One thing is really clear with these children and that is traditional teaching does not work for about 10% of students. My role has changed in recent years from teaching to assessment of children with attention and learning problems. I grew frustrated with Grade 7 (13 years old) students coming through to High school with reading ages of 8 year olds after being assessed and the latest literacy program trialled with little or no impact. So I began researching and trialling things to see if I could make a difference. I grew interested in the Corpus Callosum, Vestibular System and Cerebellum that all feature in research as likely culprits.I was also very interested in the development of phonics that over 90% of my students seem to consistently miss in primary school despite adequate opportunity. Research has also firmly established this is an area that effects over 80% of sutdents with Dyslexia or Reading Disorders. I noticed that the characteristics and developmental histories of these children seemed to have predictable themes. IE walked early

There can be no dyslexia until the child begins to learn to read. After that, the
cure is very much a reversal of the teaching method.

Don’t get me wrong — disappointing motor performance can occur in people with dyslexia. I think it is a separate issue. Bundling them together is a mistake.

Nothing about Levinson’s work is in the least scientific.

This is what Larry Silver, MD had to say about the cerebellum and learning in

Neurophysiological Approaches (a critique)

http://dyslexia.mtsu.edu/modules/articles/displayarticle.jsp?id=69

Author(s): Larry Silver M.D.

Reprinted with Permission From: International Dyslexia Association (info)

Printed Date: Spring 2001

Date Posted on this Website: October 03 2002

Cerebellar – Vestibular Dysfunction

Several investigators have suggested that the vestibular system is important in learning. They claim that there is a causal relationship between vestibular disorders and poor academic performance involving reading and written language in children with Learning Disabilities. Ayres, (1973), Frank and Levinson (1973), and Levinson (1980) suggest that such children require a specialized therapy before they can benefit from academic input. DeOuiros (1971) and Levinson (1984) suggest that evidence of a vestibular disorder is predictive of learning disabilities and that therapy can prevent these disabilities.

In recent years, Levinson has published several books on the causative role of the vestibular and vestibular-cerebellar systems in learning disabilities. He proposes the treatment of dyslexia with anti-motion sickness medication to correct the vestibular dysfunction. No research is cited in his books to support his theory or the effectiveness of his treatment. His books refer to his clinical observations and case examples. In one book (Levinson, 1984), he proposes multiple other interventions along with the anti-motion sickness medication, including many other types of medication plus special education.

The role of the vestibular system in the higher cortical functions required for academic performance is not known. Some of the symptoms generally associated with learning disabilities (faulty eye movements, poor postural coordination, poor balance, and poor spatial orientation) could be indicative of vestibular disorder. Such symptoms, however, are only indirect evidence for vestibular dysfunction. The most prominent objective sign of vestibular involvement is nystagmus (spasmodic, rapid movement of the eyeball from side to side).

The hypothesis that there is a relationship between vestibular function and the academic learning of reading and written language comes chiefly from the authors noted. Ayres used the Southern California Postrotary Nystagmus Test. In this test, the child is rotated in alighted room with eyes open, which provides both visual and vestibular stimulation. Thus, it may not be a valid test of vestibular function. Frank and Levinson, used “blurring speed” as evidence for abnormal vestibular function. This was described as the speed at which words passing across the visual field can no longer be recognized. But, because this involves the passing of stimuli across the subject’s visual field at varying speeds, it constitutes visual stimulation, not vestibular.

Consequently, none of the work of these investigators has provided conclusive evidence for vestibular dysfunction in individuals with learning disabilities. These data could possibly be interpreted as evidence of visual dysfunction. Other studies on vestibular dysfunction in children with learning disabilities have reported negative or equivocal results as well.

A study by Polatajko (1985) investigated the relationship between children’s vestibular function and academic learning using well-defined criteria for learning disabilities and exact measurements of vestibular activity. The evaluation of vestibular function consisted of examination of calibration records, search for spontaneous and gaze nystagmus, testing smooth pursuit, and vestibular and optokinetic testing. Vestibular nystagmus was induced by a rotating chair. No significant differences either in the inbsity of vestibular responsivity or in the prevalence of vestibular dysfunction were found between the normal learning children and children with learning disabilities. There was no evidence that children having low, average, or high vestibular responsivity differed significantly on measures of academic performance. There was no significant correlation between measures of vestibular function and measures of academic performance.

In summary, there is no current evidence supporting the theory of vestibular dysfunction nor supporting the proposed treatment approaches. Yet, the primary proponent of this treatment for learning disabilities remains extremely busy evaluating and treating these children.

Polatajko, H.I. (1985). A critical look at vestibular dysfunction and learning-disabled children. Dev Med Child Neurol 27:283-292