A Family Struggles With Dyslexia

Kim Smith, now an adult, was diagnosed with dyslexia in fifth grade.  Her son, Mercury Nevarez, attends school in San Bernadino County, California, and also struggles with reading.

It appears there's some kind of disconnect between the family, Mercury's school, and the district.

Because the family has a history of dyslexia, both parents have asked the school to test Mercury and asked for him to be held back a year. Both requests have been denied. “They said it’s not their responsibility to test him, and they don’t want to hold him back because they said it’s bad on his self esteem,” his father Joe Nevarez said.

It's a pity, because Hesperia has been a leader in changing the approach to struggling students.  I hope that young Nevarez is getting the help he needs.

The district, Hesperia, has an enrollment of over 20,000 children in k-12 classes. 

The director of special education, points to Hesperia's program called ExCEL (EXcellence, a Commitment to Every Learner), which seems to be home-grown at Hesperia, but has been adopted by a number of districts in California and around the country.

You know, it only takes one person to block a family's access to intervention for a student: a resistant teacher, a resistent Special Ed supervisor, or a resistant principal.

From reading the material about Hesperia's programs (early intervention, great!; a reliance on Reading Recovery, not so great), I'm wondering if Mercury Nevarez didn't just fall through the cracks.

More on Hesperia USD and the ExCEL program:

The Impetus for Change

Before the district adopted its model, known as "ExCEL" (Excellence - a Commitment to Every Learner), district staff faced growing challenges. They knew that their special education population was large (about 12%) and growing, and that those who entered special education were not leaving - their learning problems were not being remediated. Special education expenses were "encroaching" on general education dollars.

 

"We were becoming dissatisfied with the cost of special education. We were becoming dissatisfied with the lack of success that we were having in special education. We were dissatisfied with the fact that the kids who were going into special education were not coming out."
  -Interviewee, Hesperia Unified School District

They became aware that, in the process of using traditional criteria to qualify children for special education, students had to fall so far behind to qualify that it was difficult to help them catch up again.

Prior to adoption of ExCEL, teachers planned lessons and taught classes autonomously, using a traditional, non-collaborative approach.

 

"Everyone pretty much worked in their own classroom in isolation and did their own thing."
  -Interviewee, Hesperia Unified School District

Parents, staff and students often had low expectations, believing that many children faced so many socioeconomic challenges that they were unlikely to improve academically.

In exploring ways to improve special education, planners at the district realized they needed to change not just special education, but the system as a whole. They wanted to intervene early with children to provide assistance before they failed or before the "achievement gap" identified them as eligible for special education. They also wanted to better serve their students in general education. The district knew that it wanted to reduce the numbers of children referred into special education, but at the same time, it did not want to reduce special education staff positions.

 

"If you're riding a horse and it dies, get off."
  Jim Huckeba, Director of Student Services, in The Special Edge, August 2003, p. 4.

The administrator of the Desert/Mountain SELPA, in which the district is located, traveled to Elk Grove Unified School District in Northern California in to observe and bring away ideas that could be applied to Hesperia schools. Hesperia's district superintendent, Richard Bray, also became familiar with Elk Grove's approach and saw its possibilities for the district. That same year they also attended training on the Johns Hopkins reform model, "Success for All." The Hesperia District created a unique set of strategies based on their own research on effective reform, and their observations of the Elk Grove model, and called it "ExCEL."

Implementation began at the elementary school level, extended to the middle school level, and is in its early stages at high schools. Adoption of ExCEL strategies proceeded school by school and would typically start with the creation of a leadership team at a school site to brainstorm how to custom-implement ExCEL at that site. Principals would ask volunteers to serve. As the successes became clear at school after school in the district, the momentum carried further schools forward, until in 2004 all elementary schools were participating in ExCEL, and in 2006, both middle schools were added to their total.

Hesperia's success with the ExCEL program has been a double-edged sword.  Because Hesperia is successful in early identification, many kids, who in other districts would be counted in Special Education for NCLB,  are in general education in Hesperia.  This reduces Hesperia's SpEd performance on NCLB tests -- the most able kids are mainstreamed.  It's a finely-nuanced Catch-22.

One district that was identified for Program Improvement based on the performance of the students with disabilities subgroup is the Hesperia USD. Superintendent Dick Bray said the district has no PI schools, yet it is now slated for reforms.

The reason? Hesperia has implemented an early-intervention program that has helped students before they would otherwise even qualify as “students with disabilities.” In fact, since the program’s inception in 1998, the number of students entering the Resource Specialist Program is down 55 percent, Bray said.

The model, Excellence: A Commitment for Every Learner, focuses on early intervention, prevention and acceleration using research-proven strategies. Based on the belief that all students can learn, ExCEL comprises frequent student assessment, ongoing staff collaborations and high expectations, engaging and teaching all students at their instructional level.

Bray said his district has gone to great lengths to identify needy students early on, before they fail in mainstream classes. But the PI identification suggests otherwise.

“This isn’t an educational problem,” Bray said. “We’re doing a great job identifying kids at an early age.”

Luckily, Bray has been successful getting the word out on the situation, and parents and the community know the district is doing an exemplary job of educating its students with disabilities. Still, it’s hard not to be recognized for a job well done.

“It really took the wind out of everybody’s sails,” Bray said. “It was demoralizing.”

Bray, who has testified numerous times in front of the State Board of Education on this issue, said he supports a model that recognizes step-by-step progress. He said numbers and labels aside, it’s important to keep the main goal in mind: ensuring all students have equal opportunities to succeed.

“There must be some way to exempt the schools that are otherwise succeeding,” he said. “What it comes down to is, are we doing everything we can for our most needy kids?”

Bray said his district is proof that this isn’t a question of providing a quality education to special needs kids. Rather, it’s proof that this is a glitch in federal law that needs to be ironed out.

“It’s not an educational problem, it’s a political problem,” Bray said. “It’s one of those anomalies of NCLB and it’s going to be solved politically.”

Jim Huckeba, Hesperia USD’s director of special services, said the very nature of the law is what causes the problem. When students in the subgroup improve, they move out of the subgroup. Therefore, the test scores of students who were the highest functioning aren’t counted, thus keeping performance levels the same.

“The problem with the special education subgroup is when students reach proficiency, they transfer out of the subgroup,” he said. “Those who remain are the lowest functioning.”

Huckeba said adding to the problem is the very nature of the subgroup itself. Unlike the socio-economic or English learner subgroups, the students with disabilities subgroup is based on academic achievement itself.

“It’s a flawed model, because the subgroup is defined by its performance,” he said.

That, combined with the fact that Hesperia uses an early-intervention model, means more kids are performing at higher levels and thus transitioning to mainstream classes at a younger age.

“We skim the higher functioning kids off the top. So if we’re successful, the scores should decrease, not increase,” Huckeba said.

The ExCEL model used in Hesperia is similar to the Responsiveness to Intervention model, which assesses students early on to determine their academic abilities. It is very different from the more typical “wait to fail” model.

“It determines students’ current level of functioning, it doesn’t put a label on them,” Huckeba said. “As a result, we’ve had a dramatic decrease of students going into RSP.”

Another irony is that California’s high standards can be “blamed” for throwing many districts into PI. In California, proficiency means above grade level, thus giving the appearance that California students perform lower than their counterparts nationwide.

“The bar has been set very high,” Huckeba said.

Despite this, many teachers and administrators in Hesperia are finding themselves frustrated over being thrust into Program Improvement.

“We’ve been labeled not because we haven’t been successful with special education students but because we have been successful with special education students,” Huckeba said.

Federal law allows up to 2 percent of students in the special education subgroup to be assessed using a yet-to-be-developed alternative assessment for students with persistent academic disabilities. This 2 percent is in addition to and beyond the current 1 percent who are assessed using the California Alternate Performance Assessment. While this flexibility is certainly helpful, it is not the ultimate solution, Huckeba said.

“It’s a step but it will only delay the inevitable,” he said.

Huckeba said one solution would be for federal officials to recognize the progress these students have made, whether or not they are considered “students with disabilities.”

“We need another way to approach the subgroup,” Huckeba said. “We need to treat all students not on the basis of categories but on academic achievement, regardless of category. We need to forget about categories and worry about students.

“This is not to say NCLB has not been successful,” he said. “It’s just there are flaws in the program that will make it statistically impossible to make AYP every year for special education because when you do, they are taken out of the subgroup.”

 

Comments

[John Lloyd]

I'm not an attorney (nor do I play one on TV), but I think that this is potential evidence of a legal problem:

...both parents have asked the school to test Mercury

As I understand it, even in these days of RtI, parents' requests for evaluation for eligibility for special education must be honored...where is that pesky law?

[liz Ditz]

What I'm wondering is if Kim Smith asked verbally -- that she didn't know that a formal written request was necessary.

The schools hold all the cards, in my view.

Imagine this scenario: Mom and Dad are meeting with Teacher over child Sandy's disappointing school performance. Mom and Dad say, verbally, to Teacher, "Well does Sandy need some testing to find out why Sandy is performing so poorly?".

(backstory: one or more of the following may hold
1. Teacher doesn't know from testing.
2. Teacher has been told to discourage parents from seeking evaluations, for any number of reasons
3. Teacher believes that if Sandy would just "try harder", Sandy's performance may improve
4. Other reasons -- such as Teacher feels defensive)

Teacher says, "Not really" and the conversation moves on.

Parents don't know their rights, and Teacher may have only a weak grasp of the law.

I suspect something like the above happened in young Mercury's case.

[Dovie]

we have a 10 year old child that we had tested and he is "definitely" dyslexic! His teachers refuse to admit that he needs help (although he tested out as reading in the lower first grade level and he is in 4th grade)....Where can we get him special help to teach him how to read? He gets so frustrated and upset. AGAIN....where can we go to get him help?

[Liz D.]

(dovie did not supply a valid email address, I hope she comes back)

Hi Dovie -- your boy sure does need help. If you are in the San Francisco Bay Area, I can start tutoring him next week.

You are probably going to have to pay for outside tutoring, even though the school district *should* be providing him with remediation -- but many don't.

If you are outside the Bay Area,

If you are near a Masonic Learning Center, they may be able to help you for free. If not, I recommend finding someone who is an Orton Gillingham (O-G) tutor.

Susan Barton has a DVD-based program that is based on O-G principles

http://www.bartonreading.com/

You can get more reliable information from Susan Barton's site, Bright Solutions for Dyslexia
http://www.dys-add.com/

My daughter is dyslexic. We flailed around with a few alternative therapies--wasting my daughter's precious time, and of course money, before her successful remediation using Orton Gillingham, specific, direct, multisensory instruction.

http://www.ortonacademy.org/

The Orton-Gillingham approach is language-based, multisensory, structured, sequential, cumulative, cognitive, and flexible. Its breadth, perspective, and flexibility prompt use of the term approach instead of method.

Language-based. The Orton-Gillingham approach is based on a technique of studying and teaching language, understanding the nature of human language, the mechanisms involved in learning, and the language-learning processes in individuals.

Multisensory. Orton-Gillingham teaching sessions are action oriented with auditory, visual, and kinesthetic elements reinforcing each other for optimal learning. The student learns spelling simultaneously with reading

Structured, Sequential, Cumulative. The Orton-Gillingham teacher introduces the elements of the language systematically. Students begin by reading and writing sounds in isolation. Then they blend the sounds into syllables and words. Students learn the elements of language, e.g., consonants, vowels, digraphs, blends, and diphthongs, in an orderly fashion. They then proceed to advanced structural elements such as syllable types, roots, and affixes. As students learn new material, they continue to review old material to the level of automaticity. The teacher addresses vocabulary, sentence structure, composition, and reading comprehension in a similar structured, sequential, and cumulative manner.

Cognitive. Students learn about the history of the English language and study the many generalizations and rules that govern its structure. They also learn how best they can learn and apply the language knowledge necessary for achieving reading and writing competencies.

Flexible. At best, Orton-Gillingham teaching is diagnostic-prescriptive in nature. Always the teacher seeks to understand how an individual learns and to devise appropriate teaching strategies.

Emotionally Sound. In every lesson, the student experiences a high degree of success and gains confidence as well as skill. Learning becomes a rewarding and happy experience.

Here's a parent's take on the Barton System--do it yourself at home

http://www.interdys.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=876

"I have been using Barton with my 7-year old for over seven months. We try to do Barton every day for 45 minutes and are currently at the end of Level 4 of the program.

Will Barton work? From my experience (and many others I have met), the answer is yes. It is based on the Orton-Gillingham method. It begins by teaching phonemic awareness, something you may not find in many other programs, and then, very explicitly and sequentially, teaches reading and spelling rules. By using this program, I have learned a lot of spelling rules myself that I have never heard of. I just learned to spell by visual memory, because it looks right. But the program teaches you the rules -- something that dyslexics desperately need. My daughter is really doing well. She is in public school, and her teacher says she is above average for both reading and spelling -- despite being moderately dyslexic.

I have done a lot of reading on multisensory approaches and have also attended an IDA research conference. I have been happy to learn that all of the research-based recommended components of a good multi-sensory program are included in the Barton method.

Do you need additional training? No -- everything is provided in videos and written materials. I do wish that Susan Barton provided more of an explanation as to why certain lessons are taught the way they are, or why they are taught in a particular order, as I like to know the rationale behind a teaching method. But this is a just a minor complaint and certainly not an issue that would hold me back from endorsing the program.

Is the program worth the expense? Only you can decide. If you just look at the materials you receive for the money, it really doesn't look like much. But I think the program has been priceless, as my daughter has shown great improvement. Could she have improved as much with a less expensive program? I don't know.
When I explored my options last year, I considered hiring a tutor (MUCH more costly, at $70/hour). I also looked into other OG programs, but they all required training. I didn't want to have to take the time to go through a formal training program -- I like just being able to watch the DVDs in the evening in the comfort of my own home. Another reason I chose the program is because Susan Barton has been extremely helpful to me with any questions I have had -- even before I purchased the materials -- and I have found her access itself to be worth the cost of the program."

For handwriting issues, I really love the Handwriting without Tears curriculum
www.hwtears.com

Their workbooks are very reasonably priced and their approach to letters makes so much sense. I started using it with my 4-year old daughter last month and I wish so much I had heard about it when my 7-year old was younger. I think it would have helped a lot with reversals.

More resources

You could go to

http://www.sparktop.org

a site for kids with learning disabilities.

Or, you could call The Learning Disabilities Association of America and find a chapter near you.

Learning Disabilities Association of America
4156 Library Road
Pittsburgh, PA 15234-1349
Phone (412) 341-1515 Fax (412) 344-0224

If you are in or near Tennessee, you could contact

Center for Dyslexia
200 N. Baird Lane - MTSU Box 397
Murfreesboro, TN 37132

Phone:
(615) 494-8880

Fax:
(615) 494-8881

E-mail:
dyslexia@mtsu.edu

Best of luck.

If you are near Bedford, MA, I highly recommend the Center for Learning and Reading

http://ase.tufts.edu/crlr/

I also highly recommend the resources at Wrightslaw

http://www.wrightslaw.com/

I suggest you order the book, "From Emotion to Advocacy"

http://www.wrightslaw.com/bks/feta2/feta2.htm

Good luck and don't hesitate to write back.