theory and practice of multisensory teaching

Evangelidis Basil Research Proposal

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Theory and Practice of Multisensory Teaching

Abstract: The relative theories of multiple intelligences and learning styles

promote simultaneous visual, auditory and tactile-kinaesthetic multisensory

instruction. However, a dynamic approach to multisensory teaching should also

give emphasis to the construction and the optimization of learning situations,

regardless of the limitations of specific styles. Talents, experience, personality,

environment, intuition, altruism, interests, are some of the interdependent

factors constituting an experiential-learning situation, as a socially constructed

quality. Whereas different learning styles are always found mixed and

continuously changing in the every-day classroom, instruction should be based

on natural, holistic, combinatory, sequencing and efficient multisensory learning

situations.

“We no longer make children wear their VAK badges”

(cited by Goswami, 2006)

From antiquity to the modern era, researchers quarrel over the fidelity of the senses

and ask questions about the elements of multisensory experience and their

significance for teaching. Among all, the most interesting conundrum is whether

experience is created by subjective or objective forces, e.g. the significance of nutrition

for the eye (Reid, 2005), the importance of pattern glare in reading (Wilkins, Huang,

Cao, 2004), the hypothesis that visual spatial attention is more important for non-word

reading (Facoetti, Trussardi, et al. 2009), etc. But there is no doubt that effective

intervention should begin by considering both objective and subjective elements of


multisensory experience, learning styles and, prominently, personal strengths and

talents.

Apart from idiosyncrasy, the developmental stages and milestones of learning are

related to the successive activation of discrete sensory systems. Learning begins with

active touch (haptic system), followed by the integration of motor, visual, auditory and

verbal systems. Reading, spelling and writing skills are being developed by gradual

cognitive upgrades at the levels of hearing and seeing, noticing and excluding noise,

understanding and representing, feeling, criticizing, deciding.

Teachers involve in this collaborative process by organising living experiences in

the classroom, cultivating talents, guiding the use of emulation programmes in

computers, building up “hands-on labs” for technical training (Clarke, 2006), etc.

However, the most simple sensory material, such as the mouth and the body positions,

the movement of articulatory muscles, the presence or the absence of voicing airflow,

the discrimination of syllable divisions, the prosody (intonation, stress, loudness, pitch

level, juncture, speaking rate), should be analysed and presented meaningfully and

clearly.

Thus, multisensory teaching can point out that languages are a continuum between

noise, consonants and vowels. Discriminating meaningless from meaningful visual

cues may help the dyslexic pupil to overcome difficulties, e.g. oral reading with playing

cards which represent, with distinguished colours, meaningful parts of words (“grain”,

“rain”, “in”).

Athletics, pictures, word-puzzles and natural science could be essential parts of

multisensory teaching. Interestingly enough, the available combinations of stimulating

learning situations with multisensory content can be unlimited. Kast, Meyer, et al.


(2007, p. 356) enumerate several types of intervention programmes, i.e. analysing low-

level auditory perceptual learning (“practicing to improve perception of tones, tone

durations, auditory rhythms or gaps between successive acoustic stimuli”),

manipulating speech-like stimuli for improvement in phonological awareness of the

sounds in words, improvement of low-level and high-level visual signals, combination

of training in visual and auditory functions that “improves multi-modal coding of speech

stimuli, thus improving reading and writing skills”, etc.

Furthermore, computer programmes for dyslexic students can accelerate

multisensory learning by increasing the number of associations between letters and

phonemes, using many alternative modes and channels of presentation. For instance,

Fast ForWord, a popular computer programme, “helps dyslexics associate sounds with

letters”. Devised in the light of the auditory theory of dyslexia, Fast ForWord “focuses

on helping dyslexic children to process speech by exaggerating words and slowing

them down” (Murphy, 2003, p. 342).

In fact, multi-sensory e-learning is not a panacea. Although everybody accepts that

modern pedagogy meets neuroscience and information technology; even though most

researchers contend that visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learning methods accelerate

retention and improve recall of the programme material (Clarke, 2006), others

disagree. Whereas “findings about rapid synaptic proliferation in young children’s

brains have nurtured hopes that cognitive capabilities can be increased by teaching

infants vocabularies and basic facts with audiovisual material”, there is no proof that

such training might enhance long-term retention (Stern, 2005).

If this is the case, then how can dyslexic children “achieve more when taught to their

strengths” (Brooks, Weeks, 1998, p. 220) with multisensory methods? Crucial in this

field is the role of the modern teacher, as an exception manager and auditor, who


concentrates on the questions, the skills and the learning styles of the students,

selecting the appropriate experiential learning tools, e.g. personalized texts, diagrams,

videos, discussions groups, hands-on labs, live labs, smart labs, interactive gaming,

etc. (Clarke, 2006).

Moreover, is there a better method than natural learning? Machine learning,

psychology, education and neuroscience are combined today into a new science of

learning, but the fact remains that inherent computational skills improve through the

interpretation of the behaviour and the experience of other humans. For instance, the

need for social interaction advances language learning. Additionally, there is sufficient

evidence that natural interaction is much more effective than machine learning,

computers and robots, such as BabyBot. Even though BabyBot learns to detect human

faces, cannot share their emotions (Meltzoff, Kuhl, Movellan, Sejnowski, 2009).

But the most common example against depersonalized instruction is television

programmes that have long-term negative effects on learning:

Preschool-aged children watch >90 minutes of television daily, and

correlational studies link early television viewing with deficits in

executive function (EF), a collection of prefrontal skills underlying

goal-directed behaviour, including attention, working memory,

inhibitory control, problem solving, self-regulation, and delay of

gratification. EF is increasingly recognized as key to positive social

and cognitive functioning and is strongly associated with success in

school (Lillard, Peterson, 2011, p. e2).

Hence, multisensory experience is useful when natural, whilst artificial media such

as television distract children’s attention. Significantly, multisensory learning and


attention are interconnected with memory span, as well. Recent research discovers

stages of working-memory development:

2-year-olds having a capacity span allowing them to recall around

two items, 5-year-olds around five, with adults being able to recall

about seven items (Jeffries, Everatt, 2004, p. 199).

The visual-spatial sketchpad memory system (e.g. block recall, maze memory, etc.)

that discriminates between dynamic and static information is found impaired in

dyspraxia, whereas dyslexics expose mnemonic deficits in phonological and

articulatory loop (e.g. non-word list recall, forward digit recall, etc.). In addition,

dyslexics show deficits in central executive memory systems, e.g. listening recall,

backward digit recall, etc. That is, dyslexia is specifically explained by a verbal-memory

deficit (Jeffries, Everatt, 2004), that includes inability to recall verbal instructions, slow

or no responses to questions, problems with note taking, essay planning and self-

organisation, etc.

But, verbal memory and exact acquisition of the subtle mappings of letters to sounds

can operate efficiently through auxiliary visual and multisensory representations. For

instance, the different orientations of one and the same symbol produce specific

alphabet letters such as b and d, and p and q (Asaravala, 2003). From this viewpoint,

reading, imagination, visual thinking, play and multisensory teaching are inextricably

linked:

In reading, an alternative orientation of the same thing is seen as a

different thing. Thus, one might consider a “p” carved out of a solid

block of wood or other material and imagine it tossed in the air,

tumbling side to side and end over end, as it falls to the floor. When


it lands, an observer would not be able to determine whether the

original was intended to be a “p” or a “q” or a “b” or a “d”. Barring

certain minor idiosyncrasies of typeface design, the four letters are

identical in every respect, except orientation in space (West, 1997,

p. 82).

Multisensory presentations facilitate anchor verbal information through non-

language mental representations (Oakland, Black, et al. 1998). Various types of stimuli

can exploit differences in the timing of speech: a speech contrast between temporal

cues (/ba/, /da/), a speech contrast with non-temporal, steady-state cues (/u/, /y/), a

“non-speech non-temporal contrast” (spectrally rotated /u/ and /y/), a “non-speech

temporal contrast” (spectrally rotated /ba/ and /da/), etc. (Vandermosten, Boets, et al.

2010, p. 10390).

However, instruction should progress gradually, stressing on qualities such as the

overlapping, the fusion, the covariance, the distance and the timing of the sensory

objects. Teachers should designate the specific stimulus components of multisensory

experience, should perform and explain the function of multisensory integration,

multisensory enhancement, multisensory depression, and reverse effectiveness

(Stein, Stanford, 2008).

In multisensory experiences the most critical factors are spatial and temporal

proximity (simultaneity versus asynchrony) across and within different sensory

systems, e.g. visual, auditory, haptic (active touch), proprioceptive, etc. Since

increasing asynchrony reduces multisensory interactions, extremely important is the

concept of


a temporal window of multisensory integration, or a range of

interstimulus intervals over which multisensory stimuli are highly

likely to be bound into a single perceptual event (Hillock, Powers, et

al. 2011, p. 462).

The integrated audio-visual binding window is broader in children, that is, not

appropriately focalising. For this reason, recent research stresses on the quest for

maturational milestones in multisensory development, possibly related to

developmental disabilities such as dyslexia and autism. Hopefully, training may affect

the malleability or the plasticity in the size of the temporal window (Powers, Hillock,

Wallace, 2009). Hence, teachers should clarify and emphasize the critically proximal

educational information, activating all the available modules; not only language, logic,

orderliness, linearity, sequential time, arithmetic, unrelated factual information, but also

visual images, spatial relationships, face and pattern recognition, gesture, proportion,

daydreaming, relationships in learning, etc. (West, 1997; Goswami, 2006).

In general, multisensory information should support and refresh “clear and distinct”

spectral-temporal-spatial steps in instructive pathways, promoting altogether the

acquisition of left and right hemisphere skills, i.e. the analysis of external space and

the orientation of the body in space, the experience and expression of emotion, the

appreciation of emotion in others, the regulation of attention, etc.

Moreover, sensory learning connects with motor and social skills. The neuro-

scientific distinction, between centrifugal motor neural fibres and centripetal sensory

neural fibres, emphasizes that learning is supported by “brain circuits linking perception

and action”. Thus, learning presupposes adaptation and plasticity, and develops

through social interaction, i.e. social skills as imitation, shared attention and empathic


understanding (Meltzoff, Kuhl, Movellan, Sejnowski, 2009). That is, multisensory

learning should run through social learning situations.

Decisive acceleration to the multisensory approaches is given by the dispute over

the causes of dyslexia, either visual-attentional, or phonological-auditory, or

magnocellular, etc. These theories refer to respective modes of deviated behaviour

such as contrast-dependent visual persistence, or inaccurate perception and

discrimination of rapidly changing sounds, or impaired mediation of transient visual

perceptions such as motion, etc.

Besides, mismatched information produced by different sensory channels, may

cause illusory perceptions, such as the McGurk effect. This well documented

phenomenon, examined in dyslexic children by Bastien-Toniazzo, Stroumza, Cavé

(2009), is produced by incongruent audiovisual stimuli. For example, the presentation

of a perfectly audible acoustic message /ga/ simultaneously with articulatory

movements corresponding to the different message /ba/ often generates the integrated

aural perception of /da/. This effect can be presented in the classroom as an interesting

audio-visual synchronization game.

Similarly, motivating learning situations may enhance students’ attentional and

experiential span. “Teachers need to present instruction in a multisensory manner,

using sight, sound, speech, touch, and movement”, e.g. colour-coding organizers,

highlighters or post-it notes, activities calendars, number lines, cards, conferences with

students, co-operative learning, reading aloud, repeating choruses, word games with

similar sounds, collecting rhyming words, matching pictures, clapping syllables, singing

songs with alliteration, tracing the letters, visualization techniques, “strategies such as

story maps, graphic organizers, anticipation guides, and study guides” (Wadlington,

2000).


Another purpose of multisensory teaching may be the training in focused attention,

sustained attention, selective attention, alternating attention and divided attention

(Chenault, Thomson, et al. 2006). Auditory spatial attention has been shown to be

defective in children with specific language impairment or reading disorders. Moreover,

visual spatial attention, essential for the segmentation of words in their constituent

graphemes (graphemic parsing), is impaired in dyslexics with poor non-word reading

ability. Teachers should focus on the learning of phonological decoding, by

encouraging attention-demanding training for the rehabilitation of sluggish spatial

attention (Facoetti, Trussardi, et al. 2009).

Furthermore, some forms of implicit learning, i.e. sequence learning, are impaired

in dyslexia, partly because of motor sequencing dysfunction, whereas other forms of

implicit learning, i.e. spatial context learning, are spared (Bennett, Romano et al. 2008).

In particular, sequence processing is related to sequence complexity (Folia, Uddén et

al. 2008). Thus, learning objectives should be highly sequential, emphasizing

comprehension and meta-cognitive processes. Apart from the acquisition of motor

sequences, implicit learning plays a central role in cognitive functions such as

“stimulus-response associations, priming effect, and classical conditioning” (Menghini,

Hagberg, et al. 2008).

Especially important for instruction is the knowledge that children with reading

difficulties show shorter saccades, longer and more fixations, and more regressions

than normal readers (Dürrwächter, Sokolov et al. 2010). Hence, learning material

should be presented gradually, in the appropriate temporal and spatial order and

synchronicity, including sufficient adaptation intervals. As Pammer and Vidyasagar

(2005, p. 327) propose, “effective reading requires the exquisite synchronicity of both


auditory and visual information”. In other words, the wider the “time gap” is, between

auditory and visual level, the poorer the word recognition accuracy.

Critically examined, the asynchrony phenomena are caused by the incongruity

between the faster holistic visual channel and the slower sequential auditory channel

(Breznitz and Misra, 2003, p. 488). For this reason, dyslexic children have more

difficulty when using a phonological strategy, especially when words are presented

auditory.

Nevertheless, crucially important is the awareness that dyslexia is not a deficit, but

a learning difference and a different learning style. Dyslectic behaviour includes not

only weaknesses, but also strengths and talents, i.e. visual thinking, creativity,

giftedness, which can be built up with multisensory teaching (“textbooks, story

boards, demonstrations and video footage”).

A wonderful metaphor is that, while dyslexics liquidating meanings, normal readers

categorize. But, dyslexia may be an opportunity to explore unique perceptual

experiences. For example, in hands-on labs, such as a kitchen, children may discover

the role of unitary integration in taste (gustatory, olfactory, tactile and visual), and

communicate it through cookery, language, books and names. Participating actively in

different experiential-learning situations, dyslexic learners can prove that they are:

Innovative thinkers; excellent trouble-shooters; intuitive problem

solvers; creative in many different ways; lateral thinkers (Ranaldi,

2003, pp. 32, 20).

Evidently, different divisions of types of learners, such as active-reflective, sensing-

intuitive, visual-verbal, sequential-global, cannot be reached with the same methods,

simultaneously, at whole-classroom level. By organising proactive, individual and


group, multisensory instruction, teachers can help dyslexics express their visual and

spatial skills in mathematics, physics and engineering, their ability to recognize

patterns, represent three-dimensional shapes, rearrange designs and information

(Reid, Kirk, 2001). As intuition is a sine qua non of knowledge, fresh, discovered,

unfamiliar, constructive experiences are vital.

This way, a dyslexia-friendly school can implement multisensory teaching for the

remediation of various dyslectic traits (e.g. disorientation, difficulty distinguishing

sounds, difficulty distinguishing main figure and background, auditory lag, deficit in

visual and auditory sequencing, difficulty with analogy or abstraction, etc.).

A multiple-intelligences school encourages talents in spatial, mechanical, drawing,

and related right-hemisphere skills, offers construction toys, models and craft work,

enhances experiences for the “musical ear”, and supports ability to visualize. In

addition, dyslexia-friendly schools incorporate alternative channels of learning, such

as books on audio tapes, videotaped films, theatre and educational television.

Multisensory teaching and assessment may include performance skills, picture

completion tests, mechanical assembly tests, mechanical puzzle boxes, etc. Modern

graphics and gesture-based personal computers may help distinguish hundreds of

subtle skills. An example is the use of “computer-based simulators to teach and test

professionals ranging from airline pilots and military personnel to medical students”

(West, 1997, p. 42).

In a multiple intelligences world (linguistic, musical, logical-mathematical, spatial,

bodily-kinaesthetic, personal, naturalist, spiritualist, etc.) the demand for multisensory

teaching is enormous. Many dyslexics are privileged with visual imagery, that is,

“gestalt” sensitivity, “sensitivity to patterns, forms and whole” (Gardner, 1983). Visual-

spatial modes of thought produce images of wide scope that embolden learning, e.g.


the atom as a tiny solar system (Dalton) or the unconscious as submerged like an

iceberg (Freud).

Therefore, reading difference can be a gift, when is accompanied by right-

hemisphere traits, i.e. visual thinking, spatial ability, pattern recognition, problem

solving and creativity. In particular, spatial intelligence is extremely important for the

dyslexic, as it offers him the apparatus to recognize instances of the same element; to

transform or to recognize a transformation; to conjure up mental imagery and then to

transform that imagery; to produce a graphic likeness of spatial information (Gardner,

1983; West 1997).

In conclusion, the demand for multi-sensory learning is compelling because of the

increasingly distracted, rapidly changing and challenging environments at school and

work. In a highly competitive reality, multisensory teaching methods should provide

direct feedback, complete knowledge and vivid presentation of the correctly learned

word, sentence, function, rule, etc.

Last but not least, talents and knowledge can combine creatively with multisensory

instruction. Many dyslexics exhibit rare talents, skills and interests in the visual arts, in

philosophical and scientific thought, in music. On the contrary, they have major

difficulties in reading, writing, speaking and, sometimes, mathematics. Despite

difficulties, they should develop their talents.

Nevertheless, a humanistic approach to special education should consider

multisensory teaching as the natural mode of learning, especially through collective

action, constructions and design, through active communication, art, excursions,

naturalistic play, etc. Transmitting to the student the awareness that human mind is

motivated by appetite (Aristotle), but is educated by experiences of mastery.


Websites

‐ Dyslexia Online Magazine.

http://www.dyslexia-parent.com/mag30.html

‐ Dyslexic Talent.

http://dyslexictalent-english.ning.com/

‐ Honey & Mumford Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ).

http://www.peterhoney.com/

‐ Indiana State University learning styles site.

http://www.indstate.edu/cirt/id/pedagogies/styles/learning.html

‐ Learning and Skills Research Centre.

http://www.lsrc.ac.uk/

‐ Multisensory Teaching.

http://www.multisensoryteaching.com/

‐ On the Cutting Edge. Early Career. Efficient, Effective Teaching. Learning

Styles.

http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/earlycareer/teaching/learningstyles.h

tml

‐ Texthelp Systems.

http://www.texthelp.com/

‐ The Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity.

http://www.dyslexia-parent.com/mag30.html

http://dyslexictalent-english.ning.com/

http://www.peterhoney.com/

http://www.indstate.edu/cirt/id/pedagogies/styles/learning.html

http://www.lsrc.ac.uk/

http://www.multisensoryteaching.com/

http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/earlycareer/teaching/learningstyles.html

http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/earlycareer/teaching/learningstyles.html

http://www.texthelp.com/


http://www.dyslexia.yale.edu/

‐ Touch-type Read and Spell Computer Course.

http://www.ttrs.co.uk/

‐ LdPride.net. Understanding your Learning Styles [e-book].

http://www.ldpride.net/Understanding-Learning-Styles.pdf

‐ University of Illinois Extension. Helping Children Succeed in School.

http://urbanext.illinois.edu/succeed/learningstyles.cfm

References

‐ ASARAVALA, A. (2003). New Typeface to Help Dyslexics. Wired [online].

Available at: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2003/10/60834

[Accessed: 31 Aug. 2011]

‐ BASTIEN-TONIAZZO, A., STROUMZA, A., CAVÉ, C. (2009). Audio-Visual

Perception and Integration in Developmental Dyslexia: An Exploratory Study

Using the McGurk Effect. Current Psychology Letters 25 (3): 1-14 [online].

Available at:

http://cpl.revues.org/index4928.html


‐ BENETT, I. J., ROMANO, J. C., HOWARD, J. H., HOWARD, D. V. (2008). Two

Forms of Implicit Learning in Young Adults with Dyslexia. Annals of the New

York Academy of Sciences, 1145: 184–198 [online].

Available at:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1749-6632/issues

http://www.dyslexia.yale.edu/

http://www.ttrs.co.uk/

http://www.ldpride.net/Understanding-Learning-Styles.pdf

http://urbanext.illinois.edu/succeed/learningstyles.cfm

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2003/10/60834




‐ BROOKS, P. L., WEEKS, S. A. J. (1998). A Comparison of the Responses of

Dyslexic, Slow Learning and Control Children to Different Strategies for

Teaching Spellings. Dyslexia, 4: 212-222 [online].

Available at:

http://blackboard.ljmu.ac.uk


‐ BREZNITZ, Z., MISRA, M. (2003). Speed of processing of the visual–

orthographic and auditory–phonological systems in adult dyslexics: The

contribution of ‘‘asynchrony’’ to word recognition deficits. Brain and Language,

85 (3), pp. 486–502 [online].

Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science

[Accessed: 19 Mar. 2011]

‐ CHENAULT, B., THOMSON, J., ABBOTT, R. D., BERNINGER, V. W. (2006).

Effects of Prior Attention Training on Child Dyslexics’ Response to Composition

Instruction. Developmental Neuropsychology 29 (1): 243–260 [online].

Available at:

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/87565641.asp


‐ CLARKE, D. J. (2006). Blended Learning v2.0: Multi-Sensory Solutions. Chief

Learning Officer [online].

Available at:

http://clomedia.com/articles/view/blended_learning_v2_0_multi_sensory_soluti

ons

http://blackboard.ljmu.ac.uk/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/87565641.asp

http://clomedia.com/articles/view/blended_learning_v2_0_multi_sensory_solutions

http://clomedia.com/articles/view/blended_learning_v2_0_multi_sensory_solutions


‐ DÜRRWÄCHTER, U., SOKOLOV, A. N., REINHARD, J., KLOSINSKI, G.,

TRAUZETTEL-KLOSINSKI, S. (2010). Word length and word frequency affect

eye movements in dyslexic children reading in a regular (German) orthography.

Annals of Dyslexia, 60 (1), pp. 86–101.

Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com


‐ FACOETTI, A., TRUSSARDI, A. N., RUFFINO, M., LORUSSO, M. L.,

CATTANEO, C., GALLI, R., MOLTENI, M., ZORZI, M. (2009). Multisensory

Spatial Attention Deficits are Predictive of Phonological Decoding Skills in

Developmental Dyslexia. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22 (5): 1011–1025

[online].

Available at:

http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/jocn


‐ FOLIA, V., UDDÉN, J., FORKSTAM, C., INGVAR, M., HAGOORT, P.,

PETERSSON, K. M. (2008). Implicit Learning and Dyslexia. Annals of the New

York Academy of Sciences 1145: 132–150.



‐ GARDNER, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences.

New York: Basic.

‐ GOSWAMI, U. (2006). Neuroscience and education: from research to practice?

Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7 (5): 406-411.

http://web.ebscohost.com/

http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/jocn



‐ HILLOCK, A. R., POWERS, A. R., WALLACE, M. T. (2011). Binding of sights

and sounds: Age-related changes in multisensory temporal processing.

Neuropsychologia, 49 (3): 461–467 [online].

Available at:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002839321000521X


‐ JEFFRIES, S., EVERATT, J. (2004). Working memory: its role in dyslexia and

other specific learning difficulties. Dyslexia, 10 (3): 196-214.



‐ KAST, M., MEYER, M., VŐGEL, C., GROSS, M., JÄNCKE, L. (2007).

Computer-based multisensory learning in children with developmental dyslexia.

Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 25: 355–369 [online].

Available at:

http://blackboard.ljmu.ac.uk


‐ LILLARD, A. S., PETERSON, J. (2011). The Immediate Impact of Different

Types of Television on Young Children’s Executive Function. Pediatrics, 128 (4)

[online].

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/09/08/peds.2010-

1919.full.pdf+html

[Accessed: 13 Sep. 2011]

‐ MELTZOFF, A. N., KUHL, P. K., MOVELLAN, J., SEJNOWSKI, T. J. (2009).

Foundations for a New Science of Learning. Science, 325 (5938): 284-288.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002839321000521X

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/nlebk_104614_AN?sid=ade00676-6b5d-46c6-8bed-65e11dbd2e20@sessionmgr112&vid=7

http://blackboard.ljmu.ac.uk/

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/09/08/peds.2010-1919.full.pdf+html

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/09/08/peds.2010-1919.full.pdf+html


‐ MENGHINI, D., HAGBERG, G. E., PETROSINI, L., BOZZALI, M., MACALUSO,

E., CALTAGIRONE, C., VICARI, S. (2008). Structural Correlates of Implicit

Learning Deficits in Subjects with Developmental Dyslexia. Annals of the New

York Academy of Sciences, 1145: 212–221 [online].



‐ MURPHY, G. (2003). Lost for words. Nature, 425 (6956): 340-342.

‐ OAKLAND, T., BLACK, J. L., STANFORD, G., NUSSBAUM, N. L., BALISE, R.

L. (1998). An Evaluation of the Dyslexia Training Program: A Multisensory

Method for Promoting Reading in Students with Reading Disabilities. Journal of

Learning Disabilities 31 (2): 140-147.

‐ PAMMER, K., VIDYASAGAR, T. R. (2005). Integration of the visual and auditory

networks in dyslexia: a theoretical perspective. Journal of Research in Reading,

28 (3), 2005, pp. 320–331 [online].

Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-

9817.2005.00272.x/pdf


‐ POWERS, A. R., HILLOCK, A. R., WALLACE, M. T. (2009). Perceptual Training

Narrows the Temporal Window of Multisensory Binding. The Journal of

Neuroscience 29 (39): 12265–12274.

‐ RANALDI, F. (2003). Dyslexia and Design & Technology. London: David Fulton

[online].

Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer



http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2005.00272.x/pdf

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2005.00272.x/pdf

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/nlebk_104614_AN?sid=ade00676-6b5d-46c6-8bed-65e11dbd2e20@sessionmgr112&vid=7


‐ REID, G. (2005). Dyslexia and Inclusion: Classroom Approaches for

Assessment, Teaching and Learning. London: David Fulton Publishers.

Available through: http://www.netlibrary.com/Reader/


‐ REID, G., KIRK, J. (2001). Dyslexia in Adults: Education and Employment.

Chichester: Wiley.

‐ STEIN, B. E., STANFORD, T. R. (2008). Multisensory integration: current

issues from the perspective of the single neuron. Nature Reviews

Neuroscience, 9 (4): 255-266.

‐ STERN, E. (2005). Pedagogy Meets Neuroscience. Science, 310 (5749): 745.

‐ VANDERMOSTEN, M., BOETS, B., LUTS, H., POELMANS, H., GOLESTANI,

N., WOUTERS, J., GHESQUIÈRE, P. (2010). Adults with dyslexia are impaired

in categorizing speech and nonspeech sounds on the basis of temporal cues.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107 (23): 10389-10394.

‐ WADLINGTON, E. (2000). Effective Language Arts Instruction for Students with

Dyslexia. Preventing School Failure, 44 (2): 61-65 [online].



‐ WEST, T. G. (1997). In the Mind’s Eye. Visual Thinkers, Gifted People with

Dyslexia and other Learning Difficulties, Computer Images and the Ironies of

Creativity. New York: Prometheus.

http://www.netlibrary.com/Reader/

http://web.ebscohost.com/


‐ WILKINS, A., HUANG, J., CAO, Y. (2004). Visual stress theory and its

application to reading and reading tests. Journal of Research in Reading, 27

(2), pp. 152–162.

theory and practice of multisensory teaching

Documents