1.0 Background Decoding Dyslexia Ontario is a parent-led, non-profit organization that raises dyslexia awareness, empowers families to support their children who are dyslexic, and shares best practices regarding identification, remediation and support for students with dyslexia. We are parents, teachers, tutors and students who are concerned about the students with dyslexia in our public schools. The Decoding Dyslexia parent advocacy movement began in the U.S. and has managed, in under a decade, to influence education policy across that country. They have done so by providing policy makers with illustrations of the failure of schools to address the needs of students with dyslexia and by offering evidence-based solutions to this tragedy. To date, 47 of 50 states have dyslexia legislation and related policy. The Ontario Curriculum Consultation process does not seek to specifically address Ontario’s reading curriculum and Ontario’s reading instruction policies and guidelines. Yet this Submission begins with reading and then will also address math, EQAO (and other large-scale standardized assessments), and mental health. This is because reading is the one key skill that every child must develop to find success in school and in life. Math and any other subject taught in schools cannot be entered into by a student without first knowing how to read. Reading therefore must be addressed by the Ontario Curriculum Consultation. Decoding Dyslexia wants to improve overall reading scores (and math scores) by addressing the needs of the estimated 6% to 17% of children with dyslexia in our province (J. Fletcher et al, 2007, p. 105). By providing a reading curriculum that follows universal design, is based on the science of reading and is accessible to ALL children, we can reduce the number of children with learning disabilities who will need special education services, leading to cost savings for our schools and better outcomes for students. Where students with physical impairments requires a wheelchair ramp to access a school environment, a student with dyslexia requires an explicit, systematic and scientifically based approach to reading instruction to access education www.decodingdyslexiaon.org 1 DecodingDyslexiaOntario Ontario’s Education Curriculum Consultation Decoding Dyslexia Ontario Submission December 12, 2018
Transcript
1.0 Background
Decoding Dyslexia Ontario is a parent-led, non-profit organization that raises dyslexia awareness, empowers families to support their children who are dyslexic, and shares best practices regarding identification, remediation and support for students with dyslexia. We are parents, teachers, tutors and students who are concerned about the students with dyslexia in our public schools. The Decoding Dyslexia parent advocacy movement began in the U.S. and has managed, in under a decade, to influence education policy across that country. They have done so by providing policy makers with illustrations of the failure of schools to address the needs of students with dyslexia and by offering evidence-based solutions to this tragedy. To date, 47 of 50 states have dyslexia legislation and related policy.
The Ontario Curriculum Consultation process does not seek to specifically address Ontario’s reading curriculum and Ontario’s reading instruction policies and guidelines. Yet this Submission begins with reading and then will also address math, EQAO (and other large-scale standardized assessments), and mental health. This is because reading is the one key skill that every child must develop to find success in school and in life. Math and any other subject taught in schools cannot be entered into by a student without first knowing how to read. Reading therefore must be addressed by the Ontario Curriculum Consultation.
Decoding Dyslexia wants to improve overall reading scores (and math scores) by addressing the needs of the estimated 6% to 17% of children with dyslexia in our province (J. Fletcher et al, 2007, p. 105). By providing a reading curriculum that follows universal design, is based on the science of reading and is accessible to ALL children, we can reduce the number of children with learning disabilities who will need special education services, leading to cost savings for our schools and better outcomes for students. Where students with physical impairments requires a wheelchair ramp to access a school environment, a student with dyslexia requires an explicit, systematic and scientifically based approach to reading instruction to access education in our province, a right for all children under The Ontario Human Rights Code.
Current research states that the methods for teaching reading that work for students with dyslexia work for all children. The U.K. has dramatically changed its reading scores since the commissioning of the Rose Report in 2009 which indicated a desperate need to overhaul the national reading curriculum and the manner in which teachers were trained to teach reading in the that jurisdiction. Yet, here in Ontario, the government continues to ignore our own dismal reading scores, and particularly of those who struggle to read (EQAO reference).
In 2014, the Ministry of Education removed the term ‘dyslexia’ from its Policy and Program Memorandum #8 which provides an overview of how The Ministry defines “Learning Disability”(LD) and how the Boards should address the educational needs of students with LD. Eliminating the term does not make our children disappear. Rather, it ensures that parents and teachers are unaware of what dyslexia is and how to help students with dyslexia. Furthermore, it creates educational policy that is vague and ineffective for students with dyslexia and often leads to many children failing to learn to read.
In 2015, Decoding Dyslexia Ontario was formed to advocate for educational services for our children with dyslexia.
In September 2017, the Ministry of Education released its revised Special Education Guidelines, without including the perspective of Decoding Dyslexia Ontario which had been in contact with Ministry representatives’ about the need to implement evidence-based reading instruction, proven intervention and support for students with dyslexia – Appendix A Wynne Letter, December 2017. The former head of Special Education, Louise Sirisko, indicated in a face-to-face meeting that we should submit our concerns in writing and so, in the consultation phase and prior to the release of the Special Education Guidelines, Annette Sang, former Chair of Decoding Dyslexia ON submitted commentary to Linda Chan who was overseeing the review of the Special Education Guidelines. The Special Education Guidelines, like the Expert Panel report from 15 years ago, do not mention dyslexia nor does it provide teachers and administrators with clear and effective instruction on how to support the learning of students with dyslexia. Again, the needs of our children with dyslexia are being ignored by the Ministry of Education who is tasked with educating our children through the public school system.
In August of this year Decoding Dyslexia was encouraged by a letter from Kim Spence, Acting Director Special Education/Success for All Branch in response to Decoding Dyslexia’s introduction letter to the honourable Lisa Thompson, Minister of Education (Appendix B). The term dyslexia is used and the prevalence of dyslexia is acknowledged. We are, however, discouraged that instead of acting on the decades of available research on the importance of early intervention and on how teach children with dyslexia to read, more studies are underway, no plans are in place to screen students or train teachers. There is no shortage of good research on dyslexia. There is a shortage of implementation of the knowledge.
We submit this to the Curriculum Consultation because the 6 - 17% of children with dyslexia in the province of Ontario matter. They have the same right to an education that every other child in this province. The manner in which we teach reading is the key for a child with dyslexia having access to education and find success in school and in life.
Since dyslexia has not been adequately addressed within Ontario’s public education system, Decoding Dyslexia Ontario would like to provide the consultation with some basic definitions and information relating to dyslexia:
“Dyslexia is a brain-based type of learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read. These individuals typically read at levels significantly lower than expected despite having normal intelligence. Although the disorder varies from person to person, common characteristics among people with dyslexia are difficulty with phonological processing (the manipulation of sounds), spelling, and/or rapid visual-verbal responding. In individuals with adult onset of dyslexia, it usually occurs as a result of brain injury or in the context of dementia; this contrasts with individuals with dyslexia who simply were never identified as children or adolescents. Dyslexia can be inherited in some families, and recent studies have identified a number of genes that may predispose an individual to developing dyslexia.”
U.S. National Institutes of Healthhttps://www.ninds.nih.gov/Disorders/All-Disorders/Dyslexia-Information-Pagehttps://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/reading/conditioninfo/pages/disorders.aspx
Dyslexia is a specific type of learning disability which has been investigated for over 100 years. The most common indicator of dyslexia is difficulty decoding words, however this is often accompanied by processing speed challenges and working memory deficits that can affect severity.
Dyslexia is known to be: very heritable; present at birth; a life-long condition; a specific brain/neurology difference; affects every race and socioeconomic class; runs a spectrum from mild to severe based upon genetic risk and environmental risk; responds to systematic, sequential, explicit and evidence-based reading instruction methodologies; responds best to remediation provided at a young age due to greater neural plasticity within younger
brains (Bayles, K.A. & Tomoeda, C.K., 2010).
Other than dyslexia, other known risks for reading struggles at school include English language learning, fetal alcohol syndrome (BC Ministry of Education, 1996), low socioeconomic status, mild intellectual disability (van Wingerden, E., 2018), executive function (Whitney Sesma H. et al, 2009) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
According to the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada report PIRLS/ePIRLS 2016 Canada in Context: Canadian Results from the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study, 18% of Ontario Grade 4 students read below the benchmark set by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement which coordinates the PIRLS assessment (Brochu, P. et al, 2018).
As well, using a very ‘rough’ percentage that 10% of all grade school students have some degree of dyslexia, Decoding Dyslexia Ontario estimates that the 10% equates to, this year, 200,000 Ontario students showing signs of dyslexia. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/educationfacts.html
3.0 Why Ontario’s Policies, Curriculum and Services Must Change
Students with dyslexia can learn to read and there is significant research that provides clear instruction on how to do so. Ontario must leverage this global research into best practice to address the large numbers of students struggling to learn to read because of dyslexia across our province.
Known best practices to mitigate the key common dyslexia symptom, poor reading as per the norm, include: Screening children for dyslexia in Kindergarten; Universal Design for Learning (UDL) inclusive of students with dyslexia which requires that primary grade reading
instruction be evidence-based, that is, in-keeping with the meta-analysis of more than 100,000 reading research studies that resulted in the U.S. National Reading Panel Report of 2000; and
When reading instruction in the Primary classroom fails for a student, employ reading interventions that correspond with the recommendations from the International Dyslexia Association
Currently, the majority of students with dyslexia: Are culled from French immersion programs (Outhit, J., 2018) Are not identified until Grade 3 or later Perform poorly on EQAO assessments compared to non-SEN students (EQAO, 2012) Are unprepared to take academic-level courses in secondary school (please see note below) Require more time to graduate from secondary school than non-SEN students, and Drop out at more than twice the rate of non-SEN students (Parekh, G., 2013).
These outcomes must change. This infographic is from the Toronto District School Board (TDSB, 2015).
4.0 Ontario’s Reading Curriculum - Align Ontario Policy and Practice with the Global Science
Reading is the foundational skill that affects all other learning in grade school. To make reading instruction accessible to all struggling readers (a broad classification which includes our biologically pre-disposed children), the following changes should be made to the Ontario’s Ministry of Education reading-related policies.
4.1 Review Kindergarten and Primary Grades Curriculum
Numerous reading research studies, including the landmark U.S. National Reading Panel Report of 2000, state that all struggling readers require classroom reading instruction which includes explicit, systematic, and intentional instruction in phonological awareness, phonemic decoding, vocabulary, language structure, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. Otherwise, learning to read within the general classroom is inaccessible to all struggling readers.
The evidence-based reading instruction data applies to English language classroom instruction and to French language classroom instruction. “This report affirms that the basic components of effective reading instruction are the same whether the language of instruction is English or French.” (Ontario Ministry of Education Expert Panel on Reading Report, 2003).
1. Revise the Kindergarten and Primary reading curriculum, English and French streams, to evidence-based reading instruction which aligns with the scientific research, including: National Reading Panel Report, 2000 (U.S.) * Foundations for Literacy Report, 2008 (Canada) ** Rose Report, 2009 (U.K.) ***
2. Educate pre- and in-service teachers on how to identify dyslexia and in evidence-based reading instruction methods to ensure students with dyslexia learn to read.
3. Instruct and certify Special Education teachers who work within Ontario’s English and French school boards in structured literacy-based reading remediation. Provide this type of intervention to students who fail to meet benchmarks in general education in a timely manner.
4. Screen all Ontario students for dyslexia in Kindergarten so that timely and appropriate intervention can begin no later than the end of Grade 1.
5. Guarantee and provide the appropriate assistive technology and resources (including digital textbooks, books and other digital written material), in order to support students with dyslexia in the classroom.
Additionally, since severe dyslexia is the most challenging reading disability to remediate, the explicit, systematic and cumulative evidence-based classroom practices (often referred to as Structured Literacy) that work for students with dyslexia will work for most struggling readers. (Smith, R. and Topple, J., 2018). Conversely, reading remediations that work for English Language Learners or for children from low SES households do not necessarily work well, or at all, for students with dyslexia whose reading challenges are more difficult to remediate and will be present to some extent for life.
Finally, by rewriting Ontario’s Kindergarten and Primary Curriculum, and implementing explicit, systematic and cumulative evidence-based classroom reading instruction, the number of struggling readers that will require differentiated instruction or special education services will decrease. Children will be less likely to drop out of French immersion programs to move to the English stream due to reading struggles. The learning gap and the mental health challenges that develop as a child struggles to learn to read will not take root. Teaching reading effectively to all children can prevent a host of costly interventions that result when a child fails to learn to read.
The Ontario Branch of the International Dyslexia Association’s (ONBIDA) can provide evidence as to best practice classroom reading instruction and for intervention for students with dyslexia. The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) has studied reading methodologies and reading disability, specifically dyslexia, since the 1930s. As well, the IDA’s Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading provides a template to follow.
4.2 Educate all pre- and in-service teachers
The lack of evidence-based reading instruction in teacher’s colleges was covered recently by American Public Radio reporter Emily Hanford in the September 2018 radio documentary/article Hard Words, Why Aren’t Kids Being Taught to Read? (Hanford, E., 2018)
Moreover, in addition to Ms. Hanford’s broadly read investigative journalism piece, reading scientists including Dr. Mark Seidenberg (Seidenberg, M., 2017) and Dr. Maryanne Wolf (Wolf, M., 2018) have written and spoken about the requirement for teacher training in identifying dyslexia and in evidence-based reading instruction and reading remediation.All teachers need to understand the risk factors for dyslexia, how to initially screen for dyslexia, how to monitor reading progress, warning signs, and when to involve special education to ensure timely and effective reading
“Phonics instruction produced substantial reading growth among younger children at risk of developing future reading problems. Effect sizes were d = 0.58 for kindergartners at risk and d = 0.74 for 1st graders at risk. Phonics instruction also significantly improved the reading performance of disabled readers (i.e., children with average IQs but poor reading) for whom the effect size was d = 0.32. These effect sizes were all statistically greater than zero.
Systematic phonics instruction produced significantly greater growth than non-phonics instruction in younger children’s reading comprehension ability (d = 0.51). However, the effects of systematic phonics instruction on text comprehension in readers above 1st grade were mixed.
The conclusion drawn is that growth in word-reading skills is strongly enhanced by systematic phonics instruction when compared to non-phonics instruction for kindergartners and 1st graders as well as for older struggling readers. Growth in reading comprehension is also boosted by systematic phonics instruction for younger students and reading disabled students. These findings should dispel any belief that teaching phonics systematically to young children interferes with their ability to read and comprehend text. Quite the opposite is the case.”
U.S. National Reading Panel Report 2000, p. 2-94
remediation. Yet, this is not the norm in Ontario. Decoding Dyslexia Ontario hears this from teachers themselves. Teachers want to help all children be successful at learning the fundamental skill of reading, and they want the skills to be able to do so.
With respect to pre- and in-service teacher training, Decoding Dyslexia Ontario defers to the expert opinion of IDA’s Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading.
4.3 Train and Certify Special Education Teachers
Pre-service and in-service Special education teachers need training to know how to screen for dyslexia, how to monitor students with dyslexia, the best time to intervene with dyslexia, and what reading remediation works best for dyslexia. In the U.K., this has already begun. Changes to the manner in which teachers are trained to screen for dyslexia and to teach reading were implemented following the release of The Rose Review and Rose Report (Rose, J. 2006, 2009). In the U.K., this includes training expert teachers to oversee others in the classroom.
Throughout the U.S., legislation to require early screening and teacher training exists in the majority of states (Youman, M. and Mather, N., 2018). Dyslexia Handbooks and online training exists in many states that provide expert support for administrators and teachers in local schools (New Jersey Department of Education, 2017). Yet in Ontario, the word dyslexia is not used within the Special Education Guide and broad-scale effective instruction for Special Education Teachers in what it is that students with dyslexia need is not in place.
Once again, the ONBIDA can provide detailed insight on the type of education special education teachers require and the reading specialist certification that can be created. Their parent organization the International Dyslexia Association accredits pre-service and in-service educator education programs on the basis of a school’s ability to follow IDA’s Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading.
4.4 Screen Kindergarten students for being ‘at risk’ for dyslexia
Many global reading research studies indicate that explicit, systematic, and intentional instruction in phonological awareness and decoding work best, and therefore must be written into the curriculum and leveraged, in Kindergarten and Grade 1.
According to Ontario’s Expert Panel on Reading, 2003:
“There is a critical window of opportunity from the ages of four to seven for learning to read. Children who successfully learn to read in the early primary years of school are well prepared to read for learning and for pleasure in the years to come. On the other hand, children who struggle with reading in Grades 1 to 3 are at a serious disadvantage. Academically, they have a much harder time keeping up with their peers, and they increasingly fall behind in other subjects. They are far more likely to suffer low self-esteem and, in their teen years, are more likely to drop out without completing high school. Children with unaddressed reading difficulties have not failed the system; the system has failed them.” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2003, p. 1).
A 2016 paper from Tufts University, Harvard University and Boston Children’s Hospital researchers on the neurobiology of dyslexia states:
“When is the best time to intervene for atypical reading development? It has been shown that targeted literacy interventions are most effective when administered in kindergarten and first grade [187,188]. Across six studies, after receiving intensive instruction (number of instruction hours ranged from 30 to over 300 across studies), 56 – 92% of the at-risk beginning readers reached the range of average reading ability [187]. A meta-analysis comparing early intervention studies offering at least 100 sessions, reported larger effect sizes for intervention studies conducted with kindergarten and first graders than with children in 2nd and 3rd grades.” (Ozernov-Palchik, O. et al, 2016).
There is global, evidenced-based consensus to identify children as being ‘at risk’ for dyslexia in Kindergarten and begin reading intervention immediately, certainly no later than Grade 1. With early identification and evidence-based instruction the reading deficit common to dyslexia can be greatly mitigated due to the neural plasticity of the human brain. Yet in Ontario, it is common to hear that dyslexia does not exist and/or that we do not test for reading disability/dyslexia until at least Grade 3.
In line with this global evidence, the Ontario Psychological Association (OPA) revised its Learning Disabilities Assessment guidelines.
“Earlier assessment need not involve complex psychoeducational testing such as administration of IQ tests. It does involve effective screening of all children in kindergarten and grade one for early identification and to optimize access to early intervention (Fletcher & Vaughn, 2009; Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003). Those determined to be at risk, based on low early literacy (e.g., phonemic processing) and numeracy skills, are then provided with evidenced-based intervention in kindergarten and the early grades.” (Ontario Psychological Association 2018, p. 22)
Now that OPA also endorses early screening, Decoding Dyslexia Ontario defers to any screening recommendations advanced by ONBIDA since their parent organization is follows the assessment of available screeners. Decoding Dyslexia Ontario endorses screening for dyslexia in Kindergarten within all Ontario English and French schools.
Once screening is in place, those children ‘at risk’ for dyslexia or other academic struggles must be monitored and intervention must be promptly provided. For children with dyslexia, intervention/remediation should commence when children cannot succeed with regular classroom instruction, including providing remediation in Kindergarten and Grade 1.
4.5 Guarantee and provide the appropriate assistive technology
Children with dyslexia can learn to read: functional reading skill must be the goal for all students in public education. However, while reading remediation is on-going for students or when a student has severe challenges maintaining pace with classroom reading, appropriate and adequate assistive technology must be provided. People for Education reports indicate that many students with disabilities cannot get access to computers and assistive technology. Once a child with dyslexia has basic reading skills, assistive technology is critical to allow the student to keep up with the reading and writing demands of the classroom.
To be clear, assistive technology DOES NOT remove the responsibility from the Ministry of Education under the Education Act, or any Ontario school board, to identify and work to remediate a student’s reading challenge.
Within English and French school board, written materials must be made available in accessible formats that work for all students with disabilities.
As mentioned earlier in this submission, competent reading is the foundation upon which knowledge is built.This includes mathematics. To comprehend and to solve mathematics, one must be able to read the relevant material.
To solve either math or scientific problems, a student frequently must read, and then re-read, the problem at hand. A common problem-comprehension technique is to underline/highlight the key words/numbers within a question or problem. Moreover, by the secondary school level, students taking a STEM subject must also be able to discount extra data/information that is provided within the problem. From this, the student must be able to work through to their solution. The ability to read is critical to ensuring success in the Ontario Math curriculum. Additionally, we would like to point out that assistive technology, specifically that with text-to-speech and speech-to-text functionality, is definitely not equivalent to reading and writing for STEM subject mastery. Again AT cannot be substituted for good reading instruction.
If a student cannot read and are reliant on text-to-speech and/or speech-to-text at the middle and secondary school stage in public education, they are at a serious disadvantage in math and the other STEM subjects. Moreover, such reading struggles often co-occur with working memory challenges and/or executive function challenges making it exceptionally more difficult to ‘ear-read’/hear a problem, to discern the important data within the problem; to establish the ‘attack’ or order of operation; to work through the steps to the solution; and to finally present their solution if they cannot read or write. Hearing/ear-reading complex STEM problems result in cognitive overload.
Because reading and writing is very important for all STEM subjects, if a student’s reading and writing skill is known to be slower or at a lower level than their learning abled peers, the accommodation of additional time must be provided to students with dyslexia or other reading or writing disabilities. This duty to accommodate is clearly outlined under The Ontario Human Rights Code. However, People for Education reports indicate that such accommodations are not being provided consistently for students, such as those with dyslexia, who require them across the province
Also with respect to accommodations for students that have writing challenges [which is common for many children with dyslexia (particularly spelling)], for any STEM problems with a few lines of writing, such students should be able to write both short and longer answers to problems on a computer and then attach the printout to any STEM work that they prefer to work out by hand.
SEN students must be provided the choice to work out STEM problems, and write up STEM laboratory work, by hand or compose on computer – never one or the other. Students must have the choice since it is individual in nature and students must discern and know what works for them.
“Thorough understanding of mathematics enhances educational and occupational opportunities for all people. The workplace also requires increasingly advanced computational and technological skills; those who do not possess these skills are restricted in career choices (Kapperman & Sticken, 2003)” (Brawand & Johnson, 2016)
The DyslexiaHelp website from the University of Michigan provides some further insight into dyslexia and math and provides great suggestions for how Math curriculum can be easily modified to support all students, including those with dyslexia, in the classroom: http://dyslexiahelp.umich.edu/professionals/dyslexia-school/mathematics.
6.0 EQAO
The Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) was established as a quality, monitoring and accountability measure by the Royal Commission on Learning. From the annual EQAO results, it was anticipated that best practices could be identified, as well as school or Board challenges, and segmented achievement gaps, all of which would feed into and inform instruction, priorities and policy.
For students with dyslexia, EQAO provides much needed data. It is through the EQAO assessment that the achievement gaps in reading was evidenced by the early 2000’s for special educational needs (SEN) students. Moreover, this gap was shown to be province-wide (systemic) in every board.
EQAO testing used to exempt students who could not adequately read the test from taking the EQAO tests; EQAO has always permitted scribing for those with a writing disability (frequently associated/comorbid with dyslexia). Most Boards had significant exemption rates at the turn of the century.
Over the past number of years, EQAO has permitted more assistive technology (AT) usage for students with Individual Education Plans (IEPs) which can be either IPRC/formal or informal. Frequently an IEP will list AT (text-to-speech, and speech-to-text) for students with known reading challenges. In fact, this accommodation is common for students with LD/dyslexia since they cannot read at grade level but do need to access subject matter in areas such as geography or history so as not to fall behind their peers. The use of text-to-speech technology for the EQAO assessments by learning disabled students with documented reading struggles creates the situation whereby the student’s reading ability measure transforms into an ‘oral comprehension’ measure.
The 2008 Ontario Auditor General Report sheds light on how the use of assistive technology on EQAO assessments can affect outcome. From page 368,
“an increase in the success rate on the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test of students who need assistive technology. A training project on the use of assistive technology was conducted in four of the 10 secondary schools at one school board. The success rate of students who needed assistive technology to write tests was 63% at these four schools, compared to 41% at the board’s other six secondary schools.” (Ontario Auditor General Report, 2008)
On the same page, the Auditor General leverages EQAO to indicate assessment trends in Figure 4 (next page). What is not answered is in reading measures, how much of the reading gain is due to leveraging assistive technology to measure reading skill? Each year of EQAO assessment since 2008, there has been more AT-enabled assessments offered and used by Ontario’s SEN students.
The EQAO results do not include, year-over-year, how many SEN students in each Board are using AT-enabled reading skill assessments.
The position of the Ministry of Education and EQAO regarding use of AT for reading skill assessment differs from similar policies in the United States. The U.S. National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) is conducted in Grades 4, 8 and 12, does not permit either read aloud or text-to-speech AT for tests that are measuring reading comprehension. Below “SD” is an acronym for “Students with Disabilities”.
To identify a reading skill achievement gap, as was one of the purposes of the EQAO, using AT which includes text-to-speech functionality changes the nature of the assessment so much that the assessment is changed into an oral comprehension assessment. By establishing an oral version of the EQAO’s reading assessment, the Ontario Ministry of Education demonstrates that it has different education expectations for a segment of Ontario’s SEN students.
For an analogy, if you wanted to know how poor your eyesight is, do you read the eye chart in the doctor’s office using eye glasses (an accommodation that would mask your vision challenge) or do you read the eye chart without your corrective lens so you and the professional can understand the degree-of-impairment? Allowing the use of AT on the EQAO tests masks the need of our students with dyslexia to actually learn to read.
7.0 Mental Health
Decoding Dyslexia Ontario is greatly concerned by the lack of attention paid the mental health of our children with dyslexia. It is not that we aren’t talking about Mental Health in Ontario, it is that we aren’t talking about dyslexia and so the educational needs and related mental health needs are being ignored. It is well documented that reading failure can lead to mental health issues (Rosen, P., 2018). Should the Ontario government institute Decoding Dyslexia Ontario’s recommended reading policy changes, earlier identification and remediation will lessen challenges of many children since the year-after-year failure to read and learn may end.
However, mental health challenges could also be lessened if Ontario teachers would understand the ongoing challenges caused by dyslexia. Even after one learns to read, dyslexia will continue to pose a challenge in terms of reading speed, reading comprehension which worsens with fatigue due to great effort required for decoding, and very commonly poor spelling.
On November 28th, Statistics Canada released the Canadian Survey on Disability Reports 2017 which indicates the common co-occurrence of mental health challenges with learning disabilities, including a staggering statistic of 25% for youth ages 15-24. Moreover, University of Toronto Esme Fuller Thompson’s research indicates much higher suicide rates for individuals with learning disabilities. (Fuller Thompson, E. 2017) We are also well aware from both American and Canadian statistics that a large percentage of the incarcerated population experiences very low levels of literacy. (Moody, K.E. et al, 2000)
These statistics about mental health and potential outcomes for people with dyslexia greatly concern Decoding Dyslexia Ontario parents. We would like the connection between learning disabilities/dyslexia and mental health issues to be discussed and addressed more effectively by education policy makers, physicians, psychologists, school boards, teacher education, and with all students. The anxiety and depression that our children feel is not innately because of their dyslexia, rather it is rooted in a system that fails to address their educational needs. Most students with dyslexia enter school eager for their first experience of formal schooling, yet find that the environment does not respond to their need. In fact, school is often a place where they receive negative assessment of their skills and their abilities, leading to poor self-esteem, often disruptive behaviour and school absenteeism. Addressing and supporting the mental health needs of students with dyslexia is a critical component in providing access to education in the province of Ontario. By discussing mental health needs in grade school, we hope that our children will be more likely to seek out help when they attend post-secondary school or enter the workforce.
Decoding Dyslexia Ontario appreciates this feedback opportunity offered to our parent-led non-profit organization, and all other parents. We are thankful for the opportunity to provide our insight and research towards improving Ontario’s public education system. We are available to discuss our submission further should the consultation have questions on anything presented here.
We eagerly await the broad systemic changes that will end the lack of identification and effective reading instruction, and the lowered academic expectations and opportunities that our children with dyslexia endure in Ontario’s public education. We know that the Supreme Court of Canada case, Moore v. British Columbia (Education) requires that in all jurisdictions across Canada, the governments must ensure the “legal rights of students with learning disabilities to receive an education that gives them an opportunity to develop their full potential.” (Philpott, D.F. and Fiedorowicz, C.A.M. 2012) With the curriculum changes suggested throughout this submission, access to education with the goal of full participation could be achieved by the many students with dyslexia in our public schools.
We laud the government for beginning this broad conversation. We welcome this Consultation as an examination of the status quo, a review of global evidence, critical analysis by multiple stakeholders including parents, and - in the future - the introduction of equitable, accessible and evidence-based educational policy, curriculum and guidelines; universal classroom design to increase accessibility for all students; greater accountability; and, inclusion for all. This is a positive step for students with dyslexia and for all students in the province of Ontario.
December 14, 2017 APPENDIX APremier Kathleen Wynne Government of OntarioLegislative Building Queen's Park Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A1
Mitzie HunterMinisterMinistry of Education22nd Floor, Mowat Block900 Bay StreetToronto, Ontario M7A 1L2
Dear Premier Wynne and Minister Hunter,
Subject: Request meeting to discuss Ontario Special Education Needs (SEN) Students with Dyslexia
One year ago, the Toronto Star ran an article about the accessibility of Ontario’s education system with respect to students with disabilities which included,
“The province will develop an education accessibility standard to remove barriers that students with disabilities face in classrooms, curriculum and on school premises, Premier Kathleen Wynne said Monday…
… In the five-page letter sent Monday, advocates said barriers make it difficult for disabled students to succeed. The result is unemployment that has reached crisis levels among adults with disabilities.”
Even before this article appeared our parental advocacy group, Decoding Dyslexia Ontario, made many attempts to have the concerns regarding the “barriers [that] make it difficult for disabled students to succeed” addressed. These barriers include the lack of timely identification, the need for scientific, evidence-based reading instruction, the need for intense interventions based upon structured literacy and the necessity that teachers are trained in evidence-based methods. With the current barriers, children with Dyslexia show very sizeable education achievement gaps and outcomes in comparison with learning abled students. In Ontario, children with Dyslexia need equity in education.
In the 12-months since the Toronto Star piece ran, we have made several overtures to the Government and to the Ministry of Education to address the accessibility issues and equity barriers that students with Dyslexia face. We have heard from a growing number of parents across Ontario about the lack of awareness and appropriate services for their children in the public-school system, and the detrimental effect this situation has on their children’s emotional and social well-being.
Dyslexia, the most common learning disability, is no longer listed explicitly under the exceptionality category of Learning Disability provided to boards by the Ministry despite Dyslexia’s key common symptom is a reading disorder - but all reading disorders are not Dyslexia (since reading struggles can also be caused by ELL or other conditions such as fetal alcohol syndrome or ASD).
Last week, the Government took much-needed action to provide children with Autism in Ontario with evidence-based interventions. This action builds on existing initiatives including more ABA, greater ABA education and OME’s Effective Educational Practices for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders Guide. …2/
We commend these initiatives and look to the Ministry of Education to implement best practices for Dyslexia identification and intervention. For example, we recommend developing an Effective Educational Practices for Students with Dyslexia guide.
Dyslexia’s evidence-based educational practices offer the knowledge of how to provide appropriate, and timely, interventions to level the playing field between the learning disabled and the learning abled. Students with Dyslexia can learn to read and there is significant and current research to tell us how. Ontario must leverage this global research into best practice to address the large numbers of students struggling to learn to read because of Dyslexia across our province.
Known best practices to mitigate the key Dyslexia symptom, poor reading as per the norm, include: Screening children for Dyslexia in Kindergarten Universal Design for Learning (UDL) inclusive of students with Dyslexia which requires that the Primary grade
reading instruction be evidence-based, that is, in-keeping with the meta-analysis that resulted in the U.S. National Reading Panel Report of 2000, and
When reading instruction in the Primary classroom fails for a student, employ reading interventions that correspond with the recommendations from the International Dyslexia Association
Currently, the majority of students with Dyslexia: Are not identified until Grade 3 or later Perform worse on EQAO assessments than non-SEN students Are unprepared to take academic-level courses in secondary school Require more time to graduate from secondary school than non-SEN students, and Drop out at more than twice the rate of non-SEN students
Within the past year, Decoding Dyslexia Ontario has met or corresponded with the Ministry of Education many times with little to no outcome:
October 17, 2016 Met with ADM Martyn Beckett and Director of Spec. Ed. Louise Sirisko to discuss concerns with respect to the treatment of children with dyslexia in Ontario public schools. Late identification, the need for evidence-based intervention and teacher training, and the importance of using the term ‘dyslexia’ were all discussed. An online webinar for teacher training was shared with Mr. Beckett and Ms. Sirisko following the meeting. No further action by the MOE
December 12, 2016 Open letter to Premier Wynne, jointly with the Ontario Branch of the International Dyslexia Association, with a public request for a meeting regarding special education and dyslexia – no meeting granted, received a response letter from Mitzie Hunter. No further action by the MOE
August 31, 2017 Met with ADM Martyn Beckett and Spec. Ed Director Louise Sirisko, along with Dyslexia Canada, regarding the revised 2017 Special Education Guidelines upon which we were not consulted. We were told to submit our comments on-line for consideration
September 21, 2017 Submitted on-line to Linda Yan, MOE Education Officer, our comments and concerns with the revised 2017 Spec Ed Guidelines. Ms. Yan responded that our concerns will be logged.
Oct 19, Nov 3, Nov 6, 2017 Email exchange with ADM Martin Beckett re: dyslexia status and new Spec Ed Guidelines
At our meeting with Martyn Beckett and Louise Sirisko in August 2017, we expressed concern at not being consulted in the development of the draft 2017 Special Education Guidelines. More significantly, we expressed that the revised Guidelines eliminate the word Dyslexia and any clear definition of it.
This action, to eliminate the term Dyslexia from the Special Education Guidelines, indicates to us that the needs of our children, who represent about 15% of the population, are not being fully considered in the development of these new Guidelines. Furthermore, that by eliminating the word Dyslexia from the Guidelines, the Ministry appears to be creating a systemic barrier to equality of access to education for children with Dyslexia. There again has been no effective response to these expressed concerns.
The Ministry has told us several times that they are committed to addressing our children's needs under the broad category of learning disability. However, students with Dyslexia are continuously falling through the cracks in Ontario because the specifics of Dyslexia and training about the necessary interventions are not being provided to teachers and other school-related professionals.
If you don't identify Dyslexia and provide clear information to those who teach our children every day, they will continue to struggle to support our children effectively. This creates a systemic barrier to the education that these children have a right to under The Ontario Human Rights Code.
To that end, we request a meeting with you to discuss how the province truly intends to address the needs of children with Dyslexia, that, under the current approach by the Ministry, are not being effectively supported in Ontario’s public schools. Furthermore, we would like to discuss how Decoding Dyslexia Ontario can be included and fully participate in discussions, such as the Education Standards Development Committee, and forums that directly affect our children with Dyslexia.
Finally, we were pleased to see Patrick Case’s appointment to the new Education Equity Secretariat. We are very interested in the unfolding Education Equity Action Plan, and believe that the lack of identification, non-availability of targeted remediation and known achievement gaps are equity and human rights issues. We have written to Mr. Case to discuss how our organization could provide input into the Education Equity Action Plan (letter enclosed).
We look forward to working with you to help create an education system that is accessible and equitable for all children in Ontario.
Patrick Case, ADMEducation Equity SecretariatMinistry of Education900 Bay StreetToronto, Ontario M7A 1L2
Dear Mr. Case,
Subject: Education Equity Secretariat and the Education Equity Action Plan
I am writing to introduce our advocacy organization Decoding Dyslexia Ontario. As the name implies, we are working for accessibility and services within Ontario’s public education system that meet the needs of children with dyslexia. We are the Ontario chapter of a larger, US-originated, movement whose goals include:
Including “dyslexia” in education policy Mandatory teacher training on dyslexia, including warning signs and intervention strategies Mandatory early screening tests for dyslexia Mandatory dyslexia remediation programs, accessible to general and special education students Access to, and appropriate use of, “assistive technologies” in public schools
I saw you on The Agenda in November and think that your mandate, and work experience, are commendable. Our organization has a struggle to have the Ontario’s public education system embrace the global research and initiatives which could increase education equity, experience and outcome for students with dyslexia.
Since you are mandated with equity issues within public education, please know that Ontario deviates from global Best Practices when it comes to reading instruction and to dyslexia identification and intervention.
Issue Ontario Global ComparativesDyslexia policies, guidelines or appropriate curriculum
No UK, Scotland, Ireland, France, Finland, Germany have Dyslexia recognition, as well,
Furthermore, in August 2017 the Ministry of Education unveiled its new Special Education Guidelines that eliminate the word dyslexia but does mention ASD another neurobiological condition thereby discriminating against students with dyslexia who continually underperform on many educational measures. Please see the attached letter to the Premier which includes some of the known education achievement gaps.
On behalf of Decoding Dyslexia Ontario, we would very much like to meet with you to discuss the Secretariat, the Education Equity Action Plan, and our involvement.
APPENDIX BFrom: Special Education (EDU) <[email protected]>Sent: August 29, 2018 10:57 AMTo: [email protected]: Correspondence - Decoding Dyslexia Ontario
Dear Ms. Makk,
Thank you for your email, written correspondence and supplementary background information on dyslexia. I am pleased to respond on behalf of the Minister of Education.
Please know that the Ministry of Education is committed to fostering a caring and safe learning environment in Ontario schools to support the success and well-being of all students, including students with dyslexia.
As you noted in your correspondence, students with learning disabilities (LDs) represent the largest category of exceptionality in Ontario, with over 38% of Identification, Placement and Review Committee (IPRC)-identified exceptionalities categorized as LD, according to 2016-17 preliminary data. While the exact prevalence of dyslexia is not known, estimates range from 6 to 17% of the school-age population (J. Fletcher et al, 2007, p. 105). The Ministry is aware that many of these students experience numerous challenges in school and continues to work with schools boards to strengthen their capacity to support students with LD.
As part that effort, the EDU supported a number of initiatives for students with LD that include:
The 2014 revision of Policy/Program Memorandum 8 – Identification of and Program Planning for Students with Learning Disabilities (PPM 8) to reflect current research evidence, and practices in the identification, assessment and program planning for students with LD. The definition of “learning disability” in PPM 8 is intentionally broad and inclusive in order to recognize that there is a wide range of learning disabilities/disorders that may range in severity. This includes reading disorders such as dyslexia.
The electronic release of Learning for All, A Guide to Effective Assessment and Instruction for All Students, Kindergarten to Grade 12. This guide has been designed to share information with educators about research-informed educational approaches proven to be effective in supporting the learning of all students from Kindergarten to Grade 12.
A partnership with the Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario (LDAO) to develop a range of resources (e.g., research summaries, practical strategies, webinars, and videos) for educators. These free resources are available to educators in Ontario at http://ldatschool.ca/ and http://taalecole.ca/. You may find there a number of resources that are specifically developed to increase knowledge and improve skills of educators to better support students with dyslexia. The LDAO also organizes annual Educators’ Summer Institutes targeting educators in Ontario who work or may work with students with LD. The Institute provides attendees with
practical information on effective assessment and instructional strategies, new perspectives, and knowledge in the field of LDs, including information that is relevant to supporting students with dyslexia.
The establishment of three-year intensive reading pilots in school boards in 2016. As part of the project, an external research team from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) at the University of Toronto is studying student outcomes and documenting the implementation process at the pilot boards.
The establishment of a Learning Disability (LD) reference group in 2016 to provide expertise and feedback on the pilots. The LD Reference Group is made up of school board and demonstration school representatives, a parent and student representative and community partners representing English-language and French-language perspectives. The LD Reference Group includes representation from Dyslexia Canada.
Your letter mentioned the critical role that early identification and intervention play in student outcomes. School boards are required to implement procedures for early and ongoing identification of the learning abilities and needs of all students as part of continuous assessment and program planning regardless of any diagnosed or undiagnosed medical condition. Research is also underway to support boards in developing a deeper understanding of learner profiles to inform early and ongoing assessment and intervention strategies. The team’s findings on best practices regarding the pilots will be presented to EDU at the end of the upcoming school year.
I also wish to acknowledge your concern regarding funding for special education. Ontario provides school boards with operating funding, including special education funding, through the annual Grants for Student Needs (GSN). In addition to GSN funding, the ministry provides school board with the Special Education Grant (SEG). The SEG supports positive outcomes for students with special education needs. It is for the additional costs of the programs, services, and/or equipment students may require.
EDU has recently announced a $52 million GSN investment will be refocused to support students with special education needs. This funding continues to support school boards in hiring multi- disciplinary teams which could include Speech-Language Pathologists, Psychologists, Social Workers, Behaviour Experts and others, as appropriate, based on local needs to support all students with special education needs.
In addition, EDU is continuing to collect and analyze feedback to inform any future revision to the Special Education in Ontario, Kindergarten to Grade 12: Policy and Resource Guide (2017).Decoding Dyslexia’s voice is an important contribution to this dialogue and I would encourage you to continue providing your feedback.
I appreciate your sharing the information prepared by Decoding Dyslexia Ontario. This information will be shared with my colleagues in the Provincial and Demonstration Schools Project of the Special Education/Success for All Branch.
Yours truly,Kim SpenceActing Director Special Education/Success for All Branch
Bayles, K.A. and Tomeda, C.K. Neuroplasticity: Implications for Treating Cognitive-Communication Disorders, ASHA Convention, 2010. https://www.asha.org/Events/convention/handouts/2010/1673-Bayles-Kathryn/
Brawand, A. and Johnson, N. (2016) Effective Methods for Delivering Mathematics Instruction to Students with Visual Impairments. Journal of Blindness Innovation and Research, Vol 6, No 1. 2016 https://nfb.org/images/nfb/publications/jbir/jbir16/jbir060101.html
British Columbia Ministry of Education. (1996). Teaching Students with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome/Effects, a Learning Resource for Teachers. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/kindergarten-to-grade-12/teach/teaching-tools/inclusive/fetal-alcohol-syndrome.pdf
Brochu, P., O’Grady, K., Scerbina, T. and Tao, Y. (2018). PIRLS/ePIRLS 2016 Canada in Context: Canadian Results from the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study. Toronto, Ontario. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada ISBN 978-0-88987-506-7. https://www.cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/385/PIRLS2016-Report-EN.pdf
Brown, R. S. and Parekh, G. (2010). Special education: Structural overview and student demographics (Research Report No. 10/11-03). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Toronto District School Board. https://www.tdsb.on.ca/Portals/research/docs/reports/SpecEdStructuralOverviewStudentDemo.pdf
Brown, R. S. and Parekh, G. (2013). The intersection of disability, achievement, and equity: A system review of special education in the TDSB (Research Report No. 12/13-12). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Toronto District School Board https://www.tdsb.on.ca/Portals/research/docs/reports/Intersection%20of%20Disability%20Achievement%20and%20Equity.pdf
Canadian Human Rights Commission. (2017). Left Out: Challenges faced by persons with disabilities in Canada's schools, Cat. No. HR4-41/2017E-PDF ISBN: 978-0-660-07398-9, Ottawa. p. 24, 2017 https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/sites/default/files/challenges_disabilities_schools_eng.pdf
Canadian Parents for French (2012). The State of French-Second-Language Education in Canada: Academically-challenged Students and French Second Language Programs [Contributors include Dr. N. Wise and Dr. F. Genesse (McGill University)] Canadian Parents for French, Ontario. ISBN 978-0-921189-34-3 https://cpf.ca/en/files/CPFNational_FSL2012_ENG_WEB2.pdf
Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO). (2012). Cohort tracking 2004 to 2012 infographic. Toronto.http://www.eqao.com/en/about_eqao/media_room/communication-docs/infographic-cohort-tracking-2012.pdf
Fuller-Thomson, E. (2017). One in 6 women with learning disabilities has attempted suicide, EurekaAlert!, American Association for the Advancement of Science. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-06/uot-oi6061917.php
Hanford, E. (2018). Hard Words, why aren’t kids being taught to read? APR Reports, American Public Radio. https://www.apmreports.org/story/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read
Hawken, J. (2008). Foundations for Literacy: An Evidence-based Toolkit for the Effective Reading and Writing Teacher. Canadian Language & Literacy Research Network. https://www.idaontario.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Hawkin-2008-Foundations-for-literacy-an-eivdence-based-toolkit-for-the-effective-reading-and-writing-teacher.pdf
International Dyslexia Association (2018) Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading. https://dyslexiaida.org/knowledge-and-practices/
Li, M., Malins, J.G., DeMille, M.M.C., Lovett, M.W., Truong, D.T., Epstein, K., Lacadie, C., Mehta, C., Bosson-Heenan, J., Gruen, J.R., Frijters, J.C., and the GRaD Study Consortium. (2018). A molecular-genetic and imaging-genetic approach to specific comprehension difficulties in children, NPJ Science of Learning, 3, Article number: 20. Nature. ISSN 2056-7936. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-018-0034-9
Lyytinen, H., Erskine, J., Hämäläinen, J., Torppa, M. and Ronimus, M. (2015) Dyslexia—Early Identification and Prevention: Highlights from the Jyväskylä Longitudinal Study of Dyslexia. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, 2015; 2(4): 330–338. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4624816/
Moody, K.C., Holzer C.E. 3rd, Roman M.J., Paulsen, K.A., Freeman, D.H., Haynes, M., James, T.N. (2000) Prevalence of dyslexia among Texas prison inmates. Tex Med, 96(6), 69-75. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10876375/
Morris, S., Fawcett, G., Brisebois, L., and Hughes, J. (2018). A demographic, employment and income profile of Canadian with disabilities aged 15 years and over, 2017. Canadian Survey on Disability Reports 2017, Statistics Canada, Ottawa. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-654-x/89-654-x2018002-eng.htm
National Assessment of Education Statistics (2015). NAEP Accommodations Increase Inclusiveness, Washington DC, https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/accom_table.aspx
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (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: Reports of the Subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf
New Jersey Department of Education (2017), The New Jersey Dyslexia Handbook A Guide to Early Literacy Development & Reading Struggles. https://www.nj.gov/education/specialed/dyslexia/NJDyslexiaHandbook.pdf
Office of the Auditor General of Ontario (2008), 2008 Annual Report, Government of Ontario. http://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/annualreports/arbyyear/ar2008.html
Ontario Human Rights Commission (2018), Policy on accessible education for students with disabilities, Government of Ontario, March 2018. ISBN : 978-1-4868-1869-3 (Print) 978-1-4868-1870-9 (HTML) 978-1-4868-1871-6 (PDF) http://www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Policy%20on%20accessible%20education%20for%20students%20with%20disabilities_FINAL_EN.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education (2003) The Report of the Expert Panel on Early Reading in Ontario. Toronto. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/reports/reading/reading.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education (2014). Policy/Program Memorandum No. 8: Identification of and Program Planning for Students with Learning Disabilities. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/extra/eng/ppm/ppm8.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education (2017). Special Education Guidelines. ISBN 978-1-4606-9592-0 (PDF) http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/policy/os/onschools_2017e.pdf
Ontario Psychological Association (2018). Ontario Psychological Association Guidelines for Diagnosis and Assessment of Children, Adolescents, and Adults with Learning Disabilities Consensus Statement and Supporting Documents, June 2018. http://www.psych.on.ca/getattachment/37646d71-1469-4731-a3c6-55a458a8238f/OPA-Guidelines-for-Diagnosis-and-Assessment-of-Learning-Disabilities-Sept-7-2018-(1)-1.pdf.aspx?ext=.pdf
Outhit, J. (2018). A school divided: What French immersion has done to Suddaby, Waterloo Region Record, July 17, 2018. https://www.therecord.com/news-story/8748056-a-school-divided-what-french-immersion-has-done-to-suddaby/
Ozernov-Palchik, O., Yu, X., Wang, Y. and Gaab, N. (2016). Lessons to be learned: how a comprehensive neurobiological framework of atypical reading development can inform educational practice, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 2016, 10:45–58 http://www.thegaablab.com/imgs/Ozernov_Palchik_2016_ResearchGate.pdf
Parekh, G. (2013). Structured Pathways: An Exploration of Programs of Study, School-wide and In-school Programs, as well as Promotion and Transference across Secondary Schools in the Toronto District School Board . Toronto District School Board, Organizational Development/Research & Information Services, p. 95. Dec 2013.
Philpott, D.F. and Fiedorowicz, C.A.M. (2012). The Supreme Court of Canada Ruling on Learning Disabilities [Moore vs BC Education Decision]. Learning Disabilities Association of Canada
Rose, J. (2006) Independent Review of the Teaching of Early Reading, Nottingham: DfES Publications. https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/5551/2/report.pdf
Rose, J. (2009) Identifying and Teaching Children and Young People with Dyslexia and Literacy Difficulties [Rose Report] http://www.thedyslexia-spldtrust.org.uk/media/downloads/inline/the-rose-report.1294933674.pdf
Rosen, P. (2018) Stress and Kids with Learning and Attention Issues, Understood.org USA LLC. https://www.understood.org/en/friends-feelings/managing-feelings/stress-anxiety/stress-and-kids-with-learning-and-attention-issues
Seidenberg, M. (2017) Language at the Speed of Sight: How We Read, Why So Many Can’t, and What Can Be Done About It, Basic Books. ISBN-10: 0465019323, ISBN-13: 978-0465019328
Shaywitz, S.E., Shaywitz B.A., Pugh, K.R., Fulbright, R.K., Constable, R.T., Mencl, W.E., Shankweiler, D.P., Liberman, A.M., Skudlarski, P., Fletcher, J.M., Katz, L., Marchione, K.E., Lacadie, C., Gatenby, C. and Gore, J.C. (1998) Functional disruption in the organization of the brain for reading in dyslexia, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Vol. 95, pp. 2636–2641, March 1998 http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/95/5/2636.full.pdf
Siegel, L. (2016) Not Stupid, Not Lazy: Understanding Dyslexia and Other Learning Disabilities. International Dyslexia Association, ISBN-10: 0892140690, ISBN-13: 978-0892140695
Smith R. and Topple, J. (2018). By Focusing on Dyslexia, We Address the Needs of All Children, International Dyslexia Association. https://dyslexiaida.org/by-focusing-on-dyslexia-we-address-the-needs-of-all-children/
Stanovich, P.J. and Stanovich, K.E. (2003) Using Research and Reason in Education: How Teachers can use Scientifically Based Research to Make Curricular and Instructional Decisions, National Institute for Literacy https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/Stanovich_Color.pdf
Supreme Court Judgments (2012). Moore vs. British Columbia (Education). Citation 2012 SCC 61; Report [2012] 3 SCR 360. https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/12680/index.do
Toronto District School Board [TDSB] (2015). Sifting, Sorting and Streaming., https://www.tdsb.on.ca/Portals/ward3/docs/Sifting,%20Sorting%20and%20Selecting.pdf Van Wingerden, E., Segers, E. van Balkom, H., and Verhoeven, L. (2018). Cognitive Constraints on the Simple View of Reading: A Longitudinal Study in Children With Intellectual Disabilities. Scientific Studies of Reading, Volume 22, 2018 Issue 4, Pages 321-334, Published online: 27 Mar 2018 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10888438.2018.1446435
Whitney Sesma, H., Mahone, E.M., Levine, T, Eason, S.H., and Cutting, L.E. (2009) The Contribution of Executive Skills to Reading Comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 2009 May; 15 (3): 232-246. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2728040/
Wolf, M. (2018). Reader Come Home, The Reading Brain in a Digital World, Harper Collins. ISBN-13: 978-0062388780; ISBN-10: 0062388789
Wong, M. (2015) Stanford study on brain waves shows how different teaching methods affect reading development. Stanford Report, May 28, 2015 https://news.stanford.edu/news/2015/may/reading-brain-phonics-052815.html
Youman, M and Mather, N. (2018) Dyslexia Laws in the USA: A 2018 Update, International Dyslexia Association. https://dyslexiaida.org/dyslexia-laws-in-the-usa-an-update/
