More reading issues-advice.......

[Twilight Woods]

DD 6 has made some real improvements with reading. We are still working on CVC word fluency and have stopped at lesson 37/OPG with her and have just practiced reading her Nora books.

 

Today we were working on the "ea" sound and she flipped out on me saying she doesn't want to read/hates reading and had a good 20 min cry fest.

 

In addition to OPGTR we use phonics flash cards and ETC. I feel like we are stuck and hate seeing her cry over reading. She get's frustrated easily with it. She is my aspie/ADHD girl.

 

At this point I do not want to shelf it..... I was looking at AAR1 and I wonder if this would be a better fit for her? The price tag is what is preventing me from ordering it. Plus I dont think I NEED to change programs...... but I dont know.

 

What should I do?

[mrs.m]

Take a break (1-2 weeks) and cuddle on the couch and read to her for awhile. Then try again. I wouldn't change programs because it might be that she needs more time.

[Twilight Woods]

Take a break (1-2 weeks) and cuddle on the couch and read to her for awhile. Then try again. I wouldn't change programs because it might be that she needs more time.

 

I seem to be doing this every few weeks. :(

[MomatHWTK]

[Edit to cut down on cyber-footprint]

 

I like phonics for the building skills it provides, but I honestly think as a means of learning to read is is much harder than just learning by doing.

[Edit to cut down on cyber-footprint]

we went with the "to, with, by" method

 

FWIW, the full version of Starfall.com offers a nice break from formal reading lessons, as does JumpStart online.

Edited June 14, 2012 by MomatHWTK

[PeterPan]

Have you ever thought of NOT teaching her to sound out? I'd definitely back off for a while. Sometimes a good summer break makes a huge difference. Then just play games for the phonograms and start stealthily spelling and reading words. You could use the word lists in SWR and not even tell her what she's doing. If you spell those words with her using the SWR methods, read them back, and practice them with stealthy games (bananagrams, etc.), by the time she gets through the first 12 lists (I-2), she's reading at a 1st grade level, bam, done, no torture. :)

[PeterPan]

I like phonics for the building skills it provides, but I honestly think as a means of learning to read is is much harder than just learning by doing. I am trying to teach my middle two kids phonics, but it was a such a joy killer for my oldest that we never made it beyond 'silent-e'. After than, we went with the "to, with, by" method and he's a sight reader. :blush:

 

 

 

What is the to/with/by method?

[Twilight Woods]

Have you ever thought of NOT teaching her to sound out? I'd definitely back off for a while. Sometimes a good summer break makes a huge difference. Then just play games for the phonograms and start stealthily spelling and reading words. You could use the word lists in SWR and not even tell her what she's doing. If you spell those words with her using the SWR methods, read them back, and practice them with stealthy games (bananagrams, etc.), by the time she gets through the first 12 lists (I-2), she's reading at a 1st grade level, bam, done, no torture. :)

 

I was thinking about this. I am not familiar with SWR so I will have to look into this. I noticed she is a better "sight" reader.

[LillyMama]

I seem to be doing this every few weeks. :(

 

How about not taking a break completely but just review for a while? Go over lessons she's good at, only use books she's mastered. Or switch gears and focus on sight words? Or move over to a spelling curriculum? When we started All About Spelling with my son, his reading took off. To me, it's the same thing. You can "do reading" with her multiple times a day and in multiple ways, so that she doesn't "hate reading" but instead can just "hate reading new things."

 

For what it's worth, my daughter had mastered CVC words at 4 years old and her brother didn't become proficient in them until 6.5. They're just different. He needs lots of review and lots of times of focusing on what he already does well. We use the ETC online tool, which is always set a book behind the one we're working on in OPGTR and the ETC workbooks. This makes him feel confident and enjoy some reading so that he doesn't identify all of reading with the struggle. Does that make sense?

[Twilight Woods]

How about not taking a break completely but just review for a while? Go over lessons she's good at, only use books she's mastered. Or switch gears and focus on sight words? Or move over to a spelling curriculum? When we started All About Spelling with my son, his reading took off. To me, it's the same thing. You can "do reading" with her multiple times a day and in multiple ways, so that she doesn't "hate reading" but instead can just "hate reading new things."

 

For what it's worth, my daughter had mastered CVC words at 4 years old and her brother didn't become proficient in them until 6.5. They're just different. He needs lots of review and lots of times of focusing on what he already does well. We use the ETC online tool, which is always set a book behind the one we're working on in OPGTR and the ETC workbooks. This makes him feel confident and enjoy some reading so that he doesn't identify all of reading with the struggle. Does that make sense?

 

Yes. :) I have been also looking at doing AAS and see how she does with that.

[MomatHWTK]

I learned about the "to, with, by" method in the book Reading Rescue 1-2-3. Using this method, you first read a selection to the child as they follow along. Next, you ask the child to read but you read with them. Finally, the child reads the selection by themselves.

 

The "to" step is pretty self-explanatory. As you read, you can follow along with your finger to help the child develop better eye-tracking and you can sound out some words to model chunking and other techniques.

 

The "with" section is intended to build confidence. You ask the child to read, but offer assistance at the first sign of hesitancy. If the child cannot begin a word, you might offer up the first letter sound. If a child continues to struggle with that word, you would read the word demonstrating how to decode it as you do so.

 

The "by" method is used once the child has developed fluency reading the passage. These should be passages easy enough that the child will not struggle or encounter difficult or unfamiliar words. Reading slowly and steadily is ok, having to stop and decode is not. If the child is struggling to sound out words, take it back to a "with" reading. :001_smile:

 

 

[Edit to cut down on cyber-footprint]

Edited June 14, 2012 by MomatHWTK

[Tanikit]

I also really like the to-with-by method and have been using it with my 4.5 year old though not as they suggest (she has a very good memory and so I can read it "to" her a good few days before we read it together instead of right before as in the method.

 

I like that the phonics is taught while reading the book - it takes away much of the pain of drilling and reading the book "to" the child takes all stress off them at least at the beginning of the lesson.

 

It has worked really well with my DD and now I catch her reading some books alone that we have read many times (she does not have these ones memorised) and has even attempted some books from the library that she has only heard once.

 

It is not the only method I use - I have also used the word lists from OPGTR but we only ever do 4 or 5 words of that in one day and never the sentences. And when she reads to me I sound out any word she hesitates on or mispronounces showing her how to do the sounding out herself even though she does know how to do it (I think she struggles with print size more than anything as make it big and she can sound it out herself)

 

Hang in there - I'd keep lessons VERY short for now - even if its only a few words at a time or one sentence and perhaps do it twice a day.

[Incognito]

The "Learn to Read Bible" is designed for the "to/with/by" method, and is cut into nice small stories. They explain it simply at the beginning. Although my take on it was that the with was literally "with" and we read it together directly after I read it. We've used it some, and will use it more coming up. My 6yo does seem to do better learning what words look like and then just using phonics to decode the ones she doesn't know already.

[Ellie]

I'd put everything away until at least September. Ev.re.y.th.ing.

 

I don't know when the expectation came to be that children should read by 6yo, but it just isn't true for *most* children.

 

And then...y'all know I'm going to recommend Spalding. :D You just need the manual (WRTR), the phonogram cards, and the Spelling Assessment Manual--under $50.

[Twilight Woods]

I'd put everything away until at least September. Ev.re.y.th.ing.

 

I don't know when the expectation came to be that children should read by 6yo, but it just isn't true for *most* children.

 

And then...y'all know I'm going to recommend Spalding. :D You just need the manual (WRTR), the phonogram cards, and the Spelling Assessment Manual--under $50.

 

How is the "spalding method" different from OPGTR or other curricula for reading?

[Plateau Mama]

She's 6. I know that kids are expected to read by kindergarten now. But when we were kids, 6 was just getting started. I distintly remember being sorted into groups in 1st grade for reading lessons. (I totally could not get that the girl in the story was name "Lucy" with the soft-C sound and called her "Lucky" every day.) We also learned our letters at the beginning of 1st.

 

So while some kids may be ready by K for full reading lessons, I can't believe all are. My 6 y.o. is still working on CVC, my 11 y.o. didn't get it until he was 9, my 8 y.o. is reading well but still couldn't tell you what "ea" says on demand (she'd need the whole word and some context to figure it out).

 

I like phonics for the building skills it provides, but I honestly think as a means of learning to read is is much harder than just learning by doing. I am trying to teach my middle two kids phonics, but it was a such a joy killer for my oldest that we never made it beyond 'silent-e'. After than, we went with the "to, with, by" method and he's a sight reader. :blush:

 

FWIW, the full version of Starfall.com offers a nice break from formal reading lessons, as does JumpStart online.

 

:iagree: Children's reading brains develop between 5-8 (typically). Some kids just aren't ready until closer to 8, some are ready by 5. No amount of forcing the issue will make them ready. It's just going to make them hate reading. Schools are doing more harm than good by forcing all children to read in K.

 

I had a child who taught herself to read at 4. I had another that was forced to read in K, but didn't really get it until the end of 1st. I can't tell you how damaging it was for him to be told day after day he was behind and should be able to do xyz. He loved (and still does) to be read to, but just could not put together the things needed to read. By 2nd grade he was at a 5th grade level, and now, at the end of 4th, reads for all the time. (He's been HS since 2nd grade.)

[Iucounu]

Children's reading brains develop between 5-8 (typically). Some kids just aren't ready until closer to 8

I have previously regarded it as a myth that a normally developing child may not be ready to read until 8 or later. Such claims seem to crop up with some frequency among "better late than early" proponents, but in my previous attempts to dig deeper I didn't find any solid research support. I think there are plenty of reasons why reading might be delayed (learning disabilities, stress, etc.) but normally developing but yet years-delayed cognitive abilities are not in my current belief among them.

 

MomatHWTK, I don't know if I'd draw conclusions about some children just normally developing much later from your circumstances either. You haven't gone with a phonics-heavy approach, and have three children with somewhat delayed reading skills in my opinion-- but also in my opinion the avoidance of phonics might have a good deal to do with the delay.

[Ellie]

How is the "spalding method" different from OPGTR or other curricula for reading?

Short story: Spalding teaches children to read by teaching them to spell.:) It addresses all modalities--auditory, kinesthetic, visual. It teaches penmanship simultaneously, as well as capitalization and punctuation, and simple writing. Spalding is a complete English (or "language arts" :D ) program for children up to at least 8yo.

[ksoika]

If you find room in your budget, I'd say go with AAR or AAS. We abandoned OPGTR and ETC and have never been happier. I found ETC worked really well at the lower levels but after a book or two my girls couldn't stand another page of it. I was the one who abandoned OPGTR as I found it boring :)

 

Either way, I hope you and your little one have a relaxing summer & that you can come back around at it with fresh enthusiasm!

[Twilight Woods]

If you find room in your budget, I'd say go with AAR or AAS. We abandoned OPGTR and ETC and have never been happier. I found ETC worked really well at the lower levels but after a book or two my girls couldn't stand another page of it. I was the one who abandoned OPGTR as I found it boring :)

 

Either way, I hope you and your little one have a relaxing summer & that you can come back around at it with fresh enthusiasm!

 

 

I have been looking at AAR1. I might just drop reading for now and use AAR when we start up. It's just so darn expensive. I do like the 1 yesr return policy so if it doesn't work I can return it.

[Plateau Mama]

I have previously regarded it as a myth that a normally developing child may not be ready to read until 8 or later. Such claims seem to crop up with some frequency among "better late than early" proponents, but in my previous attempts to dig deeper I didn't find any solid research support. I think there are plenty of reasons why reading might be delayed (learning disabilities, stress, etc.) but normally developing but yet years-delayed cognitive abilities are not in my current belief among them.

 

.

 

There have been studies that have proven this. Talk to teachers who have taught for 20 years ( or 20-30 years ago). Everyone of them I've talked to had said this is the normal age range. My anti-Hsing MIL/teacher was the one who first explained this to me. The earlier we (society in general) have started forcing children to read the lower our literacy rate has gone.

[PeterPan]

How is the "spalding method" different from OPGTR or other curricula for reading?

 

WRTR, SWR, and AAS are all kissing cousins. There are a few more in there. AAS (Marie Rippel) has taken sort of a different tack with the learning how to read side of things. I'm not sure yet, because I haven't looked it over in person, but it LOOKS like her method in AAR involves sounding out. I don't know if she's using word families. When you look at WRTR and SWR you're into purely *spelling* their way into reading, and the literally encourage you to do just that. What it does is get over the hump of decoding for kids for whom decoding isn't working. It does so WITHOUT SACRIFICING actual phonics understanding. The dc still understands the sound-written connection. They just do it as spelling instead of decoding. Then they practice reading the words they have spelled. Practice them enough, spell enough, and *usually*, barring major LDs, the reading kicks in. There are exceptions to that, but usually there's a reason.

 

If a dc isn't hitting age norms pretty close to age norm, yes that's a red flag to start thinking about LDs, attention issues, vision issues, etc. etc. Yes I would be radically concerned if my 7, 8, 9 yo were not reading well and yes I would have his/her butt in some offices getting vision, etc. evaluated. No I would not buy into the paraded line that kids develop over a huge spread. Sure they do, but that DOESN'T mean the kids were without underlying LDs, vision problems, etc. etc. It just means that the kid had to plow uphill against those undiagnosed problems and FINALLY the blessed child was able to get the skill. Wouldn't it have been better to have diagnosed the problem? Of COURSE it would have. But then you step on people's toes, and we don't do that here. But don't even get me started on people blowing off problems saying they went away when they DIDN'T, cuz I could really start to rant. :D

 

I'm not saying your dc has a problem. Actually, don't you hang out on the SN board and know there are some underlying problems? Sorry, I've totally lost track. If there are problems, find them. If there aren't, cool. And if there are problems (working memory, attention, whatever), be cognizant of the CONSEQUENCES of those problems and chose programs that have been successful with those kids.

 

And yes, any time a kid is having school problems, I always suggest vision. Never hurts to check, and a developmental optometrist is what you want. I'm taking my dd for her annual check tomorrow. $60 and they not only can do a regular exam but can screen for the extra things that affect school work (convergence, focusing, tracking, etc.). Always good to check. :)

 

Reading is one of the most stressful things when you're beginning, because it's sort of like bad infertility and waiting to get pregnant. You figure it will NEVER happen, till it finally does. :D

[Iucounu]

There have been studies that have proven this. Talk to teachers who have taught for 20 years ( or 20-30 years ago). Everyone of them I've talked to had said this is the normal age range. My anti-Hsing MIL/teacher was the one who first explained this to me. The earlier we (society in general) have started forcing children to read the lower our literacy rate has gone.

What studies? I'm not interested in scientific studies attempting to show a lack of harm from delayed academics in general, but rather studies showing many children aren't cognitively ready to read until 8 or later, without any learning disabilities or other problems that would cause the delay, but also that those same children wind up without any learning problems later and are considered to be normal. Anecdotes are worse than worthless and are a big cause of problems and confusion in this area IMO.

 

(I'm also highly interested in any studies showing an increase in illiteracy resulting from an increase in early literacy efforts. I'm a little shocked that anyone would make such a claim without solid support, and I am guessing that there is no such support.)

 

Here's a study showing that approximately three quarters of reading-delayed children, in the bottom 8% of their age group at approximately 5.5 years old, showed improvement with certain types of reading interventions:

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/psych/people/academic/jcarroll/jcarroll/publications/hatcheretaljcpp2006.pdf

 

Skimming the paper did not reveal information on how many of these children had learning disabilities, but of the remainder (one quarter of the bottom 8%) who showed little to no improvement it was noted that some actually resisted the interventions.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Iucounu

[Iucounu]

If a dc isn't hitting age norms pretty close to age norm, yes that's a red flag to start thinking about LDs, attention issues, vision issues, etc. etc. Yes I would be radically concerned if my 7, 8, 9 yo were not reading well and yes I would have his/her butt in some offices getting vision, etc. evaluated. No I would not buy into the paraded line that kids develop over a huge spread. Sure they do, but that DOESN'T mean the kids were without underlying LDs, vision problems, etc. etc. It just means that the kid had to plow uphill against those undiagnosed problems and FINALLY the blessed child was able to get the skill. Wouldn't it have been better to have diagnosed the problem? Of COURSE it would have. But then you step on people's toes, and we don't do that here. But don't even get me started on people blowing off problems saying they went away when they DIDN'T, cuz I could really start to rant. :D

:iagree::hurray:

 

The thing I dislike intensely is when I see advice from laypeople to worried parents that years-long delays are perfectly normal, resulting in an avoidance of steps to find out the underlying issues. Homeschooling already presents an increased risk of children with learning deficits slipping through the cracks, and that sort of advice can only compound the problem.

[PeterPan]

Homeschooling already presents an increased risk of children with learning deficits slipping through the cracks, and that sort of advice can only compound the problem.

 

That's an interesting thing to ponder. On the one hand, we don't have a pool of (theoretically) normal kids or years of experience to compare our kids to. On the other hand, what we do have, at least on these boards, are moms who are hyper-intune and DEDICATED to finding out what's going on. We have a very active SN section. But you're right, it is sort of foreign to me when I meet people who say their kids were probably aspie but that they didn't take the time to get a diagnosis (like it's NOT gonna be an issue later???) or that they don't "believe" in adhd and consider it a construct of school and something easily worked around in the home (as if "believing" changes neurological development and as if you're going to be able to protect that dc for the other 60 years of his life through employment, family, etc.). Sometimes they're missing it and sometimes they're not thinking long-term.

 

And you know SOMETIMES the problem is low expectations. I KNEW my dc was bright, so I knew I was hitting contradictions and illogical walls that needed an explanation. Some kids don't get that benefit. They just conclude that's their "vocational" dc, the one who will never amount to anything. So he becomes 2nd class and doesn't get the benefit of evals and potential therapy. I LOVE what good therapy can do. I LOVE the way interventions can change a life. It BLOWS MY MIND when someone is willing to accept a thought process that had been the norm a hundred years ago. Yes, a hundred or two hundred years ago they got called insane, got a subpar job, etc. Now we're in the age of the internet and can get answers. Not only can you find out in a matter of minutes here on the boards 13 reasons WHY your dc might not be (xyz thing you're considered about), but then you can find not only a treatment option but the BEST treatments, locate the practitioners, and be on your way.

 

But I think that thought process is a generation gap, meaning I try not to be too hard on somebody in the past who has chosen differently. A lot has changed in the past 10 years, with the internet, with MRIs and brain knowledge, with access to effective therapies. Nuts, the astoundingly affective speech therapy my ds receives that could begin to unlock his speech in ONE SESSION was not even in EXISTENCE 15 years ago. So I'm really not harsh on someone who *in the past* chose not to get a late talker evaluated (one of my pet peeves), because there WEREN'T exceptionally good answers. But NOW there are. Now I can refer you to a map, get you a qualified specialist, and get that late talker evaluated to figure out if the problem is auditory processing, tone, motor control, or a developmental delay. They can narrow it down that well. (BTW, it strikes me as odd that some people are willing to say happily that their dc develops on a different schedule and NOT have it occur to them that what they really just said is that their dc has developmental delays. But whatever!) And then they can give the right therapy and change the child's LIFE. Why in the WORLD would someone hold to advice written in a book 20+ years ago using old knowledge about what was normal and where interventions could be helpful???

 

Well whatever, I told you I'd rant. :lol:

 

The happy thing is the op IS aware of the issues and IS pursuing them. She's just at this age/stage where it's a whole bunch of things at once and really hard to sort out. She'll get there. Sometimes it takes a number of evals (vision, CAPD, neuropsych, OT) to get at all the issues and then you have mom's trial and error as she works through the options and curricula. It's one reason I think it's really wise to go to homeschooling conventions. Not only is it a FABULOUS way to see materials (not everything obviously, but a lot), but it's also a great way to hook up with people and see the human side of things. We generally have a board get together at the amazing, huge Cincinnati convention each year. There are other conventions with SWB where people are probably doing the same thing. It's just such a great thing to sit down and eat dessert and gab with someone (or talk with SWB in person!) and realize the FACE behind the people here and what they're doing, find out they don't blink with lights, aren't aliens. Sometimes they tell you things in person they don't put on the boards. Sometimes you find someone new to research, when you realize they're in the same boat. And of course it's VERY encouraging.

 

This is a LONG RACE, not a sprint. Reading, basic math, that's only the start. It's 12+ years of this. It's easy to get weary. Just gotta take it one step at a time, enjoy the good, get through the bad, and endure. :)

Edited June 13, 2012 by OhElizabeth

[Twilight Woods]

WRTR, SWR, and AAS are all kissing cousins. There are a few more in there. AAS (Marie Rippel) has taken sort of a different tack with the learning how to read side of things. I'm not sure yet, because I haven't looked it over in person, but it LOOKS like her method in AAR involves sounding out. I don't know if she's using word families. When you look at WRTR and SWR you're into purely *spelling* their way into reading, and the literally encourage you to do just that. What it does is get over the hump of decoding for kids for whom decoding isn't working. It does so WITHOUT SACRIFICING actual phonics understanding. The dc still understands the sound-written connection. They just do it as spelling instead of decoding. Then they practice reading the words they have spelled. Practice them enough, spell enough, and *usually*, barring major LDs, the reading kicks in. There are exceptions to that, but usually there's a reason.

 

If a dc isn't hitting age norms pretty close to age norm, yes that's a red flag to start thinking about LDs, attention issues, vision issues, etc. etc. Yes I would be radically concerned if my 7, 8, 9 yo were not reading well and yes I would have his/her butt in some offices getting vision, etc. evaluated. No I would not buy into the paraded line that kids develop over a huge spread. Sure they do, but that DOESN'T mean the kids were without underlying LDs, vision problems, etc. etc. It just means that the kid had to plow uphill against those undiagnosed problems and FINALLY the blessed child was able to get the skill. Wouldn't it have been better to have diagnosed the problem? Of COURSE it would have. But then you step on people's toes, and we don't do that here. But don't even get me started on people blowing off problems saying they went away when they DIDN'T, cuz I could really start to rant. :D

 

I'm not saying your dc has a problem. Actually, don't you hang out on the SN board and know there are some underlying problems? Sorry, I've totally lost track. If there are problems, find them. If there aren't, cool. And if there are problems (working memory, attention, whatever), be cognizant of the CONSEQUENCES of those problems and chose programs that have been successful with those kids.

 

And yes, any time a kid is having school problems, I always suggest vision. Never hurts to check, and a developmental optometrist is what you want. I'm taking my dd for her annual check tomorrow. $60 and they not only can do a regular exam but can screen for the extra things that affect school work (convergence, focusing, tracking, etc.). Always good to check. :)

 

Reading is one of the most stressful things when you're beginning, because it's sort of like bad infertility and waiting to get pregnant. You figure it will NEVER happen, till it finally does. :D

 

Thanks. Yes we have issues. :) We are working on getting the "issues" officially DX by a neuropsy. Her vision is fine we had that checked.

[Iucounu]

On the other hand, what we do have, at least on these boards, are moms who are hyper-intune and DEDICATED to finding out what's going on... The happy thing is the op IS aware of the issues and IS pursuing them. She's just at this age/stage where it's a whole bunch of things at once and really hard to sort out. She'll get there.

Great, thoughtful post, and I agree. I think there's a tendency on the part of people not to want to believe that there's a problem, and a tendency of others to want to reassure them too, especially when that reassurance helps to reinforce their belief that they haven't done wrong by their own children. This creates an atmosphere rife for such stuff as "better late than early" to spread like wildfire. I think your points about the fast pace of change these days are excellent.

 

Also, I want to be clear that I wasn't aiming any of my GENERAL COMMENTS ON READING, READING INSTRUCTION OR ADVICE ABOUT READING at anyone in particular, and certainly not at the OP.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Iucounu

[Twilight Woods]

That's an interesting thing to ponder. On the one hand, we don't have a pool of (theoretically) normal kids or years of experience to compare our kids to. On the other hand, what we do have, at least on these boards, are moms who are hyper-intune and DEDICATED to finding out what's going on. We have a very active SN section. But you're right, it is sort of foreign to me when I meet people who say their kids were probably aspie but that they didn't take the time to get a diagnosis (like it's NOT gonna be an issue later???) or that they don't "believe" in adhd and consider it a construct of school and something easily worked around in the home (as if "believing" changes neurological development and as if you're going to be able to protect that dc for the other 60 years of his life through employment, family, etc.). Sometimes they're missing it and sometimes they're not thinking long-term.

 

And you know SOMETIMES the problem is low expectations. I KNEW my dc was bright, so I knew I was hitting contradictions and illogical walls that needed an explanation. Some kids don't get that benefit. They just conclude that's their "vocational" dc, the one who will never amount to anything. So he becomes 2nd class and doesn't get the benefit of evals and potential therapy. I LOVE what good therapy can do. I LOVE the way interventions can change a life. It BLOWS MY MIND when someone is willing to accept a thought process that had been the norm a hundred years ago. Yes, a hundred or two hundred years ago they got called insane, got a subpar job, etc. Now we're in the age of the internet and can get answers. Not only can you find out in a matter of minutes here on the boards 13 reasons WHY your dc might not be (xyz thing you're considered about), but then you can find not only a treatment option but the BEST treatments, locate the practitioners, and be on your way.

 

But I think that thought process is a generation gap, meaning I try not to be too hard on somebody in the past who has chosen differently. A lot has changed in the past 10 years, with the internet, with MRIs and brain knowledge, with access to effective therapies. Nuts, the astoundingly affective speech therapy my ds receives that could begin to unlock his speech in ONE SESSION was not even in EXISTENCE 15 years ago. So I'm really not harsh on someone who *in the past* chose not to get a late talker evaluated (one of my pet peeves), because there WEREN'T exceptionally good answers. But NOW there are. Now I can refer you to a map, get you a qualified specialist, and get that late talker evaluated to figure out if the problem is auditory processing, tone, motor control, or a developmental delay. They can narrow it down that well. (BTW, it strikes me as odd that some people are willing to say happily that their dc develops on a different schedule and NOT have it occur to them that what they really just said is that their dc has developmental delays. But whatever!) And then they can give the right therapy and change the child's LIFE. Why in the WORLD would someone hold to advice written in a book 20+ years ago using old knowledge about what was normal and where interventions could be helpful???

 

Well whatever, I told you I'd rant. :lol:

 

The happy thing is the op IS aware of the issues and IS pursuing them. She's just at this age/stage where it's a whole bunch of things at once and really hard to sort out. She'll get there. Sometimes it takes a number of evals (vision, CAPD, neuropsych, OT) to get at all the issues and then you have mom's trial and error as she works through the options and curricula. It's one reason I think it's really wise to go to homeschooling conventions. Not only is it a FABULOUS way to see materials (not everything obviously, but a lot), but it's also a great way to hook up with people and see the human side of things. We generally have a board get together at the amazing, huge Cincinnati convention each year. There are other conventions with SWB where people are probably doing the same thing. It's just such a great thing to sit down and eat dessert and gab with someone (or talk with SWB in person!) and realize the FACE behind the people here and what they're doing, find out they don't blink with lights, aren't aliens. Sometimes they tell you things in person they don't put on the boards. Sometimes you find someone new to research, when you realize they're in the same boat. And of course it's VERY encouraging.

 

This is a LONG RACE, not a sprint. Reading, basic math, that's only the start. It's 12+ years of this. It's easy to get weary. Just gotta take it one step at a time, enjoy the good, get through the bad, and endure. :)

 

:iagree:

 

This particular DD of mine has been in EI speech, DT, OT since she was 15 mo. Thos abruptly stopped at 3 b/c they deemed her "fine". Apparently "aspie" qualities are considered ok by their standards in this day and age. I can only imagine what kind of child I would have had-had I not put my foot down and demanded a referral when she was 15mo.

[MomatHWTK]

[Edit to cut down on cyber-footprint]

Edited June 14, 2012 by MomatHWTK

[Iucounu]

Actually, my first reader's delay is due to several diagnosed learning disabilities. No amount of phonics instruction would change that situation.

That's not obvious, and in fact I'd say there are plenty of studies showing improvement with reading intervention for learning-disabled kids, but we need not argue about it if it makes you uncomfortable. If you would like to debate this, let's start a new thread.

 

The OP was adressing her concerns with regard to a 6 year old child, a child who has learned her letter sounds and is progressing. Not learning to read until first grade in no way impeded my future academic success

You were advocating simply not worrying about it when children learn to read late by modern standards, using just getting started at six as a perfectly fine way to learn to read, and using your own children as apparent examples of kids who were learning to read just fine. I continue to think that being years behind the learning curve on reading is not ideal-- and research shows that I'm right, though there's no need to go into it here, I think, as it might just upset you further. I don't think that avoiding phonics instruction is a good idea for children who are behind, or for any children.

 

Now, I'm a layperson-- but knowing what I know, if I encountered a learning-disabled child who was reading late, and had been taught with avoidance of phonics because that seemed easiest, I'd by no means feel certain that the avoidance of phonics wasn't responsible for part of the delay. Sight words do offer attractive advantages in increasing fluency, but they're only part of the puzzle.

 

Pointing out norms from forty years ago is fine, but it doesn't mean that they were optimal. As another poster has noted, pointing out that children who were initially behind achieved some proficiency also doesn't disprove that the reading delay (or teaching methods potentially causing it) held the child back. From this perspective, while your anecdote about learning to read at age six and not being held back is fine for inclusion in the thread, it certainly does not show that you wouldn't have done better academically if you'd started earlier, had better reading instruction, etc.; and it also certainly doesn't show anything about late-begun or phonics-avoiding reading instruction being just fine in general.

 

"Delayed" is a very subjective term.

It's actually an objective term when based on a frame of reference. A delay is measurable: it's the measurement between a start point and an end point of the delay duration. When I speak of reading delays I am speaking of delays putting a child substantially behind (years behind, if you like) the average age at which children learn to read in the United States. Vague without statistics, perhaps, but capable of precise definition and not subjective: based on a norm.

 

And please, don't claim to not be adressing your comments to a specific poster and then address a specific poster by name, it begs the intelligence of us all.

I'm sorry you're so upset. Of course I mean all my general comments in the thread. I'd have to be a complete idiot to do what you're suggesting; reading in context, I think it's clear I meant to refer to the general comments. Sheesh.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Iucounu

[PeterPan]

:iagree:

 

This particular DD of mine has been in EI speech, DT, OT since she was 15 mo. Thos abruptly stopped at 3 b/c they deemed her "fine". Apparently "aspie" qualities are considered ok by their standards in this day and age. I can only imagine what kind of child I would have had-had I not put my foot down and demanded a referral when she was 15mo.

 

Karen, I'm going down that road too, as my ds is in speech therapy. You're just a little ahead of me on that one. Our SLP wants him to do Earobics. Have you done stuff like that yet? And definitely check into auditory processing. They say that can be behind some speech problems. Nuts, sometimes a dc will be given a whatever label for speech and it was actually undiagnosed apraxia. But I digress. I'm just saying, like you're finding, it takes a lot of evals to look at all the facets. No one person takes responsibility for everything, only the parent, if that makes sense.

[Twilight Woods]

Karen, I'm going down that road too, as my ds is in speech therapy. You're just a little ahead of me on that one. Our SLP wants him to do Earobics. Have you done stuff like that yet? And definitely check into auditory processing. They say that can be behind some speech problems. Nuts, sometimes a dc will be given a whatever label for speech and it was actually undiagnosed apraxia. But I digress. I'm just saying, like you're finding, it takes a lot of evals to look at all the facets. No one person takes responsibility for everything, only the parent, if that makes sense.

 

Makes sense. This DD does not have any auditory issues.... it is actually one of her strengths. Thankfully with speech she started talking and talking well right before she turned 3. Now if I could just get her to "calm" down we could probably get somewhere with the reading :lol: In EI we spent a lot more time focused on OT and DT b/c she was more signifigantly delayed in those arears and working on family relationsships.... becoming attached to me-instead of just a person who took care of her.

 

My older DD the one with ADD-inattentive/GAD has HUGE auditory processing issues. She has never been tested tho but I like to give the example of: She hears this when I speak to her "Drew, Blah blah blah, ok?" She will be looking at me and say "what?". *sigh*. It should be an interesting meeting with the pscyologist next week. I also suspect LD especially in math with the older.

 

It's challenging and makes finding the right things for them difficult b/c the learning barriers.

[PeterPan]

Make sure you read NJKelli's posts on the boards. She has done really extensive CAPD testing with her dd. *Soemtimes* that "huh" thing is actually just processing speed. You distinguish it from auditory processing alone because it will affect ALL their systems and actions. Someone on the boards a while back had stats on driving accidents in unmedicated adhd. That impulsivity and the slow processing/reactions is just NOT COOL for driving safely. :(

 

So your psych appointments are next week? Well good! You must be so relieved. Start making your lists of questions. It was such a cathartic experience for us. There was a lot to get off our chests, lol. And you know, until then I would just put up the school stuff and not worry about it. Enjoy the sun, color, swim, paint with water, whatever, and make some moves in a month or 6 weeks after you have the testing results back. You'll get there. A break will be good. Sounds like you deserve one. :)

[Twilight Woods]

Make sure you read NJKelli's posts on the boards. She has done really extensive CAPD testing with her dd. *Soemtimes* that "huh" thing is actually just processing speed. You distinguish it from auditory processing alone because it will affect ALL their systems and actions. Someone on the boards a while back had stats on driving accidents in unmedicated adhd. That impulsivity and the slow processing/reactions is just NOT COOL for driving safely. :(

 

So your psych appointments are next week? Well good! You must be so relieved. Start making your lists of questions. It was such a cathartic experience for us. There was a lot to get off our chests, lol. And you know, until then I would just put up the school stuff and not worry about it. Enjoy the sun, color, swim, paint with water, whatever, and make some moves in a month or 6 weeks after you have the testing results back. You'll get there. A break will be good. Sounds like you deserve one. :)

 

We are schooling light right now. Reading with the younger and math with the older. If we took a break I would literally be starting over. *sigh*. Thankfully I am only keeping it to 10-15 mins. :)

 

It's only the initial appointment. I am hoping they can test them soon after. I just wish it wasn't so freaking expensive. Oh well. At least it will give me some direction. I will have to research processing speed vs auditory... I am not familiar with it. Im wondering if the processing speed can be related to her ADD. She doesn't have they hyper part. She is rather calm unless it's outside her comfort zone.

[PeterPan]

The DSM (the book they all use for diagnosing) calls it all ADHD and has subtypes (inattentive, hyperactive, etc.). So yes ADHD subtype inattentive is what people used to call ADD. Since it's no longer ADD per the DSM, I don't bother. Sort of like dyslexia that no longer exists because it's a reading disorder getting another name change after that, but whatever.

 

Yes, ADHD I think will often have a low processing speed. It's just overall and not specific to one thing. It shows up in our house as carriage whit: the whitty response you think of after the party, as you're driving away. :) Sometimes it will look like disobedience because they are slow to respond or don't seem to do what you said. The Eides, authors of "The Dyslexic Advantage," have an interesting explanation of low processing speed and WHY it takes so long for certain things to stick. It's something to do with brain structure and mini-columns. If the columns in the brain are close together, you get quick, easy connections. Boom, faster learners, that's what we love! If the columns are farther apart, it takes a LOT longer to make the connection, and the wiring between them might be really circuitous. It might hit and bump other things along the way. Boom, our kids who take forever to learn some nitpicky fact like 6X9 but can tell you all sorts of narratives about history and whose cousin did what during the Civil War and why the British were actually the... It's NO coincidence!!

 

So once you start to see it as an actual structure issue, a lot of what you deal with will make more sense. It makes sense that they need so much extra work to develop automaticity. It makes sense why they're so contradictory, with certain weaknesses and certain astounding strengths. It's why you keep working on the problem areas but keep going with the things they WILL be good on. Honestly, you know what you might do is get your dd (rising 6th) Hands-on Equations. Seriously. Might turn out the child is kick-butt at pre-algebra and algebra! Being good at division has nothing to do with it really. Once that logic stage kicks in, more conceptual work might be just her thing. You don't want to hold her back, or it will be this never-ending abyss.

 

Well now I'm totally confused who I'm talking about, lol. Have you posted about 2 different kids?

 

The go-to book on CAPD is "When the Brain Can't Hear."

[PeterPan]

The DSM (the book they all use for diagnosing) calls it all ADHD and has subtypes (inattentive, hyperactive, etc.). So yes ADHD subtype inattentive is what people used to call ADD. Since it's no longer ADD per the DSM, I don't bother. Sort of like dyslexia that no longer exists because it's a reading disorder getting another name change after that, but whatever.

 

Yes, ADHD I think will often have a low processing speed. It's just overall and not specific to one thing. It shows up in our house as carriage whit: the whitty response you think of after the party, as you're driving away. :) Sometimes it will look like disobedience because they are slow to respond or don't seem to do what you said. The Eides, authors of "The Dyslexic Advantage," have an interesting explanation of low processing speed and WHY it takes so long for certain things to stick. It's something to do with brain structure and mini-columns. If the columns in the brain are close together, you get quick, easy connections. Boom, faster learners, that's what we love! If the columns are farther apart, it takes a LOT longer to make the connection, and the wiring between them might be really circuitous. It might hit and bump other things along the way. Boom, our kids who take forever to learn some nitpicky fact like 6X9 but can tell you all sorts of narratives about history and whose cousin did what during the Civil War and why the British were actually the... It's NO coincidence!!

 

So once you start to see it as an actual structure issue, a lot of what you deal with will make more sense. It makes sense that they need so much extra work to develop automaticity. It makes sense why they're so contradictory, with certain weaknesses and certain astounding strengths. It's why you keep working on the problem areas but keep going with the things they WILL be good on. Honestly, you know what you might do is get your dd (rising 6th) Hands-on Equations. Seriously. Might turn out the child is kick-butt at pre-algebra and algebra! Being good at division has nothing to do with it really. Once that logic stage kicks in, more conceptual work might be just her thing. You don't want to hold her back, or it will be this never-ending abyss.

 

Well now I'm totally confused who I'm talking about, lol. Have you posted about 2 different kids?

 

The go-to book on CAPD is "When the Brain Can't Hear."

[ktgrok]

The DSM (the book they all use for diagnosing) calls it all ADHD and has subtypes (inattentive, hyperactive, etc.). So yes ADHD subtype inattentive is what people used to call ADD. Since it's no longer ADD per the DSM, I don't bother. Sort of like dyslexia that no longer exists because it's a reading disorder getting another name change after that, but whatever.

 

Yes, ADHD I think will often have a low processing speed. It's just overall and not specific to one thing. It shows up in our house as carriage whit: the whitty response you think of after the party, as you're driving away. :) Sometimes it will look like disobedience because they are slow to respond or don't seem to do what you said. The Eides, authors of "The Dyslexic Advantage," have an interesting explanation of low processing speed and WHY it takes so long for certain things to stick. It's something to do with brain structure and mini-columns. If the columns in the brain are close together, you get quick, easy connections. Boom, faster learners, that's what we love! If the columns are farther apart, it takes a LOT longer to make the connection, and the wiring between them might be really circuitous. It might hit and bump other things along the way. Boom, our kids who take forever to learn some nitpicky fact like 6X9 but can tell you all sorts of narratives about history and whose cousin did what during the Civil War and why the British were actually the... It's NO coincidence!!

 

So once you start to see it as an actual structure issue, a lot of what you deal with will make more sense. It makes sense that they need so much extra work to develop automaticity. It makes sense why they're so contradictory, with certain weaknesses and certain astounding strengths. It's why you keep working on the problem areas but keep going with the things they WILL be good on. Honestly, you know what you might do is get your dd (rising 6th) Hands-on Equations. Seriously. Might turn out the child is kick-butt at pre-algebra and algebra! Being good at division has nothing to do with it really. Once that logic stage kicks in, more conceptual work might be just her thing. You don't want to hold her back, or it will be this never-ending abyss.

 

Well now I'm totally confused who I'm talking about, lol. Have you posted about 2 different kids?

 

The go-to book on CAPD is "When the Brain Can't Hear."

 

awesome post about slow processing speed! My son has processing speed issues and yes, I ask a question and get the "huh?" but if i wait a second, he will know what I said. I do the same thing...delayed reaction I guess....but learned to adapt, and he is too. But man, I feel SO guilty for all the times I yelled at him for not doing something right when I said, when he needed a full minute just to understand and process what I said. Sigh..

[Twilight Woods]

The DSM (the book they all use for diagnosing) calls it all ADHD and has subtypes (inattentive, hyperactive, etc.). So yes ADHD subtype inattentive is what people used to call ADD. Since it's no longer ADD per the DSM, I don't bother. Sort of like dyslexia that no longer exists because it's a reading disorder getting another name change after that, but whatever.

 

Yes, ADHD I think will often have a low processing speed. It's just overall and not specific to one thing. It shows up in our house as carriage whit: the whitty response you think of after the party, as you're driving away. :) Sometimes it will look like disobedience because they are slow to respond or don't seem to do what you said. The Eides, authors of "The Dyslexic Advantage," have an interesting explanation of low processing speed and WHY it takes so long for certain things to stick. It's something to do with brain structure and mini-columns. If the columns in the brain are close together, you get quick, easy connections. Boom, faster learners, that's what we love! If the columns are farther apart, it takes a LOT longer to make the connection, and the wiring between them might be really circuitous. It might hit and bump other things along the way. Boom, our kids who take forever to learn some nitpicky fact like 6X9 but can tell you all sorts of narratives about history and whose cousin did what during the Civil War and why the British were actually the... It's NO coincidence!!

 

So once you start to see it as an actual structure issue, a lot of what you deal with will make more sense. It makes sense that they need so much extra work to develop automaticity. It makes sense why they're so contradictory, with certain weaknesses and certain astounding strengths. It's why you keep working on the problem areas but keep going with the things they WILL be good on. Honestly, you know what you might do is get your dd (rising 6th) Hands-on Equations. Seriously. Might turn out the child is kick-butt at pre-algebra and algebra! Being good at division has nothing to do with it really. Once that logic stage kicks in, more conceptual work might be just her thing. You don't want to hold her back, or it will be this never-ending abyss.

 

Well now I'm totally confused who I'm talking about, lol. Have you posted about 2 different kids?

 

The go-to book on CAPD is "When the Brain Can't Hear."

 

yes 2 different kids :)