\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Part 1: The Three Educational Faces of Dyslexia: Some Key Findings from Logographic and Alphabetic Phases},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2018-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2018)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2018-01-15}
\title{Part 1: The Three Educational Faces of Dyslexia: Some Key Findings from Logographic and Alphabetic Phases}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{D  Montgomery}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 14 December 2017 Accepted: 1 January 2018 Published: 15 January 2018}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


Introduction-Dyslexia is an unexpected difficulty in learning to read and write in relation to age and ability by the methods normally used in classrooms. It was distinguished from 'alexia' a loss of ability to read in adults mainly with left hemisphere strokes, and identified as a developmental disorder of children referred to as 'word blindness' by Hinshelwood (1917). It is now a condition recognised in most countries and languages across the world although its theory of causation has changed.Dyslexia is found throughout the ability range although research studies tend to exclude slower learners to control some of the variables. Dyslexia can be remediated to some extent and the earlier the provision begins the more likely it is to be effective (Schiff man, p. 66 in Goldberg  and Schiff man, 1972; and Clements', 1972  survey of 10,000 cases). Even though dyslexics may eventually learn to read and write they usually still have problems with spelling in adulthood especially when they encounter new and more technical vocabulary (Snowling, 2000).

\end{abstract}


\keywords{}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
yslexia is an unexpected difficulty in learning to read and write in relation to age and ability by the methods normally used in classrooms. It was distinguished from 'alexia' a loss of ability to read in adults mainly with left hemisphere strokes, and identified as a developmental disorder of children referred to as 'word blindness' by  {\ref Hinshelwood (1917)}. It is now a condition recognised in most countries and languages across the world although its theory of causation has changed.\par
Dyslexia is found throughout the ability range although research studies tend to exclude slower learners to control some of the variables. Dyslexia can be remediated to some extent and the earlier the provision begins the more likely it is to be effective (Schiff man, p. 66 in Goldberg and Schiff man, 1972; and Clements', 1972 survey of 10,000 cases). Even though dyslexics may eventually learn to read and write they usually still have problems with spelling in adulthood especially when they encounter new and more technical vocabulary \hyperref[b69]{(Snowling, 2000)}. \hyperref[b46]{50} per cent of dyslexics also have co-occurring handwriting problems  {\ref (Montgomery, 2000;}\hyperref[b42]{Kaplan, 2000)} and these can make remediation more difficult and complex. Such cases are frequently referred to remedial centres or research programme as severe.\par
The incidence of dyslexia is lower in languages that are more 'transparent' than English in that they have a close association between one sound and one symbol as in Turkish or Italian. This makes decoding in reading and encoding for spelling easier. English is regarded as an 'opaque' language because although it is about 40 \% phonics based the rest of it is morphemically governed by units of meaning and their origins in the complex history of the roots of the English language from Latin, Greek, Norse, Anglo-Saxon and Norman French.\par
The normal methods of Early Years teaching of literacy skills are the teaching of 'phonics first' which involves teaching word building for reading and writing from the sounds as they are introduced. It can take about 6 months of daily tuition for children to be able to read something interesting and meaningful. The other main system is by 'Look and Say'. The key words from the early storybooks are repeatedly paired with their written forms and a basic sight vocabulary is thus built up. Phonics to help decoding is introduced after a sight vocabulary of about 50 words has been established. Most teachers use a mixture of these two approaches and what is evident is that both work best where the teacher is organised and systematic.\par
Research has shown that the 'phonics first' system for teaching in English leads to a lower incidence of dyslexia (1.0 to 1.5\%, \hyperref[b9]{Chall, 1967}\hyperref[b10]{Chall, , 1985;;}\hyperref[b12]{Clark, 1970;} {\ref SED, 1978;} {\ref Ferarro, 1982;}\hyperref[b56]{Read, 1986)}. If the 'Look and Say' system is used then the same researches showed an incidence of 4\%. The British Dyslexia Association (2018) now reports an incidence of 4 \% cases of severe dyslexia and 10 \% less severe. This suggests that the 'phonics first' agenda  {\ref DfE, 2014)} is not being implemented. However even if it were we should still have a significant number of dyslexic children in our schools and usually there are more than the numbers predicted from the researches. It also shows that phonics as currently undertaken, whether basic, analytic or synthetic is not the answer to the dyslexic problem. It would appear to be necessary but not sufficient.\par
Over the 100 years since Hinshelwood, the dominant theme in dyslexia that teachers and psychologists seek to address is the difficulty in learning to read rather than spell. It has come to be the prime concern because after the period of acquisition and development of literacy skills we use reading to learn more widely across the curriculum. In addition most teachers were taught by the 'Look and Say' system and the colleges and reading experts promoted it and have argued that spelling should only be explicitly taught after children have learned to read.\par
'This conclusion -that any formal teaching of spelling should be delayed until children have started reading and are able to evolve their own strategies for understanding the nature of writing and spelling -brings the implications of research evidence for school and classroom practice into sharp focus'.  {\ref (Whitehead, 2004. 186)} Spelling is thus in most instances still 'caught' \hyperref[b55]{(Peters, 1985)} as teachers follow the 19 th century tradition of teaching spelling and handwriting through daily copy writing of news. These 'normal' teaching methods are patently not working for dyslexics because of a failure to distinguish between the different needs in the period of acquisition of literacy and its later development. 
\section[{Dyslexia}]{Dyslexia}\par
can lead to significant underachievement both in school and later in life and can affect the gifted and slower learner alike. \hyperref[b66]{Silverman (2004)} had found that the most common contribution to underachievement among the gifted worldwide was handwriting problems and this has also been found in schools in disadvantaged areas in the UK \hyperref[b46]{(Montgomery, 2008)} and among current gifted  {\ref (Montgomery, 2016)}. In the schools 30\% of pupils had handwriting problems and one third had spelling difficulties. About 5\% of those with handwriting difficulties showed specific dysgraphic writing problems. Confused in the term 'writing problems' is also the spelling problem that is not often recognised as a related dyslexia condition so it was designated 'dysorthographia'  {\ref (Montgomery, 2000)}.\par
In the literature specific reading difficulties has appeared to become a synonym for dyslexia e.g. \hyperref[b68]{Snowling, 1991;}\hyperref[b70]{2005} {\ref , DfE, 1997}; Vellutino and Fletcher et al 2004 and most of the vast quantities of psychological and educational research have been directed to it. It is the zeitgeist.\par
In her response to Lord Adonis on 'Does dyslexia exist?' \hyperref[b70]{Snowling (2005)} argued that "even if appropriate procedures for the identification, assessment and intervention of children at risk of reading problems were put into place in all schools' dyslexia would still not be diminished as it is a brain based disorder. She added that the above interventions and practices would however help to alleviate the difficulties faced by these children."\par
In the present research it became evident  {\ref (Montgomery, 2000}\hyperref[b50]{(Montgomery, , 2017}) that many bright children had entered school already able to read without having been explicitly taught, others quickly learnt once in school but somehow their spelling and writing never matched their reading ability. Such cases were regularly referred to or appeared in the research studies but schools and psychological services would consistently ignore them because they could read at least at grade level if not better. Adult dyslexic students on the MA Dyslexia and SEN programmes reported similar personal experiences but they still showed the usual phonological, naming and spelling deficits. What this suggested was that reading was not really the core difficulty in dyslexia and so it was no wonder the problems had not been solved/resolved. We could have been looking in the wrong place for nearly 100 years. 
\section[{II.}]{II.}\par
The Model for the Design of the 
\section[{Current Research Programme}]{Current Research Programme}\par
Frith in 1985 provided a developmental psychological model of dyslexia. There were three phases and 6 steps in which sometimes reading was the pacemaker and at other times it was spelling.\par
The three phases were the Logographic phase in which dyslexics classically had difficulties moving from an early phase of acquisition in which reading is visually based (logographic), to the Alphabetic phase when children are able to use letter-sound associations for both reading and spelling. Later some dyslexics fail to move on into the Orthographic phase where reading and spelling are automatic and considered to be independent of sound.\par
This picture reflects the 'Look and Say' context in which the observations were made but the same phases or designations could be applied to the educational processes that were becoming evident, They would become the Three Educational Faces of Dyslexia and show that different remediation processes were necessary in each of the phases not the same one. 
\section[{a) Introduction 1. The Logographic Face}]{a) Introduction 1. The Logographic Face}\par
The research methodology began as grounded research \hyperref[b71]{(Strauss and Corbin, 1990)} with multiple case studies leading to field studies, controlled experimental designs and meta-analyses.\par
Earlier research had shown the educational problems dyslexics experienced as they began literacy learning. These deficits were:\par
? An inability to develop sound-symbol knowledge (phonics) ? Poor alphabetic knowledge (names of the letters) ? Difficulties in rapid naming of items, and left and right hands/sides ? Problems in remembering sequences of numbers (digit span), days of week, months etc. ? Lack of phonological awareness (sound-symbol awareness) \hyperref[b39]{(Liberman, 1971;} {\ref Chomsky, 1973, Bryant and}\hyperref[b7]{Bradley 1985)}; \hyperref[b8]{Bourassa and Treiman, 2003)} In the current research (Montgomery 2017) it was hypothesised that if dyslexia could be identified in the Reception class, a specialist multisensory articulatory phonogram training (MAPT) system could be implemented there. The introduction of the articulatory element had been found to be the dyslexics' missing link in earlier controlled experimental research with alphabetic phase dyslexics  {\ref (Montgomery, 1997a)}.\par
It was proposed that earlier facilitation of phonic and alphabetic knowledge in the acquisition phase could close the gap between dyslexics and the rest and could help overcome general underachievement in the disadvantaged.\par
In the cases of normal spellers \hyperref[b24]{Gentry (1981)} had identified two steps that occurred within the acquisition or Logographic phase. The first was precommunicative in which the children made unreadable scribbles and marks to represent their messages or as they told a story. The next step was pre-phonetic, this was the creative or invented spelling stage where a single letter or 'phone' might represent a word or a group of letters and some meaning could be identified. Dyslexics showed the same characteristics, there was a failure of the potential dyslexic to move into the prephonetic stage. This was only observable in their written work \hyperref[b56]{(Read, 1986;}\hyperref[b45]{Montgomery, 2007)}. Steven aged 6.5 years before and after 6 x 20 minute lessons using TRTS (Teaching Reading Through Spelling, see alphabetic section below) . 
\section[{Pre-communicative phase}]{Pre-communicative phase}\par
Early pre-phonetic phase  
\section[{Method; Logographic Face}]{Method; Logographic Face}\par
The method of investigation selected was 'story writing or news'. After one month in school the children in the Reception classes were set to write their news or story without any help from the teacher using any skills they could muster.\par
'The errors children make when they write are neither random nor thoughtless-examined diagnostically they reveal systematic application of the child's level of understanding'.  {\ref Rosencrans, 1998.10} In 1997-8 a pilot study had been conducted in a Hounslow infant school to promote their teaching of synthetic phonics because their spelling SATs were so poor, A handbook of 110 mini-lessons Developmental Spelling \hyperref[b44]{Montgomery, 1997b}\hyperref[b50]{Montgomery, , 2017) )} was written for them and their news stories were collected after the intervention in Reception, and Years 1 and 2. SATs scores increased as follows. In 2012, 15 schools in a coastal area were invited to join the research project but only 3 accepted the offer. A private school in the Midlands also volunteered to take part.\par
The method selected was 'story writing'. Every subject would be asked to write a story or their news for the research project. They did this after one month in Reception without any help -free writing. They repeated the same task in March of the following year to find out what the Early Years tuition system had taught them. The Reception teachers received detailed individual reports on handwriting and spelling in January and June with suggestions to try Multisensory Articulatory Phonogram Training (MAPT) where relevant to connect sounds with symbols. Emergent (free form) Spelling Assessment -Scoring the scripts Scores 5 Word forms, letters, phone(s) evident 4. Letters, possible phones 3. Some letter shapes and letters, in a line 2. Marks, mandalas (roundels), occasional letters, possibly in lines 1. Scribble, marks in some order 0. Random marks, no marks.\par
The strategy is to identify the statement that most typifies the writing sample and award that 'score' or rank. A score of 5 is pivotal in that it identifies those children who have just 'cracked the alphabetic code'. This is best seen in their attempts to make words using 'skeletal phonics or phones' such as 'wt' for 'went', 'ws' for 'was' 'goig' for 'going' and 'se' for 'she' or single letter sounds to represent a word 'w' for 'was'. Phonetics would be represented by 'kwiz' for 'quiz', 'buk' for 'book' 'apl' 'nite', 'marster', 'berd', 'butiful' Correct spelling of common words such as 'I ''the', 'and' and 'my' do not count as phonic achievement as they are so commonly used they can often be recalled visually rather than phonetically.\par
The reports focused upon: 1.The explicit teaching of sounds by first feeling the consonants in the mouth and mouthing them and feeling them as they wrote the grapheme -MAPT.\par
This was based upon previous research that found such a system was necessary for dyslexics because they appeared to have an Articulation Awareness deficit  {\ref (Montgomery,1997a}\hyperref[b45]{(Montgomery, , 2007))}. This was potentially an observable sign of the neurological problem found in the 'pick up' system (James and Engelhardt, 2012). They found that when preliterate fiveyear old children printed, typed, or traced letters and shapes, then were shown images of these stimuli while undergoing fMRI scanning a previously documented "reading circuit" was recruited during letter perception only after handwriting not after typing or tracing experiences.\par
They found that the initial duplication process mattered a great deal. When children had drawn a letter freehand, they exhibited increased activity in three areas of the brain that are activated in adults when they read and write.. It showed that handwriting supports soundsymbol knowledge development.\par
Neurological studies such as this suggest that there is a system that in normal subjects implicitly connects sounds with symbols in a structured readingrich environment even in Look and Say regimes. It appears to be facilitated in phonics regimes and by particular multisensory phonogram training in remediation programmes. In dyslexics the system appears to be disrupted so that very specific and often repetitive training is needed to overcome the initial 'phone' barrier. Gesch wind (1979) identified dissociation in dyslexia in the left angular gyrus. This is where sounds and symbols would be connected (By articulatory feel/movements) but in dyslexics this connection appears to be broken. It therefore needs to be restored by overtraining, or other areas of the brain have to be taught to take over the 'pick-up' function.\par
Using in-air tracing of the letters then writing them freeform on the paper, the Fernald (1943) method was based upon practices in the specialist dyslexia APSL programmes (Alphabetic-Phonic-Syllabic-Linguistic) that use full cursive as the medium.\par
Two years later, In September 2014 the 3 State schools left in the project were asked to provide a further sample of their children's writing on entry into Year 2. This time it was a 10-minute free writing test on a favourite topic of the child's choice with a few minutes to think and plan what they would write. Two schools now responded (N=93 scripts). In late 2015 the SATs results from the three local schools were collected from the Government website.\par
IV. 
\section[{Results}]{Results} 
\section[{a) Scoring the Reception Scripts}]{a) Scoring the Reception Scripts}\par
Prior to the receipt of the first set of scripts i) a spelling development rating scale and ii) a handwriting coordination rating scale were developed based on all Reception scripts already held. The critical borderline between pre-communicative and pre-phonetic spelling was found to be a score of 5. At this point the writer might use an initial sound to represent a whole word e..g. 'w' for 'was', or two letters to represent a word e.g. 'wt' for 'went' or 'lt' for 'late'. These were designated 'phones'. The range was from random marks (scores 1) to more or less correct spelling (scores 10). Interobserver reliability scores were strong. 
\section[{Volume XVIII Issue I Version I ( G )}]{Volume XVIII Issue I Version I ( G )}\par
Global Journal of Human Social Science -Scripts with mainly correct and legible spelling score 10 10. Mainly correct spelling, legible, systematic word spaces. 9. More correct spelling, skeletal phonics, meaning clear. 8. Some correct words, phonics, phonetics, meaning generally clear 7. Skeletal phonics, phonetics, some words, meaning apparent 6. Some phonic skeletons, word bits and phones, some meaning.\par
'My little sister is in bed because she is having her tonsils out' The scores in the above table \hyperref[tab_0]{1} show that School C children consistently obtained higher scores than the other two schools in the same local area. This confirms the disadvantages associated with being poor found for reading in The Sutton Trust Research \hyperref[b38]{(Jerrim, 2013)}. The children here are also disadvantaged in spelling. Girls consistently outperformed boys in all the schools. 
\section[{James's script on entry to Reception 'I took grandad to the lidrary'}]{James's script on entry to Reception 'I took grandad to the lidrary'}\par
He scores 9 for spelling. The spelling is almost correct, the meaning is clear but word spaces are not well defined yet. In comparison with Faye's script his shows some coordination difficulties. E.g. the script is faint, there is variation in pressure and 'wobble and shake' on the letter strokes. The letter bodies vary in size and some letters are 'drawn' rather made in monoline e.g. 'g' and 'y '. He scored 7 on the Handwriting checklist.  The Year 2 follow-up study 2014 -2015\par
The children in the original Reception classes were followed-up again when they entered Year 2 and all the subjects had passed the basic phone test and could write readable messages. Only one, Freddie, exhibited dyslexic symptoms:- Table \hyperref[tab_1]{2} a and 2b above the ratio of boys to girls 'at risk' from dyslexia was 1.4 to 1 and 33.. 227\% of the whole cohort was at risk from potential literacy difficulties in writing after 5 months in school. This new ratio is similar to that found in an international survey by Rutter et al (  {\ref 2004}) not the traditional 4 to 1 boys to girls. These 3 schools were the feeder schools to the large secondary school C in an earlier Year 7 writing research project \hyperref[b46]{(Montgomery, 2008)}. In that study 18.6 per cent of the cohort had spelling difficulties that put them in the 'dyslexia zone' and one third had poor spelling i.e. they made more than 5 misspellings per 100 words  {\ref (HMCI, 2001)}.\par
He writes: 'wusrp. The wus a Boiy He wet to the sheoos -and He wet pust a . tugL. The to tugL bin The to hat a most The most (monster) slew + him. . he runb and the boy got lost .\par
. 
\section[{then tat boy nev bin seen agn'}]{then tat boy nev bin seen agn'}\par
He writes at a speed of 4.9 words per minute which is significantly slower than for the age group as a whole (e.g. 7 to 8 w.p.m. in cohort studies Montgomery, 2017)). It is faint and variable in pressure.\par
Of all the scripts from the Year 2 classes the one in Figure  {\ref 3} above was the least decipherable and contained the most primitive spelling. It is typical of spelling seen in the scripts of older or early recovering dyslexics.\par
At the end of Year 2 the schools taking part in the Writing Research Project were entered for the national SATs and the results are shown below. The Project children in all three schools showed significant improvements in their results compared with the three previous years. The literacy improvements in the low SES schools were in the region of 30\% and 10 \% in the already high scores of the middle SES school C.\par
After 19 months the main factors affecting the cohort's achievements were residual handwriting coordination difficulties, legibility and orthographic spelling problems. Analysis of the scripts also revealed factors about the current teaching methods in the Reception Year and that 'Phonics First' and synthetic phonics were not much in evidence. Guided letter formation sky writing, and the use of lines to write on would be prominent in a list of advisory points as well as removing tracing and copying from the schools' agenda.\par
V. 
\section[{Conclusions: Logographic Face}]{Conclusions: Logographic Face}\par
Targeting phones using MAPT is something that can easily be done by Reception teachers and assistants to overcome both dyslexia and social disadvantage and widely increase achievement.\par
The design and use of the spelling rating scale enabled the targeting of teachers' attention to the need to concentrate on developing 'phones' for use in both reading and writing. The training in the Developmental Spelling approach could also be used to promote the acquisition of alphabetic knowledge and word building that Freddie would need. Systematic teaching of handwriting form and pencil hold would help if also included.\par
Analysing children's freeform marks on paper will show the children's level of knowledge of the literacy concepts and skills that have been learnt. Then by incorporating MAPT and the developmental synthetic spelling programme they can speed up literacy learning.\par
The literacy problems observed here appear to arise from the global approaches advocated for use in the Early Years literacy acquisition approaches for some very specific tasks. In addition the current EYFS strategy speed of learning 4 to 5 new letters and combinations by visual strategies each week is initially too fast for many of these children and the first letters chosen are not necessarily the easiest for grapheme formation for beginning writers whereas the set-i t then p n s has a proven track record and gives many words and blends. The exposure to many other letters in the graphic shape groups (c a o d g ), to the range in story books and in copy writing modes can be very confusing to disadvantaged and dyslexic beginners.\par
Join the P.E.A.R.L. project via the LDRP website. 'Promoting and Enhancing Achievement in Reception Learners -PEARL' VI. 
\section[{The Alphabetic Face of Dyslexia a) Introduction}]{The Alphabetic Face of Dyslexia a) Introduction}\par
Dyslexia in the alphabetic stage is observable as very poor reading and spelling, well below the pupil's age and ability and a lack of progress despite extra support. The school will refer the pupil to the educational psychology services for a diagnosis. This will involve testing using an individual IQ test usually the latest version of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V) and associated reading and spelling tests and any further tests considered necessary. In administrative terms the decrement has to be 20 per cent between the literacy skills and IQ with literacy the poorer in order to qualify for Statementing and specialist dyslexia tuition.\par
In terms of actual skills the pupil in the alphabetic phase may have acquired some phonic and some whole word knowledge but the knowledge is insecure and incomplete. The pupil often does not know the sounds and names of all the 26 alphabet letters, may have problems with alphabetical order, remembering the days of the week, months of the year and naming left and right side. Because currently no attempt is made to address dyslexic difficulties in the Logographic phase all dyslexics with no phonic skills up to those with some in the late alphabetic phase will need to be placed upon an APSL (Alphabetic-Phonic-Syllabic-Linguistic) specialist remedial programme to build in what they have not learned so far.\par
In comparison with peers the skills of dyslexics at 6 or 7 years are at the level of a Reception learner in the Logographic phase like Steven Figure \hyperref[fig_0]{1} above. At 10 years the skills may be at the level of a 6, 7 or 8 year old. Reading accuracy will be lower than reading comprehension scores on the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability -NARA \hyperref[b52]{(Neale, 1997)}, an indication of the potential higher ability Spelling will generally be at a lower level than reading and attempts at word building may not succeed beyond the regular consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) level. In attempts to spell more difficult words they resort to simple phonetics that can be distorted by their mispronunciations or dialect patterns.\par
Dyslexics with very good visual memories may read at grade level but have very poor spelling. These were termed 'dy sortho graphics' and present special challenges for the school diagnostic and State menting system.\par
Poor spellers' in their attempts to learn spelling lists for their weekly tests may spend a lot of time on the task only to become muddled and score poorly however hard they try. It can be very disheartening and stressful leading to psychosomatic illnesses and truancy in some severe cases.\par
In a spelling test Gavin wrote 'box' for 'parcel', a semantic substitution showing the lengths to which a pupil will go to try to do what is asked. In free writing dyslexics report selecting words they know they can spell rather than the word they really want to use and this of course slows down the writing process and the extra cognitive processing can interfere with compositional abilities and quality.\par
Poor handwriting skills or any tendency towards coordination difficulties will create further problems for the dyslexic not only in acquisition in the Logographic stage but also later in the remedial programme for the Alphabetic phase. It will cause them to avoid writing whenever possible and lose opportunities for developing automaticity and learning more spellings.\par
Caroline Year 2(Aged 7) Figure  {\ref 4}  Why does dyslexia arise? How was it possible for normal learners to learn sounds and their symbols without being explicitly taught and then use this knowledge to build their reading and writing skills whilst dyslexics could not? Something was missing for dyslexics.\par
How could the clever alphabet system of writing be invented? Presumably a dyslexic could not have done it. Researching writing systems showed that the alphabet system was invented only once in history and by the Phoenicians. They spoke a Semitic consonantal language \hyperref[b23]{(Gelb, 1963)} and it had 22 consonants. A Eureka moment! Consonants have a distinct articulatory pattern or feel in the mouth. This order in a syllable can be detected whereas we cannot hear the sequence (Liberman and Shankweiler et al, 1967) e.g. ws for was. tp for top. This accounted for the way in which children's spelling developed naturally in the logographic phase.   The hypothesis therefore was that dyslexics would have an articulation awareness problem whereas normal learners would not. A series of pilot studies  {\ref (Montgomery, 1981} {\ref (Montgomery, , 1984) )} showed evidence for this and the hypothesis was tested and the results are shown below in Table 5  {\ref (Montgomery,1997a)} The above table shows that dyslexics already on the TRTS programme have good scores on the phoneme segmentation test of 15 items of increasing difficulty in comparison with those on the waiting list and close to the scores of much younger controls with similar reading ages. The dyslexics' scores on the articulation awareness test were significantly lower both in the dyslexic group on the programme and on the waiting list. It was odd to discover that when making e.g. the 'l' sound many of them could not say where the tip of their tongue was touching or if the mouth was open or closed.\par
In a follow-up study in the same project 134 Reception learners were tested on the AA test and it was found that 4 of them had no awareness of where in the mouth their tongue was touching, or whether their lips were open or shut etc. The AA test was added to an LEA infant screening survey \hyperref[b19]{(Forsyth, 1988)} and was found to be the only test in the set that had good predictive capacity for poor reading results at 7 years.\par
Neurological research by Geschwind (1979) indicated that a dissociation problem in the left angular gyrus could interfere with the process of associating sounds with symbols during reading acquisition in dyslexics. This could be cutting the articulatory information link.\par
More recently Waldie and Haigh et al (2013) showed over-activation in the right hemisphere regions of the putamen and precentral gyrus during both regular and pseudo word lexical decision-making. No specific specialisation has been attributed to the putamen but it is involved in regulating movement and is thought to have a role in implicit learning that plays an important role in normal Reception class literacy learning. The precentral gyrus is also associated with initiating the onset of movements and Waldie et alsuggested it is likely that this activity reflects increased reliance on silent articulatory processes. Another study that provided empirical support for theview that a letter-speech soundbinding deficit is a key factor in dyslexia was by \hyperref[b0]{Aavena and Snellings et al, 2013)}. These studies may indicate that in the remedial process the intact right hemisphere areas are activated and support or take on the functions of the left in the Alphabetic phase.\par
We know from work with stroke patients that early intervention is very important and that the initial stages of retraining are slow and difficult and this is mirrored in the early intervention period with dyslexics. The first few sounds and letters can take hours or even weeks to acquire but once the dyslexic has achieved this the whole process speeds up\par
The remedial programmes that demonstrate the best effects in the Alphabetic phase must give dyslexics at least 2 years uplift in reading and spelling in one year to enable them to 'catch up' with peers \hyperref[b73]{(Vellutino, 1979;}\hyperref[b45]{Montgomery, 2007)}. So far in this research the programmes that do this are found to be the Hickey Multisensory Language Course \hyperref[b30]{(Hickey, 1977}; Augur and Briggs, 2nd edition, 1991) and (TRTS) Teaching Reading Through Spelling  {\ref (Cowdery et al, 1983-87;} {\ref Reprint,1994)}. They are both anglicised versions of the original  {\ref Stillman Programme (1956, 1997)} and the 4 TRTS authors were trained by Miss Hickey.\par
These programmes address the dyslexics' basic problems in the acquisition of alphabetic and phonic knowledge as well as teaching syllabification and linguistics in the later stages. They do this by applying an initial rigorous multisensory phonogram training system giving as much attention to spelling (and writing) as reading. Joined up or cursive writing with lead-in strokes are an essential component with a clearly defined purpose.\par
Hornsby and Shear's Alpha to Omega (1977) although popular and widely available is built upon Hornsby's speech therapy background rather than an educational ethos and does not insist on cursive. The 5 vowels are introduced together which can prove problematic.\par
Over decades data was collected from several hundred dyslexia teachers on B.Ed and MA SpLD and SEN degrees to identify programmes that fulfilled the 2 year uplift criterion and remediated reading, spelling and handwriting difficulties. So far the only successful ones have been those based on the original \hyperref[b26]{Gillingham and Stillman (1956)} programme brought to the UK by Sally Childs (1963) and anglicised by Kathleen \hyperref[b30]{Hickey (1977)}. Details of the studies and descriptions of the programmes and why they work can be found in the following  {\ref (Montgomery, 1997a}\hyperref[b45]{(Montgomery, , 2007}\hyperref[b50]{(Montgomery, , 2017))}. Stating the amount of uplift in terms of Standard Deviations was found to be less understood by parents and teachers and so avoided.\par
The Phonological Assessment Battery (PhAB, \hyperref[b20]{Frederickson and Frith et al, 1997)}  ? All these tests except the naming speeds require secure phonic knowledge. Even naming speed involves verbal processing with which dyslexics are known to have difficulty. More specifically the other 6 sub tests can only be undertaken if we have some spelling knowledge, in particular phonics. My argument therefore is why not give them a letter sound test and a graded spelling test. it would take less time and we should know exactly which sounds they did know. Training could then be more precise using the APSL approach. \hyperref[b7]{Bryant and Bradley (1985)} and Bradley (1981) trained their experimental group of pre-readers how phonemes were represented by graphemes using plastic letters to make words (sound -symbol correspondence). After 40 ten-minute sessions over two years the experimental group was 4 months ahead of the control groups. Another two years later at age 8/9/years they were two years ahead of those controls who had received no training and were three months ahead of the 300 children who had originally performed well on the rhyme test.\par
Although Bryant and Bradley claimed that the training was 'phonological' it was just another term for teaching a spelling strategy that can be found in dyslexia programmes.\par
'The particular advantage gained by the children taught to understand the connection between sound categories and orthographic spelling patterns suggests the two together make a formidable contribution to children's early progress in spelling.'  {\ref (Bradley and Huxford, 1994. 410)} KEY: R.Prog. Reading progress; S. Prog. Spelling progress. TRTS -Teaching Reading Through Spelling; A to O Alpha to Omega; H -Hickey Multisensory Language Course/DILP; SME-Spelling Made Easy. \hyperref[b4]{(Brand , 1998)}. 
\section[{11}]{11}\par
Year 2018\par
© 2018 Global Journals\par
Part 1: The Three Educational Faces of Dyslexia: Some Key Findings from Logographic and Alphabetic Phases\par
Table  {\ref 5}: Shows a meta-analysis of the relative effectiveness of APSL and Non APSL programmes (Alphabetic-Phonic-Syllabic-Linguisticprogrammes)  {\ref (Bradley and Huxford, 1994. 410)} When \hyperref[b67]{Simonson (2008)} tested the effectiveness of phonological awareness training in her MA SpLD research project she compared the use of HMLC with LTK (Language Tool Kit, Rome and Osman, 1994) she found that the phonological training did improve the phonological skills significantly but did not transfer to the spelling performance on tests and in their free writing. Those trained on HMLC were not so good on the phonological awareness tests but their spelling skills were much improved.\par
Thus if we get straight on with symbol-sound correspondences and spelling teaching we save time and focus on the very specific needs of the dyslexic. The structure of an APSL lesson: Volume XVIII Issue I Version I ( G ) \hyperref[b58]{Ridehalgh (1999)} examined the results from teachers who had undertaken dyslexia training courses at Dyslexia Centres around the UK. The factors she investigated were length of remediation, frequency of sessions and size of tutorial groups in dyslexic subjects taught by three different schemes -Alpha to Omega \hyperref[b35]{(Hornsby and Shear, 1993)}, Dyslexia Institute Language Programme (DILP/Hickey, 1995), and Spelling Made Easy (SME, \hyperref[b4]{Brand, 1998)}. She found that when all the factors were held constant the only programme in which the dyslexics gained significantly in skills above their increasing age was Alpha to Omega.\par
However in a follow-up she found that the users of the Hickey programme in her sample had found it more convenient to leave out the spelling pack work and the dictations! The data also showed that in paired tuition the dyslexics made greater gains than when working alone with the teacher (see table 5.2 below) This is an important consideration in terms of the dyslexics' progress and of economics in schools. All the four tutors in the 1997a TRTS study worked with matched pairs of pupils.\par
Webb found that she had to cut out the dictations and some of the spelling-pack work because the allocated time for lessons was too short. As can be seen this has had an effect on the spelling results. She also found that in using SME the pupils were not making progress unless she introduced the multisensory mouth training from TRTS to link the sound and symbol. This accounts for the better SME results than for Ridehalgh's groups.\par
In Gabor's study at an international school the high progress dyslexics had supportive backgrounds and were encouraged at home to do the homework.\par
Pawley's study took place with 10 pupils placed in a London special school for Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (EBD). In the previous year the group had made no progress with their literacy skills. He found that as their reading and spelling improved the incidence of EBD decreased by 30.7\%. Before and after the programme the incidence of behavioural problems were independently recorded on the Connor's EBD scale  {\ref (2007)}. 
\section[{Table 6:}]{Table 6:}\par
To show the impact of pairs versus single tuition and progress in one year  {\ref (Ridehalgh, 1999, p. 52} The use of SME shows pupils regressing in each year in all conditions whereas the use of the Hickey based DILP programme and A to O show greater progress with pairs tuition (except in spelling for A to O). Ridehalgh also found that the spelling progress with DILP was 1.06 in the first 6 months but dropped back thereafter (0.54). This shows the importance of the initial multisensory alphabet and phonics training. Spelling progress at different years showed: ? A to O was most effective at 7 and 11 years.\par
? DILP was most effective at 8 years. This was without the use of the spelling packs and dictations. ? SME was of most value at 12 and 13 years.\par
In a separate project \hyperref[b62]{Roycroft (2002)} used DILP for four months with 10 dyslexics in pairs, twice per week and found that they made 1.4 years progress in reading and 2.5 years progress in spelling. 10 Controls in pairs given standard reading and writing support made 0.2 months progress in reading and 0.1 months progress in spelling in the same 4 months. All these results suggest that we might use an APSL programme for six months or one semester then stop so that there can be a period of consolidation. One semester or a term and a half should give an uplift of at least one years' progress. 
\section[{Various}]{Various}\par
commercial programmes have borrowed elements from HMLC and TRTS and have given poorer results when cursive is not included or spelling is not given due weight, Games approaches have also proved useful and popular butwork best as part of the schemes e.g a typical HMLC/TRTS lesson follows this pattern: 1. Alphabet arc work with capital letters and letter names, 2 Reading pack, 3.Spelling pack, 4. Dictations and 5. Games. Such a lesson takes 50 minutes, but can be split into two related sessions. Join the A.P.R.I.L. project. 
\section[{Alphabetic Phase Remediation.to Improve Literacy APRIL}]{Alphabetic Phase Remediation.to Improve Literacy APRIL}\par
We need to broaden the search to find effective and short term intervention programmes that have the maximum benefit for dyslexics and is also cost effective for schools. Current 'programmes' can go on for years and years without such benefit and new tutors take the dyslexic over the same ground year after year. The dyslexics know this and their knowledge and feedback are important in the investigations.\par
Teachers in the UK have claimed that among others 'Toe by Toe' and Language Tool kit have proved useful. In the USthe Slingerland Methodand the Spalding Road to Reading are popular. include modified Orton-Gillingham methods written by Orton students. Other schemes are no doubt effective but the data is not available in comparative terms such as presented in this meta-analysis to be able to check the facts and follow them up into research studies. Contributions of single cases and group or controlled studies are therefore invited, make contact through the LDRP website www.ldrp.org.uk so their data can inform the studies. All proper attributions and copyright will be recognised and respected.\begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png}
\caption{\label{fig_0}Figure 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1}\includegraphics[]{image-3.png}
\caption{\label{fig_1}Figure 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{52}\includegraphics[]{image-4.png}
\caption{\label{fig_2}5 Figure 2}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{36}\includegraphics[]{image-5.png}
\caption{\label{fig_3}Figure 3 : 6}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{14}\includegraphics[]{image-6.png}
\caption{\label{fig_4}Part 1 :Figure 4 a}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1}\includegraphics[]{image-7.png}
\caption{\label{fig_5}Part 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.425\textwidth}P{0.2630952380952381\textwidth}P{0.16190476190476188\textwidth}}
SATs 1997\tabcellsep SATs 1998\tabcellsep \\
Reading\tabcellsep 46 \%\tabcellsep 58\%\\
Spelling\tabcellsep 16\%\tabcellsep 44\%\\
Writing\tabcellsep 57\%\tabcellsep 58\%\\
Mathematics\tabcellsep 83\%\tabcellsep 85\%\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_0}Table 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{2} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.06623376623376623\textwidth}P{0.22077922077922074\textwidth}P{0.23917748917748918\textwidth}P{0.029437229437229435\textwidth}P{0.22077922077922074\textwidth}P{0.07359307359307359\textwidth}}
Class\tabcellsep Nos\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Free Writing 1}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Free Writing 2 Nos 'at risk}\\
A1\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep 2.33\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 7.12\tabcellsep 3 + 2\\
A2\tabcellsep 18\tabcellsep 2.44\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 4.3\tabcellsep 11 +\\
B 1\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 3.24\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 6.13\tabcellsep 4 + 2\\
C 1\tabcellsep 28\tabcellsep 6.11\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 6.76\tabcellsep 0\\
C 2\tabcellsep 27\tabcellsep 5.37\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 6.1\tabcellsep 5 + 3\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{(23=scored 4)}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 111\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{4}{l}{Private school results (F1 only, then withdrew)}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep D 1\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 3.57\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep D 2\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 3.5\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep D 3\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 4.05\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Totals\tabcellsep 64\tabcellsep 3.71\end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: a: Shows initial socio-economic advantages in spelling scores Figure 2b: Millie's writing on entry to the same class Report: ']} 
\caption{\label{tab_1}Table 2}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{3} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.8033723021582734\textwidth}P{0.025224820143884892\textwidth}P{0.01223021582733813\textwidth}P{0.009172661870503597\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{4}{l}{\textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore }\\
2011 2012 2013 2014*\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2014\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Reading Writing Maths}\\
School A 35\% 47\% 48\% 78\%*\tabcellsep 85\%\tabcellsep 80\%\tabcellsep 66\%\\
School B 37\% 37\% 50\% 66\%*\tabcellsep 76\%\tabcellsep 78\%\tabcellsep 46\%\\
School C 77\% 87\% 88\% 96\%*\tabcellsep 95\%\tabcellsep 98\%\tabcellsep 96\%\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_2}Table 3 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
Year 2018\\
9\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}Table 4 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.7822207792207791\textwidth}P{0.0020974025974025974\textwidth}P{0.0020974025974025974\textwidth}P{0.0553051948051948\textwidth}P{0.0013246753246753246\textwidth}P{0.006954545454545455\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{1. Alphabet work (Selecting and laying out the wooden}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{capital letters in an arc and naming them)}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{2. The reading pack work}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{3. The spelling pack work}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{4. Dictations}\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{5. Games}\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Example of the APSL multisensory phonogram training for}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep letter 'd'\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{? The teacher begins by presenting the reading pack}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{card 'd'}\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{? The pupil learns to respond and say /d/}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{? They discuss the clueword e.g. 'dog'}\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{APSL Dyslexia Progs Progress in 1 Year. NON APSL Programmes in 1 Year}\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{\textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore }\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{R. Prog \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore  S. Prog R. Prog S. Prog Researcher}\\
A to O\tabcellsep 1.93\tabcellsep 1.95\tabcellsep 0.53\tabcellsep 0.32\tabcellsep Hornsby et al 1990\\
N=107\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{N=107 (Teachers' phonic programmes)}\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{\textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore }\\
TRTS\tabcellsep 2.45\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
N=38\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{N=15 (Eclectic mix by teacher)}\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{Pairs tuition \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore }\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{(H \& A to O) 1.21}\tabcellsep 0.96\tabcellsep 0.69\tabcellsep 0.65\tabcellsep Ridehalgh 1999\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{N=50 \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore  N=50 (SME)}\\
TRTS\tabcellsep 3.31\tabcellsep 1.85\tabcellsep 2.2\tabcellsep 1.14\tabcellsep Webb 2000\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{N=12 \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore \textunderscore  N=12 (SME/TRTS)}\\
TRTS\tabcellsep 4.04\tabcellsep 3.00\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{(no control group)}\tabcellsep Gabor, 2007\\
N=12\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
A to O\tabcellsep 2.4\tabcellsep 2.4\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Same group, no}\tabcellsep Pawley 2007\\
N=10\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{progress in previous year}\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_6}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.2278\textwidth}P{0.11560000000000001\textwidth}P{0.0714\textwidth}P{0.09519999999999999\textwidth}P{0.0714\textwidth}P{0.2686\textwidth}}
Year 2018\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
12\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Volume XVIII Issue I Version I\tabcellsep Programme SME N=50 DILP A -O N=50.\tabcellsep Single 0.71 0.69 0.47\tabcellsep Reading Pairs 0.66 1.59 1.19\tabcellsep Single 0.79 0.66 1.19\tabcellsep Spelling Pairs 0.5 0.96 \} 0.87 \} DILP+A-O R =1.21 S=0.96 Totals R S 0.69 0.65\\
G )\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
(\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
© 2018 Global Journals\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_7}}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{Year 2018 © 2018 Global Journals Part 1: The Three Educational Faces of Dyslexia: Some Key Findings from Logographic and Alphabetic Phases} 			\footnote{© 2018 Global JournalsPart 1: The Three Educational Faces of Dyslexia: Some Key Findings from Logographic and Alphabetic Phases} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Liberman]{b40}\label{b40} 	 		\textit{},  		 			A M Liberman 		.  		 	 
\bibitem[Montgomery and Maldon]{b49}\label{b49} 	 		\textit{},  		 			D Montgomery 		,  		 			Maldon 		.  		LDRP.  	 
\bibitem[Rutter et al.]{b63}\label{b63} 	 		\textit{},  		 			M L Rutter 		,  		 			A Caspi 		,  		 			D Fergusson 		,  		 			L J Horwood 		,  		 			R Goodman 		.  		 	 
\bibitem[Chall ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		\textit{},  		 			J Chall 		.  		1985. Reading Development New York: McGraw-Hill.  	 
\bibitem[Dilp/Hickey ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		\textit{},  		 			Dilp/Hickey 		.  		1995.  		 			Dyslexia Institute Language Programme Dyslexia Institute 		 	 
\bibitem[Frederickson et al. ()]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		\textit{},  		 			N Frederickson 		,  		 			U Frith 		,  		 			R Reason 		.  		1997.  	 
\bibitem[Snowling ()]{b69}\label{b69} 	 		\textit{},  		 			M J Snowling 		.  	 	 		\textit{Dyslexia}  		2000. Blackwell. 2.  	 
\bibitem[ British Dyslexia Association ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		\textit{},  		 \url{www.bda-dyslexia.org.uk}  	 	 		\textit{British Dyslexia Association}  		2018.  	 
\bibitem[Cowdery et al. ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘-87Teaching Reading Through Spelling Volumess 1 -7 Reprint’.  		 			L L Cowdery 		,  		 			D Montgomery 		,  		 			P Morse 		,  		 			M Prince-Bruce 		.  	 	 		\textit{DfE 2014 National Curriculum, Key Stages 1 and 2. Framework for English and Mathematics},  				 (Wrexham; London)  		1983. 1994. 1997. 2006. DfE.  	 	 (The Rose Report London: DfES 19) 
\bibitem[Ridehalgh ()]{b58}\label{b58} 	 		\textit{A comparison of remediation programmes and an analysis of their effectiveness in a sample of pupils diagnosed as dyslexic},  		 			N Ridehalgh 		.  		1999.  		 			MA SpLD dissertation London: Middlesex University 		 	 
\bibitem[Aavena et al. ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		‘A lab-controlled simulation of a letterspeech sound binding deficit in dyslexia'’.  		 			S Aavena 		,  		 			P Snellings 		,  		 			J Tijms 		,  		 			M W Van Der Molen 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Experimental Child Psychology}  		2013. 4 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ouellette and Beers ()]{b53}\label{b53} 	 		‘A not-so-simple view of reading: How oral vocabulary and visualword recognition complicate the story'. Reading and 58’.  		 			G Ouellette 		,  		 			A Beers 		.  	 	 		\textit{Child Development}  		2010. 9 p. .  	 	 (2008 'Pathways to literacy: A study of invented spelling and its role in learning to read) 
\bibitem[Gelb ()]{b23}\label{b23} 	 		\textit{A Study of Writing 2 nd edition London},  		 			I J Gelb 		.  		1963. University of Chicago Press.  	 
\bibitem[Roycroft ()]{b62}\label{b62} 	 		\textit{A study to investigate whether DILP would help Year 3 pupils in mainstream school, showing difficulties with reading and spelling},  		 			S Roycroft 		.  		2002.  		 			MA SpLD dissertation London: Middlesex University 		 	 
\bibitem[Bradley ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		‘A tactile approach to reading’.  		 			L Bradley 		.  	 	 		\textit{British Journal of Special Education}  		1981. 8  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Montgomery ()]{b47}\label{b47} 	 		\textit{Able, Gifted and Talented Underachievers Chichester},  		 			D Montgomery 		.  		2009. Wiley-Blackwell.  	 
\bibitem[Hornsby and Shear ()]{b35}\label{b35} 	 		\textit{Alpha to Omega: The Teaching of Reading},  		 			B Hornsby 		,  		 			F Shear 		.  		1993.  	 	 (Writing and Spelling 4 th edition Oxford: Heinemann Educational) 
\bibitem[Hornsby and Shear ()]{b34}\label{b34} 	 		\textit{Alpha to Omega: The Teaching of Reading, Writing and Spelling Oxford: Heinemann Educational},  		 			B Hornsby 		,  		 			F Shear 		.  		1977.  	 
\bibitem[Forsyth ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		\textit{An evaluation of an Infant school screening instrument' Unpublished SEN Dissertation},  		 			D Forsyth 		.  		1988. Kingston-upon-Thames: Kingston Polytechnic.  	 
\bibitem[Gabor ()]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		\textit{An evaluation of the process and progress towards setting up a dyslexic programme in an International School},  		 			G Gabor 		.  		2007.  		 			MA SpLD dissertation London: Middlesex University 		 	 
\bibitem[Webb ()]{b76}\label{b76} 	 		\textit{An evaluation of the SEN provision to improve literacy skills of Year 9 students at Nfields' Unpublished MA dissertation},  		 			M Webb 		.  		2000. London.  		 			Middlesex University 		 	 
\bibitem[Simonson ()]{b67}\label{b67} 	 		\textit{An investigation of two writing approaches in the remediation of spelling difficulties},  		 			M Simonson 		.  		2008.  		 			MA SpLD dissertation London: Middlesex University 		 	 
\bibitem[Kaplan ()]{b42}\label{b42} 	 		‘Atypical Brain Development and dyslexia research'. Conference keynote symposium. International Psychology Conference, Stockholm Montgomery, D. 1981 'Do dyslexics have difficulty accessing articulatory information?’.  		 			C Kaplan 		.  	 	 		\textit{Psychological Research}  		2000. 43 p. .  	 
\bibitem[London (ed.) ()]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		\textit{Beneath the surface of developmental dyslexia},  		 			Phonological Assessment Battery London 		.  		Surface Dyslexia London: Routledge and Kegan-Paul (ed.)  		1985. Pearson Frith.  	 
\bibitem[Bryant and Bradley ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		 			P E Bryant 		,  		 			L Bradley 		.  		\textit{Children's Reading Difficulties},  				 (Oxford)  		1985. Blackwell.  	 
\bibitem[Read ()]{b56}\label{b56} 	 		\textit{Children's Creative Spelling London: Routledge and Kegan-Paul},  		 			C Read 		.  		1986.  	 
\bibitem[Montgomery ()]{b46}\label{b46} 	 		\textit{Cohort analysis of writing in Year 7 after 2, 4, and 7 years of the National Literacy Strategy' Support for Learning 23},  		 			D Montgomery 		.  		2008. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Snowling ()]{b68}\label{b68} 	 		‘Developmental Reading Disorders’.  		 			M J Snowling 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry}  		1991. 32  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Montgomery ()]{b44}\label{b44} 	 		\textit{Developmental Spelling Handbook Maldon: Learning Difficulties Research Project www},  		 			D Montgomery 		.  		 \url{.ldrp.org.uk}  		1997b.  	 
\bibitem[Suggate et al. ()]{b72}\label{b72} 	 		‘Do fine motor skills contribute to early reading development?’.  		 			S Suggate 		,  		 			E Pufke 		,  		 			H Stoeger 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12081}{10.1111/1467-9817.12081}.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Research in Reading}  		2016b. 00  (00)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Snowling ()]{b70}\label{b70} 	 		\textit{Does dyslexia exist question' Response to Lord Adonis, House of Lords},  		 			M J Snowling 		.  		2005. Westminster.  	 
\bibitem[Montgomery ()]{b50}\label{b50} 	 		\textit{Dyslexia-friendly Approaches to Reading, Spelling and Handwriting. A toolkit for teachers London: Routledge},  		 			D Montgomery 		.  		2017.  	 
\bibitem[Pawley ()]{b54}\label{b54} 	 		\textit{Dyslexia-the hidden trigger},  		 			J Pawley 		.  		2007.  		 			MA SpLD dissertation London: Middlesex University 		 	 
\bibitem[Hickey (ed.) ()]{b31}\label{b31} 	 		\textit{Dyslexia: A Language Training Course for Teachers and Learners 2 nd edition},  		 			K Hickey 		.  		London: Whurr (ed.)  		1991.  	 
\bibitem[Hickey (ed.) ()]{b30}\label{b30} 	 		\textit{Dyslexia: A Language Training Course for Teachers and Learners London},  		 			K Hickey 		.  		Wimbledon: K. Hickey Estate (ed.)  		1977.  	 
\bibitem[Fernald ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		 			G M Fernald 		.  		\textit{Remedial Techniques in Basic School Subjects},  				 (New York)  		1943. McGraw-Hill.  	 
\bibitem[Goldberg and Schiffman ()]{b28}\label{b28} 	 		 			H K Goldberg 		,  		 			G B Schiffman 		.  	 	 		\textit{Problems of Reading Disabilities London: Grune and Stratton p},  				1972. p. 66.  	 
\bibitem[Chall ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		\textit{Learning to Read: The Great Debate},  		 			J Chall 		.  		1967. New York: McGraw-Hill.  	 
\bibitem[Gentry ()]{b24}\label{b24} 	 		‘Learning to spell developmentally’.  		 			J R Gentry 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Reading Teacher}  		1981. 34  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bosse et al. ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		‘Lexical orthography acquisition: Is handwriting better than spelling aloud?’.  		 			M Bosse 		,  		 			N Chaves 		,  		 			S Valdois 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00056}{10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00056}.  		 \url{Http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00056}  	 	 		\textit{Frontiers in Psychology}  		2014.  	 
\bibitem[Ferreiro and Teberosky ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		\textit{Literacy Before Schooling Exeter NH: Heinemann Education},  		 			E Ferreiro 		,  		 			A Teberosky 		.  		1982.  	 
\bibitem[Montgomery ()]{b43}\label{b43} 	 		 			D Montgomery 		.  		\textit{a Spelling: Remedial Strategies},  				 (London)  		1997. Cassell.  	 
\bibitem[Neale ()]{b52}\label{b52} 	 		\textit{Neale Analysis of Reading Ability second edition Windsor},  		 			M D Neale 		.  		1997. NFER-Nelson.  	 
\bibitem[Bradley and Huxford ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		‘Organising sound and letter patterns for spelling' 425-38 In’.  		 			L Bradley 		,  		 			L Huxford 		.  	 	 		\textit{Handbook od Spelling, Theory, Process and Intervention Chichester},  				 			C D A Brown,  			N C Ellis 		 (ed.)  		1994. Wiley.  	 
\bibitem[Shankweiler et al. ()]{b41}\label{b41} 	 		‘Perception of the speech code’.  		 			D P Shankweiler 		,  		 			F S Cooper 		,  		 			M Studdart-Kennedy 		.  	 	 		\textit{Psychological Review}  		1967. 74  (6)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Goswami and Bryant ()]{b29}\label{b29} 	 		\textit{Phonological Skills and Learning to Read Hove},  		 			U Goswami 		,  		 			P E Bryant 		.  		1990. Lawrence Erlbaum.  	 
\bibitem[Silverman (2004)]{b66}\label{b66} 	 		\textit{Poor handwriting: A major cause of under achievement},  		 			L K Silverman 		.  		 \url{http://www.visuospatial.org/Publications/Accessed}  		2004. April 2007.  	 
\bibitem[Clark ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		\textit{Reading Difficulties in Schools Harmondsworth: Penguin},  		 			M M Clark 		.  		1970.  	 
\bibitem[Waldie et al. ()]{b75}\label{b75} 	 		‘Reading the wrong way with the right hemisphere’.  		 			K E Waldie 		,  		 			C E Haigh 		,  		 			G Badzakova-Trajkov 		,  		 			B J Kirk 		.  	 	 		\textit{Brain Science}  		2013. 3 p. .  	 
\bibitem[References Références Referencias Volume XVIII Issue I Version I]{b33}\label{b33} 	 		\textit{References Références Referencias Volume XVIII Issue I Version I},  		 	 
\bibitem[Gillingham and Stillman ()]{b26}\label{b26} 	 		\textit{Remedial Training for Children with Specific Disability in Reading, Spelling and Penmanship Bath: Basic Books},  		 			A M Gillingham 		,  		 			B U Stillman 		.  		1956.  	 
\bibitem[Rose ()]{b57}\label{b57} 	 		\textit{Rose Review. Independent Review of the Teaching of Early Reading: Final Report London: DfES},  		 			J Rose 		.  		2006.  	 
\bibitem[Rose ()]{b60}\label{b60} 	 		\textit{Rose Review. Independent Review of the Teaching of Early Reading: Final Report London: DfES},  		 			J Rose 		.  		2006.  	 
\bibitem[Liberman ()]{b39}\label{b39} 	 		‘Segmentation of the spoken word and reading acquisition’.  		 			I Y Liberman 		.  	 	 		\textit{Bulletin of the Orton Society}  		1971. 23 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Maughan et al. ()]{b64}\label{b64} 	 		‘Sex differences in developmental reading disability’.  		 			B Maughan 		,  		 			T E Moffit 		,  		 			H Meltzer 		,  		 			Carroll 		,  		 			J 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of the American Medical Association}  		2004. 291  (16)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Hornsby and Farrar ()]{b36}\label{b36} 	 		‘Some effects of a dyslexia-centred teaching programme' 173-96 in’.  		 			B Hornsby 		,  		 			M Farrar 		.  	 	 		\textit{Children's Difficulties in Reading, Spelling and Writing},  				 			P D Pumfrey,  			C D Elliott 		 (ed.)  		 (London)  		1990. Falmer Press.  	 
\bibitem[Geschwind ()]{b25}\label{b25} 	 		‘Specialisations of the human brain’.  		 			N Geschwind 		.  	 	 		\textit{Scientific American}  		1979. 231 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Vellutino et al. ()]{b74}\label{b74} 	 		‘Specific reading disability (dyslexia) what have we learned in the past four decades’.  		 			F R Vellutino 		,  		 			J Fletcher 		,  		 			M Snowling 		,  		 			D Scanlon 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry}  		2004. 45  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bourassa and Treiman ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		‘Spelling in children with dyslexia: Analyses From the Treiman-Bourassa Early Spelling Test’.  		 			D Bourassa 		,  		 			R Treiman 		.  	 	 		\textit{Scientific Studies of Reading}  		2003. 7  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Brand ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		\textit{Spelling Made Easy Baldock},  		 			V Brand 		.  		1998. Herts: Egon.  	 
\bibitem[Montgomery ()]{b45}\label{b45} 	 		\textit{Spelling, Handwriting and Dyslexia London: Routledge},  		 			D Montgomery 		.  		2007.  	 
\bibitem[Peters (ed.) ()]{b55}\label{b55} 	 		\textit{Spelling: Caught or Taught? 2 nd edition},  		 			M L Peters 		.  		Routledge and Kegan Paul (ed.)  		1985. London.  	 
\bibitem[Strauss and Corbin ()]{b71}\label{b71} 	 		 			A L Strauss 		,  		 			J Corbin 		.  		\textit{Basics of Qualitative Research},  				 (Newbury Park, Sage)  		1990.  	 
\bibitem[Conners ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		\textit{Teacher's Rating Scale for EBD London},  		 			K C Conners 		.  		2007. Pearson/Psychological Corporation.  	 
\bibitem[Montgomery ()]{b48}\label{b48} 	 		\textit{Teaching Gifted Children with Speial Educational Needs. Supporting dual and multiple exceptionality London: Routledge},  		 			D Montgomery 		.  		2015.  	 
\bibitem[The education of Pupils with Learning Difficulties in Primary and Secondary Schools ()]{b65}\label{b65} 	 		\textit{The education of Pupils with Learning Difficulties in Primary and Secondary Schools},  		 by HMI Edinburgh: HMSO.  		1978.  		 			SED (Scottish Education Department 		 	 	 (A progress Report) 
\bibitem[James and Engelhardt ()]{b37}\label{b37} 	 		‘The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development’.  		 			K James 		,  		 			L Engelhardt 		.  	 	 		\textit{Neuroscience and Education}  		2012. 1  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Gillingham and Stillman ()]{b27}\label{b27} 	 		\textit{The Gillingham Manual: Remedial Training for Students with Specific Disability in Reading, Spelling and Penmanship Cambridge MA},  		 			A M Gillingham 		,  		 			B U Stillman 		.  		1997. Educators Publishing Service Inc.  	 
\bibitem[Augur Briggs (ed.) ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		\textit{The Hickey Multisensory Language Course},  				 			J Augur,  			S Briggs 		 (ed.)  		 (London)  		1991. Whurr/Wiley-Blackwell.  	 	 (2nd edition) 
\bibitem[Rome and Osman ()]{b59}\label{b59} 	 		\textit{The Language Tool Kit Cambridge MA},  		 			Rome 		,  		 			J Osman 		.  		1994. Educators Publishing Service.  	 
\bibitem[Mueller and Oppenheimer ()]{b51}\label{b51} 	 		‘The pen is mightier than the keyboard. Advantages of longhand over laptop note-taking’.  		 			P A Mueller 		,  		 			D M Oppenheimer 		.  	 	 		\textit{Psychological Sciences}  		2014. 25  (6)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Jerrim ()]{b38}\label{b38} 	 		\textit{The Reading Gap The Sutton Trust},  		 			J Jerrim 		.  		2013. Millbank, London.  	 
\bibitem[Rosencrans ()]{b61}\label{b61} 	 		\textit{The Spelling Book. Teaching Children How to Spell USA International Reading Association},  		 			G Rosencrans 		.  		1998.  	 
\bibitem[Vellutino ()]{b73}\label{b73} 	 		 			F R Vellutino 		.  		\textit{Dyslexia: Theory and Research},  				 (London)  		1979. MIT Press.  	 
\bibitem[Clay ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		\textit{What Did I Write? The Beginnings of Reading Development},  		 			M M Clay 		.  		1975. London: Heinemann.  	 
\bibitem[Whitehead ()]{b77}\label{b77} 	 		 			M R Whitehead 		.  		\textit{Language and Literacy in the Early Years},  				2004. 3.  	 	 (rd edition London: Sage) 
\bibitem[Hinshelwood ()]{b32}\label{b32} 	 		\textit{Word Blindness London: H.K. Lewis \& Co 37. HMCI 2001 The Annual Report of the Chief Inspector for Schools in England London: The Stationery Office},  		 			J Hinshelwood 		.  		1917Congenital.  	 
\bibitem[Chomsky ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘Write first, read later’.  		 			C Chomsky 		.  	 	 		\textit{Childhood Education}  		1973. 47  (6)  p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
