Dyslexia eda 2016

Preview:

Citation preview

Maximizing Differences in Types to Improve Dyslexics’ Reading Performances

Emma Brambilla, Armando Toscano

1. Why don’t people read well?

What reading is: McClelland & Rumelhart, 1981

#Keywords:connectionismword level, letter level, feature levelvisual and acoustic inputhigher level inputword superiority effect

What reading is: Marslen-Wilson, 1980

#Keywords:modularismon-line interactive processinglexicon, syntax, previous knowledgecontext effect

What reading is: Levelt, 1992

#Keywords:globalprocess lexicon, lexical concept, phonetic programlexical errors

The tuning orchestra hypothesis

General conclusions we can draw:

Reading is the symphony

Little lacks of tuning and synchronism

Many layers

Basic layers are more conditioning

The tuning orchestra hypothesis

Maybe they play badly because…

noise comes from a poor training

noise comes from misperception

noise comes from a bad direction

notes are badly written (visual noise)

The tuning orchestra hypothesis

They can play badly because…

noise comes from a poor training

noise comes from misperception

noise comes from a bad direction

notes are badly written (visual noise)

person

environment

The tuning orchestra hypothesis

2. How can we convert all this into an intervention?

What an intervention should beI can help you

Law 170/2010

SpecialistsTeachersFamilyChild

What an intervention should beI can help you

Law 170/2010

Why do they always concentrate on me?

What interventions actually areIt’s your problem

Law 170/2010

SpecialistsTeachersFamilyChild

What interventions actually areIt’s your problem

I’m not treated like the others

Law 170/2010

What an intervention could be

Who is dyslexic?

Inclusive interventions

Teachers Family

Technological support

Specialists

Fonts actually in useRello & Baeza-Yates, 2013

Reading time

OpenDyslexiaArial

OpenDyslexia Italic

Fixation time

CourierVerdana

Arial

Preferences

GaramondOpenDyslexia Italic

Fonts actually in useRenske de Leew, 2010

DyslexieSame speed Better accuracy

2. Our research

A dyslexic’s perspective

Visual noise

Italic CursiveAesthetics

A dyslexic’s perspective

Visual noise

p q b d I l

A dyslexic’s perspective

Visual noise

Italic CursiveAesthetics

p q b d

extrinsic

intrinsic I l

Our fontextrinsic visual noise

intri

nsic

visu

al n

oisep Q i L

B d

Dyslexia™

The “key” metaphor

MethodSample: 85 children from 1st to 5th class [M= 56%, F=44%; LD= 15%, nonLD=85%]

Materials: 5 texts (corresponding to class levels)

LD nonLD

Arial poor good

Dyslexia™ good poor

Hp:accuracyspeed

Design

Variable 1: rapidity

Variable 2: accuracyReading Performance

Variable 3: LD

Variable 4: ageVariable 5: scholarization Variable 6: complexity

Variable 7: differences in types

Resultsrapidity: F=11.89, =.001𝛂 accuracy: F=15.87, =.001 𝛂

Results

LD nonLD

Arial poor good

Dyslexia™ good better!

Inclusive interventions

Teachers Family

Technological support

Specialists

Inclusive interventions

Teachers Family

Technological support

Specialists

🎯

Inclusive interventions

Teachers Family

Technological support

Specialists

🎯

research@armandotoscano.com

Thakn you!

Appendix

rapidity accuracy rapidity accuracy rapidity accuracy

LD LD non-LD non-LD overall overall

1 0:02:37 13 0:02:05 3.277777778 0:02:08 4.25

2 0:02:32 5.75 0:02:07 4.428571429 0:02:13 4.722222222

3 0:04:41 15.4 0:02:43 5.363636364 0:03:14 8.235294118

4 0:06:40 10 0:02:05 3.4 0:02:36 4.307692308

5 0:02:39 6.333333333 0:02:14 3.769230769 0:02:18 4

Recommended