Early Identification of Dyslexia: Understanding the Issues

Colenbrander, Danielle; Ricketts, Jessie; Breadmore, Helen L.

doi:10.1044/2018_lshss-dyslc-18-0007

Cited by 33 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants were classified as having DD if they scored 1.0 standard deviation (SD) below the normative value (population mean SS = 100, SD = 15) on the average of all three measures (SS ≤ 85; Tran et al, 2014). Although there is no specific cutoff that delineates DD from competent readers, 1 SD cutoff criteria is clinically meaningful, often used in research studies, and supported by previous studies investigating the relationship between DD and language (Catts et al, 2005;Colenbrander et al, 2018;McArthur et al, 2000;Snowling et al, 2003). Participants were classified as having intermediate readers (IR) level if their average SS was from 85 to 100, including 100, and as having skilled readers (SR) level if their average SS was greater than 100.…”

Section: Testing Procedures and Sample Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language Difficulties in School-Age Children With Developmental Dyslexia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developmental dyslexia (DD) is a common reading disability, affecting 5% to 11% of children in North America. Children classified as having DD often have a history of early language delay (ELD) or language impairments. Nevertheless, studies have reported conflicting results as to the association between DD-ELD and the extent of current language difficulties in children with DD. To examine these relationships, we queried the parents of school-aged children with reading difficulties on their child’s early and current language ability. Siblings were also examined. Children were directly assessed using quantitative tests of language and reading skills. To compare this study with the literature, we divided the sample ( N = 674) into three groups: DD, intermediate readers (IR), and skilled readers (SR). We found a significant association between DD and ELD, with parents of children in the DD/IR groups reporting their children put words together later than the SR group. We also found a significant association between DD and language difficulties, with children with low reading skills having low expressive/receptive language abilities. Finally, we identified early language predicted current language, which predicted reading skills. These data contribute to research indicating that children with DD experience language difficulties, suggesting early recognition may help identify reading problems.

show abstract

Section: Testing Procedures and Sample Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language Difficulties in School-Age Children With Developmental Dyslexia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A clearer understanding of child and contextual influences on the development of reading also will support improvements in how early and accurately students at risk for reading difficulties and disabilities are identified. Currently, numerous challenges remain in identifying students early enough to maximize benefits of interventions (Colenbrander, Ricketts, & Breadmore, 2018; Gersten, Newman‐Gonchar, Haymond, & Dimino, 2017). Investigators often use behavioral precursors or correlates of reading to estimate students’ risk for reading failure.…”

Section: Where Do We Go Next In the Science Of Reading?mentioning

confidence: 99%

How the Science of Reading Informs 21st‐Century Education

Petscher¹,

Cabell²,

Catts³

et al. 2020

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The science of reading should be informed by an evolving evidence base built on the scientific method. Decades of basic research and randomized controlled trials of interventions and instructional routines have formed a substantial evidence base to guide best practices in reading instruction, reading intervention, and the early identification of at‐risk readers. The recent resurfacing of questions about what constitutes the science of reading is leading to misinformation in the public space that may be viewed by educational stakeholders as merely differences of opinion among scientists. The authors’ goals in this article were to revisit the science of reading through an epistemological lens to clarify what constitutes evidence in the science of reading, and to offer a critical evaluation of the evidence provided by the science of reading. To this end, the authors summarize those things that they believe have compelling evidence, promising evidence, or a lack of compelling evidence. The authors conclude with a discussion of areas of focus that they believe will advance the science of reading to meet the needs of all students in the 21st century.

show abstract

“…Acknowledging the benefits of using a label, there are two points for consideration when diagnosing dyslexia. First, early diagnosis of dyslexia in pre-kindergarten or kindergarten is ideal so that early intervention may stave off the effects of future poor reading ( Colenbrander, Ricketts, & Breadmore, 2018 ). Those effects include negative emotions associated with reading instruction, low self-esteem, and poor long-term reading outcomes.…”

Section: Promote the Informed Responsible And Appropriate Use Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%