Sally E. Shaywitz’s research while affiliated with Yale University and other places

For decades, dyslexia interventions within the school setting are typically delivered at a low dosage, raising concerns that these interventions are not intensive enough to sustain long-term reading outcomes. We sought to investigate the impact of such interventions delivered in one state using data from the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. This unique study sample included both typically reading (n = 246) and dyslexic (n = 66) children beginning at age 5 who have been followed continuously and noninterruptedly through their current age of 45 years. Our findings indicate that the school-based interventions examined in our data did not lead to sustained outcomes for dyslexic readers. Findings suggest that participation in these interventions did not lead to improved outcomes for dyslexic readers in adulthood and may even have a detrimental effect on reading comprehension as adults. If students with dyslexia are to improve their reading, schools must adopt and use evidence-based interventions when reading difficulties are identified in the primary grades. Our findings provide strong empirical support for the need for more intensive and comprehensive interventions for students with dyslexia.

Dyslexia is among the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in children, yet despite its high prevalence all too frequently goes undiagnosed. Consequently dyslexic children all too often fail to receive effective reading interventions. Here we report our findings from a study using a teacher completed evidence-based dyslexia screener to first screen then test predominantly African-American children in grades kindergarten through second grade in two inner city public charter schools in New Orleans. Almost half (49.2%) of the children screened as at risk for dyslexia and of these the majority were found to be dyslexic on more detailed testing. Our results suggest that large numbers of African-American students with dyslexia may be overlooked in schools.

Research indicates that the achievement gap in reading between typical and dyslexic readers is already evident in first grade and persists through adolescence. However, it is not known whether this reading gap persists into adult life. In this report we use an epidemiologic sample of 312 children (typical readers = 246; dyslexic readers = 66), followed longitudinally from age 5 through adulthood and examine two fundamental questions: 1) Is reading level in 1 st grade predictive of reading proficiency in adulthood in typical and dyslexic readers? and 2) Are the trajectories of reading development from 1 st through 5 th grade predictive of reading proficiency in adulthood in typical and dyslexic readers? Our findings indicate that early reading levels in 1 st grade as well as the trajectory of reading development through the first five years of school were associated with reading scores in adulthood. This association was stronger for dyslexic than for typical readers, especially the latter factor. These findings indicate that the achievement gap between typical and dyslexic readers persists far beyond adolescence, in fact, into adult life.

The spread of COVID-19 has led to the disruption of K-12 education for about 90% of the world’s student population. The effects on children’s academic development are unknown. We examined how disruption in schooling over three consecutive summers in disadvantaged minority children affects reading and whether an intensive intervention can ameliorate these effects. Our data were collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We applied Latent Change Score models to examine developmental trends in a longitudinal study of reading in 111 economically disadvantaged children, assessed biannually from grades 1 to 4, including 3 summers (for a total of 6 months of school hiatus). The students fell behind the normative population in their ability to understand written texts, a decrease in their relative percentile of 0.25 of a standard deviation each summer, and an effect 3–4 times greater than prior studies suggested. Compared to children in a comparison group, children who received an evidence-based intervention during the school year were better able to maintain their reading scores. These findings provide evidence that disruptions in schooling, for example, those implemented to slow the spread of COVID-19, may have a significant detrimental effect on the reading abilities of disadvantaged children and that children who received a reading intervention were better able to maintain their reading scores during the hiatus. It is critical that policy makers prioritize the allocation of necessary resources to minimize the negative effects on reading this pandemic has wrought on these most disadvantaged children.

Statement of Relevance Accurate early screening is important for providing effective early intervention for dyslexic readers. It is in these early years of school that the slope for reading acquisition is greatest, only to plateau at a much slower rate as the child goes on in school. Some have suggested using family history as a proxy for identification of dyslexia. However, the classification accuracy of family history as a screening measure for dyslexia is unknown. Here, we show that using family history as a proxy for dyslexia is unwarranted. Using an epidemiologic sample of 398 children followed from age 5 through adulthood, we found that sensitivity of family history for predicting dyslexia was unacceptably low for all family member groups. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves for family history alone, an evidence-based early screening measure alone, and the combination of screener and family history indicate that the evidence-based screener yields the best results for predicting at-risk for dyslexia while the addition of family history does not improve the value of using the screener alone. These findings indicate that family history is not effective as a screening measure for dyslexia and that family history does not improve the classification accuracy provided by an evidence-based early screening measure.

Purpose of review: Within the past decade tremendous advances have occurred in our understanding of dyslexia. Recent findings: Reliable data now validate the definition of dyslexia as an unexpected difficulty in reading in an individual who has the ability to be a much better reader. That dyslexia is unexpected is now codified in US federal law (PL 115-391). Replicated studies using functional brain imaging have documented a neural signature for dyslexia. Epidemiologic, longitudinal data now demonstrate that dyslexia is highly prevalent, affecting 20% of the population, affecting boys and girls equally. These data further demonstrate that the achievement gap between dyslexic and typical readers is now evident as early as first grade and persists. Evidence-based, efficient, inexpensive screening tools now offer the possibility of universal screening to identify children at risk for dyslexia as early as first grade. Specialized schools which focus on dyslexic students provide welcoming communities, ensuring that dyslexic children will not only survive but thrive. Summary: Taken together, these findings indicate that we must act and act now to ensure that this 21st century knowledge of dyslexia is disseminated to educators, policy makers, and most of all to parents of dyslexic children.