Predicting future poor readers from pre-reading visual skills: A longitudinal study

Reading is essential for learning, from literature to physics, from paper to screens on e-readers and smart phones. Even if it is well known that learning to read implies good language skills, children also need to develop good oculomotor and visual-perception skills. Thereby, any deficits in visual processing may affect learning. The possible impact of visual deficits is rarely considered, especially with regard to eye movements and visual perception. Hence, these deficits are usually discovered much later or remain undiagnosed. The present study aimed at assessing the usefulness of visual processing related measures in the early detection of reading difficulties. Visual skill differences that are apparent early in kindergarten might provide predictive insights into risk for learning difficulties at school entry. We used a prospective, longitudinal approach where visual processes (assessed with the Developmental Eye Movement (DEM) test) were measured in 51 preschoolers, and the impact of these processes on future reading development was explored one year later, in Grade 1. Results showed that (1) 31% of our sample of preschoolers showed visual processing impairments (without any clinical complaints) and (2) reading accuracy and speed in first graders were significantly correlated with visual skills assessed in kindergarten, thus confirming the significant role of oculomotor and visual-perception processes in the acquisition of reading skills. These suggests the potential for these measures to be used clinically for identifying children at risk for low academic achievement, enabling appropriate targeting of early interventions.

Learning disabilities, dyslexia, and vision

Learning disabilities constitute a diverse group of disorders in which children who generally possess at least average intelligence have problems processing information or generating output. Their etiologies are multifactorial and reflect genetic influences and dysfunction of brain systems. Reading disability, or dyslexia, is the most common learning disability. It is a receptive language-based learning disability that is characterized by difficulties with decoding, fluent word recognition, rapid automatic naming, and/or reading-comprehension skills. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonologic component of language that makes it difficult to use the alphabetic code to decode the written word. Early recognition and referral to qualified professionals for evidence-based evaluations and treatments are necessary to achieve the best possible outcome. Because dyslexia is a language-based disorder, treatment should be directed at this etiology. Remedial programs should include specific instruction in decoding, fluency training, vocabulary, and comprehension. Most programs include daily intensive individualized instruction that explicitly teaches phonemic awareness and the application of phonics. Vision problems can interfere with the process of reading, but children with dyslexia or related learning disabilities have the same visual function and ocular health as children without such conditions. Currently, there is inadequate scientific evidence to support the view that subtle eye or visual problems cause or increase the severity of learning disabilities. Because they are difficult for the public to understand and for educators to treat, learning disabilities have spawned a wide variety of scientifically unsupported vision-based diagnostic and treatment procedures. Scientific evidence does not support the claims that visual training, muscle exercises, ocular pursuit-and-tracking exercises, behavioral/perceptual vision therapy, "training" glasses, prisms, and colored lenses and filters are effective direct or indirect treatments for learning disabilities. There is no valid evidence that children who participate in vision therapy are more responsive to educational instruction than children who do not participate.

Another joint statement regarding learning disabilities, dyslexia, and vision--a rebuttal

Several medical organizations have published yet another joint statement trivializing vision therapy and vision disorders in the learning-disabled population. A review of the references in the joint statement as well as other references find that the joint statement is misleading because of inappropriate citations and selected references, as was the case with previous joint statements. The most current joint statement ignores the results of evidence-based research and makes recommendations regarding the treatment of convergence insufficiency that have no scientific validity. Ophthalmology should not allow professional rivalry to cloud its judgment regarding optometry's involvement in the diagnosis and treatment of learning-related vision problems.