Students with Learning Difficulties – Why is language learning problematic for them and how can the language teacher help?

Students with Learning Difficulties – Why is language learning problematic for them and how can the language teacher help?

Lengyelfi Eszter

Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem

In my essay, I am going to investigate the nature of the problems that students with learning disabilities (LDs), for example dyslexia and dysgraphia, have with language learning and the teaching methods by which the language teacher could make it significantly easier and more successful for them. My claim is that as a language teacher it is exceedingly important to be familiar with the methods to help students with LDs. Their difficulty does not mean that they are not able to acquire a foreign language; it only means that they learn more slowly and need different teaching methods. First of all, I am going to discuss some common assumptions regarding the difficulties of dyslexic children and the basic problems of dyslexia as one of the most common LDs, afterwards listing some teaching methods and ways to redesign classes so that they are suitable for children who fight such difficulties. I intend to point out that all teachers should be familiar with and be able to apply these teaching methods because a significant progress in the proficiency of students with LDs can be acquired with relatively little effort, and, at least in my opinion, a good teacher must be able to develop all the students in the class regardless of the learning difficulties.

            A basic characteristic of students with LDs is that they lack an ability that is essential for the understanding of what they have read: the ability to read fluently and to recognize words automatically (Linan-Thompson, Vaughn, Hickman-Davis & Kouzekanani, 2003). In addition, it is exceedingly difficult for them to deduce abstract grammar rules without direct instruction (Hutchins & Engels, 2005) and they also lack memory capacities needed for remembering semantic information (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1990).  As Critchley points out, dyslexia, one of the most common LDs, means “difficulties in learning to read despite conventional instruction, adequate intelligence, and socioeconomic opportunity. It is dependent upon fundamental cognitive disabilities (…)” (As cited in Bruck, 1988, p. 52.). More specifically, the major difficulty for dyslexic children lies in decoding single words. Thus the question arises of whether they have idiosyncratic manners in recognizing words or whether they process them similarly to normal readers (Bruck, 1988). Finding answer for this question constitutes the basis of understanding the nature of dyslexia and other LDs, and, the basis of the establishment of methods to aid their learning.

In 1988, Maggie Bruck carried out a piece of research study on dyslexic children’s ways of spelling and of recognizing words in comparison with normal students. According to her, there are two basic ways of recognizing words: using phonological information or recognizing the printed word’s meaning based on its visual representation. She stated that normal (i.e., without LDs) learners switch from the first to the second one for high-frequency words as they proceed in learning but still continue to develop the first method. Previous studies have raised the possibility that dyslexic children follow a different pattern. However, based on the investigation of four areas (knowledge of spelling-sound correspondences, use of phonological information for word recognition, use of context for word recognition, processes used to spell words) she concluded that although dyslexic children’s knowledge of spelling-sound correspondences is weaker than that of normal children, they apply it in the same patterns to recognize words. The difference lies in dyslexic children’s delayed transition from the first word recognition method to the second. This means that although they rely on phonological information for word processing, their knowledge of spelling-sound correspondences is incomplete and therefore they cannot move on to the method of word-specific associations. As Bruck states, “[…] they must continue to use phonological processes and to rely on inadequate spelling-sound correspondence information for word recognition” (Bruck, 1988, p. 66). However, in their underlying methods of word recognition, no qualitative differences can be found between dyslexic and normal children (Bruck, 1988). Nevertheless, they inevitably need different teaching methods to facilitate their learning.

According to Linan-Thompson, Vaughn, Hickman-Davis and Kouzekanani (2003), there is evidence that students who find the acquisition of reading exceedingly difficult “benefit from supplemental, intensive reading instruction” (p. 222). They have found that supplemental reading instruction for students with LDs is even more effective than previous studies have suggested; eighty-eight percent of students have made more than minimal gains. Results of this study support the practice of intensive and explicit reading instruction for students. As, according to this study, the usefulness of this additional support does not depend on the student’s level of proficiency, I personally suspect that such methods could be beneficial to other students as well, regardless of the LDs. What is clear from this research is that the successful acquiring of skills is inseparable from sufficient instruction (Linan-Thompson, Vaughn, Hickman-Davis, Kouzekanani, 2003).

Another problem with teaching concerns the Natural Approach, which “encourages active mastery of language in communicative situations” (Hutchins & Engels, 2005, p. 71.), a still widely popular method in the foreign language programs of universities. However, as it requires the students to deduce abstract patterns based on foreign language input, it is not suitable for students with LDs, who would need more structure-based classes. Therefore, Hutchins and Engels (2005) have revised this method and claim that direct explanation of grammar rules is a necessary constituent of language learning. They also state that this should take place before the exposure to and required production of foreign language. According to them, an explicit structuring of the classes, such as reminders of the previous class, an overview of the present class and the discussion of the plans for the next class are needed for the orientation of students with LDs. They also mention, very importantly, that “[t]he environment should be inclusive for all students” (Hutchins & Engels, 2005, p. 77), which again suggests that what is crucial for students with LDs is, if not absolutely necessary, is probably also useful for normal learners.

As Scruggs and Mastropieri (1990) state, the difficulty of remembering important information is one of the most well-known characteristics of  students with LDs. According to them, “mnemonics”, that is, procedures that help in developing memory, might be of great help for these students, because they relate new information to the learners’ already existing knowledge. On the basis of previous research, Scruggs and Mastropieri state that it is likely that these memory deficits are language based and that students with LDs face problems both in the process and in the structure of semantic memory. Mnemonic instruction is proved to be effective because it facilitates the memorizing of the verbal label belonging to new knowledge, which otherwise is easily, forgotten thereby blocking the way to the knowledge itself.  Empirical evidence proves that mnemonic techniques help the comprehension of new materials (Scruggs and Mastropieri, 1990, p. 276).

It can be seen from the above  that, based on an understanding of the nature of learning difficulties in general or specifically, a variety of supporting methods can be worked out to aid students with LDs. What is perhaps most important to note is that they do not differ qualitatively in their ways of understanding language or remembering materials from normal students, they are just weaker at some crucial skills and therefore need additional support from teachers. This implies three things. First, that they are able to acquire a foreign language or learn anything that normal students do, provided that the teaching methods are suitable for them. Secondly, that as their very basic patterns of learning are similar to that of normal learners, the methods used to help students with LDs will also be suitable for the whole class, regardless of the learning difficulties. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, that such supplemental methods are already designed and can be designed based on research, that is, every teacher has the possibility to design his or her classes in a way that is suitable for all the students in the class, and, in my opinion, it is exceedingly important that they do so. Of course, teacher trainings that provide this knowledge are also necessary.

References

Bruck, M. (1988). The word recognition and spelling of dyslexic children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23 (1), 51-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/747904

Hutchins, M. & Engels, A. (2005). Foreign language instruction for students with learning difficulties: rethinking the setting and structure of classes using the natural approach. Modern Language Studies, 35 (2), 71-81. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30039826

Linan-Thompson, S., Vaughn, S., Hickman-Davis, P., & Kouzekanani, K. (2003). Effectiveness of supplemental reading instruction for second-grade English language learners with learning difficulties. The Elementary School Journal, 103 (3), 221-238. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002270

Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1990). Mnemonic instruction for students with learning disabilities: what it is and what it does. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13 (4), 271-280. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1510353