Tag: reading

You Asked! Question 28

Posted on by

Download a PDF version of this You Asked question and answer here.

Q28:  My school district says that they can’t assess for dyslexia and won’t even say the word “dyslexia” in my child’s IEP.  What should I do?

A:  Yes, school districts can and should assess for dyslexia and use the term dyslexia in identifying the needs of a student. However, there is no law that says that they must use this term in the assessment process, and since dyslexia is a diagnosis under the DSM-5, if a school district says they cannot assess for “dyslexia” they may feel you are asking for a medical diagnosis.  However, a school assessment to identify a reading disability such as dyslexia is different than a “diagnosis,” and you can still get the assessments done that will inform you and your child’s IEP team if your child is indeed dyslexic.  Therefore, you should clarify that you want your child assessed for learning disabilities in the area of reading to see if they have characteristics of dyslexia. Under California law (5 CCR 56337.5(a)), it states:

“A pupil who is assessed as being dyslexic [emphasis and meets eligibility criteria specified in Section 56337 and paragraph (10) of subdivision (b) of Section 3030 of Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations for the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1400 et seq.) category of specific learning disabilities is entitled to special education and related services.”

There were so many concerns were being raised by parents whose IEP teams refused to use the term dyslexia (and dysgraphia and dyscalculia) that the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services wrote a Dear Colleague letter to state and local educational agencies dated October 23, 2015 clarifying that “there is nothing in the IDEA that would prohibit the use of the terms dyslexia, dyscalculia, and dysgraphia in IDEA evaluation, eligibility determinations, or IEP documents.” The letter goes on to state “OSERS further encourages States to review their policies, procedures, and practices to ensure that they do not prohibit the use of the terms dyslexia, dyscalculia, and dysgraphia in evaluations, eligibility, and IEP. Finally, in ensuring the provision of free appropriate public education, OSERS encourages SEAs to remind their LEAs of the importance of addressing the unique educational needs of children with specific learning disabilities resulting from dyslexia, dyscalculia, and dysgraphia during IEP Team meetings and other meetings with parents under IDEA.”

California Department of Education’s CA Dyslexia Guidelines provided more specific guidance stating on Page 55:

“An evaluation for dyslexia includes  assessment in written language areas (e.g., reading, spelling, handwriting, written expression) that are characteristic of dyslexia: letter identification; letter–sound (grapheme–phoneme) associations; word identification-decoding of real and pseudo-words; reading fluency (i.e., accuracy, automaticity, and prosody); reading comprehension (sentence and passage levels); spelling (real and pseudo- words); and written expression (sentence and passage levels). The evaluation should include reading comprehension and written expression because they require higher-level organization, memory, and integration of skills for functional use and application.”

According to the California Association of School Psychologists’ Frequently Asked Questions- California Dyslexia Guidelines (Question #4):

“Can school teams assess for dyslexia? School teams can (and should) assess for.  CDE Guidelines [CA Dyslexia Guidelines] discuss the critical characteristics that are indicative of dyslexia (see p. 53-58) noting that dyslexia can be identified in both general education and through a comprehensive evaluation that is part of a Special Education eligibility evaluation.

Since oral language is the foundation for building literacy skills, a comprehensive language-literacy evaluation should also include assessment of oral language skills (e.g., comprehension and production of spoken language in the areas of phonology, morphology, and syntax [form], semantics [content], and pragmatics/discourse [use]).

To make an accurate identification of dyslexia, the evaluator or evaluation team must also consider a student’s developmental and medical history (including vision and hearing screenings as well as medications), family and school history, teacher reports, self-reports, parent reports, social and emotional status, and current classroom performance.” 

The California Department of Education did a “roadshow” to educate local education agencies (LEAs) about the CA Dyslexia Guidelines and to assure them that it was okay to use the term “dyslexia”.  Slide #10 on the CDE presentation states this fact.

What does it look like in your student’s IEP?

When determining special education eligibility, most students with dyslexia will usually be found eligible under the umbrella term of “Specific Learning Disability” usually with identified deficits in “basic reading skills”, “reading fluency”, and/or “written expression”. Often, but not always, there is a deficit indicated in the basic psychological processing area of “phonological processing” (Refer to You Asked questions #4 and #14 for additional information on phonological processing).

As many LEAs use the Special Education Information System (SEIS), DDCA is including examples of Team Determination of Eligibility forms that may be helpful to engage the IEP Team in discussion regarding whether your child has characteristics of dyslexia.  (Please note that individual LEA SEIS forms may be different and forms are updated periodically so ask your LEA for a copy of their forms.)

If these boxes are indicated on your child’s SEIS forms, the IEP team should be discussing and documenting whether or not dyslexia may be a concern (and dysgraphia if written expression deficits are indicated, and dyscalculia if mathematical deficits are indicated).

What to do if my school district still insists that can’t assess for dyslexia and can’t even say the word “dyslexia” in my child’s IEP?

First, so that your child can be assessed without delay, clarify that you want a comprehensive psychoeducational assessment, and that you are concerned about your child’s deficits in reading. Then, ask your Special Education Director for your school district in writing (with proof of delivery) for Prior Written Notice (PWN) of the school district’s policy that states they are not allowed to assess for or use the term dyslexia.

This is an example of the PWN response you should be provided by your district.

Summary

While California is not part of the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB), SREB does a good job in summarizing (page 4) “Overcoming a Reluctance to Name Dyslexia”:

“Recognizing dyslexia’s impact on language processing in the brain makes it possible for educators to determine the best instructional strategies for children affected by it. However, public school officials are sometimes hesitant to label a student’s reading difficulties as “dyslexia.” They believe labeling a student with dyslexia would provide a medical or psychological diagnosis that they are not licensed to make. Some states and local education agencies have side-stepped this issue by creating policies for children with characteristics of dyslexia, avoiding the direct label.

In 2015, the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) provided guidance on the use of the term dyslexia in public schools. The guidance clarified that the IDEA does not prevent schools from using the term. In fact, OSERS reminded state and local education agencies that acknowledging the exact nature of a child’s specific learning disability is important for addressing the child’s educational needs. It urged public schools to be willing to identify dyslexia by name and use proven methods for teaching children with dyslexia.”

You Asked! – Question 22

Posted on by

Download a PDF version of this You Asked question and answer HERE.

Q22: Why are younger students generally not found eligible for Specific Learning Disability when a “severe discrepancy” model is used for special education eligibility?

A: Under California law, the use of severe discrepancy may be considered but must not be required [5 CCR 3030(b)(10)(B), 34 CFR 300.307(a)(1)].  Many school districts are by default requiring a severe discrepancy by not looking to other allowable methods in determining a specific learning disability for special education eligibility purposes. [Please refer to You Asked #23 for additional information].

In California, a severe discrepancy is defined as a difference between intellectual ability (“IQ) and achievement of 1.5 standard deviations (or more)*. For our younger students with suspected dyslexia that would mean a “severe discrepancy” in areas such as basic reading (or spelling) on standardized achievement testing.

For younger students (Kindergarten through 2nd grade), it would be very difficult to have this large of a gap between IQ and standardized academic achievement test scores in reading or spelling.  The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) explains: “although there are many tests that may be used early (in Kindergarten and beginning of first grade) to assess beginning skills in reading and spelling, the standards for average achievement are generous. A child in late Kindergarten or early first grade may only need to read a few letters and two or three common words to score well enough to reach a score of “average”. Compared to other young learners, students with dyslexia may not seem to be “behind.” ” [Source:  The International Dyslexia Association, “Just the Facts: Testing and Evaluation“].

IDA states that “research demonstrates that additional direct instruction provided appropriately, beginning in Kindergarten through third grade, can help all but the most severely impaired students catch up to grade-level literacy skills and close the gap for most poor readers.  Assessment is the first step in identifying these students early to make sure they receive the effective instruction they need to succeed.” [Source:  The International Dyslexia Association, “Just the Facts: Dyslexia Assessment: What Is It and How Can It Help?]

So, it is unlikely that a younger student will demonstrate a “severe discrepancy” on standardized achievement testing for the reasons given above but we also know that early identification and appropriate intensive intervention greatly increases the positive outcomes for our dyslexic students so what should be done with respect to our younger students?

Even before formal assessment, careful early screening of younger students beginning in Kindergarten can help identify students at risk for dyslexia.  According to IDA, screening should occur in the following areas (before second grade), “it is more important to focus an evaluation on the precursors of reading development. Measures of language skills, phonological awareness, memory, and rapid naming are more suggestive of being at-risk for dyslexia among young children than are measures of word reading, decoding, and spelling. Therefore, measures of phonological awareness, memory, and rapid naming are typically included in Kindergarten and beginning first grade screening tests that can identify children who need targeted intervention to improve these critical skills so these children can meet grade-level benchmarks.” [Source:  The International Dyslexia Association, “Just the Facts: Testing and Evaluation“].

For purposes of assessment, California regulations appear to acknowledge the difficulty in identifying a severe discrepancy especially in younger children and provide IEP teams with flexibility in applying these rules under 5 CCR 3030(b)(10)(B)(3) which provides for the following:

“If the standardized tests do not reveal a severe discrepancy as defined in subdivisions 1. or 2. above, the IEP team may find that a severe discrepancy does exist, provided that the team documents in a written report that the severe discrepancy between ability and achievement exists as a result of a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes. The report shall include a statement of the area, the degree, and the basis and method used in determining the discrepancy. The report shall contain information considered by the team which shall include, but not be limited to:

(i)    Data obtained from standardized assessment instruments;

(ii)    Information provided by the parent;

(iii)    Information provided by the pupil’s present teacher;

(iv)    Evidence of the pupil’s performance in the regular and/or special education classroom obtained from observations, work samples, and group test scores;

(v)    Consideration of the pupil’s age, particularly for young children [emphasis added]; and

(vi)    Any additional relevant information.”

* –  Please be advised that in California, IQ testing of African-American students is prohibited [refer to Larry P. v. Riles, 495 F. Supp. 926 (N.D. Cal 1979), 793 F. 2d 969 (9th Cir. 1984), 37 F. 3d 485 (9th Cir. 1994).  Also, see article from CA Association of School Psychologists (CASP Today Spring 2013 – Larry P. Edition, pgs. 7, 17)].

For more YOU ASKED questions and answers click HERE.