Tuesday, 8 October 2013

No real change in the reading performance in Britain for the last 60years

No real change in the reading performance in Britain for the last 60 years.

Why should there be a change. There has been free universal access to education in Britain since 1944.  Changes in teaching method or style does really seem to have any effect.

All the ideas that have developed from the work I and others have been doing, supports the idea that your reading performance is a function of visual biology, need for glasses, retinal design/physiology,  font size, available working memory and the ‘nature of the language’.

These control
  • Your reading speed.
  • Your reading stamina.
  • Your ability to understand what you have read in the context of your previous reading..and hence your enjoyment.

These all combine to control your ‘total reading experience and hence your ‘literacy’.

Read the rest of the posts in my blog, going back over the last year.

Only if we change the way we present text can we get more people to higher levels of literacy
Ours is probably the most opaque language. Tough.

The USA has at least simplified some of the spellings!

Finland has the simplest language to read /write. That is why it is at the top.

Tuesday, 1 October 2013

IT is not the ‘COLOR’ background that controls the reading of many dyslexic and other people.

IT is not the ‘COLOR’ background that controls the reading of many dyslexic and other people.

In this blog I have tried to put down many of my experiences in helping dyslexic adults and people who find reading ‘hard work. I have also tried to put it in the context of the theories and hypotheses that abound in reading.

I have to some extent fallen into the trap of writing about my work using mental constructs /ideas/language that really get in the way of the explanations. 

I write of…… color background and reading,
                …… font size and reading

I write of……Reading speed
                ……Reading performance

I really want to write about the Biology of reading.

 On a computer screen, when we change the background screen settings; all we really do is change the rate at which red, green and blue absorbing pigment molecules are able to capture photons and release electrons.  These electrons ultimately give rise to a burst of ‘waves of depolarisations’ (nerve impulses)  which supply ‘digital’ data allowing ‘edge detection and the ability for our visual cortex to discriminate between edges in the visual scene, the edges/ lines and nodes which we call letters on the page.

 If the image stays static, the eye is not moving relative to the letters, then the data stops being sent.
 Since the eye is continually moving as it ‘takes its pictures,’ the digital data has to be detailed enough, accurate enough and coordinated with data on the ‘movement’ for the visual cortex to compute for us a clear image such that the reading speed we achieve is fast enough for us to enjoy, understand the ideas being conveyed by the word sequence.

Changing the relative stimulation of the red and green cone cells, by changing the red and green component of the light from the background pixels, has to change the ‘rate’ at which the nerve impulses arrive at the visual cortex or we would not ‘notice any color change’.

It is only change in impulse frequency that ever changes. The impulses are all the same size.

So for each person there has to be a mathematical relationship between the red/green balance and the rate of data transfer from eye to ‘brain’/visual cortex.  There has to be a particular ratio/balance which sends the highest amount of data.

Is this what affects crowding and visual attention span and ultimately the development of automaticity reading fluency/performance and attention?