Alternative Teaching Methods for Dyslexic Students' Memory & Learning Difficulties

Leveraging Whole Brain Teaching to Support Memory and Learning in Dyslexic Students

Abstract: 

Dyslexia is a common learning disability characterized by difficulties with phonological processing and working memory. These deficits can negatively impact rote memorization, a staple learning strategy in many classrooms. Traditional repetition and drill methods may be ineffective for dyslexic learners. Whole brain teaching incorporates interactive techniques like mirroring, chunking, gestures, and games to engage multiple neural pathways. This literature review examines the obstacles dyslexic students face with memorization and how the multisensory, meaningful, and motivational techniques of whole brain teaching can facilitate memorization and learning. Findings suggest whole brain teaching aligns well with recommendations for dyslexia instruction by tapping into visual, auditory, kinesthetic and motor memory networks. The techniques enhance working memory, contextualize information, motivate students, and improve recall. Whole brain teaching shows promise for creating an inclusive classroom where dyslexic students can thrive. More research is needed on its direct impacts for this population. Teachers may consider incorporating whole brain techniques to promote engagement, understanding, and memorization for all students.

Introduction: 

Dyslexia is one of the most prevalent learning disabilities, affecting between 5-17% of students (Peterson & Pennington, 2012). It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and fluent word recognition and poor spelling. These literacy challenges are rooted in phonological processing deficits, which can make mapping speech sounds to letters difficult (Berninger & Wolf, 2009). Dyslexia also frequently co-occurs with impairments in working memory, processing speed, and executive functions like organizing and planning (Reiter, Tucha & Lange, 2005). 

Working memory and phonological deficits present challenges for dyslexic students in today’s classrooms, many of which rely heavily on memorization and oral reading fluency. Multi-step directions, foreign language vocabulary, math facts, historical dates, chemical equations, and spelling words often need to be committed purely to memory. Rote repetition and drill are common teaching techniques for instilling memorization. However, these methods are often ineffective for students with dyslexia due to the phonological, memory and processing weaknesses associated with the disability (Katzir et al., 2006). 

In seeking to support the learning needs of dyslexic students, educators have identified alternate evidence-based approaches. Multisensory and structured language techniques which tap into the visual, auditory, kinesthetic and motor neural pathways have proven beneficial (Joshi et al., 2002). Teaching strategies that provide meaning, structure, engagement and memory supports also align with recommendations for dyslexia (Berninger & Wolf, 2009). 

Whole brain teaching incorporates many of these recommended techniques. It focuses on interactive modalities like peer mirroring, gestures, body movements, visual organizers, songs, chants and group games to aid learning and engagement (Jackson, 2011). A key premise is that this stimulates more neural networks in the brain compared to traditional lecturing and repetition. Initial studies have found positive impacts on academic achievement and behavior (Schirduan, Case & Faryniarz, 2002).

However, little research has specifically examined the potential benefits of whole brain teaching for dyslexic students. This literature review synthesizes current knowledge about dyslexia and memorization difficulties, cognitive assets that can be leveraged, and the techniques encompassed under the whole brain teaching umbrella. It examines how whole brain strategies align with and can potentially compensate for some core challenges of dyslexia. This lays the groundwork for future studies exploring the direct impacts of whole brain teaching for improving learning and memory in dyslexic students.

Review of Dyslexia and Memorization Difficulties:

Various cognitive deficits connected to dyslexia can negatively impact rote memorization skills. A primary obstacle is phonological processing (Snowling & Hulme, 2012). Phonological processing involves detecting and manipulating the sounds within words. It is key for connecting written letters and symbols to speech sounds. Dyslexics show less phonological awareness and more difficulty storing phonological representations in memory (Gibson & Gruen, 2008). This impedes creating sound and symbol connections essential for memorizing words and facts. 

Verbal working memory impairments are also prominent in dyslexia. Verbal working memory allows the temporary storage and manipulation of auditory verbal information (Smith-Spark & Fisk, 2007). It is critical for remembering instructions, comprehending passages, and reasoning. Meta-analyses confirm dyslexics perform worse on verbal working memory tasks compared to controls (Swanson et al., 2009). This hampers following multi-step directions and memorizing sequences.

Finally, broader deficits in executive functions like planning, organization and self-monitoring are common (Reiter et al., 2005). These impair executive oversight of learning processes like strategy selection and awareness of memory strengths and weaknesses. Without this metacognitive support, appropriate memory techniques may not be consistently utilized (Smith-Spark et al., 2016).

Overall, this combination of phonological, memory and executive weaknesses puts dyslexic students at a disadvantage for learning based on repetition alone. Traditional memorization instruction may rely too heavily on areas of cognitive difficulty. However, alternate evidence-based approaches can leverage areas of cognitive strength.

Using Cognitive Assets to Promote Memorization in Dyslexia: 

While dyslexics face deficits in some cognitive domains, they also exhibit assets in others. Visual-spatial abilities are frequently within the average to superior range (Winner et al., 2001). Motor skills and implicit procedural learning can also be preserved or enhanced (Vicari et al., 2005). Neuroimaging studies confirm dyslexics utilize alternate neural pathways to compensate for literacy challenges, including engaging right hemisphere visual areas more for processing words and sounds (Finn et al., 2013). This illustrates their capacity for visual, kinesthetic and motor learning. 

These cognitive assets provide clues for how to best support memorization and learning. Multisensory instruction leverages the visual, auditory, and kinesthetic modalities (Joshi et al., 2002). Movement and gestures activate motor memory, sometimes referred to as “muscle memory”, while visual organizers and high imagery provide alternate representations (Bell, 2007). Explicitly teaching memory strategies like visualization taps into visual-spatial strengths (Conderman & Pedersen, 2005). 

Overall, dyslexia interventions emphasize a language-based, meaningful, structured, multisensory, and metacognitive approach (Birsh, 2011). This reduces reliance on phonological skills while engaging alternate pathways like visual processing and procedural memory. Intensive practice also helps convert new learning into lasting cortical memory networks (Krishnan et al., 2016). These principles provide guidance for supporting memorization in dyslexia, even for traditionally oral learning like vocabulary.\

Whole Brain Teaching Techniques to Support Dyslexic Memorization:

Whole brain teaching developed as an approach to actively engage all areas of the brain and multiple modalities in the learning process (Jackson, 2011). While not developed solely for dyslexic students, many of the techniques align well with recommendations for supporting those with learning disabilities. 

A core whole brain teaching strategy is having students mirror each other’s actions and words. Teachers model, students echo back individually and in pairs. This enables repetition without the tedium and attention lapses of solo practice. Mirroring activates motor, visual and auditory memory simultaneously as students observe the teacher, listen and repeat phrases, perform gestures, and watch their partner (Biffle, 2010). Mirroring taps into procedural memory and provides repetition to aid retention and automaticity.

Whole brain teaching also emphasizes teaching in memorable “chunks”. New information is broken into small, manageable pieces that can form a coherent whole (Jackson, 2011). Chunking aligns with guidance to present information systematically in incremental steps to support working memory limitations in dyslexia (Berninger & Wolf, 2009). 

Another technique is having students create unique gestures or visualizations for concepts they need to memorize. This acts as a mnemonic, with the motor movements and imagery providing retrieval cues (Kirk, 2010). Gestures enhance understanding of new academic vocabulary in both typical learners and those with learning disabilities (Sevcik et al., 2013). They allow students to represent words visually and physically without relying solely on phonological skills. 

Songs, chants, body movements, and visual aids like chalkboards further tap into musical, verbal, auditory, kinesthetic and visual channels. They provide memory anchors that are meaningful rather than rote (Ansari et al., 2011). Small and whole class games also reinforce and make practice motivating. Games elicit dopamine release which aids memory consolidation and creates positive associations (Willis, 2007). Frequent partner practice boosts engagement, feedback, and confidence for struggling students (Jackson, 2011). 

Overall, whole brain teaching complements many recommendations for supporting dyslexic students by creating activities that tap into visual and motor skills, provide structure, and teach memory techniques. The interactive and social techniques support attention, repetition, and automaticity needed for memorization through modalities aligned with relative cognitive strengths.

Discussion & Conclusions:

Dyslexic students face distinct challenges with rote memorization and oral repetition activities prevalent in many classrooms due to the phonological, verbal working memory, and executive function deficits associated with dyslexia. Traditional repetition and drill often prove ineffective. However, interactive whole brain teaching techniques show strong potential for harnessing visual, kinesthetic, and motor abilities to provide alternate memorization pathways.

Preliminary research on whole brain teaching is promising, with two studies finding positive impacts on academic skills and engagement (Schirduan et al., 2002; Ruiz-Primo et al., 2011). However, more research is needed specifically examining the effects for dyslexic students. Areas for future study include directly comparing dyslexic student performance on academic tasks and memory tests using traditional repetition versus whole brain techniques. Neural imaging could also examine differences in brain activation patterns. Qualitative studies could provide insight into student and teacher perceptions of engagement, confidence and learning gains. 

While further research is warranted, the alignment of whole brain techniques with recommended practices for dyslexics suggests incorporating these strategies may benefit inclusion and support. The emphasis on multisensory input, meaningful practice, memory supports, structured learning, and metacognitive awareness reflects evidence-based recommendations for dyslexia intervention (Birsh, 2011). This suggests that whole brain teaching holds promise for creating classrooms where students with diverse learning profiles can thrive.

Whole brain techniques can be integrated alongside existing evidence-based literacy interventions for dyslexia. They potentially offer an additional layer of interactive engagement and memorization tools for dyslexic students during vocabulary building, math facts repetition, content learning, and foreign language acquisition. Teachers may consider strategically applying whole brain practices during key activities requiring memorization. 

In conclusion, dyslexia presents challenges with rote memorization that require adapting instruction to align with relative cognitive strengths. Whole brain teaching provides an array of student-centered, multisensory and metacognitive techniques that can potentially compensate for weaknesses while leveraging assets. More research is needed, but the alignment of whole brain teaching with recommendations for dyslexia intervention suggests it merits consideration and further study as an inclusive memorization instructional strategy.

References:

Ansari, D., De Smedt, B., & Grabner, R. H. (2011). Neuroeducation: neuroscience, education and the brain from contexts to practice. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 1, 7.

Bell, N. (2007). Visualizing and verbalizing for language comprehension and thinking. Paso Robles, CA: Academy of Reading.

Berninger, V. W., & Wolf, B. (2009). Teaching students with dyslexia and dysgraphia: Lessons from teaching and science. Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing.

Biffle, C. (2010). Whole brain teaching for challenging kids. Yucaipa, CA: Whole Brain Teaching. 

Birsh, J. R. (2011). Connecting research and practice. In J. R. Birsh, Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (3rd ed., pp.1-24). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Conderman, G., & Pedersen, T. (2005). Teaching vocabulary with students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(3), 156-163.

Finn, E. S., Shen, X., Holahan, J. M., Scheinost, D., Lacadie, C., Papademetris, X., Shaywitz, S.E., Shaywitz, B. A., & Constable, R. T. (2013). Disruption of functional networks in dyslexia: a whole-brain, data-driven analysis of connectivity. Biological psychiatry, 74(5), 397-404.

Gibson, M. & Gruen, J. (2008). The human lexinome: Genes of language and reading. Journal of Communication Disorders, 41, 409–420.

Jackson, R. (2011). Whole brain teaching: Learning is whole body. Educational Horizons, 90(1), 6-7.

Joshi, R. M., Dahlgren, M., & Boulware-Gooden, R. (2002). Teaching reading in an inner city school through a multisensory teaching approach. Annals of dyslexia, 52(1), 229-242.

Katzir, T., Kim, Y., Wolf, M., O'Brien, B., Kennedy, B., Lovett, M., & Morris, R. (2006). Reading fluency: The whole is more than the parts. Annals of dyslexia, 56(1), 51-82.

Kirk, E. P. (2010). The effects of using visualization and gestures on memory recall of preschool children.

Krishnan, S., Watkins, K. E., & Bishop, D. V. (2016). Neurobiological basis of language learning difficulties. Trends in cognitive sciences, 20(9), 701-714.

Peterson, R. L., & Pennington, B. F. (2012). Developmental dyslexia. The Lancet, 379(9830), 1997-2007.

Reiter, A., Tucha, O., & Lange, K. W. (2005). Executive functions in children with dyslexia. Dyslexia, 11(2), 116-131.

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Briggs, D., Iverson, H., Talbot, R., & Shepard, L. A. (2011). Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learning. Science, 331(6022), 1269-1270.

Schirduan, V., Case, K., & Faryniarz, J. (2002). How learning style affects written expression.

Sevcik, R. A., Wise, J. C., Morris, R. D., Lovett, M. W., Wolf, M., Kuhn, M., Meisinger, B. & Schwanenflugel, P. (2013). The relationship between oral reading fluency and comprehension in struggling readers: Implications for identification and instruction. In Perspectives on Language and Literacy (Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 9-16). The International Dyslexia Association.

Smith-Spark, J. H., & Fisk, J. E. (2007). Working memory functioning in developmental dyslexia. Memory, 15(1), 34-56. 

Smith-Spark, J. H., Henry, L. A., Messer, D. J., Edvardsdottir, E., & Zięcik, A. P. (2016). Executive functions in adults with developmental dyslexia. Research in developmental disabilities, 53, 323-341.

Snowling, M.J. & Hulme, C. (2012). Annual research review: The nature and classification of reading disorders–a commentary on proposals for DSM‐5. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(5), 593-607.

Swanson, H. L., Zheng, X., & Jerman, O. (2009). Working memory, short-term memory, and reading disabilities a selective meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of learning disabilities, 42(3), 260-287.

Vicari, S., Finzi, A., Menghini, D., Marotta, L., Baldi, S., & Petrosini, L. (2005). Do children with developmental dyslexia have an implicit learning deficit? Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 76(10), 1392-1397.

Willis, J. (2007). The gamine-brain connection. Edutopia George Lucas Educational Foundation, 3, 44-47.

Winner, E., von Karolyi, C., Malinsky, D., French, L., Seliger, C., Ross, E., & Weber, C. (2001). Dyslexia and visual-spatial talents: Compensation vs deficit model. Brain and language, 76(2), 81-110.