Many of us would ask whether we can find different types of children with reading disability. If we can, it will clean up the heterogeneous mess and allow us to understand the reading-disabled children’s difficulties in terms of the cognitive processing mode they use. For example, who belongs to the true dyslexic category? Who should we place in the so-called garden-variety category? Does everyone who has reading difficulties also show a distinct pattern of deficits in cognitive processing? What is the value of classification or subtyping in terms of cognitive processes?
There has been recent research to identify the subtypes. We mention two studies, one done by our team of researchers at the Developmental Disabilities Centre and the other by Morris and colleagues (1998), a group of scientists in USA.
In our own research we conducted the PASS tests as well as tests of reading ability. Our sample was made up of 65 children in Grade 2 classes. Their performance on the reading tests had shown a very poor level of reading competence for single words and nonwords (for example, fiba, brampt). We grouped their scores into clusters by cluster analysis, which is a statistical procedure. Three clusters of children emerged: first, a group which had poor scores in almost all of our PASS processes; second, a group with poor scores mainly on successive processes; and third, a very small group of only nine children who were not poor performers in the PASS tests, but were reading poorly. We had, thus, found the garden variety (first group), the dyslexic (second group) and the ‘no-deficit’ group (the third group).
Thus, the PASS theory is useful for resolving the confusion and also for guiding the educator who has to deal with the heterogeneous class of reading-disabled children. The study suggests that guidance for managing instruction, according to the strength and weakness in the child’s cognitive functions, can be provided.
A recent study in USA that tried to classify reading disabilities used many tests that, while not taken directly from the PASS tests, were very similar. The focus of this study was to discriminate between different types of reading-disabled children within a heterogeneous group of 232 children made up of both good and poor readers. The scientists in this study also used cluster analysis to look at subtypes. Seven reading-disabled subtypes emerged and two were normal readers. The authors used cognitive tests, linguistic and neuropsychological tests, and tests of phonological coding and reading.
The tests that were found to be important for subtyping were tests of phonological awareness, word recall (successive tests), rapid naming (successive), similarities (simultaneous), speed of articulation (successive), judgment of line orientation and visual-spatial judgment (simultaneous), visual attention (attention), and nonverbal short-term memory (successive). Thus, looking at the tests that were used, one could easily put them into the PASS category of tests and, although the authors (Morris et al, 1998) did not use the PASS theory in explaining their results, it is clear that PASS processes are extremely relevant here to understand the clusters that emerged.
Earlier we discussed how the two major difficulties of reading-disabled children were word decoding and phonological awareness. We add the selected PASS processes to this list. Difficulties in successive processing are typically found among beginning readers, who are likely to be dyslexics, whereas most general poor readers may be weak to a certain extent in all the PASS processes. However, in spite of intact PASS processes normal for their age, some children still do not learn to read adequately.
Children who are experiencing reading difficulties may primarily have a problem in their successive and simultaneous processing, when all other noncognitive causes are ruled out. The noncognitive causes can include poor instruction, lack of motivation, cultural disadvantage, malnutrition, and several kinds of physical and sensory handicaps—deafness, cerebral palsy, and so on. The PASS processes in which a child may be weak must be determined; this helps us to choose an appropriate program for remediation). Reading may be poor in children who have a problem in arousal-attention.
Once that condition is controlled (for example, by drugs or behavioral programs), then the child’s reading ability may improve. Some children may be clumsy and disorganized, probably due to a deficit in their planning process. Again, if that is their primary processing difficulty, an appropriate program must be designed to help such children. A classic dyslexic usually has poor successive processing, while all other processes are adequate. Thus, a PASS profile of the child is useful in individualized planning programs.