Overcoming Dyslexia: A New and Complete Science-Based Program for Reading Problems at Any Level [Deckle Edge] [Hardcover]

One particularly attractive feature of the book is that it covers many areas of concern: not just the science of dyslexia, but also the techniques of testing for dyslexia and teaching to dyslexics, the social and personal implications of dyslexia, policy and administrative implications of dyslexia, effective advocacy for a dyslexic child, misconceptions about dyslexia, and so forth. A special treat is the epilogue, which provides the life stories of seven dyslexics who have been extraordinarily successful as authors, physicians, businesspersons, or politicians. I particularly note that many of these successful people regard dyslexia not as a burden to overcome, but as a gift that forces them to think where others rely on rote memorization.

I bought this book because my son is dyslexic. After reading it, I am also nearly convinced that I am dyslexic. (Before you read too much into genetics, let me tell you that my son is adopted.) Other apparent dyslexics I know are my father (a self-made multimillionaire who has difficulty spelling words of four or five letters) and my Ph.D. thesis advisor (a highly creative theoretical physicist, winner of the Wolf Prize and the Boltzmann Metal, who told me not to fret overly about my poor spelling, because "the ability to spell anticorrelates with intelligence").

The book does not deserve five stars, however, because it is seriously schizophrenic. Most of the book, particularly parts I, II, and IV, takes the position that there are many different kinds of students, who enter school with a variety of backgrounds and a variety of objectives, and that this variety demands a variety of teaching approaches. For example:

"Every child is different." (page 193)

"There is no one perfect school environment that will suit every child." (page 302)

"Good readers and dyslexic readers follow very different pathways to adult reading." (page 314)

They are poor schools that "pride themselves on uniformity." (page 297)

My observations, both as a parent and as a teacher, support the soundness of these conclusions. After all, every shirt manufacturer knows that it's *not* true that "one size fits all". If we need variety in such a simple thing as shirt sizing, isn't it clear that we also need variety in something as complex as thinking, teaching, and learning?

Yet part of Shaywitz's book (much of part III) flatly rejects this need for variety and replaces it with a doctrinaire insistence that there is only one way to learn reading, namely phonics:

"A young child *must* develop phonemic awareness if he is to become a reader." (page 51)

The child "must understand that spoken words come apart" into short sounds. (page 176)

"All children must master the same elements." (page 262)

Fluency training "invariably works." (page 273)

"It is only by reading aloud...that real gains are noted." (page 235)

"There is no other way." (page 263)

It is abundantly clear that such statements are dead false: deaf children do not -- cannot -- learn to read by associating letters with sounds, as phonics demands. Furthermore, I assure you that I do not read this way. I simply do not understand the complex rules about vowels on pages 200 and 201 -- rules that Shaywitz claims *must* be understood by second graders to enable them to read. (While reading these rules, I could only think that, in comparison, quantum mechanics is utterly trivial.) Perhaps this is related to the fact that I've never been able to play a musical instrument, or to sing, or even to hum. But surely I am a counterexample to this arrogant insistence that "there is no other way".

Shaywitz claims that her insistence on phonics as the only way to learn is supported by the report of National Reading Panel. In fact, that panel draws exactly the opposite conclusion, namely that "Not all children learn in the same way and one strategy does not work for all children."

It may well be that deaf people and I don't read as efficiently as other people do. It may well be that phonics is the most efficient place to start when attempting to teach a child to read. But to insist, as Shaywitz does, that it's the place to start *and* the place to stop is contrary to both common sense and the evidence.

The book's dual-headed character is sometimes frightening in its contradictions. On page 358 Shaywitz recounts vividly how awful it is for dyslexics to be forced to read aloud in class. (The same can be said for those with speech impediments, for those with non-standard accents, for poor readers who are not dyslexic, and for those who are just plain shy.) And on page 235 she writes with pride that, due to her contributions to the "No Child Left Behind Act", soon all children will be forced to read aloud in class.

The tragedy is that due to the adoption of the "No Child Left Behind Act", and due to impending changes in the "Individuals with Disabilities Education Act", our country is moving away from the sound practice of "one strategy does not work for all children" and towards the one-size-fits-all doctrine of "there is no other way."