Please help me sort out what I need to do

[PeterPan]

Ok, I'm reviewing your comments on the audiologist. Are you pursuing APD evals? The SLP *may* have something for APD. It's kinda a funky controversial field for them. From their angle, APD is a language issue, which is why good thorough language testing is warranted. In reality the section of the brain causing APD, at least from what I've read, is a bit different and more like setting a row of townhouses on fire. So you have to treat the language issues but there's more.

Has she been checked for retained reflexes? That's your next move. Go ahead and schedule the SLP, but somewhere in there, as you're doing this, find someone to test for retained reflexes or do it yourself. Some kids get a bit of a language bump when the reflexes integrate. It's possible they're an issue. There are stepped up discussions to have, but that's your first thing to resolve. And that can be concurrent with the SLP evals, sure.

[Jentrovert]

6 minutes ago, Storygirl said:

I would use the SLP that gives the more extensive testing and reporting, even though she is farther away. While you are deciding, you can also research educational psychologists. If you suspect anything other than a language issue (such as a math disability or ADHD), I would use a psych instead of an SLP. But if you are just exploring the dyslexia/reading issues, I think the SLP you describe is okay.

The only thing I wonder -- and I really don't know -- is if an SLP is licensed to provide an official learning disability diagnosis, or whether she can tell you what is going on but is not allowed to diagnose. I don't know what the licensing rules are.

An educational psychologist would undoubtedly cost more. I think you could go either way. Keep in mind that kids with LDs often need to be evaluated more than one time over their childhood. If they go to college, for example, the college will want the testing to be recent; if they go to public school at some point, the school repeats testing every three years -- so updating testing is common. So you can decide that the SLP evaluations are sufficient for now and accept that you may do additional testing later.

Because the SLP has a narrower focus than a psych and will not be testing as wide of a range of things. You may find eventually that some of those other areas are also concerning. And that's not unusual, either. What we see and understand about our kids at age 7 is not identical to what we see in them at age 12 or 16. As an example, DD13 had her dyslexia testing with a neuropsych just as she turned ten. She just turned 14, and we are looking more into the ADHD question now (the NP thought ADHD back then but did not diagnose). It can be an ongoing exploration.

 

I don't know if an SLP can diagnose either. I tend to think not, because on one of the websites I looked at (I think for a dyslexia center, maybe?) I remember thinking it was worded oddly and specifically avoided stating that they dx dyslexia. So I figured the SLP wasn't able to actually diagnose. I'm leaning toward just what you're saying, that the SLP evals are sufficient for now, and do more later. But I will still go ahead and find and get on the list for a neuropsych, since indications are that will be covered by their insurance.

Now, is it an educational psychologist that would dx adhd, etc? Or a neuropsych? 

[Jentrovert]

16 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

So I would run both of them through, a two-fer. 

Yes, whether you go with LIPS or FIS, I would run them both through. Your dd may go through more quickly. You could integrate it into Barton 1 if you want. My ds has apraxia (a motor planning of speech problem) so we used the LIPS materials all through Barton 1 and 2, completely integrated. There's no waste here, just more tools. It will be fabulous.

Ok, I will go about getting LiPS. If I understand correctly from previous threads, I need the manual and the mouth pictures, not the complete kit. Is this correct?

Ok, so her list sounds really fab. Does she test narrative language? As long as she does, she sounds like your woman. Driving that far for a good eval is fine. It's not something you do a bunch of times. Says the woman who drove that far weekly for THERAPY, lol. I've even done it twice weekly, which I really don't recommend. Sigh. 

So if you can get somebody closer to do that, obviously go closer. But yes it sounds like she's hitting the stuff you want and will crank you out a lot of actionable material. She's also creating a baseline to retest in a year or two and see your progress, see what's working and what remains. How long is her wait? You'd like to get that baseline testing done before you eval. These kids are going to want full psych evals, paper trail, college accommodations, etc.

Drop in the bucket. I don't know how she's billing at that rate and surviving. Make sure narrative language is there. Around here SLPs bill $80-125 an hour. So that eval, if it includes 3 hours of testing, also has to include money for report writing. That alone tells you she's either under-billing or doing some cut and paste, haha. Cut & paste is fine. It's not like your kid is so novel. That's why she owns all the stuff, lol. So yeah, great price, go for the service, get it done. Will doing that hinder your ability to make psych evals happen at some point? 

I'll double check on the narrative language testing, it wasn't specifically mentioned in her email. Yikes, I don't think I could handle that drive weekly or twice weekly. We were doing twice monthly, almost 2.5 hours one way, for vision therapy and that got very old. lol Kudos to you. I'm not sure how long her wait is, I will try to call today during quiet time and get more info. No, if we do this it won't affect our ability to make psych evals happen. Even if the psych evals aren't covered, we could still make them happen, although prob not both kids at once. 

You've had her to an audiologist? Unless that was recent, I would update that and get them to run a screener for APD as well. I'm not a super fan of the TAPS because it's half phonological processing, so hopefully they'll have the SCAN. Our university can do that for free, and it would be wise to get that done just to be super sure, especially if it's low cost or free.

It was at least 2 years ago. I specifically asked about testing for APD, and he said she was too young. They found no issues with her hearing. I'm sure I can get that testing redone, for free, so I'll get on that. My son hasn't been to an audiologist, so I might as well do him at the same time.

 

Ok, so on my immediate list is to get LiPS. Let me clarify my thinking on Barton . . . . is it a given at this point that I will need to do Barton with at least one child, regardless of the SLP evals or other testing? If so, I may go ahead and order Level 1 (not to use any of this before getting the baseline stuff, but so I can begin reviewing it myself). Or, should I hold off on that?

[Jentrovert]

28 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

Ok, I'm reviewing your comments on the audiologist. Are you pursuing APD evals? The SLP *may* have something for APD. It's kinda a funky controversial field for them. From their angle, APD is a language issue, which is why good thorough language testing is warranted. In reality the section of the brain causing APD, at least from what I've read, is a bit different and more like setting a row of townhouses on fire. So you have to treat the language issues but there's more.

Has she been checked for retained reflexes? That's your next move. Go ahead and schedule the SLP, but somewhere in there, as you're doing this, find someone to test for retained reflexes or do it yourself. Some kids get a bit of a language bump when the reflexes integrate. It's possible they're an issue. There are stepped up discussions to have, but that's your first thing to resolve. And that can be concurrent with the SLP evals, sure.

 

I commented on the audiologist above, and I'll check and see if the SLP has something for APD. I'm going to schedule fresh testing at the dev opt, and that includes testing for retained reflexes. 

[Jentrovert]

38 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

Yes, whether you go with LIPS or FIS, I would run them both through. Your dd may go through more quickly. You could integrate it into Barton 1 if you want. My ds has apraxia (a motor planning of speech problem) so we used the LIPS materials all through Barton 1 and 2, completely integrated. There's no waste here, just more tools. It will be fabulous.

 

 

Re-reading and had a question about this . . . you're saying I can integrate it into Barton 1 with BOTH kids? Not just my daughter because she passed the pretest, but with both just because it can be done that way. Do I understand that right? 

[Jentrovert]

Does anyone know if HSA funds can be used for testing? Is all this considered medical or solely educational?

[PeterPan]

48 minutes ago, Jennifer said:

I don't know if an SLP can diagnose either.

So an SLP can diagnose if they want to, if they feel it's a thing they're versed enough in to diagnose. There's an SLP practice that now does exclusively OG tutoring around here that will run a CTOPP, the DAR, and write a brief letter saying yes it's dyslexia. That's enough for our local ps (who are really kind of cantankerous sometimes) to go forward and get on board using that as evidence that they need to eval. So SLPs *can* diagnose if they feel that's in their realm. Most however are not OG certified, are not doing literacy, are not any of that and really wouldn't go there. And it's not a substitute for psych evals and not a replacement for the paper trail you need from a psych. All the other doors open with that psych eval. It's just the great irony that some SLPs are doing more that is actually actionable and sniffing out what needs to happen. So if you go to a neuropsych they're a lot o psych with some screening for SLP issues, etc. You go to an SLP you get a lot of SLP. 

16 minutes ago, Jennifer said:

Does anyone know if HSA funds can be used for testing? Is all this considered medical or solely educational?

Yes. Well pull up the lists for what is considered medical (our guy usually gives us a list), but yes we paid with ours. Definitely always the SLP. And you should be able to do the neuropsych too.

24 minutes ago, Jennifer said:

 

Re-reading and had a question about this . . . you're saying I can integrate it into Barton 1 with BOTH kids? Not just my daughter because she passed the pretest, but with both just because it can be done that way. Do I understand that right? 

Barton says to do LIPS *first*. I'm saying it's flexible, a methodology, and you can use it the way you want. If you want to teach them together, fine. If you want to jump ahead into Barton with her and just integrate the LIPS tools in, fine. There's no contradiction and they flow nicely. I integrated them all the way through Barton 1 and 2 because I had too. It's just more tools, more manips, more analysis, more multisensory. 

29 minutes ago, Jennifer said:

I'm going to schedule fresh testing at the dev opt, and that includes testing for retained reflexes. 

Perfect

34 minutes ago, Jennifer said:

 

Ok, so on my immediate list is to get LiPS. Let me clarify my thinking on Barton . . . . is it a given at this point that I will need to do Barton with at least one child, regardless of the SLP evals or other testing? If so, I may go ahead and order Level 1 (not to use any of this before getting the baseline stuff, but so I can begin reviewing it myself). Or, should I hold off on that?

Hmm, scenarios where you DON'T use Barton with these kids? If you hire a tutor ($$, but still an option) or decide to get OG trained, those might be reasons. Otherwise, yeah pretty much Barton is what you're looking at. How far out is the SLP eval? If it's far, I think it will kill you to have it and not use it, lol. 

[PeterPan]

37 minutes ago, Jennifer said:

I need the manual and the mouth pictures, not the complete kit. Is this correct?

yes

37 minutes ago, Jennifer said:

she was too young.

yup. Most want to see them 7+. ABLE Kids has an eval they'll do younger, but that's CO and a haul for most people. It's actually really worth it for some people. I would get your reflexes integrated and give it 6 months to pan out before you decide to do that, kwim? That's a pretty big step. I took my dd and she wears a filter. 

[Jentrovert]

Gotcha, ok. And yeah, I'll see how far out the SLP eval will be before getting Barton. 😁 

[Storygirl]

Check with your insurance regarding what they will pay for. Our plan (Blue Cross Blue Shield) will not cover educational testing for dyslexia and other LDs. Because it can be done for free through the public schools. But they will cover testing for things such as ADHD and sometimes autism or other developmental issues that can affect learning. Every insurance plan has different guidelines, so you will need to see. We've had three kids tested by neuropsychs using the same insurance, and what they have covered has varied, since my kids' needs are varied.

Some providers don't take insurance but will give you the information that you need to submit the bill to the insurance company yourself for reimbursement. We are doing that ourselves this summer, because we are using an out of network psych for some evaluations.

As for a health savings plan -- it's possible, and the provider should know.

I agree that $500 is a good deal. Our psych evaluations have been close to $2000.

[ktgrok]

On 6/14/2019 at 8:44 AM, Mainer said:

That's what I thought, I just wish there was more specifically for orthographic processing. Some of my students have an unusual presentation of average phonological skills, with super low orthographic memory. Guess we just keep the nose to the grindstone 🙂

From reading your other posts, I am wondering if she is as good at phonological stuff as you think, or has just figure out ways to get around her weak phonological skills (like hand on the mouth, watching your mouth, etc - using visual, not auditory input). Either way, the constant DOING of the phonological skills is what rewires the brain, and that's what drives the orthographic memory. For us, that meant first Barton for level 1 and part of 2 I think, and then Abecedarian (more efficient, less expensive, worked for her but only after Barton)

On 6/14/2019 at 12:25 PM, Jentrovert said:

 

 

 

I've been wondering, what exactly is the difference in Barton and something like we currently use (LOE)? I'm not at all resistant to using Barton, just curious. I have a hard time imagining it being MORE explicit . . . on the other hand, there have been many times I've added additional explaining or made things even more incremental in LOE, so maybe I can see it. Or is it more the WAY it's presented? The pace? 

It is so different....it is explicit in breaking words down over and over and over again, it focuses on that in a way that LOE or AAR don't. We did both LOE and AAR and she still couldn't read. After Barton 1 and 3 levels of Abecedarian she was basically at grade level. 

On 6/14/2019 at 1:41 PM, Lecka said:

I have an opinion about that article about orthographic.

I think that if you can’t read phonologically yet, then it makes sense to not be able to read orthgraphically either.

So if you are still in the process of remediation — you are still in the process of remediation.

These numbers do change with remediation.

 

Yup. 

[ktgrok]

This may help 

 

[Jentrovert]

On 6/27/2019 at 11:18 PM, Ktgrok said:

From reading your other posts, I am wondering if she is as good at phonological stuff as you think, or has just figure out ways to get around her weak phonological skills (like hand on the mouth, watching your mouth, etc - using visual, not auditory input). Either way, the constant DOING of the phonological skills is what rewires the brain, and that's what drives the orthographic memory. For us, that meant first Barton for level 1 and part of 2 I think, and then Abecedarian (more efficient, less expensive, worked for her but only after Barton)

It is so different....it is explicit in breaking words down over and over and over again, it focuses on that in a way that LOE or AAR don't. We did both LOE and AAR and she still couldn't read. After Barton 1 and 3 levels of Abecedarian she was basically at grade level. 

Yup. 

Thank you, this makes sense. I've actually been thinking this (that she's not really as good at phonological skills as it seems). I think that up until now, she's been able to mask it really well, but now that things are amping up the deficits are becoming more clear. Also, up until recently I think her interest has been enough to propel her through hard things. But now it's a level of difficulty for her where the interest isn't enough/worth it.

We had the testing at the dev opt this week, will get results later this month. And the testing with the SLP is later this month as well. 

Thank you all again. I will either update or start a new thread when I have some test results. 

[Jentrovert]

We had the testing with the SLP this week. She will score the tests and provide a full report, which she'll go over with me in a couple weeks. I'll no doubt have questions after that. For now, about reading, she did say that she thinks dd will score as dyslexic. I was surprised by a couple things, though:

She does NOT recommend Barton. She recommends AAR and AAS for dyslexia. She said she finds Barton "weak" (she said this when talking about explicit phonics rules). Also she doesn't recommend LiPs, because it is difficult to implement. This is not so surprising.

I had pretty much settled in my mind what we were going to do, and now I'm unsettled. 🤔 She sees lots of kids and is very familiar and at ease with homeschool families. Should I wait for the full report to see what else may influence my decision? What do you think about what she said re Barton?

[PeterPan]

2 hours ago, Jentrovert said:

She does NOT recommend Barton. She recommends AAR and AAS for dyslexia. She said she finds Barton "weak" (she said this when talking about explicit phonics rules). Also she doesn't recommend LiPs, because it is difficult to implement. This is not so surprising.

Sigh, this woman is a bear of very little brains. LIPS is NOT hard to implement, and an SLP ought to be able to. It was written by SLPs for SLPs. So that tells you right away she's not one to grapple with hard things. Is she OG-trained? I think that's the other thing she's showing, that she wants highly scripted, doesn't want to grapple with the conceptual. LIPS is conceptual and OG is conceptual. You wrap your brain around it and do custom instruction to fit the needs of the student. She's leaning toward fully scripted, inexpensive, open and go programs.

So the author of AAR/AAS is a fine lady. She's a prof of reading at a college or university somewhere, isn't she? I guess look it up and see. Her program is solid, thorough, and appropriate for the intended audience. It's bringing OG clarity to the mainstream market. BECAUSE it has solid foundations, it's working for a lot of people in a lot of situations. Because it's not a tier 3 intervention and not a conceptual product, it's not going to fit ALL situations. But if you're just asking whether it's solid, yes, whether the content is good for many people, yes. In general, AAR is a pretty slow level of presentation for some kids who are going to be faster to learn to read and not a high enough level of intervention for the most struggling.

I own AAS1-6. (7 wasn't out when I bought in and used it with my dd after VT.) I kept the levels and like them, still have them, have dabbled in them with my ds. So having that good track record, I bought AAR pre to try with my ds. The author generously offered it to me for feedback, knowing my use was a little unusual (moderate to severe verbal apraxia), but I had already purchased. I found that AAR pre did not begin to have the level of instruction my ds needed in order to gain phonemic awareness and phonological processing. It had significant flaws for a student with his level of disability (unfamiliar words, insufficient ways to work on tasks, not multi-sensory instruction, on and on), and it was clear that my ds was NOT it's intended audience. I went over to therapy level products (LIPS, etc) and have never looked back.

It's not a question of whether something is good, only whether the instruction is at the tier of intervention your dc requires. In the ps interventions are labeled with tiers. So my understanding is Barton is labeled by some states as a tier 3 intervention. It functions as a tier 3 intervention. You would be extreme overkill to use with a typically developing dc and it goes at things extremely carefully, no step left to inferences, small small steps at every point. It's not slowing down a harder program but making visual and working on more ways the teeniest, tiniest steps. THAT fit my ds. 

Barton was not a perfect fit for my ds. I had to leave out sections he was not developmentally ready for, add in our speech therapy methodology for his praxis, bringing in LIPS for the first several levels, adding way more multisensory that Barton specifies, on and on. If you ask OG trained SLPs, they're going to say that's an obvious sign to use OG. It's true, but I didn't have time for training and didn't have time to do custom work. Barton got me a lot of the way there, and you'll find SLPs and tutors who are OG-trained who use it precisely for that reason. So I AGREE with the criticisms of Barton (that it doesn't hit reading comprehension, isn't an extremely flexible tool for the most complex situations, etc.), but still we made it work. My ds reads BEAUTIFULLY and was testing at a 6th grade level when he finished 1st grade. I had him checked by a reading tutor (because he would not read), and it BLEW HER MIND.

So. You are an intelligent woman. You need to go with your gut and your assessment. If you look at the samples of AAR, which is a really nice bringing of OG to the masses, and you're like oh yeah that would be fine!, then do it, kwim? There are a few people here with kids diagnosed dyslexic who have done fine with it. But recognize that it is NOT a tier 3 instruction and that it is not equivalent to Barton, OG, Wilson, or a similar level of intervention. If it works for you, that's all that matters. If you try it because of the crowd, not because it makes sense to you as being the logical choice, that doesn't make sense. If you buy it for an older dc (I forget, how old is this dc?) and you lose even 3 months, it's heartbreaking. 

AAR is going to have some advantages as far as charm. For a very young dc with no language issues who can possibly read the readers and enjoy them, it could be really charming! My ds couldn't even get out of the box with it. It's not like Barton is some logical fit in that sense. Barton is aimed at about 3rd/4th and up. I was using it in K5/1st, so think about that. We made it work, and my ds had this crazy vocabulary to where it could work. My ds would not have liked the charming little readers of AAR. Those details matter too.

So let me review your situation and previous posts. I think you are a highly intelligent person who is ready to use materials that are more advanced, more conceptual. I think you should not be afraid to do this, because using these more flexible materials will make you a more flexible instructor. I came to Barton with 10 years of SWR/WRTR/AAS experience, having taught through all the levels. I had my brain wrapped around the basics, so it was a small leap. I'm a pretty flexible teacher because of that. But you have a learning curve, so learning the approach with a tier 3 intervention can be a good strategy. Getting OG training or Wilson can be a good strategy. The MORE YOU KNOW, the better you're going to do at this. 

Backing up here. You already used LOE?? It's not enough different from AAS/AAR. It is, but it's not. The LOE chick was an SWR trainer before she went out on her own. So I'm just saying you're making a lateral slide there if you're not careful. It's been a while since I looked at them, but that's what I would be asking and looking for. And they're 6/7? I can see why she's suggesting AAR. Developmentally it's a charming choice. If it works, it's a charming choice. And if it leaves them feeling like it's hard, like it's still frustrating, then you're back to where you started looking at Barton or OG/Wilson training, only having lost a year and discouraging them.

Have you looked at the samples for AAR? It would be a very different feel. A Barton lesson is lots and lots of phonological processing. There's no attempt at being cute with little worksheets and puppies and skunks. It's just gonna go in, work with those tiles, and get the kid reading. 

I had a neuropsych slam me up and down, saying parents shouldn't teach dyslexics to read. Really rattled me, and finally Heathermomster here is like hello, it's not fun, it's gonna be UGLY, and some people don't have the stomach for it. Now AAR tries to make it all pretty and charming, and that's terrific if it works. If it were going to work, you would have already tried it. This intervention is HARD WORK, rocket science. My ds reads GREAT now, and the only thing I take consolation is that HE DOESN'T REMEMBER, hahaha. We did it in little 10-15 minute bursts, over and over and over, 1 1/2-2 hours a day. I wanted him IQ appropriate (for his age), and that was the only way to get him there. I wasn't there to be nice or let it take 5 years.

Roll with your gut. Look at the samples. It's ok to make mistakes. If you OWN Barton (did you order it?), just pick it up and use it. Look into OG/Wilson training. In reality, that's how your brain functions. Or at least that's my take based on these posts. If you could snag a training, then you'd know what you want and have the skill to use it.

Edited July 25, 2019 by PeterPan

[Jentrovert]

2 hours ago, PeterPan said:

Sigh, this woman is a bear of very little brains. LIPS is NOT hard to implement, and an SLP ought to be able to. It was written by SLPs for SLPs. So that tells you right away she's not one to grapple with hard things. Is she OG-trained? I think that's the other thing she's showing, that she wants highly scripted, doesn't want to grapple with the conceptual. LIPS is conceptual and OG is conceptual. You wrap your brain around it and do custom instruction to fit the needs of the student. She's leaning toward fully scripted, inexpensive, open and go programs.

Yes, I think she was saying that for homeschool families it should be easy and scripted. I don't mind unscripted, though. I've been adapting the script on both LOE and RS and it's been fine. But she was also saying that AAR is written specifically for dyslexics. 

So the author of AAR/AAS is a fine lady. She's a prof of reading at a college or university somewhere, isn't she? I guess look it up and see. Her program is solid, thorough, and appropriate for the intended audience. It's bringing OG clarity to the mainstream market. BECAUSE it has solid foundations, it's working for a lot of people in a lot of situations. Because it's not a tier 3 intervention and not a conceptual product, it's not going to fit ALL situations. But if you're just asking whether it's solid, yes, whether the content is good for many people, yes. In general, AAR is a pretty slow level of presentation for some kids who are going to be faster to learn to read and not a high enough level of intervention for the most struggling.

I own AAS1-6. (7 wasn't out when I bought in and used it with my dd after VT.) I kept the levels and like them, still have them, have dabbled in them with my ds. So having that good track record, I bought AAR pre to try with my ds. The author generously offered it to me for feedback, knowing my use was a little unusual (moderate to severe verbal apraxia), but I had already purchased. I found that AAR pre did not begin to have the level of instruction my ds needed in order to gain phonemic awareness and phonological processing. It had significant flaws for a student with his level of disability (unfamiliar words, insufficient ways to work on tasks, not multi-sensory instruction, on and on), and it was clear that my ds was NOT it's intended audience. I went over to therapy level products (LIPS, etc) and have never looked back.

It's not a question of whether something is good, only whether the instruction is at the tier of intervention your dc requires. In the ps interventions are labeled with tiers. So my understanding is Barton is labeled by some states as a tier 3 intervention. It functions as a tier 3 intervention. You would be extreme overkill to use with a typically developing dc and it goes at things extremely carefully, no step left to inferences, small small steps at every point. It's not slowing down a harder program but making visual and working on more ways the teeniest, tiniest steps. THAT fit my ds. 

Right, and I feel like I've already been slowing down a program, with LOE.

Barton was not a perfect fit for my ds. I had to leave out sections he was not developmentally ready for, add in our speech therapy methodology for his praxis, bringing in LIPS for the first several levels, adding way more multisensory that Barton specifies, on and on. If you ask OG trained SLPs, they're going to say that's an obvious sign to use OG. It's true, but I didn't have time for training and didn't have time to do custom work. Barton got me a lot of the way there, and you'll find SLPs and tutors who are OG-trained who use it precisely for that reason. So I AGREE with the criticisms of Barton (that it doesn't hit reading comprehension, isn't an extremely flexible tool for the most complex situations, etc.), but still we made it work. My ds reads BEAUTIFULLY and was testing at a 6th grade level when he finished 1st grade. I had him checked by a reading tutor (because he would not read), and it BLEW HER MIND.

So. You are an intelligent woman. You need to go with your gut and your assessment. If you look at the samples of AAR, which is a really nice bringing of OG to the masses, and you're like oh yeah that would be fine!, then do it, kwim? There are a few people here with kids diagnosed dyslexic who have done fine with it. But recognize that it is NOT a tier 3 instruction and that it is not equivalent to Barton, OG, Wilson, or a similar level of intervention. If it works for you, that's all that matters. If you try it because of the crowd, not because it makes sense to you as being the logical choice, that doesn't make sense. If you buy it for an older dc (I forget, how old is this dc?) and you lose even 3 months, it's heartbreaking. 

AAR is going to have some advantages as far as charm. For a very young dc with no language issues who can possibly read the readers and enjoy them, it could be really charming! My ds couldn't even get out of the box with it. It's not like Barton is some logical fit in that sense. Barton is aimed at about 3rd/4th and up. I was using it in K5/1st, so think about that. We made it work, and my ds had this crazy vocabulary to where it could work. My ds would not have liked the charming little readers of AAR. Those details matter too.

So let me review your situation and previous posts. I think you are a highly intelligent person who is ready to use materials that are more advanced, more conceptual. I think you should not be afraid to do this, because using these more flexible materials will make you a more flexible instructor. I came to Barton with 10 years of SWR/WRTR/AAS experience, having taught through all the levels. I had my brain wrapped around the basics, so it was a small leap. I'm a pretty flexible teacher because of that. But you have a learning curve, so learning the approach with a tier 3 intervention can be a good strategy. Getting OG training or Wilson can be a good strategy. The MORE YOU KNOW, the better you're going to do at this. 

Backing up here. You already used LOE?? It's not enough different from AAS/AAR. It is, but it's not. The LOE chick was an SWR trainer before she went out on her own. So I'm just saying you're making a lateral slide there if you're not careful. It's been a while since I looked at them, but that's what I would be asking and looking for. And they're 6/7? I can see why she's suggesting AAR. Developmentally it's a charming choice. If it works, it's a charming choice. And if it leaves them feeling like it's hard, like it's still frustrating, then you're back to where you started looking at Barton or OG/Wilson training, only having lost a year and discouraging them.

Have you looked at the samples for AAR? It would be a very different feel. A Barton lesson is lots and lots of phonological processing. There's no attempt at being cute with little worksheets and puppies and skunks. It's just gonna go in, work with those tiles, and get the kid reading. 

Yeah, they're in 1st and 2nd this school year. Dd is 2nd, and she's been through LOE Foundations A, B, and part of C. I looked at the samples and, while I think they'd both like the cutesy stuff, it just doesn't look all that different from what we've been doing. It does look a bit slower. But I've been slowing down LOE, so I don't think that will change much. And I can always add games and stuff in, I don't have to have that scripted.

I had a neuropsych slam me up and down, saying parents shouldn't teach dyslexics to read. Really rattled me, and finally Heathermomster here is like hello, it's not fun, it's gonna be UGLY, and some people don't have the stomach for it. Now AAR tries to make it all pretty and charming, and that's terrific if it works. If it were going to work, you would have already tried it. This intervention is HARD WORK, rocket science. My ds reads GREAT now, and the only thing I take consolation is that HE DOESN'T REMEMBER, hahaha. We did it in little 10-15 minute bursts, over and over and over, 1 1/2-2 hours a day. I wanted him IQ appropriate (for his age), and that was the only way to get him there. I wasn't there to be nice or let it take 5 years.

Roll with your gut. Look at the samples. It's ok to make mistakes. If you OWN Barton (did you order it?), just pick it up and use it. Look into OG/Wilson training. In reality, that's how your brain functions. Or at least that's my take based on these posts. If you could snag a training, then you'd know what you want and have the skill to use it.

No, I didn't yet order Barton. I had pretty much set in my mind that is the direction we are going . . . I think I'm just rattled, like you said, and second guessing things. Haha DD isn't currently behind grade level in decoding (fluency should be better) so while I'm not crunched for time, it also would be nice to take advantage of catching it relatively early and not get too behind. I'm concerned that choosing AAR will be like you said, a lateral move, and months later we'll be in the same place.

[PeterPan]

Remind me, did she pass the Barton screening? 

Sometimes what happens, when you get a really explicit program with a dc who is sorta there and sorta not right, is the really explicit instruction fills in holes you didn't know were there. Barton is that nitpicky and can find holes on people. You might also really like OG training.

Apparently Rippel's ds was diagnosed dyslexic at 9, but the timeline on what she actually used of what is published now is unclear to me. She released AAR years after her AAS levels, iirc. 

[Kanin]

6 hours ago, Jentrovert said:

Also she doesn't recommend LiPs, because it is difficult to implement.

LiPS isn't difficult to implement. You'll have to spend a couple hours reading (and re-reading!) the first few lessons of the manual, but it's really not hard. Even if you don't do it perfectly (I certainly don't!), it's so worthwhile. 

[Jentrovert]

33 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

Remind me, did she pass the Barton screening? 

Sometimes what happens, when you get a really explicit program with a dc who is sorta there and sorta not right, is the really explicit instruction fills in holes you didn't know were there. Barton is that nitpicky and can find holes on people. You might also really like OG training.

Apparently Rippel's ds was diagnosed dyslexic at 9, but the timeline on what she actually used of what is published now is unclear to me. She released AAR years after her AAS levels, iirc. 

Yes, she did pass the Barton screening (my ds6 did not).

[Kanin]

1 hour ago, Jentrovert said:

Yes, I think she was saying that for homeschool families it should be easy and scripted.

Maybe for some families, but not for all. It bugs me that people think easy and scripted is the way to go... because like PeterPan said, it's HARD WORK. There is just no way that reading remediation is going to be open and go, smooth sailing, no effort. That's just not the way it goes. I really enjoy teaching decoding (and LiPS), I find it really fun and an intellectual challenge. If I had no interest in it, that would be a different story. But if you'd like to learn, and you think it'll be interesting.. go for it!  🙂 

[Jentrovert]

2 minutes ago, Mainer said:

LiPS isn't difficult to implement. You'll have to spend a couple hours reading (and re-reading!) the first few lessons of the manual, but it's really not hard. Even if you don't do it perfectly (I certainly don't!), it's so worthwhile. 

I actually love stuff like this. I can't even tell you the curric I have purchased (used, at least) just to read it. 😅 I think probably that's in the minority, though, and the majority of homeschool families she's dealt with wouldn't be able to implement it easily. 

[kbutton]

8 hours ago, Jentrovert said:

We had the testing with the SLP this week. She will score the tests and provide a full report, which she'll go over with me in a couple weeks. I'll no doubt have questions after that. For now, about reading, she did say that she thinks dd will score as dyslexic. I was surprised by a couple things, though:

She does NOT recommend Barton. She recommends AAR and AAS for dyslexia. She said she finds Barton "weak" (she said this when talking about explicit phonics rules). Also she doesn't recommend LiPs, because it is difficult to implement. This is not so surprising.

I had pretty much settled in my mind what we were going to do, and now I'm unsettled. 🤔 She sees lots of kids and is very familiar and at ease with homeschool families. Should I wait for the full report to see what else may influence my decision? What do you think about what she said re Barton?

Is she implementing whatever program you decide on? If not, then I can see where she might find that Barton or something else doesn't go well with families. Some people are not as intuitive on picking up stuff and using it, or they might not be able to judge whether it's working or not. There are some things I know are "not hard" for someone else, but are rocket science for me. Other things that people find hard, I sometimes find are easy. If she has had clients that used Barton and didn't do a good job, she might be left with a bad impression of Barton. (Like teachers who judge homeschoolers as not doing a good job when a child who has lots of issues shows up in school a little behind--sometimes it's that the kid is going to be behind developmentally, not that the mom didn't teach well. I had to point this out to a teacher one time, lol! She hadn't really thought about it that way.)

1 hour ago, Mainer said:

Maybe for some families, but not for all. It bugs me that people think easy and scripted is the way to go... because like PeterPan said, it's HARD WORK. There is just no way that reading remediation is going to be open and go, smooth sailing, no effort. That's just not the way it goes. I really enjoy teaching decoding (and LiPS), I find it really fun and an intellectual challenge. If I had no interest in it, that would be a different story. But if you'd like to learn, and you think it'll be interesting.. go for it!  🙂 

I have found that my particular children make scripted stuff super hard to implement. They don't think the way the script goes, ever, lol! Instead of wading through facts and presenting it myself, I have to "unscript" all the facts or highlight them or something, and I have to pay more attention to fiddling with the material than teaching the child. 

1 hour ago, Jentrovert said:

I actually love stuff like this. I can't even tell you the curric I have purchased (used, at least) just to read it. 😅 I think probably that's in the minority, though, and the majority of homeschool families she's dealt with wouldn't be able to implement it easily. 

You're likely right.

[Jentrovert]

2 minutes ago, kbutton said:

Is she implementing whatever program you decide on? If not, then I can see where she might find that Barton or something else doesn't go well with families. Some people are not as intuitive on picking up stuff and using it, or they might not be able to judge whether it's working or not. There are some things I know are "not hard" for someone else, but are rocket science for me. Other things that people find hard, I sometimes find are easy. If she has had clients that used Barton and didn't do a good job, she might be left with a bad impression of Barton. (Like teachers who judge homeschoolers as not doing a good job when a child who has lots of issues shows up in school a little behind--sometimes it's that the kid is going to be behind developmentally, not that the mom didn't teach well. I had to point this out to a teacher one time, lol! She hadn't really thought about it that way.)

I have found that my particular children make scripted stuff super hard to implement. They don't think the way the script goes, ever, lol! Instead of wading through facts and presenting it myself, I have to "unscript" all the facts or highlight them or something, and I have to pay more attention to fiddling with the material than teaching the child. 

You're likely right.

No, she won't be implementing it. I will. You're right, part of her opinion may be from past experience with families not implementing Barton well.

[kbutton]

5 hours ago, PeterPan said:

Roll with your gut. Look at the samples. It's ok to make mistakes. If you OWN Barton (did you order it?), just pick it up and use it. Look into OG/Wilson training. In reality, that's how your brain functions. Or at least that's my take based on these posts. If you could snag a training, then you'd know what you want and have the skill to use it.

Definitely!

 

[Jentrovert]

My husband and I talked through it tonight. My gut says, after looking at the samples and re-reading this thread full of advice, that AAR wouldn't be enough different to risk wasting the time with it. He supports whatever I decide and after hearing the details agrees with me. So I ordered Level 1 and LiPs. I'm relieved to have this decision made and looking forward to starting. Still looking forward to the full report from the SLP too. 

Thank you all again, I'll update as things move along. Your advice has been invaluable--it means a lot to hear it from parents who have been there.

[Kanin]

17 hours ago, Jentrovert said:

I actually love stuff like this. I can't even tell you the curric I have purchased (used, at least) just to read it. 😅 I think probably that's in the minority, though, and the majority of homeschool families she's dealt with wouldn't be able to implement it easily. 

That's awesome. Nerds for the win! 😎

[Kanin]

16 hours ago, kbutton said:

I have found that my particular children make scripted stuff super hard to implement. They don't think the way the script goes, ever, lol!

Yeah! You're right, that does make scripting super hard! You then have to think about script vs. reality. I think it's often better to have a general description of what should happen in a lesson, and what the important aspects are. Teachers can then go from there 🙂 

[PeterPan]

When you ordered your Barton, did you order extra tiles? You don't necessarily need extra of the colored tiles, but always order extras on the letter tiles. The sets accumulate with each level, so if you don't order extra, you won't have a set to include when you sell. I guess you can order the spares for 1 when you order level 2. Barton is in CA, so if you call or email, you can probably get them added. With two kids, you might even like to order two extra sets. That way both kids have their own sets *and* you have a set to sell.

So you ordered LIPS too? Good stuff! LIPS was very powerful here, and it's not overkill to weave it into Barton 1/2 with the dc who passed or do it anyway just for good measure. Super powerful, because it's giving you so many more ways to interact with the sounds and the production (touch it, see it, move it, etc.). Do you happen to have sandpaper letters or a sand tray? 

         Didax Dd-210829 Tactile Sandpaper Lowercase Letters       These have gone up a little from when I bought them 5 years ago, but they're terrific, well worth it. You can pair them with your lIPS and Barton manipulatives. Also have a baking sheet or roasting pan and fill it with some salt. I think Barton has a list of multi-sensory ways to work on writing and sounds. More is more better on this, not overkill. So we would trace the sandpaper letter while saying the sound, write it in the air, write it on backs, match it to the face (LIPS), go from the face to colored tiles, go from colored tiles to letter magnets.

Classroom Magnetic Letters Kit  If you sign up for Lakeshore Learning's text coupons, they do BOGO and % off all the time, all the time. This is the best time of year to go dump money at Lakeshore. 

And it's not that you HAVE to have letter magnets and sandpaper. It just fit where my ds was. Barton really is aimed at 3rd/4th to adult, not little kids. No charm, no sandpaper letters, no crafts, nothing. So if you look at things and think they fit the ages of your dc well, bring them in, kwim? 

We did all our work on a 17X21(ish) whiteboard. You can find them at Walmart, Target, whatever right now. The brand used to be Board Dudes, but now it might say Uline or something. The size can hold your whole LIPS work, short sentences, math dictation, anything, and fit in front of you. Quartet 17" X 23" Magnetic Dry - Erase Board White Finish Frame  Something like that. It's saying not in stores this year, hmph. 

Well you go! You're gonna rock this! There are pros and cons to everything. Oh, did she (Barton) send you the link yet to start watching the videos? For real, she will! So you'll have a wait for your materials, but you can get started watching, learning. Have fun! And if you are reading and watching and wondering if something would work, it probably would. Don't doubt your judgment on this. 

[PeterPan]

12 minutes ago, Mainer said:

Yeah! You're right, that does make scripting super hard! You then have to think about script vs. reality. I think it's often better to have a general description of what should happen in a lesson, and what the important aspects are. Teachers can then go from there 🙂 

Barton has two levels of scripting, with a fully scripted main text and outlines in the sidebars, so it's not hard to use at the level of structure that works for you. I usually would prescreen the lesson and make it work, jumping between the full text for parts and the sidebars for others, because we were modifying and bring in LIPS methodology all the way, through every lesson, through all of Barton 1 and 2.

[Jentrovert]

25 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

When you ordered your Barton, did you order extra tiles? You don't necessarily need extra of the colored tiles, but always order extras on the letter tiles. The sets accumulate with each level, so if you don't order extra, you won't have a set to include when you sell. I guess you can order the spares for 1 when you order level 2. Barton is in CA, so if you call or email, you can probably get them added. With two kids, you might even like to order two extra sets. That way both kids have their own sets *and* you have a set to sell.

So you ordered LIPS too? Good stuff! LIPS was very powerful here, and it's not overkill to weave it into Barton 1/2 with the dc who passed or do it anyway just for good measure. Super powerful, because it's giving you so many more ways to interact with the sounds and the production (touch it, see it, move it, etc.). Do you happen to have sandpaper letters or a sand tray? 

         Didax Dd-210829 Tactile Sandpaper Lowercase Letters       These have gone up a little from when I bought them 5 years ago, but they're terrific, well worth it. You can pair them with your lIPS and Barton manipulatives. Also have a baking sheet or roasting pan and fill it with some salt. I think Barton has a list of multi-sensory ways to work on writing and sounds. More is more better on this, not overkill. So we would trace the sandpaper letter while saying the sound, write it in the air, write it on backs, match it to the face (LIPS), go from the face to colored tiles, go from colored tiles to letter magnets.

Classroom Magnetic Letters Kit  If you sign up for Lakeshore Learning's text coupons, they do BOGO and % off all the time, all the time. This is the best time of year to go dump money at Lakeshore. 

And it's not that you HAVE to have letter magnets and sandpaper. It just fit where my ds was. Barton really is aimed at 3rd/4th to adult, not little kids. No charm, no sandpaper letters, no crafts, nothing. So if you look at things and think they fit the ages of your dc well, bring them in, kwim? 

We did all our work on a 17X21(ish) whiteboard. You can find them at Walmart, Target, whatever right now. The brand used to be Board Dudes, but now it might say Uline or something. The size can hold your whole LIPS work, short sentences, math dictation, anything, and fit in front of you. Quartet 17" X 23" Magnetic Dry - Erase Board White Finish Frame  Something like that. It's saying not in stores this year, hmph. 

Well you go! You're gonna rock this! There are pros and cons to everything. Oh, did she (Barton) send you the link yet to start watching the videos? For real, she will! So you'll have a wait for your materials, but you can get started watching, learning. Have fun! And if you are reading and watching and wondering if something would work, it probably would. Don't doubt your judgment on this. 

Yep, I ordered 2 extra sets of tiles. We do already have the sandpaper letters and a sand tray. Whiteboard, too. And the kids do love stuff like that, so I'll just add cute stuff to Barton. (Can I just give a big <sigh> here, because that stuff tends to try my patience. They love it though. LOL)

I haven't yet gotten the link to the videos. Watching for that this morning. 🙂

[Jentrovert]

Just received LiPs today. I'm only a few pages in, and simply cannot understand why the SLP would recommend against this! It's like some of the LOE stuff we did, only a zillion times more explicit. (The stuff that is probably part of why my dd has the phonological awareness she does have.) Difficult to implement? I'm just not seeing that.?! This will be SO GOOD for both dd and ds!

[PeterPan]

Now there are parents who aren't comfortable with it or want more scripting, which is why some Barton users wrote FIS. But just in general, yes, it's a simple, elegant tool that can fit the most challenging applications. 

You might find it fun to see the pics of how I used it with ds. :)  

 

[Jentrovert]

Oh, fun! Such a good idea incorporating legos too. My ds is beside me and saw the pics; he's already intrigued.

[PeterPan]

Lego or anything could work. They were playmobil people. So the pirate was saying all the /r/-controlled syllables, hehe, and the little boy was an orphan, like the orphaned letters/sounds that didn't really have a spot.

In other words, you'll just evolve and build it as you go. That's just what I did. I also made my own silly names for the speech production patterns. It's ok to play with it and have a little fun.