Reflections on 17th National Conference On Learning Disabilities

October 6th, 2009

Dear Friends and Professionals:

On September 25th, 2009, I had the wonderful opportunity to speak at the 17th National Learning Disabilities Conference in Whitehorse. I was invited to speak on the topic of neuroplasticity and learning disabilities. This was the first ever talk about the impact of brain plasticity findings on the field of Learning Disabilities at a national conference in Canada. Psychologists, principals, teachers and parents were present, as were representatives from Learning Disabilities Associations throughout Canada, including the Learning Disabilities Association of Saskatchewan, which is now offering the Arrowsmith Program in their facility.

I began my presentation discussing how the field of Learning Disabilities has focused on reading difficulties. For decades, the focus of remediation and intervention has been on reading and spelling; thus, research funding and practice have focused in on this area of academic achievement. While it is true that there are many children who have reading-based learning disabilities, this focus means that the other types of learning disabilities that impact school, such as written expression and mathematics, are forgotten. In fact, the schools for children with learning disabilities in BC focus exclusively on reading and spelling intervention. As a result, thousands of children in BC are not being given appropriate cognitive intervention. For example, written expression learning disabilities are the most common type of learning disability. There is little support for children with written expression disorders, other than the use of assistive technology such as a laptop or scribe to bypass their learning problems. Additionally, math-based learning disabilities are another common type of problem for children. There is little cognitive intervention or support, other than extra tutoring and allowing these students to use a calculator. Also, approximately 65% to 80% of children with learning disabilities struggle with social perception. Again, little cognitive intervention is available to help children with this neurological difficulty. Finally, reasoning and critical thinking learning disorders are common for children, and there is no cognitive intervention for children with these learning problems. Those listening to my presentation recognized that this is true in schools today – that the focus has been on reading and spelling intervention and that children with other types of learning problems seldom get the help they so desperately need.

The Arrowsmith Program is the first cognitive remediation system that addresses multiple types of learning disabilities. This was a surprise to many who listened to my presentation, who had looked at the Arrowsmith Program solely as a reading intervention, similar to the programs they had been using for years. For many, this was the first time that they had fully recognized the broad scope and potential of the Arrowsmith program. The fact that the Arrowsmith Program addresses reading, math, written expression, reasoning, memory, spatial thinking, social perception, attention, planning and organization was a novel idea to them.

The Arrowsmith Program, founded on neuroscientific research, involves intensive and graduated mental exercises that are designed to strengthen the underlying weak cognitive capacities that are the source of the learning disabilities. Over 30 years of experience has demonstrated that these affected brain areas can be improved through mental exercises, resulting in increased mental capacities and strengthened learning abilities. Underfunctioning areas of the brain are treated like weak muscles and are intensely stimulated through mental exercises to produce strengthened learning capacities. Research at Arrowsmith School has also shown that when the deficient area is improved, the individual’s ability to perform complex tasks such as reading or writing also improves.

The Arrowsmith Program has conducted research showing positive results of the program, and we are excited about the possibility of more research. I believe that this research will be ongoing and will last more than my life time. I hope that educational researchers and policy makers will embrace the contributions from the field of neuroscience and capitalize on scientists’ abilities to measure the brain during learning activities, thereby enabling educational researchers to measure programs and interventions for students with learning disabilities in a new way. For example, many currently-used reading intervention programs, which have been helpful for many children, lack conclusive empirical evidence on their effectiveness – a finding that was somewhat shocking to many of those listening to my presentation, who had believed that these reading intervention methods had been proven by rigorous scientific study. By recognizing the relationship that neuroscientists and educators can have, new measures can be used to investigate claims made about intervention methods currently being promoted, which may have limited empirical evidence behind them. In short, all of us involved in the education of children with learning disabilities need to continue improving our programs through rigorous scientific research.

Recently, an awareness of how important the relationship between education and neuroscience has resulted in the formation of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society . One of their mandates is to bridge the gap between education and neuroscience. Current research published in Mind, Brain and Education Journal in March 2009, in an article entitled How Many Brains Does It Take to Build a Scientific Groundwork for Learning and Teaching, investigated the challenges of bringing both educators and neuroscientists together for the common purpose of improving educational practice, stating:

Some educational researchers seemed to perceive neuroscience research as a potential threat to principles about learning established by social science research, which they had built their careers on. Furthermore, only a few education policy makers accepted invitations to our meetings, possibly because some of them were intimidated by arcane neuroscience and some of them saw a political danger related to the concerns of educational researchers. Namely, that education had thus far always used the social sciences (psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc) as reference disciplines and they feared that these disciplines would suddenly be neglected and replaced by neuroscience (p 21).

Despite these challenges, many educators and policy-makers understand that, through advances in neuroscience, great progress in educational methods can be made. Advances in neuroscience increase our understanding of how to create and apply educational methods in order to better serve all students.

The final remarks in my presentation referred to the definition of learning disabilities, which states that a learning disability is lifelong. We are observing through the Arrowsmith Program that this does not always need to be the case. Some children who have completed the Arrowsmith Program are no longer classified as having a learning disability in subsequent psycho-educational assessments. This is due to the fact that their cognitive functions and achievement abilities have improved to the point that there is no longer a significant discrepancy between cognitive/intellectual ability and achievement. Thus, the statement that a learning disability is lifelong needs to be questioned with the brain’s ability to change itself.

In closing, I was grateful for the chance to speak at the 17th National Conference on Learning Disabilities. It is exciting to see the Learning Disabilities Associations throughout Canada interested in implementing the Arrowsmith Program. The success of the LDA Saskatchewan Arrowsmith Program is helping the other associations realize what is possible for children with these broad and diverse disabilities. I hope that educational researchers and policy makers will feel inspired by recent research in neuroscience, and visit Arrowsmith schools to witness for themselves the program in action. The Arrowsmith Program is the first intervention program that has utilized both education practice and neuroscience theory to provide comprehensive brain remediation for children with learning disabilities. It is my belief that so much that can be learned by the combined efforts of educators and neuroscientists, and it is my hope that a continued dialogue will further efforts to advance the field of Learning Disabilities.

Sincerely,

Howard Eaton, Ed.M.

Mayes, S.D., & Calhoun, S.L. (2008) Challenging the Assumptions About the Frequency and Coexistence of Learning Disability Types. School Psychology International, 28, 437-448.

http://www.arrowsmithschool.org/research.htm

Florida Centre for Reading Research: Orton-Gillingham Approach http://www.fcrr.org/FCRRreports/PDF/Orton_Gillingham_Approach.pdf
Florida Centre for Reading Research: Wilson Reading System – http://www.fcrr.org/FCRRReports/PDF/wilson.pdf

http://www.imbes.org/

Chiesa, B., Christoph, V., & Hinton, C. (2009) How Many Brains Does It Take to Build a New Light: Knowledge Management Challenges of a Transdisciplinary Project. Mind, Brain, and Education, 3, 17-26.