Case study: Tom, aged 8 years with dyslexic

difficulties
Tom, who is in Y3 (P4), was referred to a specialist teacher(1) as he was struggling in
the classroom even when provided with a support programme (based on sat pin). He
found it difficult to construct CVC words and it was suspected that a major part of his
difficulties involved Working Memory. Tom also had problems with long term memory, in
particular recalling sight words.
It was decided to use the Dyslexia Portfolio for a more detailed assessment and this
was administered in conjunction with GL Assessments British Picture Vocabulary Scale
(2nd Edition) as this assessment of receptive vocabulary is used by the school on a
regular basis.
Toms summary of results is given below.

The difference between general ability and achievement in the sub-tests can clearly be
seen, resulting in a Dyslexia Index of C. Toms specialist teacher says:
At this index level I would recommend a 1:1 specialist support programme. I find using
the general ability score to judge the depth of the problem very useful. Although his
general ability was lower average (standardised score 88) most of the other results
showed well below average (standardised score usually 69). Tom did not show
particular strengths which I would usually design a support programme around in
order to support weaker areas. However, I did have some further information to use.
This was because of the 1:1 nature of the Portfolio assessment and the habit I have
of always taking notes so we are not just looking at the result of a test but how the
student tackles it and the type of strategies or errors made.
Toms teacher noticed during the assessment a possible visual discrimination problem,
for instance: he read q for y in the reading speed task; when tackling non-words he
read fab instead of fap; during the single word reading test he sounded out dress as
b r s s.
Regarding phonological awareness Tom was unable to delete phonemes, and the task
just seemed to confuse him, for instance, when asked to delete flat from flatpack he
said flatclack indicating there might also be a problem with verbal memory.
A weakness in working memory (temporarily storing and manipulating information) was
picked up during non-word reading. Tom could say the sounds for the letters but then
said a word which contained only a few of the correct letters e.g. pig instead of pake.
He also found it extremely difficult to say digits backwards, while digits forwards was
successful only with a maximum of three digits, by analogy indicating he might only be
able to hold three letters at a time.
There was also over emphasis of sounding out as a reading strategy, which might have
linked to the sat pin remedial approach. Occasionally, however, he would chunk words
e.g. reading ch in then blending to form chin. It was also notable that he had an
extremely low sight word store.
When performing the spelling task Tom could identify and write down some correct
graphemes, however, when he had the additional burden of trying to write fast,
compose and spell (free writing task) he reverted to writing down mostly random letters
with no spaces in between.
Further Assessment
As the Dyslexia Portfolio indicated that the student had not broken the alphabetic code
regarding matching sounds to letters it was decided to use the Active Literacy Kit
Placement Test (Dyslexia Action) which highlighted the following difficulties:

Letter confusion (shapes)

Difficulty matching sounds to letters

Knowledge of alphabet (e.g. vowels, letter names)

Teaching Programme
Looking at the assessments the following key areas were identified to target in a going
back to the basics teaching programme:

Memory (auditory and visual, to include sequential memory)

Developing a sight word store

Securing phoneme-grapheme correspondence

Alphabetic knowledge

CD Roms
Initially CD ROMs were used to extend auditory and visual memory:

Eye Track (Semerc)

Click Hear One (Semerc)

Eye Track primarily enhances visual discrimination/memory and is based on an

escaped criminal theme. Discriminating the orientation of keys to unlock the cell was a
useful practise for b/d type difficulties. Visual/auditory memory was trained using the car
park activity where the student had to remember the order that the vehicles had parked
(an auditory clue was provided as the vehicles made different sounds).
Click Hear One concentrates on auditory memory and discrimination and supports
phase 1 of letters and sounds. However, the activities are also suitable for older children
and boys as the themes are vehicles, musical instruments and treasure island. All
of the activities are very well structured with auditory help when needed, allowing Tom
to increase his independence and confidence. Using the programme he learnt to
discriminate between similar sounds and repeat a sequence (e.g. when different
musical instruments played in turn).
I introduced a further CD ROM into my teaching program Nessy tales (Net Educational
Systems). This provides talking books on CD ROM accompanied by paper-based
books. The aim was to use the paired reading approach to increase Toms enjoyment
of reading by supporting his endeavours. This approach encouraged him to read words
by sight instead of using the sounding out strategy which wasnt working for him at
that time.

2) Active Literacy Kit (7hours of lessons)

The Active Literacy Kit is designed to aid fluency by using timed tasks. There is also
much over learning and progression is undertaken in small steps. To secure the basics
the following exercises were used:

Alphabet recital

No name Alphabet Card Sequence (picture cards with numbers on them to aid
sequencing of the alphabet)

Picture-Sound Alphabet Sequence (student encouraged to listen to initial sound

in word and reproduce it e.g. apple a, bat b)

Matching Lower Case Letters to No Name Alphabet Cards (wooden letters

helped highlight orientation difficulties)

Counting in Twos (2-26 with Number Card, then number counters, finally saying
the sequence without any aids)

Tom enjoyed the activities, particularly as he could see the gains he was making.

Evaluation of Teaching Programme

Nessy Tales:
At the beginning of the program Tom could read 12 of the words from the story fluently
(any that he self-corrected were not counted as fluent). At the end of the program he
had increased this to 20 words. This was a significant gain as he generally found it very
difficult to recall high frequency words.
The Active Literacy Kit:
The Active Literacy Placement test completed at the end of the programme, showed:

Significantly better alphabet recital

Phonically correct sounds for 19 letters (presented in random order) compared

with 11 beforehand.

Reciting 2s up to 32 before making a mistake, previously up to 12.

Alphabet was being used as a support strategy (when asked to write letters he
said them in order)

Writing letters in order 23 written correctly (including orientation), 4 done correctly

previously.

Sequencing and orientating lower case alphabet all in correct order, 5 incorrectly
orientated. Beforehand only could do 5 correctly before giving up.

Spelling single words 3 correct, beforehand none

Finally
The specialist teacher comments
I hope by providing this case study it will encourage you to use the Dyslexia Portfolio as
a starting point to devise an individualised teaching programme. Concentrate on
identifying strengths and weaknesses and make notes as you perform the assessment
to see strategies the student is using. It is also important to tackle the basics first and
take small steps in order to increase the students confidence rather than using a
scatter gun approach.
Footnotes:

(1) Julie Yaxley holds Approved Teacher Status (ATS) from the British Dyslexia
Association