Select Committee on Education and Skills Written Evidence

Memorandum submitted by Bristol Dyslexia Centre

  We are the Directors of the Bristol Dyslexia Centre and would very much like to contribute to the Select Committee inquiry into special educational needs. We both have a professional and personal interest in the SEN field. Pat is a mother of two dyslexic sons and founder of the Bristol Dyslexia Centre and Belgrave School. Over the past 35 years she has taught and lectured widely. Michael is dyslexic, a law graduate and has taught SpLD students for 10 years.

  The Bristol Dyslexia Centre has over 300 students and 30 teaching staff. The Centre has been established since 1989 and during this period has firmly established a reputation for excellence by successfully transforming thousands of struggling students from academic failures into pass grade candidates, with many attaining exceptional A grade results. The Centre incorporates Belgrave School, providing full-time education for dyslexics and school phobics for ages six to 12 years, an Assessment Centre that caters for five independent chartered educational psychologists, and three floors of the building are dedicated to part-time specialist tuition for adults and school-age students. We have also developed our own approach to learning which has been incorporated into two software titles, the Nessy Learning Programme, a phonic-based learning programme for dyslexics and BrainBooster, study skills for the ages 13 to adult.

  We would like you to consider the Nessy Learning Programme when examining the need for SEN resources, expertise and provision in mainstream schools. Nessy has achieved outstanding results from a recent study of students using the programme (please refer to supplementary materials). Following this success, the school using the programme expanded use of the software to the whole school.

—  The Nessy programme differs from others in several key aspects. One key aspect of Nessy is the structured game-based learning. We believe that learning should be fun as we all learn best when we are enjoying ourselves and that this approach should not be restricted to the Foundation stages of education but become a general principle even at secondary level. The Nessy game-based learning is effective because it is set in the context of a structured programme of incremental and cumulative learning. The Nessy programme advocates learning to read, spell and write through games, both computer and paper based card/board games, and the results of a recent survey demonstrate that this multi-sensory approach is successful and inspiring. Effective phonic-based learning is necessarily repetitive and SEN students in particular need stimulation to become motivated and engaged.

—  Another key difference is the extensive range of ability covered by the Nessy programme. By addressing abilities from five to 16 years this programme allows students to maintain learning consistency during the transition from Primary to Secondary education. Programs addressing SEN at secondary level has often been poorly resourced.

—  The Nessy programme has been successfully used by LSAs and NQTs who lack specialist experience. They have found it an invaluable resource because Nessy includes all the reading and spelling rules with supporting paper based activities in 1,500 printable pages.

—  Experienced specialist teachers, rather than academics have developed Nessy over many years. This means it uses unique learning strategies that have already proved effective in the classroom. These strategies capitalise upon dyslexic learning strengths in areas of creativity and by associating concrete meaning with intangible learning concepts that are otherwise difficult to grasp eg the prefix-root-suffix becomes a head-body-tail of a word.

  Other aspects that we feel the Committee should investigate are the inconsistencies in teacher training for the recognition and addressing specific learning difficulties in the classroom and the inadequacies of the assessment process. Many teachers lack the training or ability to identify dyslexia let, alone incorporate effective classroom strategies. In 90% of our enquiries by email and telephone it is the parents who identify their children as at risk and not the professionals. This is surely a poor indictment of the current teacher-training curriculum and many NQTs that we encounter still find that their courses include only a token and arbitrary mention of dyslexia. In our experience many teachers feel defensive and do not like to admit a lack of knowledge when approached by concerned parents.

  This is the situation in our LEA and I am sure in many others. It can take anything up to two years to be assessed by an educational psychologist and then the child needs to be functioning at several years behind their actual age to qualify for funding support. As reading assessments begin at a level of five to six years in practice this means that only the most dyslexic children are assisted and then not helped until nine to 10 years when the secondary problems of low self-esteem, frustration and disenchantment with school learning are entrenched, often with lifelong detrimental consequences. The usual standard of proof for identification of dyslexia is an assessment by an educational psychologist. Parents desperate to halt this destruction to their children's personality seek private help. The assessment process takes about two and a half hours and costs in excess of £300. The end result is a report which is often unintelligible to anyone but the most experienced specialist teacher and must be renewed after two years, yet this is the standard of proof required by official bodies such as universities, tribunals, examination boards, LEAs and schools etc Surely government could endorse an assessment which was quick and cost effective but that focused upon practical remediation and jargon-free language.

  We hope that you will consider the points raised in this submission and would be delighted to supplement these comments if you consider they include areas of relevance to the inquiry.

September 2005

---

READING AND SPELLING ASSESSMENT SCORES

Student	Nov-04 Sp Age spelling	June-05	progress 18 hours	Nov-04 R Age reading	June-05 (single)	progress 18 hours	Nov-04 R Age Reading	June-05 (context)	progress 18 hours	Nov-03C A age	June-05 CA
A	6y 5m	6y 10m	5m	6y 4m	7y 5m	13m	6y 6m	7y 0m	6m	6y 5m	7y 0m
B	6y 4m	6y 10m	6m	6y 8m	8y 9m	2y 1m	6y 9m	8y 3m	1y 6m	8y 3m	8y 10m
C	6y 10m	7y 0m	2m	6y 4m	7y 3m	11m	6y 9m	9m	8y 4m	8y 4m	8y 10m
D	7y 0m	7y 8m	8m	6y 9m	7y 9m	12m	7y 0m	8y 0m	12m	8y 5m	9y 0m
E	7y 7m	8y 2m	7m	7y 2m	8y 0m	10m	7y 0m	8y 0m	12m	8y 5m	9y 0m
F	7y 0m	7y 5m	5m	7y 5m	8y 0m	7m	7y 9m	8y 0m	3m	8y 6m	9y 1m
G	7y 7m	8y 6m	11m	8y 0m	10y 0m	2y 0m	8y 6m	9y 3m	9m	8y 7m	9y 2m
H	8y 2m	9y 10m	1y 8m	10y 0m	9y 9m	(3m	)9y 0m	9y 9m	9m	8y 8m	9y 3m
I	8y 6m	9y 0m	6m	9y 7m	10y 3m	8m	8y 8m	9y 6m	12m	9y 4m	9y 10m
J	8y 6m	9y 4m	10m	10y 7m	11y 0m	5m	9y 0m	9y 6m	6m	9y 5m	10y 0m
K	9y 2m	10y 1m	11m	9y 0m	9y 9m	9m	8y 6m	9y 0m	6m	9y 6m	10y 1m
L	11y 2m	12y 1m	11m	10y 6m	12y 6m	2y 0m	11y 0m	12y 0m	12m	9y 6m	10y 1m
M	7y 1m	8y 8m	1y 7m	8y 9m	9y 7m	10m	10y 3m	11y 6m	1y 3m	9y 10m	10y 4m
N	9y 8m	11y 4m	1y 8m	12y 6m	16y 0m	3y 6m	10y 4m	11y 4m	12m	9y 10m	10y 3m
O	9y 2m	10y 5m	1y 3m	10y 6m	12y 6m	2y 0m	8y 9m	11y 3m	2y 6m	9y 11m	10y 6m
P	8y 8m	9y 6m	10m	11y 0m	15y 0m	5y 0m	13y 0m	14y 8m	1y 8m	10y 2m	10y 10m
Q	7y 10m	9y 4m	1y 6m	9y 4m	10y 6m	12m	9y 6m	9y 9m	3m	10y 5m	11y 0m
R	8y 2m	9y 6m	1y 4m	8y 3m	10y 6m	2y 3m	10y 3m	11y 3m	12m	10y 7m	11y 2m
S	11y 2m	12y 4m	1y 2m	12y 6m	14y 0m	2y 3m	9y 9m	10y 3m	6m	11y 6m	12y 1m
T	11y 6m	12y 4m	10m	11y 0m	13y 0m	6m	12y 0m	15y 4m	3y 4m	11y 1m	11y 8m
U	8y 2m	9y 8m	1y 6m	12y 9m	11y 0m	0m	11y 3m	11y 3m	0m	11y 2m	11y 8m
V	10y 3m	10y 8m	5m	12y 9m	16y 0m	3y 3m	13y 0m	15y 4m	2y 4m	12y 2m	12y 9m
W	8y 10m	9y 9m	11m	11y 9m	12y 9m	12m	10y 6m	10y 9m	3m	12y 5m	13y 0m
X	11y 8m	12y 4m	12y 10m	12y 10m	16y 0m	3y 2m	13y 4m	8m	12y 10m	12y 10m	13y 5m
Y	11y 2m	11y 8m	10y 9m	10y 9m	14y 8m	3y 11m	12y 3m	12m	13y 5m	13y 5m	14y 0m
Z	11y 2m	13y 0m	10y 0m	10y 0m	13y 0m	3y 0m	13y 0m	1y 8m	15y 10m	15y 10m	16y 5m
Average improvement			1y 1m			1y 9m			10m

Assessment information—

Vernon single word spelling, WRAT single word reading (decoding skills), Holborn sentence reading (up to 13 years), *Kirkless contextual reading and vocabulary

  These assessments show results attained at the Bristol Dyslexia Centre using an age range of students covered by the programme. Results were taken before and after 18 hours of using the Nessy Learning Programme over a period of six months from the end of November 2004 to the beginning of June 2005. All students are dyslexic.

---

READING AND SPELLING ASSESSMENT SCORES FOR FLAX BOURTON PRIMARy SCHOOL YEAR 6 JUNE 2004

Student	Reading Comprehension Age September 2003	Reading Age Comprehension June 2004	Increase in Reading Comprehension Age	Spelling Age September 2003	Spelling Age June 2004	Increase in Spelling Age
A	8 yrs 6 mths	9 yrs 3 mths	9 mths	8 yrs 3 mths	10 yrs 5 mths	2 yrs 2 mths
B	8 yrs 6 mths			9 yrs 7 mths	10 yrs 2 mths	1yr 7 mths
C	7 yrs 9 mths			5 yrs 10 mths	7 yrs 1 mths	2 yrs 0 mths
D	9 yrs 0 mths	9 yrs 9 mths	9 mths	12 yrs 0 mths	12 yrs 4 mths	4 mths
E	9 yrs 6 mths	12 yrs 0 mths	2 yrs 6 mths	12 yrs 0 mths	12 yrs 9 mths	9 mths
F	8 yrs 9 mths	10 yrs 8 mths	1yr 11 mths	9 yrs 2 mths	11 yrs 2 mths	2 yrs 0 mths
G	7 yrs 6 mths	9 yrs 7 mths	2 yrs 1mth	7 yrs 1 mths	9 yrs 8 mths	2 yrs 7 mths
H	8 yrs 0 mths	9 yrs 3 mths	1yr 3 mths	8 yrs 3 mths	11 yrs 8 mths	3 yrs 5 mths

  June tests were administered by Backwell Comp. The June reading Test was a different and more difficult test to that used in Setember. The same spelling test was administerd in both September and June.

  Tickenham Primary School PANDA report has shown improvement since introducing Nessy.

  During the trial Nessy has been used extensively in Jersey as part of the curriculum rather than as an exclusive resource with monitored results in a comparative study. Feedback from teachers and children has been outstanding (see endorsements).

---

---

Prepared 6 July 2006