Talk:Dyscalculia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dyscalculia and acalculia is NOT the same thing. Dyscalculia is like dyslexia - there are ways to learn - while acalculia is caused by serious brain damage like in a car accident. Mette Christoffersen, Feb. 4, 2006.
I disagree with this statement. Neurological terms that use the prefix "a" imply a complete loss of or lack of a cognitive skill or behavior, whereas "dys" refers to an impairment in the subsumed area. Another distinction that has often been claimed is that the disorders which use "a" are generally acquired (e.g., stroke or head injury) whereas those termed "dys" are developmental in nature (i.e., the result of improper neurocognitive development). In point of fact, however, there are virtually no cases of complete loss or absence of cognitive functions as a consequence of brain damage. Therefore, the nosology that uses the "dys" pronoun is to be preferred in my opinion. (By the way, I am a cognitive neuropsychologist by profession and have written extensively on dyscalculia).
With respect to dyscalculia, there is a large literature on such patients, and the distinction between acalculics and dyscalculics is not consistent or frankly all that useful.
- I have removed the wikilink to acalculia, as it was a circular redirect. If acalculia is not the same as dyscalculia, why would a link for the former redirect to the latter? Makes little sense to me. BobbyLee 18:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I changed the first sentence, removing the reference to acalculia. Theres is some truth in both sides. While the description of dys- and a- calculia is absolutely correct, I have only seen the term acalculia used of brain damaged patients and never for developmental cases. Thus, perhaps, best to stick with Dyscalculia here to avoid long explanations. . . Dyscalulia as a result of brain damage is better understood at present than develomental dyscalulia, about which there is still a great deal of controversy, even about nomenclature. Beth L. Nov 17 2006 __
Please explain what an SpLD is. (LD = Learning Difficulty ?) ---Mpatel (talk) 10:31, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
Quick Google search turns up this: Semantic Pragmatic Disorder, except as "semantic pragmatic 'language' disorder" JeramieHicks 22:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
my understanding is Specific Learning Difficulty (such as dyslexia etc) as opposed to general learning difficulty/disability (what used to be termed mental handicap)I have no sources only my expereince of working with people with SpLD and general learning difficulties - and this is in the UK might be differnt in the USA Ophelia105 16:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree the SpLD refers to specific learning disability which is a term of use in neurology, psychiatry and special education.
Contents |
[edit] Etymology
Is this word another of those mixtures of Latin and Greek? Michael Hardy 03:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- It doesn't appear so:
Semiconscious • talk 08:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Math Phobia
"Math-phobia" links to this page, what's it called, as a synonym. So the article about math phobia is automatically the article about dyscalculia. Although many dyscalculics are phobic of math, you can EASILY have math phobia without being dyscalculic. It is wrong to think that the term math phobia should be linked to an article about dyscalculia - especially because it gives the impression that dyscalculia is just "made up", and all you have to do to "overcome" it is to get rid of the fear. Would you say that a DYSLEXIC only had to overcome the fear to learn how to spell? I don't hope so.
Please fix this. Please. :) --Ellyodd 14:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've seen this in a lot of articles, and it's not meant to imply that the terms are synonyms. Generally speaking this sort of thing is done because there is no separate article on the subject (math phobia), other than the small amount of information on it in this one (which isn't enough to be a separate page at this time). When a separate page is made, it will no longer be a redirect. 69.85.181.195 01:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Question
I'm wondering how specific this condition could be or generally is. Most of the potential symptoms seem to pertain to fairly general mathmatical abilities. Would it be possible for someone with this condition (or a related one you can name) to be able to do basic arithmetic, but be unable to do/having difficulty doing algebraic equations where certain additional types of thought processes/logic become involved? 69.85.181.195 01:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
-- It is definitely possible to have some mathematical abilities but be hindered in others, e.g. being unable to navigate but able to process basic algebra. There is a large range of "disability" contained within the term dyscalculia; just as a dyslexic may only make certain spelling errors or may be almost completely unable to read. 138.26.166.5 21:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] To Omit
"Critics of standards-based mathematics reform such as Mathematically Correct have proposed that replacement of direct-instruction of efficient arithmetic methods with discovery learning, and replacing instruction time and textbook space that was once devoted to instruction and practice with activity-based learning with a large proportion of non-mathematics related content has produced many students who cannot compute. Counting and using manipulatives rather than using efficient algorithms is central point of emphasis for standards based instruction. Some texts such as TERC in their initial editions complete omit instruction of any standard arithmetic method in favor of drawing tally marks, circling groups, and coloring, and devote class time and homework to singing songs such as Happy Birthday and playing card games."
i'm not sure the above paragraph belongs -- it seems to refer to something totally different from a disorder, rather, that many schools don't teach math efficiently. whereas my understanding of dyscalulia is that it has to do more with the individual's innate ability to compute and/or relate to spatial concepts like left/right, north/south, etc. than whether and how well one has been taught arithmetic. just as dyslexia has nothing to do with how well one has been taught to read, but the student's innate inability to parse written language. looking back at my elementary school experience, i know we spent plenty of time doing math-related schoolwork. but i also know i was the last in my class to memorize math facts, still can't tell left from right or read an analog clock, and always have to think long and hard about very simple things like calculating a 20% tip. Geeksquad 3.10.07
- if it will help I can probably track down a referenced source. Critics of standards-based math say that it's difficult to tell if the reason students can't calculate is because of an innate inability or simply because they have been taught methods prone to producing some of the listed symptoms, such as counting rather than using arithmetic or using complex strategies rather than standard efficient methods. approaches taken by many textbooks do not teach any traditional methods, and spend a lot of time showing students how do do things like using the plus key to divide 300 by 6 using skip counting, or drawing tallies and circling groups. --Merceris 01:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Noting the requirement for an "expert", in the UK a lot of questions from parents get directed to me as I've written a number of books on the subject. However my work in dyscalculia has taken me away from the standardised view, which has generally been imposed on the subject by those who work with dyslexia. We now have the odd situation in which most of the published books on the subject don't follow the view that the most regular commentators put forward.
The view originally put forward in "Tests for Dyscalculia" and "Methods of Teaching Maths to Pupils with Dyscalculia", and which is within all 10 books I've written, is that although dyscalculia is of genetic origin and thus cannot be "cured" a curious effect does allow most dyscalculics to be taught maths to normal standards if a particular approach is adopted.
My colleauges and I observed that almost every dyscalculic person we saw had a significant gap in understand maths at a fairly elementary level - for example with simple division. Because of the logical nature of maths that meant they could not grasp fractions, percentages, shapes - all of which build on division. We argued first that if one goes back and corrects these early problems, much will rapidly fall into place.
To solve this second problem we borrowed an idea from dyslexia (where I worked on the Multi-Sensory Learning project in the 1980s) of making all maths teaching multi-sensory. Thus a child would work with counters, would learn to transfer ten counters of one colour into another, and would simulatenously speak the numbers and write them as words and numeric symbols. The symbol + was then always spoken as one word ("add" for example) and that word and the symbol were used at the same time as the coloured counters were put together.
By tracking back to problem areas and then correcting them through this means we had terrific success - and this resulted in the series of books described on wwww.dyscalculia.me.uk It also resulted in a route to recovery which could be used by parents at home - particularly where the school rejected the notion of changing the approach to maths just for one child.
However the notion prevelant in the UK among teachers of dyslexia that only those who have been trained in dyslexia can help pupils and students has meant that our open approach which involves parents and teachers without special training, has been looked upon as unsatisfactory, and perhaps even underminding the teaching profession.
Tony Attwood BA, Dip Ed., M.Phil (Lond) F.Inst.A.M yes... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.185.51.19 (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)