“It’s never too early”

1. “It’s never too early” A policy of screening in primary school Roberta Penge A.I.D. EDA Summer School

2. Secondary Prevention of SLD • SLD are still detected too often after the 3rd school year • increased severity and • increased effect on general learning. • increased secondary problems • psychopathology, • social maladjustment • cognitive impoverishing • POOR GENERAL OUTCOME EDA Summer School

3. Secondary Prevention of SLD • A definite diagnosis of SLD can be made at the end of the second school year: • Completed theaching course • Reduction of interindividual variability • Pedagogic and rehabilitative interventions show their maximum efficacy within the third school year; • There is a general agreement about criteria for diagnostic suspect of SLD (in Italian language) at the end of the first school year • Monitoring them for a diagnostic confirmation EDA Summer School

4. How to improve early diagnosis of SLD? Pediatricians, Teachers and Parents Sensibilization Screening projects EDA Summer School

5. Screenings aimed to prevention and early diagnosis • Built on the research-action models • Made by the school with clinical supervision • Aimed to detect at risk areas • Aimed to detect at risk groups • Followed by specific teaching activities • Only “resistent” subjects will be sent to clinicians for a diagnostic procedure EDA Summer School

6. Precedent italian experiences: • Screening projects had shown efficacy on: • Teachers sensibility to LD • Techers teaching strategies • School based intervention within screening projects had shown efficacy on reducing at risk population • But not below 4% • Screening projects had not proved their sensibility and specificity EDA Summer School

7. It’s never too early EDA Summer School

8. Objectives 1 • To follow reading and writing acquisition • in 8000 children • in different Italian regions • From the first to the third school year • Offering to teachers the opportunity to deep their formation about learning processes an written language teaching EDA Summer School

9. Objectives 2 • Detecting SLD at risk children and monitoring them for three years • Verifying in a retrospective way the sensitivity and the specificity of the instruments at the different steps • Offering to the Ministry of Education with a scientific based tool to extend its application to the entire school system EDA Summer School

10. Attended Results • Monitoring of reading and writing acquisition in Italian children; • Early detection, diagnosis and intervention of SLD children -> reduction of the severity of the disturbances; • Constuction and validation of a simple and faithful instrument able to correctly detect SLD children (false positives and false negatives reduction). • Increasing of knowledge about SLD in the teachers EDA Summer School

11. May 2010 September 2010 December 2010 May 2011 September 2011 December 2011 May 2012 September 2012 First Screening Teachers formation Monitoring of at risk children Teachers Formation and second screening Teachers Formation Monitoring of at risk children Teacher Formation and third screening Final meeting Projet phases EDA Summer School

12. Writing task (word dictation) Teachers Inventory on Reading and Writing competences Results of the two tests will be compared each other In the overall sample And comparing different regions/school/classes Instuments: EDA Summer School

13. Data will be collected and analysed in anonimous way; • Teachers will receive pedagogic directions constructed on the base of the “profile” of their class/school; • Only if persistent difficulties will be detected (children at risk at least two times) parents will be alerted and invited to start a diagnostic process EDA Summer School

14. Bergamo, Cremona 15 “poli” Cuneo, Torino, Biella Fermo, Macerata Savona Pisa, Livorno Chieti Teramo Campobasso Bari, Foggia Roma Napoli, Salerno Avellino, Benevento Cagliari Vibo Valentia Ragusa Agrigento EDA Summer School

15. Subjects Diagnosis DS-Em Bilinguism (1151) (170) Diagnosis H (93) No parental consensus (0,4-1%) ? Schools refusal (3) Typically developing sample Screening sample Real sample Ipothetical sample EDA Summer School

16. Screening data • Data about parents,home spoken language, presence of known disturbances • Tasks • Word dictation 16–23 words • numbers and calculation (II grade) • Teachers Inventory • Reading • writing • Comprehension • Graphia • Scores distribution in the mother languge italian typically developing group has been used to define two cut off points (delay, inadequate) EDA Summer School

17. Monitoring selection All children with very low skills (inadequate) in at least one of: Reading speedness or correctness (teachers’ inventory) Writing correctness (teachers’ inventory) Writing correctness (dictation) EDA Summer School

18. Children chosen fo monitoring step (950 sbj) EDA Summer School

19. Monitored subjects Diagnosis (2,2%) No consensus (1,4%) Absent/trasferred Other (3,1%) (6,2%) Monitored “present” poli “absent” poli Initial sample EDA Summer School

20. Monitoring Tasks • Text reading (2 minuts) • Speed • Correctness • Word writing • Correctness Tasks standardized on italian population; Cut off are taken from normative data (sufficient; attention requested; intervention required) EDA Summer School

21. Scores distribution Indadeqaute skills: 31% one task; 25% two tasks; 19% three tasks EDA Summer School

22. Relationship among skills at the end of the first year and those at the middle of the second year • The presence of inadequate skills on at least two parameters is a better indicator of the stability of inadequateness • The collection of observational data from teachers seems to increase the attendibility of the objective data EDA Summer School