Monday, June 27, 2011

Calculating a Response to Dyscalculia: What to Do When Your Child is “Number Blind”


June 23, 2011 by Cory Armes
Do you know any children or adults who struggle with math?  Perhaps they have difficulty with basic math skills and seem unable to understand what math process to use with which problem.  Maybe they are unable to organize objects in a logical way or have difficulty with measurement of either time or money.  If you know people with these types of struggles, they may have dyscalculia.
Dyscalculia, also called “number blindness” or “numerical blindness,” is a learning disability that inhibits a person's ability to use and have a proper sense of numbers.  Literally meaning “bad counting,” dyscalculia is estimated to impact three to six percent of the population so is just as prevalent as dyslexia but often goes undiagnosed since those with this disability often excel in reading and other subject areas. 
Many people believe that math can be a difficult subject to teach or that some students just don’t “get it”.  But for those who truly have dyscalculia, it is not about how the subject is taught; it is a lack of number sense.  Two main areas of weakness may contribute to this learning disability: visual-spatial issues and language processing difficulties.  With visual-spatial weaknesses, the learner has a problem processing what the eye sees so he or she may have difficulty visualizing patterns or parts of a math problem.  Making sense of what the ear hears is the issue with language processing weakness which leads to a hard time grasping math vocabulary and building on math knowledge since there is a difficulty in understanding what the words represent.
Identification of any learning disability requires a trained professional who can evaluate a student to determine areas of strengths and weaknesses in learning.  An in-depth assessment compares what the student’s expected level of performance is to what he or she actually can do in areas of mathematical skill and understanding.  It also is helpful for at least an overview of this information to be shared with the student (especially the strengths) since knowing how you learn best is a good way to help students learn to compensate for difficulties and to build academic success and confidence.
So what can be done for those who have dyscalculia?  The first step is for parents, teachers and other educational specialists to use the evaluation results to develop strategies to address the student’s math skills.  Some will benefit from additional tutoring that adjusts the learning pace and focuses on specific areas of difficulty with repeated reinforcement of key skills.  For those with visual-spatial weaknesses, using graph paper can be helpful for organizing ideas and for those with language processing issues, clear explanations and frequent checks for understanding are important.  And, as with most students with learning disabilities, having all of the needed materials and working in a place with limited distractions is always a good idea!
As with any learning disability, the earlier that the dyscalculia can be identified and remediated, the greater the chance that your child will stay on track or stay motivated to catch up.  Talking with your child’s teacher is the best place to start so make that call or, if the teacher has contacted you, be open to their concerns.    As your child’s advocate, you can help make the difference in gaining access to the right resources to help your child work through learning challenges and achieve academic success.


Thursday, June 23, 2011

Sleep Loss in Early Childhood May Contribute to the Development of ADHD Symptoms





ScienceDaily (June 15, 2011)
— Short sleep duration may contribute to the development or worsening of hyperactivity and inattention during early childhood, suggests a research abstract that will be presented on June 14, in Minneapolis, Minn., at Sleep 2011, the 25th Anniversary Meeting of the Associated Professional Sleep Societies LLC (APSS).



Results show that less sleep in preschool-age children significantly predicted worse parent-reported hyperactivity and inattention at kindergarten. In contrast, hyperactivity and inattention at preschool did not predict sleep duration at kindergarten. The sample consisted of approximately 6,860 children, and analyses controlled for gender, ethnicity and family income.
"Children who were reported to sleep less in preschool were rated by their parents as more hyperactive and less attentive compared to their peers at kindergarten," said lead author Erika Gaylor, PhD, senior researcher for SRI International, an independent, nonprofit research institute in Menlo Park, Calif. "These findings suggest that some children who are not getting adequate sleep may be at risk for developing behavioral problems manifested by hyperactivity, impulsivity, and problems sitting still and paying attention."
According to the authors, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is not generally diagnosed until the school-age years. However, the onset of developmentally inappropriate inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity is often much younger. Sleep problems, particularly difficulty falling asleep and staying asleep, are frequently reported in children and adolescents with ADHD. However, the direction of causation, if any, has been difficult to determine. Longitudinal studies may provide a window into the direction of this complex relationship.
The analyses used data from the preschool and kindergarten waves of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study -- Birth Cohort. The dataset includes a contemporary, representative sample of children and their families living in the U.S. and followed longitudinally from birth through kindergarten entry. Total nighttime sleep duration was calculated using parent-reported bedtimes and wake times, which were obtained via interview at both time points. Parents also rated their children's behavior on brief measures of attention/task persistence and hyperactivity/impulsivity.
Last year at Sleep 2010, Gaylor reported that having a regular bedtime was the most consis¬tent predictor of positive developmental outcomes at 4 years of age. Having an earlier bedtime also was predictive of higher scores for most developmental measures.



Article retrieved from: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110614101122.htm?utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=LDOnLine.org

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Memory training improves intelligence in some children

By Melissa Healy, Los Angeles Times
June 14, 2011

Brain games can help with abstract reasoning months after the training, but they work only for those who really need and enjoy the exercises, a study says.


Training a child to hold a whole cluster of items in his or her memory for even a short time may feel like trying to hold a wave on the sand. But a study published Monday says it's a drill that can yield lasting benefits.

Children who've had such training have better abstract reasoning and solve problems more creatively than kids who haven't, the study found.

But here's a warning to parents already grooming their young children for entry into elite universities: Don't automatically rush out to enroll your young genius in brain-training summer camp or invest in DVDs promising to deliver high IQs. These drills, the scientists found, pay the greatest dividends for children who actually need them and who find the escalating challenge of the games fun, not frustrating.

For others, "it might be difficult if you push your kid too much," said study lead author Susanne M. Jaeggi, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan. "It's like a parent pushing a child to do sports or learn a musical instrument: There's always this delicate balance between too much or too little."

The training program used by Jaeggi and co-workers focused on ramping up working memory: the ability to hold in mind a handful of information bits briefly, and to update them as needed. Cognitive scientists consider working memory a key component of intelligence. But they have long debated whether strengthening short-term memory capacity will boost a person's overall intellectual function, and will do so even after the brain-training sessions are over.

It can, and it does, according to this new research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The study put 32 elementary and middle school children through a rigorous monthlong regimen of computer games designed to test, challenge and strengthen their working memory. An additional 30 children trained on a computer program that involved answering general knowledge and vocabulary questions.

The working-memory programs — adapted from a brain game designed for older users — required children to follow and remember a sequence of positions on a grid and, shortly after seeing the pattern, to answer questions about it. When a child did well on a game, the next sequence would become longer, increasingly challenging the child's ability to hold in mind the sequence and spatial information.

The task requires a child's rapt attention for as long as a minute and emphasizes the ability to screen out distractions while focusing on a single task. The child must recall where and in what order items appeared on a screen, then work backward through that remembered information to answer questions correctly.

Jaeggi called the task, known as the "n-back test" by psychologists, "really devilish. If you lose track just a little bit, you're completely out of it and you have to start anew."

When the children were tested at the end of the month of training, the Michigan researchers at first found scant differences between the group that got the working-memory training and the general knowledge group. Although those who had received working-memory training were better at holding several items in mind for a short while, on a test of abstract reasoning — fluid intelligence — they were, as a group, no smarter than the control group.

But then the researchers took a closer look and noticed a clear pattern: The children who had improved the most on the memory-training task did indeed perform better on the fluid intelligence test. And three months later, they still did better as a group than both the control group and the children who hadn't improved.

The study comes against the backdrop of explosive growth in the business of brain-training programs for children. Increasingly, designers of brain games — a roughly $300-million-a-year business that has sprung up in less than a decade — are aiming at intellectually ambitious parents bent on supplying their progeny all the cognitive advantages money can buy.

Alvaro Fernandez, who teaches the science of brain health at San Francisco State University and is the founder of SharpBrains, a company that tracks the brain fitness business, said about $75 million a year of the brain-training business was focused on school-age children. In a deal certain to accelerate that trend, the educational publishing giant Pearson last year bought Cogmed, a Swedish start-up company that has pioneered the development of brain-training programs focused on working memory.

"They'll have a sales force in every school district in the country," Fernandez predicted.

For schoolchildren, the result could be an influx in video-based training programs that could put eye-popping graphics and engaging gamesmanship in the service of academic skill-building. Many of the newest programs have emerged from a mind meld of neuroscientists and video game designers. The resulting products adapt to their users' progress, dispensing virtual prizes and increasing the level of difficulty to keep a young player motivated and challenged.

"It's train but don't strain your brain," said UCLA psychiatrist Dr. Gary Small, author of "The Memory Bible" and creator of a new training program called Memory Power. "You've got to find the sweet spot — we know that."

That formula — fun and challenging, but not so challenging as to be frustrating — turned out to be crucial in the new study. Those children who saw significant and lasting improvements in abstract reasoning were far more likely to be the ones who rated the games as challenging but not overwhelming, Jaeggi said.

She likened the mental exercise of building working memory to a would-be athlete embarking on a regimen of aerobic exercise: A workout that's too easy can lead an athlete to plateau, and one that's too hard can discourage and cause injury.

Other studies have found stronger evidence that working-memory training has the power to help a person not only to remember a shopping list but to be a more agile thinker as well, said Torkel Klingberg, a Swedish neuroscientist who founded Cogmed and has been a pioneer in working-memory research.

Patricia Schwarz, who teaches fifth-graders at L.A.'s Solano Avenue Elementary School, says her children run the gamut from those who hear instructions once and remember them till the task is done to those who get "befuddled" by the time they get to step two.

"There are a lot of kids who need instructions and graphics and words written on the blackboard. It just doesn't work for them the way it does with others," said Schwarz, a 24-year veteran of teaching. Any brain-training that works "would be fantastic," she said at the end of a long day of teaching photosynthesis.But here's a warning to parents already grooming their young children for entry into elite universities: Don't automatically rush out to enroll your young genius in brain-training summer camp or invest in DVDs promising to deliver high IQs. These drills, the scientists found, pay the greatest dividends for children who actually need them and who find the escalating challenge of the games fun, not frustrating.

For others, "it might be difficult if you push your kid too much," said study lead author Susanne M. Jaeggi, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan. "It's like a parent pushing a child to do sports or learn a musical instrument: There's always this delicate balance between too much or too little."

The training program used by Jaeggi and co-workers focused on ramping up working memory: the ability to hold in mind a handful of information bits briefly, and to update them as needed. Cognitive scientists consider working memory a key component of intelligence. But they have long debated whether strengthening short-term memory capacity will boost a person's overall intellectual function, and will do so even after the brain-training sessions are over.

It can, and it does, according to this new research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The study put 32 elementary and middle school children through a rigorous monthlong regimen of computer games designed to test, challenge and strengthen their working memory. An additional 30 children trained on a computer program that involved answering general knowledge and vocabulary questions.

The working-memory programs — adapted from a brain game designed for older users — required children to follow and remember a sequence of positions on a grid and, shortly after seeing the pattern, to answer questions about it. When a child did well on a game, the next sequence would become longer, increasingly challenging the child's ability to hold in mind the sequence and spatial information.

The task requires a child's rapt attention for as long as a minute and emphasizes the ability to screen out distractions while focusing on a single task. The child must recall where and in what order items appeared on a screen, then work backward through that remembered information to answer questions correctly.

Jaeggi called the task, known as the "n-back test" by psychologists, "really devilish. If you lose track just a little bit, you're completely out of it and you have to start anew."

When the children were tested at the end of the month of training, the Michigan researchers at first found scant differences between the group that got the working-memory training and the general knowledge group. Although those who had received working-memory training were better at holding several items in mind for a short while, on a test of abstract reasoning — fluid intelligence — they were, as a group, no smarter than the control group.

But then the researchers took a closer look and noticed a clear pattern: The children who had improved the most on the memory-training task did indeed perform better on the fluid intelligence test. And three months later, they still did better as a group than both the control group and the children who hadn't improved.

The study comes against the backdrop of explosive growth in the business of brain-training programs for children. Increasingly, designers of brain games — a roughly $300-million-a-year business that has sprung up in less than a decade — are aiming at intellectually ambitious parents bent on supplying their progeny all the cognitive advantages money can buy.

Alvaro Fernandez, who teaches the science of brain health at San Francisco State University and is the founder of SharpBrains, a company that tracks the brain fitness business, said about $75 million a year of the brain-training business was focused on school-age children. In a deal certain to accelerate that trend, the educational publishing giant Pearson last year bought Cogmed, a Swedish start-up company that has pioneered the development of brain-training programs focused on working memory.

"They'll have a sales force in every school district in the country," Fernandez predicted.

For schoolchildren, the result could be an influx in video-based training programs that could put eye-popping graphics and engaging gamesmanship in the service of academic skill-building. Many of the newest programs have emerged from a mind meld of neuroscientists and video game designers. The resulting products adapt to their users' progress, dispensing virtual prizes and increasing the level of difficulty to keep a young player motivated and challenged.

"It's train but don't strain your brain," said UCLA psychiatrist Dr. Gary Small, author of "The Memory Bible" and creator of a new training program called Memory Power. "You've got to find the sweet spot — we know that."

That formula — fun and challenging, but not so challenging as to be frustrating — turned out to be crucial in the new study. Those children who saw significant and lasting improvements in abstract reasoning were far more likely to be the ones who rated the games as challenging but not overwhelming, Jaeggi said.

She likened the mental exercise of building working memory to a would-be athlete embarking on a regimen of aerobic exercise: A workout that's too easy can lead an athlete to plateau, and one that's too hard can discourage and cause injury.

Other studies have found stronger evidence that working-memory training has the power to help a person not only to remember a shopping list but to be a more agile thinker as well, said Torkel Klingberg, a Swedish neuroscientist who founded Cogmed and has been a pioneer in working-memory research.

Patricia Schwarz, who teaches fifth-graders at L.A.'s Solano Avenue Elementary School, says her children run the gamut from those who hear instructions once and remember them till the task is done to those who get "befuddled" by the time they get to step two.

"There are a lot of kids who need instructions and graphics and words written on the blackboard. It just doesn't work for them the way it does with others," said Schwarz, a 24-year veteran of teaching. Any brain-training that works "would be fantastic," she said at the end of a long day of teaching photosynthesis.

Article retrieved from: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-iq-boost-20110614-1,0,2455553.story
Image retrieved from: http://www.trainingspace.org/cse/photos/kids_entry.jpg

Study: Working memory training can improve fluid intelligence

By: Alvaro Fernandez

Very inter­est­ing new study on com­put­er­ized cog­ni­tive train­ing (or brain train­ing), well sum­ma­rized in LA Times arti­cle Mem­ory train­ing improves intel­li­gence in some chil­dren, report says. Quote:

The train­ing pro­gram used by Jaeggi and co-workers focused on ramp­ing up work­ing mem­ory: the abil­ity to hold in mind a hand­ful of infor­ma­tion bits briefly, and to update them as needed. Cog­ni­tive sci­en­tists con­sider work­ing mem­ory a key com­po­nent of intel­li­gence. But they have long debated whether strength­en­ing short-term mem­ory capac­ity will boost a person’s over­all intel­lec­tual func­tion, and will do so even after the brain-training ses­sions are over.

It can, and it does, accord­ing to this new research, pub­lished in the Pro­ceed­ings of the National Acad­emy of Sciences.

The full study, Short-term and long-term ben­e­fits of cog­ni­tive train­ing, is avail­able here, and includes this cru­cial and often over­looked analysis:

We con­clude that cog­ni­tive train­ing can be effec­tive and long-lasting, but that there are lim­it­ing fac­tors that must be con­sid­ered to eval­u­ate the effects of this train­ing, one of which is indi­vid­ual dif­fer­ences in train­ing per­for­mance. We pro­pose that future research should not inves­ti­gate whether cog­ni­tive train­ing works, but rather should deter­mine what train­ing reg­i­mens and what train­ing con­di­tions result in the best trans­fer effects, inves­ti­gate the under­ly­ing neural and cog­ni­tive mech­a­nisms, and finally, inves­ti­gate for whom cog­ni­tive train­ing is most useful.


Article retrieved from: http://www.sharpbrains.com/blog/2011/06/14/study-working-memory-training-can-improve-fluid-intelligence/


Image retrieved from: http://www.healthadel.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/brain1.jpg

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More