# data[].attributes.body
Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language, which is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems with reading comprehension and reduced reading experience that can impede the growth of vocabulary and background knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
Seven Facts about Dyslexia

1. Neurological Basis: Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that has a neurological basis, affecting the way the brain processes written and spoken.

2. Prevalence: Dyslexia affects about 10-15% of the population, with varying degrees of severity.

3. Intelligence: Dyslexia is not related to intelligence. Many people with dyslexia are of average or above-average intelligence.

4. Early Intervention: Early diagnosis and intervention can significantly improve reading skills and overall academic performance.

5. Multi-sensory Teaching: Approaches that engage multiple senses (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) are particularly effective in teaching individuals with dyslexia

6. Common Signs: Difficulties with phonemic awareness, word recognition, spelling, and reading fluency are common indicators of dyslexia.

7. Comorbidity: Dyslexia often coexists with other learning difficulties, such as ADHD or dysgraphia (a neurological condition and learning difference in which someone has difficulty with writing for their age level).

Seven Myths about Dyslexia

1. Reversing letters: A common myth (one that I have personally thought was the very definition of what dyslexia is) about Dyslexia is simply about reversing letters or reading backwards. While letter reversals can occur, they are not the primary symptom of dyslexia.

2. Laziness: Some believe that children with dyslexia are lazy or not trying hard enough. In reality, these children often work harder than their peers but struggle due to their learning disability.

3. Outgrown: Dyslexia does not go away with age. While individuals can learn strategies to manage their difficulties, dyslexia is a lifelong condition.

4. Visual Problem: Dyslexia is not a visual problem but a language-based learning disability. It involves difficulties with processing language sounds and linking them to letters and words.

5. Gender Bias: Another myth is that dyslexia affects more boys than girls. Research indicates that dyslexia affects both genders equally, though boys are more frequently diagnosed.

6. Lack of Interest in Reading: People with dyslexia often avoid reading because it's difficult for them, not because they are uninterested.

7. Inability to Learn: Individuals with dyslexia can learn to read and write with appropriate interventions and support. They may require different teaching methods but are capable of learning effectively.

Understanding these facts and dispelling the myths is crucial for supporting individuals with dyslexia and fostering a more inclusive and informed educational environment.

# data[].attributes.body
A 504 Plan, provided under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, is designed to ensure that students with disabilities have equal access to education. This plan is particularly suitable for students with dyslexia, as it focuses on providing accommodations that help them participate in general education programs. To be eligible for a 504 plan, a student must have a documented disability that substantially limits one for more major life activities, including learning and reading. The accommodations offered under a 504 Plan might include extended time on tests, preferential seating, use of audio books, or assistive technology The process to implement a 504 Plan is generally less formal and quicker than an IEP, involving a meeting with parents, teachers, and school staff. These plans are reviewed periodically, typically on an annual basis, but can be updated as necessary to reflect the student's progress and changing needs. Importantly, the 504 Plan does not provide specialized instruction but rather accommodations to help the student access the general education curriculum.

In contrast, an Individualized Education Program (IEP), provided under IDEA, offers a more comprehensive approach tailored to the individual needs of the student. To qualify for an IEP, a formal evaluation must determine that the student has a specific learning disability, such as dyslexia, that impacts their educational performance and necessitates specialized instruction. An IEP includes both accommodations and specialized instruction, which may involve resource room support, specialized reading programs, speech therapy, and other related services. The IEP development process is more formal and involves a team that includes parents, teachers, specials education staff, and sometimes the student. The IEP sets specific, measurable educational goals and outlines how progress will be measured, with these goals being reviewed and updated annually Additionally, a full re-evaluation is conducted every three years to determine continued eligibility and need for services. The IEP ensures the provision of Free Appropriate Public Education in the least restrictive environment, mandating that schools provided the necessary specialized instruction and related services.

The key differences between a 504 Plan and an IEP include the complexity and formality of the process, the provision of specialized instruction, and the extent of legal protections. IEPs are more comprehensive, involving a detailed evaluation and formal plan with specific instructional goals and progress monitoring, whereas 504 Plans primarily provide accommodations to support access to the general education curriculum without specialized instruction. Both plans offer legal protections, but IEPs under IDEA provide more robust services and support the student's unique educational needs. Choosing between a 504 Plan and an IEP depends on the severity of the dyslexia and the specific educational needs of the student.

# data[].attributes.body
Structured literacy is an educational approach designed to support individuals with dyslexia by focusing on explicit, systematic instruction in phonological awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. This method is highly effective because it breaks down the reading and writing process into small, manageable components that can be taught in a logical sequence. Structured literacy emphasizes the direct teaching of the rules and patterns of language, allowing students to understand the structure of words and sentences. This approach helps dyslexic learners develop the foundational skills necessary for reading proficiency, ensuring they can decode words accurately and efficiently.

One of the key benefits of structured literacy for students with dyslexia is its multi-sensory nature. This approach engages multiple senses simultaneously- visual, auditory and kinesthetic- thereby reinforcing learning and aiding memory retention. For instance, students might use letter tiles to spell words, trace letters in sand, or clap out syllables.These activities make abstract language concepts more concrete, helping dyslexic learners to grasp and retain new information more effectively. By engaging different sensory pathways, structured literacy provides a comprehensive learning experience that accommodates the diverse needs of dyslexic students.

Structured literacy also places a strong emphasis on a continuous assessment and individualized instruction. Teachers frequently monitor students' progress and adjust their teaching strategies to meet each learners' unique needs. This ensures that instruction is tailored to address specific challenges faced by students with dyslexia, providing targeted support where it is most needed. Furthermore, structured literacy fosters a positive learning environment by setting clear, attainable goals, and celebrating small achievements. This approach not only improves reading skills but also boosts students' confidence and motivation, empowering them to become successful, independent learners.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Ingvar Kamprad

Ingvar Kamprad, the founder of IKEA, struggled with dyslexia throughout his life. Kamprad's dyslexia influenced ow he designed IKEA's business model and product names. Instead of using traditional product codes, he chose names that were easier for him to remember, such as Swedish names and places. This approach not only helped him manage his dyslexia but also became a distinctive feature of IKEA's brand. Kamprad's innovative thinking and determination transformed IKEA into one of the largest and most successful furniture retailers on the world.

# data[].attributes.body
David Neeleman, the founder of JetBlue Airways, has dyslexia and ADHD. Neelema often struggled with the traditional education system, but he did not let his deter him from pursuing his entrepreneurial ambitions. He used his unique perspective to innovate within the airline industry, focusing on customer service and efficiency. JetBlue became known for its high-quality service, affordable prices, and technological innovations. Neeleman attributes much of his success to his ability to think differently and find creative solutions to problems, a trait he links to his dyslexia.

# data[].attributes.body
Craig McCaw, a pioneer in the cellular phone industry and founder of McCaw Celluar (which later became AT&T Wireless), has dyslexia. Diagnosed at a young age, McCaw faced significant academic challenges. However, he used his entrepreneurial spirit and innovative thinking to revolutionize the telecommunications industry. McCaw's ability to see opportunities where others did not led to the creation of one of the first and most successful cellular networks in the United States. His success in the face of dyslexia underscores the importance of leveraging one's strengths and thinking creatively to overcome obstacles.

# data[].attributes.body
Brain research has shown that people with dyslexia have different brain activity patterns compared to those without the condition. using brain imaging techniques like MRI and PET scans, scientists have found that key areas in the left side of the brain, which are crucial for reading, are under-active in people with dyslexia. These areas are responsible for processing sounds, recognizing words, and linking visual and auditory information.

In addition to these functional difference, structural differences in the brain have also been identified. Techniques like voxel-based morphometry have shown that people with dyslexia may have variations in the volume and connectivity of white matter tracts in the left hemisphere. these white matter tracts help different parts off the brain communicate effectively. If these pathways are less developed, it can lead to slower and less accurate reading abilities, highlighting the neurological basis of dyslexia.

Genetics also play a role. Researchers have found several genes associated with reading and language processing that might contribute to dyslexia. These genes influence how the brain develops and forms connections necessary for reading. This genetic aspect helps explain why dyslexia often runs in families and opens up possibilities for early diagnosis and personalized interventions based on an individual's genetic makeup.

Understanding the brain and genetic basis of dyslexia has important implications for education and treatment. This research is guiding the development of effective teaching methods and interventions that address the root causes of dyslexia. For instance, strategies that improve phonological awareness and decoding skills, along with multi-sensory learning techniques, are proving to be beneficial. Additionally, technology-based tools designed from these scientific insights are helping dyslexic individuals improve their reading skills. As research continues, it holds the promise of even better support and outcomes for people with dyslexia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Definition of Dyslexia - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
“Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share This: `
What is dyslexia?
Dyslexia is a language-based learning disability. Dyslexia refers to a cluster of symptoms, that results in people having difficulties with specific language skills, particularly reading. Students with dyslexia often experience difficulties with both oral and written other language skills, such as writing, and pronouncing words and writing. Dyslexia affects individuals throughout their lives; however, its impact can change at different stages in a person's life. It is referred to as a learning disability because dyslexia can make it very difficult for a student to succeed without phonics-based reading instruction that is unavailable in most public schools.. In its more severe forms, a student with dyslexia may qualify for special education with specially designed instruction, and as appropriate, accommodations.
What causes dyslexia?
The exact causes of dyslexia are still not completely clear, but anatomical and brain imagery studies show differences in the way the brain of a person with dyslexia develops and functions. Moreover, most people with dyslexia have been found to have difficulty with identifying the separate speech sounds within a word and/or learning how letters represent those sounds, a key factor in their reading difficulties. Dyslexia is not due to either lack of intelligence or desire to learn; with appropriate teaching methods, individuals with dyslexia can learn successfully.
What are the effects of dyslexia?
The impact that dyslexia has is different for each person and depends on the severity of the condition and the effectiveness of instruction or remediation. The core difficulty is with reading words and this is related to difficulty with processing and manipulating sounds. Some individuals with dyslexia manage to learn early reading and spelling tasks, especially with excellent instruction, but later experience their most challenging problems when more complex language skills are required, such as grammar, understanding textbook material, and writing essays.

People with dyslexia can also have problems with spoken language, even after they have been exposed to good language models in their homes and good language instruction in school. They may find it difficult to express themselves clearly, or to fully comprehend what others mean when they speak. Such language problems are often difficult to recognize, but they can lead to major problems in school, in the workplace, and in relating to other people. The effects of dyslexia can reach well beyond the classroom.

Dyslexia can also affect a person's self-image. Students with dyslexia often end up feeling less intelligent and less capable than they actually are. After experiencing a great deal of stress due to academic problems, a student may become discouraged about continuing in school.
Are there other learning disabilities besides dyslexia?
Dyslexia is one type of learning disability. Other learning disabilities besides Dyslexia include the following:

Dyscalculia - a mathematical disability in which a person has unusual difficulty solving arithmetic problems and grasping math concepts.

Dysgraphia - a condition of impaired letter writing by hand-disabled handwriting. Impaired handwriting can interfere with learning to spell words in writing and speed of writing text. Children with dysgraphia may have only impaired handwriting, only impaired spelling (without reading problems), or both impaired handwriting and impaired spelling.

Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorders (ADHD) can and do impact learning but they are not learning disabilities. An individual can have more than one learning or behavioral disability. In various studies as many as 50% of those diagnosed with a learning or reading disability have also been diagnosed with ADHD. Although disabilities may co-occur, one is not the cause of the other.

How common are language-based learning disabilities? 15-20% of the population has a language-based learning disability. Of the students with specific learning disabilities receiving special education services, 70-80% have deficits in reading. Dyslexia is the most common cause of reading, writing and spelling difficulties. Dyslexia affects males and females nearly equally as well as, people from different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds nearly equally.

Can individuals who have dyslexia learn to read? Yes. If children who have dyslexia receive effective phonological awareness and phonics training in Kindergarten and 1st grade, they will have significantly fewer problems in learning to read at grade level than do children who are not identified or helped until 3rd grade. 74% of the children who are poor readers in 3rd grade remain poor readers in the 9th grade, many because they do not receive appropriate Structured Literacy instruction with the needed intensity or duration. Often they can't read well as adults either. It is never too late for individuals with dyslexia to learn to read, process, and express information more efficiently. Research shows that programs utilizing Structured Literacy instructional techniques can help children and adults learn to read.
How do people "get" dyslexia?
The causes for dyslexia are neurobiological and genetic. Individuals inherit the genetic links for dyslexia. Chances are that one of the child's parents, grandparents, aunts, or uncles has dyslexia. Dyslexia is not a disease. With proper diagnosis, appropriate instruction, hard work, and support from family, teachers, friends, and others, individuals who have dyslexia can succeed in school and later as working adults.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Frequently Asked Questions - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
504 v IDEA

When dealing with services and accommodations there are two options available for your child while in public education, a Section 504 plan or an Individual Education Plan, or IEP for short.

​

They are two very different yet strikingly similar methods of managing your child's education. There are key things you need to understand regarding their differences so you can make the best decision possible for your child.

​

Section 504 is a part of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act and prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in programs that receive federal financial assistance, i.e. public schools. Like the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act it is a very robust law that governs many aspects of civil rights for the disabled. It is important to note however that it is an accommodations law, not a services law. It is a law that protects a disabled person's rights to equal access to work, school and accessibility standards for life in this country.

​

Under Section 504, your child's accommodations will be spelled out. The school and teachers are supposed to follow the accommodations at all times in order to ensure access to a Free and Appropriate Public Education or FAPE. Any violations of defined accommodations is not legal. If violations happen, you may file a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights. The complaint is called an OCR complaint and the process for how that can happen is listed here: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaints-how.html.

To obtain a 504 for your child, submit a request for a dyslexia evaluation under Section 504 in writing to your school leadership which may include the counselor, teacher, vice or assistant principal, and principal, depending on what is the norm for your state / district.

​

There are no strict timelines for a 504 evaluation, but it should not take an unreasonable amount of time. As a guide, follow your state's guidelines for the IDEA evaluation process, follow up frequently in writing, and drive it through.

​

Section 504 does not guarantee a parent's rights. A 504 team may be convened at the school and changes made to the child's accommodations without either the knowledge of permission of the parent, up to and including termination of the 504 plan.

​

Section 504 does not include services. While schools may offer services to your child for their dyslexia, it is not an aspect of Section 504, which again is purely an accommodations law. Services will include dyslexia remediation. Because 504 is not a services law, specific goals will not be made and a specific commitment to days and duration of dyslexia remediation are not guaranteed. The school is not legally bound to provide services therefore advocating for these under a 504 is especially difficult.

​

​

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, known as IDEA, is a Special Education (SpEd) law that covers both accommodations and services. There are 13 qualifiers for IDEA and a Specific Learning Disability is one of them, under which dyslexia will and does fall.

​

In the words of Drs. Sally and Bennett Shaywitz, saying "Specific Learning Disability" is akin to saying "Infectious Disease," but saying "Dyslexia" is akin to saying "Strep Throat." What this means is, if you pursue an evaluation under IDEA, you want to have the evaluation findings state DYSLEXIA, not just Specific Learning Disability or SLD for short.

​

Now, let go of your assumptions regarding Special Education. With IDEA, Special Education was overhauled, and it is a service, not a place. Our children are not short changed on their graduation plans or in what classes they can take, nor will they be in a resource room full time with children with more severe disabilities.

​

One of the key points of IDEA is what is called Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), and for our dyslexic children that is a General Education (GenEd) classroom. Their services, however, will be covered by a teacher outside of their GenEd classroom. This teacher may be a GenEd dyslexia teacher or a SpEd teacher, or even both.

IDEA does not stipulate WHAT kind of teacher must provide services to your child, and that is a very important note.

​

An evaluation under IDEA is typically far more robust than under Section 504. To request an evaluation under IDEA, here is a template, which can also be found under Help & Guides / For Parents, https://www.thedyslexiainitiative.org/for-parents.

The specific name of the evaluation tends to vary state by state so it is important to understand what your state / district calls the evaluation, for example, in Texas the evaluation is called a Full Individual Evaluation, or FIE for short, but people outside of Texas usually don't hear that term. IDEA is very specific about the timelines that the evaluation must abide by, and states may modify those timelines, but they may not extend them, only shorten them. To understand your state's guidelines, click here: / https://www.wrightslaw.com/blog/determining-evaluation-timelines/.

​

If and when an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is granted under IDEA, accommodations and services will be defined and GOALS will be written. The goals within the IEP must be robust, reasonable but stretch the child and the team, and measure progress against what is defined in the contract that is the IEP. These measurements must be reported to the parent at a periodic interval, typically with the report card. The team must show progress against the goals, or the goals are inappropriately written. Note too that overwhelming progress is a sign that the goal is inappropriate because it is too easy.

​

Violating the IEP plan is a violation of IDEA. To see more please scroll down to Disputes under IDEA.

​

​

· Under IDEA a parent's rights are guaranteed, as mentioned earlier under 504 they are not.

· No changes may be made to an IEP plan without the parent's consent, including terminating the IEP

· If neither side agrees on the proposed changes for a goal then there are defined means of dispute including arbitration and due process. Note that either side may initiate both means of dispute.

​

​

Before filing a dispute read this: https://www.wrightslaw.com/info/advo.complaint.howey.htm, then if you are determined to file a dispute the process is defined here: https://www.wrightslaw.com/blog/the-idea-state-complaint-resource-center-your-guide-to-effective-state-complaints/

​

This is not an overwhelming obstacle, but it is challenging. Note that some districts engage in this practice as a means of delaying the process as long as possible.

Regardless of 504 or IEP, what you will request is an Independent Educational Evaluation or IEE, but for those disputing their 504 evaluation findings, this does trigger the rules of IDEA so know that going in.

The IEE is at the district's expense. You as the parent get to choose the evaluator, though the district have the right to propose a list of their preferred people, and your choice of evaluator must be accepted by them. I always advise that you take their list with a grain of salt, but investigate and find the evaluator that you prefer. Note that the amount the district is willing to pay may not be equal to what that person usually charges, but for districts, more often than not, they accept the district fee and do not charge more. A balance at the end of the process may not be charged to the parent. Your right to dispute the finding is protected in IDEA and you are not financially responsible for that process.

​

To request an IEE, here is a template

While IEE's are covered under IDEA, it is an option for a rejection of a 504.

​

For a detailed look at the IEE process and timeline please see: https://www.wrightslaw.com/info/test.iee.steedman.htm.

​

While all of the processes have long timelines, remember these key points:

​

504 is an accommodations law

IDEA is an accommodations AND services law

Parents rights are not guaranteed under 504

Parents rights are guaranteed under IEP

Determine how many services your child needs, what your financial ability to provide outside services is, and if the school can help play a role in remediating your child. If services are needed, an IEP gives you more teeth and your child more protection.

If your child IS NOT reading on grade level, an IEP is very likely a better option for your family.

You may pursue a 504 first, and an IEP second, in order to get accommodations and some services in place more quickly, depending on the normal 504 timeline for your district.

Once you have an IEP do not give it up, as getting it back may prove extremely challenging.

While legally you can have a 504 and an IEP at the same time for the same child, it is not recommended. Get the greater condition under the IEP, then add in the others.

​

​

Additionally, we have had a great conversation with Peter Wright of www.wrightslaw.com on Dyslexia Coffee Talk and he shared amazing information about the legal aspects of supporting our dyslexic children. The presentation he shared with us can be found here: https://www.wrightslaw.com/dyslexia/coffee.talk.dyslexia.pdf

​​

​

And lastly remember one key thing...

Conduct your requests, all questions and follow ups in writing, regardless of what method you choose.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
504 v IDEA When dealing with services and accommodations there are two options available for your child while in public education, a Section 504 plan or an Individual Education Plan, or IEP for short. ​ They are two very different yet strikingly similar methods of managing your child's education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to teach reading to dyslexic students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share this: `

Structured literacy (SL) teaching is the most effective approach for students who experience unusual difficulty learning to read and spell printed words. The term refers to both the content and methods or principles of instruction. It means the same kind of instruction as the terms multisensory structured language education and structured language and literacy.

Structured literacy teaching stands in contrast with approaches that are popular in many schools but that do not teach oral and written language skills in an explicit, systematic manner. Evidence is strong that the majority of students learn to read better with structured teaching of basic language skills, and that the components and methods of Structured Literacy are critical for students with reading disabilities including dyslexia.
Content of SL Instruction: Language
Dyslexia and most reading disorders originate with language processing weaknesses. Consequently, the content of instruction is analysis and production of language at all levels: sounds, spellings for sounds and syllables, patterns and conventions of the writing system, meaningful parts of words, sentences, paragraphs, and discourse within longer texts.

Phoneme awareness. Becoming consciously aware of the individual speech sounds (phonemes) that make up words is a critical foundation for learning to read and spell. A phoneme is the smallest unit of speech that can change the meaning of a word. For example, the different vowel phonemes in mist, mast, must, and most create different words. Although linguists do not agree on the list of phonemes in English, it has approximately 43 phonemes-25 consonants and 18 vowels.

In preschool and early kindergarten, children typically learn the underpinnings for phoneme awareness, including rhyming, counting spoken syllables, and reciting phrases beginning with the same sound. By the end of kindergarten, children should identify each speech sound by ear and be able to take apart and say the separate sounds of simple words with two and three sounds. More advanced phoneme awareness skills, especially important for spelling and reading fluency, include rapidly and accurately taking apart the sounds in spoken words (segmentation), putting together (blending) speech sound sequences, and leaving out (deleting) or substituting one sound for another to make a new word. These exercises are done orally, without print, and should be part of instruction until students are proficient readers. A large proportion of individuals with dyslexia has difficulty with this level of language analysis and needs prolonged practice to grasp it.

Phoneme awareness is an essential foundation for reading and writing with an alphabet. In an alphabetic writing system like English, letters and letter combinations represent phonemes. Decoding print is possible only if the reader can map print to speech efficiently; therefore, the elements of speech must be clearly and consciously identified in the reader's mind.

Sound-Symbol (phoneme-grapheme) correspondences. An alphabetic writing system like English represents phonemes with graphemes. Graphemes are letters (a, s, t, etc.) and letter combinations (th, ng, oa, ew, igh, etc.) that represent phonemes in print. The basic code for written words is the system of correspondences between phonemes and graphemes. This system is often referred to as the phonics code, the alphabetic code, or the written symbol system.

The correspondences between letters and speech sounds in English are more complex and variable than some languages such as Spanish or Italian. Nevertheless, the correspondences can be explained and taught through systematic, explicit, cumulative instruction that may take several years to complete.

Patterns and conventions of print (orthography). Through explicit instruction and practice, students with dyslexia can be taught to understand and remember patterns of letter use in the writing system. For example, some spellings for consonant sounds, such as -ck, -tch, and -dge, are used only after short vowels. Some letters, like v and j, cannot be used at the ends of words. Only some letters are doubled. Some letters work to signal the sounds of other letters. These conventions can all be taught as part of the print system or orthography.

Print patterns and conventions exist as well for representing the vowel sounds in written syllables. It is a convention that almost every written syllable in English has a vowel grapheme. Structured Literacy programs usually teach six basic types of written syllables: closed (com, mand), open (me, no), vowel-consonant-e (take, plete), vowel team (vow, mean), vowel-r combinations (car, port), and the final consonant-le pattern (lit-tle, hum-ble). Recognizing written syllable patterns helps a reader divide longer words into readable chunks, and helps in understanding spelling conventions such as doubling of consonant letters (little vs. title).

Morphology. A morpheme is the smallest unit of meaning in a language. Morphemes include prefixes, roots, base words, and suffixes. These meaningful units are often spelled consistently even though pronunciation changes as they are combined into words (define, definition; nation, national; restore, restoration). Recognizing morphemes helps students figure out and remember the meanings of new words. In addition, knowledge of morphology is an aid for remembering spellings such as at-tract-ive and ex-press-ion.

Syntax. Syntax is the system for ordering words in sentences so that meaning can be communicated. The study of syntax includes understanding parts of speech and conventions of grammar and word use in sentences. Lessons include interpretation and formulation of simple, compound, and complex sentences, and work with both phrases and clauses in sentence construction.

Semantics. Semantics is the aspect of language concerned with meaning. Meaning is conveyed both by single words and by phrases and sentences. Comprehension of both oral and written language is developed by teaching word meanings (vocabulary), interpretation of phrases and sentences, and understanding of text organization.

Reading comprehension is a product of both word recognition and language comprehension. Throughout structured literacy instruction, students should be supported as they work with many kinds of texts-stories, informational text, poetry, drama, and so forth, even if that text is read aloud to students who cannot yet read it independently. Reading worthwhile texts that stimulate deep thinking is a critical component of Structured Literacy.
Principles and Methods of SL Instruction
Explicit. In SL instruction, the teacher explains each concept directly and clearly, providing guided practice. Lessons embody instructional routines, for example, quick practice drills to build fluency, or the use of fingers to tap out sounds before spelling words. The student applies each new concept to reading and writing words and text, under direct supervision of the teacher who gives immediate feedback and guidance. Students are not expected to discover or intuit language concepts simply from exposure to language or reading.

Systematic and cumulative. In an SL approach, the teacher teaches language concepts systematically, explaining how each element fits into the whole. Instruction follows a planned scope and sequence of skills that progresses from easier to more difficult. One concept builds on another. The goal of systematic teaching is automatic and fluent application of language knowledge to reading for meaning.

Hands-on, engaging, and multimodal. Methods often include hands-on learning such as moving tiles into sound boxes as words are analyzed, using hand gestures to support memory for associations, building words with letter tiles, assembling sentences with words on cards, color-coding sentences in paragraphs, and so forth. Listening, speaking, reading, and writing are often paired with one another to foster multimodal language learning.

Diagnostic and responsive. The teacher uses student response patterns to adjust pacing, presentation, and amount of practice given within the lesson framework. The teacher monitors progress through observation and brief quizzes that measure retention of what has been taught.
References
Birsh, J., & Carreker, S. (2019). Multisensory teaching of basic language skills, 4th ed. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.

Brady, S. (2011). Efficacy of phonics teaching for reading outcomes: Implications from Post-NRP research. In S. Brady, D. Braze, & C. Fowler (Eds.), Explaining individual differences in reading (pp. 69-96), London, UK: Psychology Press.

Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Taylor, W. P., Barth, A. E., & Vaughn, S. (2014). An experimental evaluation of Guided Reading and explicit interventions for primary-grade students at-risk for reading difficulties. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7(3), 268-293.

Ehri, L., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S., & Willows, D. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 393-447.

Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J., Furgeson, J., Hayes, L., Henke, J., Justice, L., Keating, B., Lewis, W., Sattar, S., Streke, A., Wagner, R., & Wissel, S. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade (NCEE 2016-4008). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from the NCEE website: http://whatworks.ed.gov

International Dyslexia Association. Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading. https://dyslexiaida.org/knowledge-and-practices/

Kilpatrick, D. (2015). Essentials of assessing, preventing, and overcoming reading difficulties. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

McCardle, P., & Chhabra, V. (Eds.). (2004). The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Moats, L. C. (2010). Speech to print: Language essentials for teachers, 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

National Early Literacy Panel (NELP). (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child and Human Development.

Seidenberg, M. (2017). Language at the speed of sight: How we read, why so many can't, and what can be done about it. New York, NY: Basic Books.
The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) thanks Louisa Moats, Ed.D., for her assistance in the preparation of this fact sheet.
The International Dyslexia Association (IDA). IDA encourages the reproduction and distribution of this fact sheet.
If portions of the text are cited, appropriate reference must be made. Fact sheets may not be reprinted for the purpose of resale. © Copyright 2020. The International Dyslexia Association (IDA). For copyright information, pleaseclick here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Structured Literacy: Effective Instruction for Students with Dyslexia and Related Reading Difficulties - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Researchers are continually conducting studies to learn more about the causes of dyslexia, early identification of dyslexia, and the most effective treatments for dyslexia.
Developmental dyslexia is associated with difficulty in processing the orthography (the written form) and phonology (the sound structure) of language. As a way to understand the origin of these problems, neuroimaging studies have examined brain anatomy and function of people with and without dyslexia. These studies are also contributing to our understanding of the role of the brain in dyslexia, which can provide useful information for developing successful reading interventions and pinpointing certain genes that may also be involved.

What is brain imaging?

A number of techniques are available to visualize brain anatomy and function. A commonly used tool is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which creates images that can reveal information about brain anatomy (e.g., the amount of gray and white matter, the integrity of white matter), brain metabolites (chemicals used in the brain for communication between brain cells), and brain function (where large pools of neurons are active). Functional MRI (fMRI) is based on the physiological principle that activity in the brain (where neurons are "firing") is associated with an increase of blood flow to that specific part of the brain. The MRI signal bears indirect information about increases in blood flow. From this signal, researchers infer the location and amount of activity that is associated with a task, such as reading single words, that the research participants are performing in the scanner. Data from these studies are typically collected on groups of people rather than individuals for research purposes only-not to diagnose individuals with dyslexia.

Which brain areas are involved in reading?

Since reading is a cultural invention that arose after the evolution of modern humans, no single location within the brain serves as a reading center. Instead, brain regions that sub serve other functions, such as spoken language and object recognition, are redirected (rather than innately specified) for the purpose of reading (Dehaene & Cohen, 2007). Reading involves multiple cognitive processes, two of which have been of particular interest to researchers: 1) grapheme-phoneme mapping in which combinations of letters (graphemes) are mapped onto their corresponding sounds (phonemes) and the words are thus "decoded," and 2) visual word form recognition for mapping of familiar words onto their mental representations. Together, these processes allow us to pronounce words and gain access to meaning. In accordance with these cognitive processes, studies in adults and children have demonstrated that reading is supported by a network of regions in the left hemisphere (Price, 2012), including the occipito-temporal, temporo-parietal, and inferior frontal cortices. The occipito-temporal cortex holds the "visual word form area." Both the temporo-parietal and inferior frontal cortices play a role in phonological and semantic processing of words, with inferior frontal cortex also involved in the formation of speech sounds. These areas have been shown to change as we age (Turkeltaub, et al., 2003) and are altered in people with dyslexia (Richlan et al., 2011).

What have brain images revealed about brain structure in dyslexia?

Evidence of a connection between dyslexia and the structure of the brain was first discovered by examining the anatomy of brains of deceased adults who had dyslexia during their lifetimes. The left-greater-than-right asymmetry typically seen in the left hemisphere temporal lobe (planum temporale) was not found in these brains (Galaburda & Kemper, 1979), and ectopias (a displacement of brain tissue to the surface of the brain) were noted (Galaburda, et al., 1985). Then investigators began to use MRI to search for structural images in the brains of research volunteers with and without dyslexia. Current imaging techniques have revealed less gray and white matter volume and altered white matter integrity in left hemisphere occipito-temporal and temporo-parietal areas. Researchers are still investigating how these findings are influenced by a person's language and writing systems.

What have brain images revealed about brain function in dyslexia?

Early functional studies were limited to adults because they employed invasive techniques that require radioactive materials. The field of human brain mapping greatly benefited from the invention of fMRI. fMRI does not require the use of radioactive tracers, so it is safe for children and adults and can be used repeatedly which facilitates longitudinal studies of development and intervention. First used to study dyslexia in 1996 (Eden et al., 1996), fMRI has since been widely used to study the brain's role in reading and its components (phonology, orthography, and semantics). Studies from different countries have converged in findings of altered left-hemisphere areas (Richlan et al., 2011), including ventral occipito-temporal, temporo-parietal, and inferior frontal cortices (and their connections). Results of these studies confirm the universality of dyslexia across different world languages.

What about genes, brain chemistry, and brain function?

Several genetic variants are associated with dyslexia, and their impact on the brain has been investigated in people and mice. Using animals that have been bred to have genes associated with dyslexia, researchers are investigating how these genes might affect development of and communication among brain regions (Che, et. al., 2014; Galaburda, et al., 2006). These investigations dove-tail with studies in humans. Differences in brain anatomy (Darki, et al., 2012; Meda et al., 2008) and brain function (Cope et al., 2012; Pinel et al., 2012) have been observed in people who carry dyslexia-associated genes, even those people who have good reading skills. In addition to these investigations at the anatomical, physiological, and molecular levels, researchers are trying to pinpoint the chemical connection to dyslexia. For example, brain metabolites that play a role in allowing neurons to communicate can be visualized using another MRI-based technique called spectroscopy. Several metabolites (for example, choline) are thought to be different in people with dyslexia (Pugh et al., 2014). Researchers continue to explore the connections between these findings and are hopeful that what they learn will help to determine the causes of dyslexia. This is a difficult aspect of research because differences in the brains of people with dyslexia are not necessarily the cause of their reading difficulties (for example, it could also be a consequence of reading less).

Changes in Reading, Changes in the Brain

Brain imaging research has revealed anatomical and functional changes in typically developing readers as they learn to read (e.g. Turkeltaub et al., 2003), and in children and adults with dyslexia following effective reading instruction (Krafnick, et al., 2011; Eden et al., 2004). Such studies also shed light onto the brain-based differences of those children with dyslexia who benefit from reading instruction compared to those who fail to make gains (Davis et al., 2011; Odegard, et al., 2008). Neuroimaging data have also been used to predict long-term reading success for children with and without dyslexia (Hoeft et al., 2011).

Cause versus Consequence

An important aspect of research on the brain and reading is to determine whether the findings are the cause or the consequence of dyslexia. Some of the brain regions known to be involved in dyslexia are also altered by learning to read, as demonstrated by comparisons of adults who were illiterate but then learned to read (Carreiras et al., 2009). Longitudinal studies in typical readers reveal anatomical changes with age, some of which are related to development (Giedd et al., 1999) and others to the firming up of language skills (Sowell et al., 2004) in correlation with improvements in phonological skills (Lu et al., 2007). As such, researchers are teasing apart the brain-based differences that can be observed before children begin to learn to read from differences that may occur as a consequence of less reading by people with dyslexia. For example, researchers have found altered brain anatomy (Raschle, et al., 2011) and function (Raschle, et al., 2012) in pre-reading children with a family history of dyslexia. Future studies using longitudinal designs (i.e., long term), will inform the timeline of these changes and clarify cause and consequences of anatomical and functional differences in dyslexia.

Summary

The role of the brain in developmental dyslexia has been studied in the context of brain anatomy, brain chemistry, and brain function-and in combination with interventions to improve reading and information about genetic influences. Together with results of behavioral studies, this information will help researchers to identify the causes of dyslexia, continue to explore early identification of dyslexia, and determine the best avenues for its treatment.

References

Carreiras, M., Seghier, M. L., Baquero, S., Estévez, A., Lozano, A., Devlin, J. T., & Price, C. J. (2009). An anatomical signature for literacy. Nature, 461(7266), 983-986. doi:10.1038/nature08461

Che, A., Girgenti, M. J., & Loturco, J. (2014). The Dyslexia-Associated Gene Dcdc2 is required for spike-timing precision in mouse neocortex. Biological Psychiatry, in press. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2013.08.018

Cope, N., Eicher, J. D., Meng, H., Gibson, C. J., Hager, K., Lacadie, C., ... Gruen, J. R. (2012). Variants in the DYX2 locus are associated with altered brain activation in reading-related brain regions in subjects with reading disability. NeuroImage, 63(1), 148-156. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.037

Darki, F., Peyrard-Janvid, M., Matsson, H., Kere, J., & Klingberg, T. (2012). Three Dyslexia Susceptibility Genes, DYX1C1, DCDC2, and KIAA0319, affect temporo-parietal white matter structure. Biological Psychiatry, 72(8), 671-676. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.05.008

Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (2007). Cultural recycling of cortical maps. Neuron, 56(2), 384-398. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2007.10.004

Eden, G. F., Jones, K. M., Cappell, K., Gareau, L., Wood, F. B., Zeffiro, T. A., ... Flowers, D. L. (2004). Neural changes following remediation in adult developmental dyslexia. Neuron, 44(3), 411-422.

Eden, G. F., VanMeter, J. W., Rumsey, J. M., Maisog, J. M., Woods, R. P., & Zeffiro, T. A. (1996). Abnormal processing of visual motion in dyslexia revealed by functional brain imaging. Nature, 382(6586), 66-69. doi:10.1038/382066a0

Flowers, D. L., Wood, F. B., & Naylor, C. E. (1991). Regional cerebral blood flow correlates of language processes in reading disability. Archives of Neurology, 48(6), 637-643.

Galaburda, A. M., & Kemper, T. L. (1979). Cytoarchitectonic abnormalities in developmental dyslexia: a case study. Annals of Neurology, 6(2), 94-100. doi:10.1002/ana.410060203

Galaburda, A. M., Sherman, G. F., Rosen, G. D., Aboitiz, F., & Geschwind, N. (1985). Developmental dyslexia: four consecutive patients with cortical anomalies. Annals of Neurology, 18(2), 222-233. doi:10.1002/ana.410180210

Galaburda, A. M., LoTurco, J., Ramus, F., Fitch, R. H., & Rosen, G. D. (2006). From genes to behavior in developmental dyslexia. Nature Neuroscience, 9(10), 1213-1217. doi:10.1038/nn1772

Giedd, J. N., Blumenthal, J., Jeffries, N. O., Castellanos, F. X., Liu, H., Zijdenbos, A., ... Rapoport, J. L. (1999). Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal MRI study. Nature Neuroscience, 2(10), 861-863. doi:10.1038/13158

Gross-Glenn, K., Duara, R., Barker, W. W., Loewenstein, D., Chang, J. Y., Yoshii, F., ... Sevush, S. (1991). Positron emission tomographic studies during serial word-reading by normal and dyslexic adults. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 13(4), 531-544. doi:10.1080/01688639108401069

Hoeft, F., McCandliss, B. D., Black, J. M., Gantman, A., Zakerani, N., Hulme, C., ... Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2011). Neural systems predicting long-term outcome in dyslexia. PNAS, 108(1), 361-6. doi:10.1073/pnas.1008950108

Krafnick, A. J., Flowers, D. L., Napoliello, E. M., & Eden, G. F. (2011). Gray matter volume changes following reading intervention in dyslexic children. NeuroImage, 57(3), 733-741. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.062

Lu, L. H., Leonard, C. M., Thompson, P. M., Kan, E., Jolley, J., Welcome, S. E., ... Sowell, E. R. (2007). Normal developmental changes in inferior frontal gray matter are associated with improvement in phonological processing: a longitudinal MRI analysis. Cerebral Cortex, 17(5), 1092-9. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhl019

Meda, S. A., Gelernter, J., Gruen, J. R., Calhoun, V. D., Meng, H., Cope, N. A., & Pearlson, G. D. (2008). Polymorphism of DCDC2 reveals differences in cortical morphology of healthy individuals-A preliminary voxel based morphometry study. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 2(1), 21-26. doi:10.1007/s11682-007-9012-1

Pinel, P., Fauchereau, F., Moreno, A., Barbot, A., Lathrop, M., Zelenika, D., ... Dehaene, S. (2012). Genetic variants of FOXP2 and KIAA0319/TTRAP/THEM2 locus are associated with altered brain activation in distinct language-related regions. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 32(3), 817-825. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5996-10.2012

Price, C. J. (2012). A review and synthesis of the first 20years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading. Neuroimage, 62(2), 816-847.

Pugh, K. R., Frost, S. J., Rothman, D. L., Hoeft, F., Tufo, S. N. D., Mason, G. F., ... Fulbright, R. K. (2014). Glutamate and choline levels predict individual differences in reading ability in emergent readers. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(11), 4082-4089. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3907-13.2014

Raschle, N. M., Chang, M., & Gaab, N. (2011). Structural brain alterations associated with dyslexia predate reading onset. Neuroimage, 57(3), 742-749.

Raschle, N. M., Zuk, J., & Gaab, N. (2012). Functional characteristics of developmental dyslexia in left-hemispheric posterior brain regions predate reading onset. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(6), 2156-2161. doi:10.1073/pnas.1107721109

Richlan, F., Kronbichler, M., & Wimmer, H. (2011). Meta-analyzing brain dysfunctions in dyslexic children and adults. Neuroimage, 56(3), 1735-1742. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.02.040
p style="text-indent: -0.5in; margin-left: 0.5in;">Richlan, F., Kronbichler, M., & Wimmer, H. (2013). Structural abnormalities in the dyslexic brain: A meta-analysis of voxel-based morphometry studies. Human Brain Mapping, 34(11), 3055-3065. doi:10.1002/hbm.22127

Rumsey, J. M., Andreason, P., Zametkin, A. J., Aquino, T., King, A. C., Hamburger, S. D., ... Cohen, R. M. (1992). Failure to activate the left temporoparietal cortex in dyslexia. An oxygen 15 positron emission tomographic study. Archives of Neurology, 49, 527-534.

Sowell, E. R., Thompson, P. M., Leonard, C. M., Welcome, S. E., Kan, E., & Toga, A. W. (2004). Longitudinal mapping of cortical thickness and brain growth in normal children. The Journal of Neuroscience, 24(38), 8223-8231. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1798-04.2004

Turkeltaub, P. E., Gareau, L., Flowers, D. L., Zeffiro, T. A., & Eden, G. F. (2003). Development of neural mechanisms for reading. Nature Neuroscience, 6(7), 767-773. doi:10.1038/nn1065
The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) thanks Guinevere F. Eden, Ph.D., for her assistance in the preparation of this fact sheet. © Copyright The International Dyslexia Association (IDA). For copyright information, please click here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Researchers are continually conducting studies to learn more about the causes of dyslexia, early identification of dyslexia, and the most effective treatments for dyslexia. Developmental dyslexia is associated with difficulty in processing the orthography (the written form) and phonology (the sound structure) of language.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Dyslexia is one of the most common learning disabilities, yet its brain basis and core causes are not yet fully understood. Neuroimaging methods, including structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, and electrophysiology, have significantly contributed to knowledge about the neurobiology of dyslexia. Recent studies have discovered brain differences prior to formal instruction that likely encourage or discourage learning to read effectively, distinguished between brain differences that likely reflect the etiology of dyslexia versus brain differences that are the consequences of variation in reading experience, and identified distinct neural networks associated with specific psychological factors that are associated with dyslexia.

1. Introduction

Developmental dyslexia, an unexplained difficulty in word reading accuracy and/or fluency, affects 5-12% of children [ 1, 2]. Dyslexia is associated with many undesirable outcomes, including reduced educational attainment and academic self-esteem [ 3]. Furthermore, children with dyslexia tend to read far less outside of school than their peers [ 4], resulting in a widening gap in reading skills. Over the past 15 years, neuroimaging has made visible and quantifiable the brain differences that are associated with dyslexia; here, we review progress in the past few years in understanding the biological basis of dyslexia at a neural systems level.

Reading is a complex and slowly learned skill requiring the integration of multiple visual, linguistic, cognitive, and attentional processes. Neuroimaging methods including functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), electroencephalography (EEG, and event-related potentials or ERPs), and magnetoencephalography (MEG), have revealed the brain regions most consistently involved in single word reading. In typically reading adults, these regions are lateralized to the language-dominant left hemisphere, and include inferior frontal, superior and middle temporal, and temporo-parietal regions [ 5]. In addition, experienced readers recruit an area of the left fusiform gyrus, termed the visual word form area (VWFA), which becomes preferentially engaged for orthographic (print) processing with reading experience [ 6- 8]. This reading network ( Figure 1 ) develops over years as children gain both specific reading skills and other abilities relevant to reading (e.g., 9). White-matter pathways that connect the components of the reading network can be quantified in size and strength by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). Major tracts involved in reading include the left arcuate/superior longitudinal fasciculus, which connects frontal and temporal language regions, the inferior longitudinal fasciculus, which connects occipital and temporal lobes, and the corona radiata, which connects cortex to subcortical structures [ 10].

2. Psychological Bases of Dyslexia

Because reading involves multiple linguistic, visual, and attentional processes, it is likely that variable patterns of weakness may contribute to reading difficulty across children. Although it is unlikely that there is a single causal mechanism of dyslexia, some frequent likely causes have been identified ( Table 1 ). The best understood cause for dyslexia is a weakness in phonological awareness (PA) for spoken (auditory) language that predicts and accompanies dyslexia [ 11]. Whereas learning a spoken language happens almost effortlessly, learning to read requires explicit knowledge and practice. Children must first become aware of the phonological structure of words, so that they can map those units of sound onto their corresponding printed letters.

Table 1

Construct

Definition

Example Tasks

Example Standardized Assessment

Phonological Awareness (PA)

Knowledge of, and ability to manipulate, the sound structure of words

- Say game without the /g/
- What word do these sounds make? /s/ - /i/ - /t/
- Name a word that rhymes with star

- Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP-2) [ 64]
- Phonological Awareness Test (PAT-2) [ 65]

Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN)

Speed with which a series of familiar stimuli can be named aloud, reflecting efficient visual-verbal connections

Name, as quickly as possible, a 10×5 array of 5 randomly repeated objects, colors, letters, or numbers

- Rapid Automatized Naming-Rapid Alternating Stimulus Tests (RAN-RAS) [ 66]

Reading Fluency

Ability to read single words and connected text with sufficient accuracy and speed so as to support efficient comprehension

- Read aloud a list of common words or pseudowords as quickly and accurately as possible
- Read aloud, quickly and accurately, paragraphs of increasing complexity

- Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE-2) [ 67]
- Gray Oral Reading Test (GORT-5) [ 68]

A second psychological weakness associated with dyslexia relates to rapid automatized naming or RAN ( Table 1 ). Slowness in naming may reflect difficulty in the integration of cognitive and linguistic processes involved in fluent reading [ 12]. Often, children who are especially poor readers have weaknesses in both PA and RAN [ 13], but some children exhibit only one of these weaknesses.

A third category of potential causal explanations for dyslexia relates to basic perceptual processes that may underlie the more proximal PA or RAN weaknesses, such as temporal sampling or processing [ 14- 16], visual-spatial attention [ 17], or perceptual learning deficits [ 18]. These explanations are more mechanistic, but perhaps because they are more distal from reading per se, they are also more debated.

3. Functional and Structural Brain Differences in Dyslexia

Meta-analyses of primary research findings have identified broad patterns of functional and structural differences between typical and dyslexic readers. The most common functional brain differences, in children and adults, are reduced activations (hypoactivations) in left temporal, parietal, and fusiform (VWFA) regions [ 19- 22]. In most cases, these hypoactivations arise from comparisons between two tasks or conditions, and thus reflect a lack of differential sensitivity to reading demands rather than a broader dysfunction of those brain regions. Increased activations in dyslexia are sometimes, but not consistently, observed in left inferior frontal and right-hemisphere regions. Variability across these findings may reflect differences in reading tasks, ages of participants, diversity among dyslexic groups, and other factors. Additionally, structural gray matter differences in dyslexia tend to co-localize with regions that show functional differences [ 23], but are also observed in the cerebellum, particularly in lobule VI [ 24, 25]. DTI studies often find reduced organization or volume in the left superior longitudinal fasciculus, including the arcuate fasciculus, and corona radiata fibers [ 26].

Because most neuroimaging studies of dyslexia have been conducted with children or adults who have had years of reading difficulty, it has been impossible to determine whether the brain differences are associated with the underlying neurobiological etiology of dyslexia, or are instead the consequence of years of altered and often vastly reduced reading experience (including compensatory alterations in reading networks). One approach to dissociating the cause and consequence of dyslexia in the brain has been to compare dyslexic children not only to age-matched typically reading children, but also to "ability-matched" children who are years younger than the dyslexic children but read at the same level. Ability-matched children are conceptualized as having approximately the same amount of reading experience as older dyslexic children. In one such study, dyslexic children exhibited reduced left parietal and occipito-temporal activations relative to both age- and ability-matched children, suggesting that these hypoactivations were related to the cause of dyslexia (in contrast, left prefrontal activations tracked ability level) [ 27].

A similar design challenged another idea about dyslexia, the magnocellular hypothesis of dyslexia. Previously, postmortem evidence from individuals with dyslexia revealed smaller magnocellular neurons in the lateral geniculate body [ 28], part of the visual pathway that is associated with motion perception. Accordingly, reduced activation for moving gratings in area MT, the cortical region most associated with motion perception, was found in adults with dyslexia [ 29]. When, however, children with dyslexia were examined, their MT activations were equivalent to ability-matched younger children, suggesting that the MT hypoactivation in dyslexia reflected reading experience [ 30]. This conclusion was further supported by evidence that remediation of the reading difficulty also enhanced MT activations in children with dyslexia [ 30]. These findings suggest that reduced MT activation for visual motion in dyslexia is a consequence, not a cause, of dyslexia. Similarly, many structural brain differences in dyslexia among age-matched groups were eliminated when a group with dyslexia was compared to ability-matched children [ 31].

Another strategy for identifying brain differences that underlie dyslexia has been the study of pre-reading children, typically in kindergarten, for whom brain differences cannot be the consequence of altered reading experience. Although pre-reading children cannot have a formal diagnosis of dyslexia, children can be identified as at-risk for dyslexia because of either a family history of dyslexia, which increases their risk of dyslexia by four times or more [ 32], or low performance on tests of pre-reading skills that tend to predict future reading difficulty (e.g., PA or RAN). Often, these children are followed longitudinally to determine which at-risk children actually progress to dyslexia.

Several neuroimaging studies have found brain differences preceding formal reading instruction in pre-reading children that resemble those observed in older children and adults. ERP studies of the mismatch negativity (MMN), an automatic response to an oddball auditory stimulus that is reduced in adults with dyslexia, have observed differences between infants with versus without a family history of dyslexia [ 33], and infants who do or do not develop dyslexia [ 34, 35]. Thus, the MMN may be a promising early endophenotype of dyslexia [ 36].

In MRI, pre-reading kindergartners with familial risk for dyslexia exhibited reduced bilateral occipitotemporal and left temporo-parietal activations for PA [ 37] and also bilaterally reduced grey matter volumes in similar posterior cortical regions [ 38]. Decreased grey-matter volumes in prefrontal and parieto-temporal regions were also found in 5- and 6-year-olds with maternal histories of reading difficulty [ 39]. In a heterogeneous sample of kindergartners, pre-reading children exhibited a positive correlation between measures of PA and both the size and microstructural white-matter organization of the left arcuate fasciculus [ 40]. Although it is not yet known which of these children will develop dyslexia, these studies support the idea that the most commonly observed functional and structural brain differences characterizing dyslexia are present before significant reading experience and therefore are more likely causes rather than consequences of dyslexia.

5. Advances in Understanding the Brain Basis of Aspects of Dyslexia

Brain Basis of Phonological Awareness (PA) Deficits

Impaired PA in dyslexia could reflect either a deficit in representing phonetic sounds and/or a deficit in access to and manipulation of those sounds (e.g., for mapping phonemes to print). Previously, a review of behavioral studies of dyslexia concluded that phonetic representations are intact, but access to those representations may be impaired [ 41]. Recently, a neuroimaging study with adults found that phonetic representations, as measured by multivoxel pattern analysis of activations in bilateral auditory cortices, were intact in dyslexia, but that functional and structural (DTI) connectivity between auditory cortices and left inferior frontal gyrus was reduced [ 42]. These findings favor the interpretation of dyslexia as being characterized by weakness in access to otherwise intact phonetic representations. Consistent with this conclusion is the finding that children with dyslexia exhibited reduced prefrontal activation when engaging in an auditory PA task, but no difference in temporal-lobe activation, as compared with both age- and ability-matched children [ 43].

Brain Basis of Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) Deficits

RAN has been partially dissociated from PA as a skill essential for learning to read [ 12, 13], but now there is evidence for a neurobiological distinction between the two skills. A large structural MRI study of typical adult readers of Chinese found that phonological decoding ability was related to gray matter volume in left perisylvian cortex, whereas naming speed was related to volume in a more distributed network across all four lobes [ 44]. Further, functional activation to a PA task differed among groups of children with PA and RAN deficits, as predicted by the double deficit hypothesis. Activation in left inferior parietal lobule showed a gradient associated with PA ability, whereas activation in right cerebellar lobule VI showed a gradient with RAN ability [ 45].

Brain Basis of Reading Fluency Deficits

For older children with dyslexia who must read longer texts, slow reading is a major problem. Both the psychological and brain bases of reduced fluency for connected text, such as sentences and paragraphs, have been poorly understood relative to the many studies focusing on single-word reading. Two studies, however, examined reading fluency directly in dyslexia during fMRI by presenting sentences word-by-word at varying rates and testing comprehension, but the two studies reported disparate results [ 46, 47]. Both studies reported that more rapid reading resulted in greater activation of left fusiform cortex in the VWFA region. One study reported that children with dyslexia exhibited reduced activation related to fluency exclusively in left fusiform gyrus despite no significant differences in comprehension accuracy [ 46]. The other study reported that adults with dyslexia exhibited disproportionately worse comprehension accuracy and lesser activation in left prefrontal and superior temporal regions as a function of reading speed, but found no group difference in the VWFA region [ 47]. Although the populations and outcomes of the two studies differed, they have initiated the analysis of the brain basis of impaired reading fluency in dyslexia.

Brain Basis of Basic Perceptual Processes

Neuroimaging findings have reported neural correlates of atypical basic perceptual processes in dyslexia. Successful parsing of the speech signal depends on the ability of left auditory cortex to selectively amplify phonemic information in the 30 Hz (low gamma) range [ 48]. MEG revealed reduced entrainment, or synchronization of neural firing, to the 30 Hz frequency range in dyslexia, as well as reduced left-hemisphere specialization for such oscillations [ 49, 50]. These differences may impede the efficient transfer of acoustic information into more abstract phonemic representations. Individuals with dyslexia also exhibited reduced neural entrainment in response to linguistic stimuli [ 51, 52], differences in EEG signals that reflect integration of auditory and visual stimuli [ 53], and greater variability of auditory brainstem responses to speech sounds [ 54].

An advantage of understanding dyslexia in terms of basic perceptual processes is that the neural mechanisms of those processes can be studied in animals. Animal research has linked dyslexia-associated genes such as KIAA0319 with atypical neural migration [ 55] and impaired speech sound discrimination [ 55, 56], suggesting that the mechanism by which cortical abnormalities result in behavioral deficits is through the disruption of synchronous firing in response to oral language [ 57]. In humans, variation in KIAA0319 and two other dyslexia susceptibility genes has been associated with variation in left-hemisphere white matter and reading skill [ 58]. Such research may integrate findings from the genetic, cellular, cognitive, and behavioral levels in understanding the core deficits in dyslexia.

6. Conclusion

Progress in understanding the cognitive neuroscience of dyslexia may be approaching translation from basic research to intervention for children who will struggle to read. Remediation is known to be most effective in beginning readers, so early and accurate identification may promote effective intervention for children before they experience prolonged reading failure. Neuroimaging has identified biomarkers that enhance or outperform current behavioral measures in predicting long-term reading outcomes [ 59- 63]. With further progress in understanding specific components of dyslexia (e.g., PA, RAN, fluency) it may also become possible to develop personalized interventions that target the specific patterns of weaknesses that undermine learning to read in individual children.

​

Neuroimaging is identifying brain differences related to causes of dyslexia.

Brain bases of specific aspects of dyslexia have been better identified.

Genetics may bridge study of neural mechanisms to dyslexia in humans.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (Grant #R01 HD067312). We thank Rachel Romeo for assistance with manuscript preparation.

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

1. Lyon GR, Shaywitz SE, Shaywitz BA. A definition of dyslexia. Ann Dyslexia. 2003;53:1-14. [ Google Scholar]

4. Cunningham AE, Stanovich KE. What reading does for the mind. Am Educ. 1998;22:137-149. [ Google Scholar]

13. Wolf M, Bowers PG. The double-deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. J Ed Psych. 1999;91:415. [ Google Scholar]

56. Centanni TM, Booker AB, Sloan AM, Chen F, Maher BJ, Carraway RS, Khodaparast N, Rennaker R, Loturco JJ, Kilgard MP. Knockdown of the dyslexia-associated gene Kiaa0319 impairs temporal responses to speech stimuli in rat primary auditory cortex. Cereb Cortex. 2013 in press. [[ PMC free article] [ PubMed] Google Scholar]

60* Bach S, Richardson U, Brandeis D, Martin E, Brem S. Print-specific multimodal brain activation in kindergarten improves prediction of reading skills in second grade. Neuroimage. 2013;82:605-615. This was the first study to combine fMRI and EEG/ERP in kindergarten to predict reading outcomes in 2[ nd grade. Both fMRI and ERP measures related to visual processing in the left occipito-temporal region predicted 2 nd grade reading ability. In this small group of children, results suggest that brain imaging in kindergarten could significantly improve classification of future good versus poor readers. [ PubMed] Google Scholar]

62. Myers CA, Vandermosten M, Farris EA, Hancock R, Gimenez P, Black JM, Casto B, Drahos M, Tumber M, Hendren R, Hulme C, Hoeft F. Structural changes in white matter are uniquely related to children's reading development. Psychol Sci. 2014 in press. [[ PMC free article] [ PubMed] Google Scholar]

64. Wagner RK, Torgesen JK, Rashotte CA, Pearson N. The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, Second Edition (CTOPP-2) Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed; 2013. [ Google Scholar]

65. Robertson C, Salter W. The Phonological Awareness Test, Second Edition (PAT-2) East Moline, Illinois: LinguiSystems; 2007. [ Google Scholar]

66. Wolf M, Denckla MB. RAN/RAS: Rapid Automatized Naming and Rapid Alternating Stimulus Tests. Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed; 2005. [ Google Scholar]

67. Torgesen JK, Wagner RK, Rashotte CA. Test of Word Reading Efficiency, Second Edition (TOWRE-2) Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed; 2012. [ Google Scholar]

68. Wiederholt JL, Bryant BR. Gray Oral Reading Tests, Fifth Edition (GORT-5) Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed; 2012. [ Google Scholar]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dyslexia is one of the most common learning disabilities, yet its brain basis and core causes are not yet fully understood. Neuroimaging methods, including structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, and electrophysiology, have significantly contributed to knowledge about the neurobiology of dyslexia.

# data[].attributes.body
Supporting students with dyslexia requires a multifaceted approach that addresses their unique learning needs. Dyslexia, a language-based learning disability, primarily affects reading, spelling, and writing, making traditional classroom methods challenging for affected students. Effective support includes providing tailored interventions such as multi-sensory reading programs, with integrate visual, auditory, and kinesthetic-tactile elements to enhance learning. Additionally, IEP's or 504 plans can offer accommodations like extended time on tests, oral testing options, and access to audiobooks, ensuring students with dyslexia have equal opportunities to succeed academically.

Beyond academic accommodations, fostering a supportive classroom environment is essential for students with dyslexia. Teachers can cultivate a positive learning atmosphere by recognizing and celebrating each student's strengths, which can boost self-esteem and motivation. Incorporating assistive technology, such as text-to-speech software and word prediction tools, can also empower students to engage more confidently with their coursework. Furthermore, ongoing professional development for educators on the latest dyslexia research and teaching strategies is crucial to effectively support these students. By combining academic interventions with emotional and social support, schools can create an inclusive environment where students with dyslexia can thrive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What types of accommodations can help students with dyslexia? Here are some classroom accommodations to talk over with your child's school. You can even try these supports at home.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Explore our article to find out how you can start preparing your learners to take a Cambridge English Qualification.

We will show you how to assess your students' level, provide some tips for teaching mixed ability classes, and share some extra resources to help you get started with exam preparation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ten ways to support learners with dyslexia | Cambridge English

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this post we're sharing ten ways to support learners with dyslexia for Pre A1 Starters to B2 First for Schools

# data[].attributes.body
Such (2021). The Art and Science of Teaching Primary Reading. Corwin, UK.

https://dyslexiaida.org/advocating-for-a-child-with-dyslexia-within-the-public-education-system/

https://dyslexiaida.org/dyslexia-and-the-brain/

https://dyslexiaida.org/social-emotional/

https://www.thedyslexiainitiative.org/504-v-iep#:~:text=If%20your%20child%20IS%20NOT,504%20timeline%20for%20your%20district.

https://assets.ctfassets.net/p0qf7j048i0q/7gUDX1YFkaOHbBHiqylfli/4c5292b9283a2dc41f6b33a14dd867b4/Dyslexia_Fact_Sheet_Understood.pdf

https://dyslexiaida.org/structured-literacy-effective-instruction-for-students-with-dyslexia-and-related-reading-difficulties/

https://www.understood.org/en/articles/what-is-structured-literacy

https://www.google.com/search?q=founders+of+companies+that+have+dyslexia&rlz=1CAUYOS_enUS1073&oq=founders+of+companies+that+have+dyslexia&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyCQgAEEUYORigATIGCAEQRRhAMgYIAhBFGEDSAQg4NTk5ajBqN6gCCLACAQ&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&safe=active&ssui=on

https://www.readingrockets.org/topics/dyslexia/articles/dyslexia-and-brain-what-does-current-research-tell-us

https://dyslexiaida.org/dyslexia-and-the-brain-fact-sheet/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4293303/

https://www.understood.org/en/articles/classroom-accommodations-for-dyslexia

https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/blog/ten-ways-to-support-learners-with-dyslexia/

https://www.nccd.edu.au/professional-learning/classroom-adjustments-specific-learning-needs-dyslexia