the different components so you can see what percentile he scored in for each area.

 

I started asking some questions. I should have been doing this from the start, but that is my own fault. Anyway the main skill we need to work on is visual processing??? So now his new homework is that I make up some flash cards that say for example... a 7 1

 

Then I flash them at him and he is to recite them back and then recite them backward without looking.

 

Also, she has assigned Moving Windows stories on the Vision Builder. If anyone know what this is.

 

 

[PeterPan]

I just googled the software you mentioned. That's tracking, not visual processing. With our visual processing, they had computer software, but it had them manipulating visual inputs. My dd was just describing it. You wore different kinds of lenses, had things to line up and things popping out, etc. etc. It was improving how they process or interpret the info. They played lots of tanagrams, Set, Blink. Those latter were working on processing speed. The completed drawings. They did digit spans. They had things with a moving ball. They had software sort of like a repeating Simon where you repeated codes. They did a lot with the light-up board.

 

The visual processing stage was a lot more fun, not so grueling as the regular stuff. I didn't get to supervise as much, because ds had started speech therapy at that point.

 

Ok, one more thing. It's not the visual processing stage that changes how they read. Your dc should be reading better just from the regular VT for convergence, tracking, etc. I can't say this enough. The doctor and therapist REALLY DO MATTER. My dd went from totally rejecting fineprint books and avoiding the stuff I had gotten her to reading Lord of the Rings in a day (no joke!) after 2 months of VT. After one year with this doc you're still wondering whether it worked. I'm telling you there should be no doubt. Either your dc had way more problems than they disclosed, or the doctor isn't extremely effective.

 

Why am I being so opinionated? I mean mercy, it's none of *my* business.

Edited May 26, 2011 by OhElizabeth

[wapiti]

:lurk5: Thanks for continuing to describe the visual processing angle in detail, Elizabeth. It's something my dd10 may need (according to what the psych said after her last ed psych testing 18 months ago, long after VT was completed). My guess is none of that was handled by our old optometrist. But fortunately I know an optometrist who does ;) (both are FCOVD, go figure), so I'm planning to take her there next time she needs a checkup.

 

ETA for OP: we did see a huge jump in reading level due to VT, and I could see for myself the improvement in dd's ability to move her eyes. She had tracking issues, and could not follow my finger smoothly when we first started VT (what I can't quite figure out is how even the ped opthamologist missed it - it was that obvious, once the optometrist showed me). Her eyes jumped around. By the end of therapy, that was fixed. She can now do all sorts of funny movements with her eyes :) (I should add, to be fair, that she had OT just after starting VT, then we put VT on hold temporarily, and restarted the VT after the OT was finished - the OT had a huge impact on her ability to do the VT exercises.)

Edited May 26, 2011 by wapiti

[peacefully]

I'm in the same boat. Our optometrist specifically told us that we probably wouldn't see improvement in visual processing, so no surprise. I have a feeling that we will have a second round of VT sometime in 3rd grade (two years). We're also planning to have a second round of neuropsych evals then too. :001_huh:

[PeterPan]

Oh yeah, the visual processing stage was where it seemed like my child actually got delivered to me. I guess that sounds crazy, but seriously that's how it was. It pulled it all together and allowed all those PIECES to start working. Before that she was just so fragmented functionally. By the time we had gone through the visual processing stage, she was so much more whole, functional, confident. And things just continued to get better, with a lot of the academic stuff starting to gel. It was a huge shift for us. Still dyslexic, etc. Just a lot better on the visual side of things.

 

Yllek-Do I dare to suggest you research and see what options you would have for working on it on your own? You already maxed out available VT docs, didn't you? The visual processing computer stuff we did in the office, but a lot of the home stuff was straightforward. And some of it was stuff you ENJOY doing with your kid, things like logic games. There was this one called Chocolate Fix I think that they played a lot. So there's this whole genre of beneficial play, I guess you might say. It opened up a new world of excuse for us to play. It now has a bonafide part in our day, because now we know how much VALUE it is. We play puzzles, logic games, etc., and I don't give myself grief about it. For us, they are now as valuable as math or anything else.

Edited May 26, 2011 by OhElizabeth

[Stacy in NJ]

We decided not to pursue vision therapy for my dyslexic ds. After reading up on it and taking ds to an initial evaluation, we determine that it was mostly a scam, imo.

 

YMMV.

[peacefully]

Sometimes I'm sure that I can't even think about VT until a couple more years have passed. :tongue_smilie: But of course, you're right, Elizabeth. I need to be doing more for his visual processing, although I'm not sure what as of yet. Currently, we are doing games like RushHour, tangrams and such, but I don't have a plan to get his specific issues resolved. *sigh* There's his motor planning stuff too. My goodness, as you said in your other post, all these therapies are so tantalizing... I should do it if results happen in just a few months. Now you've got me googling again.

 

BTW, we still have more COVD options to try out. It's just that they are ALL 3 hours away. :glare: Another reason why I wanted to wait for a while before we try it again.

[PeterPan]

BTW, we still have more COVD options to try out. It's just that they are ALL 3 hours away. :glare: Another reason why I wanted to wait for a while before we try it again.

 

Well I would find somebody who's willing to work with you on those terms. Didn't you already do the once a month thing? I think you could make a lot of progress even that way. Our place had software they could sell you, but not having bought it I'm not sure what it was for. Even just some instructions to get you organized would be nice. Sounds like you're already doing great things. The tanagrams they had dd doing were a bit harder than the normal stuff you dredge up. The other thing you can do is try to add a bit of *speed* to your visual activities. Have you seen Blink? It's a simple card game, but they played it a lot. I'm not sure what the real rules are. For VT, they could play it as solitaire or pairs. You were basically turning over cards and trying to pull your matches as quickly as possible. Matches could be by any visual characteristic (pattern, color, number), so you were holding in your mind the card currently on top of your stack while comparing it to the newly turned over card to see if you could snatch it up.

 

The other thing is to play games like Memory with variations they can't process auditorily. I found this version at the school supply store that has faces, and I found a Dr. Seuss memory game at walmart around Christmas. With those, they can't think up words fast and are just using their visual memory, not saying the words to themselves.

 

There's a time for everything. Don't feel a need to overload yourself, mercy. I mean we didn't jump in until age almost 11 and we caught up pretty readily. Anything you're doing now is way more than we had.

[laundrycrisis]

BTW, we still have more COVD options to try out. It's just that they are ALL 3 hours away.

 

It may be worthwhile to have an evaluation done by one of those doctors, specifically for the visual processing problems, and have the therapist show you how to do exercises for those specific problems at home and then have very infrequent appointments in the office. It really helps to be working on specific problems. These things can be done at home but they are very specific. I would not want to spend a lot of money on any expensive software - everything we did was with very low-cost materials - markers, cards, puzzles, pattern blocks and cards, and picture search books. The expensive part is the expertise to be shown exactly what to do.

 

Going through the therapy for visual processing made such a huge difference for our son. He mentions several times a week now about being able to see pictures in his head. He could not do that before - they taught him how to use that ability in therapy. He remembers letters and words now, his reading fluency keeps improving, and writing is no longer such a painful struggle. For us it was worth every bit of time, effort and expense.

[merry gardens]

Oh yeah, the visual processing stage was where it seemed like my child actually got delivered to me. I guess that sounds crazy, but seriously that's how it was. It pulled it all together and allowed all those PIECES to start working. Before that she was just so fragmented functionally. By the time we had gone through the visual processing stage, she was so much more whole, functional, confident. And things just continued to get better, with a lot of the academic stuff starting to gel. It was a huge shift for us. Still dyslexic, etc. Just a lot better on the visual side of things.

 

Yllek-Do I dare to suggest you research and see what options you would have for working on it on your own? You already maxed out available VT docs, didn't you? The visual processing computer stuff we did in the office, but a lot of the home stuff was straightforward. And some of it was stuff you ENJOY doing with your kid, things like logic games. There was this one called Chocolate Fix I think that they played a lot. So there's this whole genre of beneficial play, I guess you might say. It opened up a new world of excuse for us to play. It now has a bonafide part in our day, because now we know how much VALUE it is. We play puzzles, logic games, etc., and I don't give myself grief about it. For us, they are now as valuable as math or anything else.

I see value in doing some of these things at home. We have lots of educational games. What I don't *get* is why some of these activities are called "vision therapy". :confused: My daughter, (the one who reads well but who told me her eyes were tired after some of those eye exercises) LOVES the game Chocolate Fix. I figured it was an educational game and logic puzzle that can help with overall brain development, but I don't understand what makes that vision therapy.

 

I'm just wondering out loud, but why do we as parents need to have "professional" telling us that it's valuable for children to play games? :confused: Then again, I've played games with my children. They may love it, but playing with them is often exhausting for me. I can see why some parents pay someone else to play games with their children. :lol:

 

That doesn't just apply to VT. I've done lots of activities this past year with my children to develop hand muscles for handwriting. Things like Play Dough, rolling pins and can openers take on "therapeutic value", but I didn't see it that way before. Why not? Honestly, I sometimes neglect those very important things, like playing with my children and letting them take part in food preparation with me. I'm planning next year to include cooking with my children as part of our homeschooling. With my older children, we used to have one day a week devoted to educational games, but I dropped that because I was afraid that we were too far behind in academics. I need to play more games with my children.

Edited May 26, 2011 by merry gardens

[rafiki]

.

[laundrycrisis]

I would not be happy about paying for VT only to be told to play checkers with my kid, etc. BUT this is not at all what our experience was like. Yes we did homework with some simple inexpensive equipment at home. But the particular way these things were used was very specific. I was trained by the therapist how to do it. It took her 10-20 minutes just to teach me how to do the activity in a way to make it therapeutic. I could not just give my kid a puzzle and tell him to do it...there were very explicit instructions. He could not move the pieces around or arrange them to make it easier. There is a technique for visual closure that involves finding where a piece matches the big picture, even when the piece has the wrong orientation. The specifics turn the activity into therapy. I would not have known how to use any of these things to turn them into therapy for our son's specific problem areas without the guidance of the therapist.

[PeterPan]

Ok, you're confusing some things. An activity BECOMES therapeutic when you do it intentionally and systematically to create a certain effect. If you just do something randomly, without building the precursor skills, without having a plan that moves them forward step-by-step, you're just playing.

 

And no, the visual processing portion (those games I described) was not the "vision therapy" portion we did for convergence, focusing, etc. They're two separate things. We did three months just working on the eyes: how they converge, focus, track, etc. Then we spent several more months working on visual processing, how the eyes interpret and apply information. Vision therapy builds neural pathways (they've seen this on MRI's), so it's not merely about strengthening muscles. So some kids, once they do the initial work to get the eyes working together correctly, are able to go quickly to good visual processing. My dd had certain components of visual processing that were literally on the level of a *2 year old*. She couldn't do a puzzle, not even a 30-60 piece puzzle labeled for 3 yo's. She wouldn't do simple preschool puzzles. She was 11. There are all kinds of components to visual processing (figure/ground, closure, etc.) that they had to build the processes for in her brain. Do you remember the post I came on here making many months ago about her doing a puzzle? That was why. She could actually do a puzzle!!

 

Merry, our VT place had a monthly parent night where you could go in, meet one of the VT's, meet one of the eye docs, and ask them all your questions. You should see if anyone in your area would do that for you. I corresponded with our prospective VT and one of the eye docs at the practice quite a bit before we ever showed up. And at that first meeting they stayed and talked for me for an hour on their time, answering all our questions. You're asking questions that have answers, and that would be the best way to get those answers. You keep saying you've done VT exercises. We had over a hundred exercises in our basic stuff (what we did for three months) and they did stuff on the computer. There's no way you've even come close, with what you've done at home, to looking at all the issues they could look at in a proper developmental optometrist exam. I mean do what you want, but there's a whole lot more to it.

[Storm Bay]

VT is not a cure-all. If there are problems beyond what VT can address, those will have to be treated with other therapies.

 

Correct:).

It can help with the visual parts. Not the auditory/phonics parts.I'm something of a skeptic of VT overall, but I don't doubt that some people benefit from it.

Yes, of course, only with visual parts. Ds doesn't have dyslexia, although twice in his life I've had times where I have had to check this out, just a cluster of symptoms that can mean dyslexia. Ds has no trouble with phonemic awareness, phonics and many other things. Ds's cluster of symptoms also points to his exact vision trouble; he's only being treated for one thing and it doesn't sound like it's going to go on for a year or even close based on what we've been told.

 

I think that it is highly possible that a minority of dc diagnosed with dyslexia need VT, whether or not it is all they'll need is going to vary, but I think often they will need more. When ds was 5 and not ready to read, we went through all the phonemic awarness, etc, issues to rule out dyslexia. He took off on reading at a later age than most, but has problems with spelling (and he's not a vs learner) and comprehension from books read silently, plus a few things in math (for an otherwise mathy boy), etc. His spelling is improving right now and we have not been working on it, because I want to wait until he's made significant progress with his VT, so it does appear to be linked to his increasing ability to read with both eyes at the same time.

UPDATE-We went to therapy today, and his therapist came out before we even started and said that we were going to cut back sessions to 30min once every two weeks. She said he only had two skills left to work on. I was shocked! I think they read here. :)

 

However, I'm still not convinced this has translated to his reading ability.

 

I am going to start a new thread on remediating phonics after VT. I would love it if any of you could tell me how you do this. :bigear:

 

I think that is where we are at right now. Thanks so much!

 

Good news! Yes, I think you'll need to remediate any problems. I don't think that VT is going to be a magic cure-all but it is evident that it is helping ds. I am very thankful that we have found someone who is a. good and b. not in it for the money (by the time he pays his overhead, his secretary and his assistant he is making a decent living, but not a high one.