Digging Into Dyslexia With Education Reporter Ann Schimke

The prevalence has been a big surprise to me, like learning that, you know, 15 to 20% of students have dyslexia. Like when you look at it that way, let's say 20% at the top end, you know, that's one in five kids. And so when you look at an average classroom of 25 kids, that's maybe five students with dyslexia, which means every teacher is seeing it.

Hey everyone, welcome to Dyslexia Journey. This is Nick and I'm Sonja, and today we are so happy to welcome Anne Shimke. Let me tell you a little bit about her. She is a senior reporter and community editor for Chalkbeat Colorado, who covers early childhood issues. Her work has appeared in the Washington Post, the Atlantic, and the Denver Post. She holds a master's degree in education policy from the University of Michigan. And she joined Chalkbeat, which was then Ed News Colorado, in 2012.

So welcome, Anne. Thank you for having me. So you've written a number of stories over the past few years about dyslexia in Colorado. What drives your interest in the topic? I think what started it, it's twofold. So journalist Emily Hanford came out probably about four or five years ago with a series of stories about how a lot of schools were using debunked methods to teach young children how to read. And so that got me interested in the issue of reading a little more than in the past.

At the same time, Colorado was changing its flagship reading law, the Read Act, and kind of tightening it up. And so at the same time as Emily Hanford's work was coming out, I was wondering, like, what is happening in Colorado? And why didn't the original version of the Read Act pass in 2012? Why wasn't it working effectively? And so those two things kind of combined together to make me just take a deeper dive into reading issues.

Yeah. And as you've, you know, been digging into it all, like, why do you feel like it's such an important issue? I think everybody would agree that reading is kind of a foundational skill for all other learning. I think we also know just from the research that kids who can't read face a tough educational road. You know, they're at higher risk for dropping out, not attending college, having greater involvement in the criminal justice system.

And so besides all the educational attainment issues, I think there's also kind of just the self-esteem issues. You know, kids who can't read well, you know, they often just come to the conclusion that I'm stupid or, you know, all the other kids are smarter than me. And so I think that's problematic in its own right, even for kids who are still kids and, you know, maybe haven't dropped out, but they're struggling with their self-image.

Yeah, it's so many different areas when you really start to break it down that are influenced. Yeah, and we really appreciate all the reporting that you've done in this area. It's really great to see that. And so to that note, let's talk a little bit about your most recent article about dyslexia. At least I think it's your most recent article. It's from October 9th, 2024. And the title, let me just make sure I get this right, or the headline is Denver District Officials Launched a Dyslexia Screening.

Just don't say dyslexia. So can you give us maybe a quick summary of your reporting on this topic? Yeah, maybe I can back up and even tell you how it came up. So back in December, the Denver School Board approved the metrics that Superintendent Alex Marrero would be evaluated on, and one of them was universal dyslexia screening. So I saw that, and I thought, well, that's new. I didn't realize they were doing universal, and it was for this school year.

So I called the district and talked to some administrators, and they kind of walked me through it. But then when I started calling teachers to say, how's it going, several of them said, what dyslexia screening? They didn't know what I was talking about. One of them said, I don't think I'm the right person to talk to you about because I don't know. I'm not doing that. My school's not doing that. So that really kind of made my eyebrows go up, and I was like, that's interesting if you're doing a universal dyslexia screening that teachers don't necessarily know that they're doing it.

And I think the issue is, Denver's using a reading assessment that they've used for years. It's not new. I think it has been refined this year a little bit. But what I think is missing, there's a few things missing, but one of them is explicit communication with parents about the results and whether kids have risk factors for dyslexia. So the teachers don't necessarily know they're doing a dyslexia screening. The parents aren't getting any information about whether their kids have risk factors or not.

And then the kids aren't really getting that information either. And I think you can argue that maybe kindergartners don't need information about whether they have risk factors. But I think some kids, as they struggle year after year, it may help them to understand that it's a learning disability and not an inherent problem with them. Yeah, that's really interesting. I have several thoughts as you were saying that. I guess one initial question is, do you have any information about sort of any numbers around the effectiveness of this particular screening that they're using?

Well, in talking to people ranging from teachers to experts, it honestly sounds like it's maybe not quite sensitive enough to truly determine dyslexia risk. The district didn't have clear numbers about the number of kids who showed risk factors for dyslexia. What they did provide is the number of children in kindergarten through third who ultimately were put on IEPs, basically special education plans for specific learning disability, which is the umbrella term that dyslexia falls under.

And it ended up being about a half a percent of all those kindergarten through third graders. So we know that dyslexia is way more prevalent than half a percent. And so it really just felt like the numbers were way too small. They weren't capturing all the kids with dyslexia risk. And so for that reason, I think we can just conclude from there that the instrument's not as effective as it could be.

Right. Yeah. And then my other thought is, as you were summarizing it was, or a question, I guess, is what is the, I guess, follow up from this? So teachers, I guess, are supposed to give this assessment. And then what's sort of the next step there? Do you know how that works? Yeah, so they give the assessment, it's given three times a year, and it's been given for years. I think they use Dibbles in a lot of schools and maybe iStation or iReady.

But then if kids show up as reading below grade level for any reason, then they're given diagnostic assessments to sort of dig deeper into the specific area where they're struggling. And so that kind of seems like the sort of two-step process for how this screening is supposed to work. Okay. Okay. And then is there explicit communication with the parents then? Do you know? No. Okay. The short answer is no. If the child, so basically after the diagnostic assessment, depending on the results, then the child's put into a small group where the teacher would work on the specific area where they're weak for, I think it's a six-week period.

If that child gets up to grade level, great. I think they're put back into the, you know, the regular mix. If not, I think they try that six-week focus instruction again, and then they sort of slowly work their way to being evaluated for an IEP. So parents would be notified if their child's being tested for special education, but not if their child's struggling. I mean, I shouldn't say that they wouldn't be notified, but it wouldn't necessarily be framed as we're seeing risk factors of dyslexia.

Right. Right. Okay. So I'm wondering if you had any sense of why that would be like, was there a thought that that would be important not to call it dyslexia, or do you think it was just, it's just not followed through in that way?

I found it baffling that it wasn't called dyslexia only because that is specifically called out in the superintendent's evaluation framework, that there would be a dyslexia screening. And I thought initially that it would be a very straightforward story about here's how the superintendent will be evaluated. Here's how people say it's going. And so the story, as I reported it, kind of changed to no one's actually using this term. There were a couple of teachers who did say, the label is not as important as ensuring that kids get the best kind of reading instruction.

And I do agree. I think most people would agree that good reading instruction is important.

One teacher said, you know, it can be kind of shocking to tell a parent that their child could be at risk for dyslexia. And our job is really to make sure they're getting the right instruction and get them up to grade level. It's not necessarily to float these scary labels to parents. So I think there's a little bit of a differing view about whether it's helpful to call it dyslexia or just help the kid read better.

Yeah, I mean, I can see that perspective. Though, you know, on the other hand, could it be less scary of a label, right? Since it is so prevalent, you know, and more normalized. You know, we talk a lot on this channel about neurodiversity and, you know, all of that, which is definitely more along the normalizing and just thinking of it as a different, you know, difference and everyone has different brains and all that.

So I think that viewpoint would argue that one should, yeah, just start normalizing it as a common thing and then hopefully it wouldn't be so scary, right? So it's interesting to hear all these nuances. You know, we're talking about very specific school districts and stories, but I think hopefully it's showing everyone sort of how all these nuances and all the pieces where it goes to different parts of the bureaucracy and to the teachers and stuff can play out.

So along those lines, for comparison, you did an article also a few years back on the Boulder Valley School District. And I'm curious just to hear, like, how that was different, how it was the same, just how it contrasts with the Denver School District. Yeah, so several years ago, maybe right during the pandemic or maybe the first year in, Boulder piloted dyslexia screening. Since then, it's become permanent. They use a very specific dyslexia screener, the Mississippi dyslexia screener.

And then for their Spanish-speaking students, they pull a few different components from other screeners to approximate what's in the Mississippi screener. They screen kindergarten students, and parents are explicitly notified about whether their kids have risk factors for dyslexia, and then it shows how they did on each of the subtests within the screener. So I think they have kind of committed to a very explicit screening in a way that Denver hasn't. I will say that it's only in kindergarten, and I think there's an argument to be made, and I've heard made by advocates for students with dyslexia, that kindergarten's not enough.

That kids can slip through the cracks, or new kids, you know, join the school, and you miss them. So I guess it remains to be seen if Boulder Valley is going to expand that to higher grades. Okay, yeah. Were you able to talk to any parents from either of these school districts to get their take on this? Yes, I've definitely talked to parents for the most recent story about Denver.

And the parents that I talked to in that case both had had private evaluations and knew their children had dyslexia. So they were more commenting about kind of their journey and why it was important for them to know that their child specifically had dyslexia or risk factors for dyslexia. So one parent was really interesting. She said once she discovered her son had dyslexia, she became more empathetic to his learning struggles and less impatient, which I thought was really interesting.

Because it really shows, like, you know, sometimes parents give in to, like, their worst or their less good instincts around, you know, kids doing well in school and maybe defaults to, like, well, he's not trying or he's lazy or whatever. Like, like, the kind of thing that the kid is already struggling with. So I think in that case, like, explicitly knowing her son had dyslexia kind of gave her a different way to look at him and interact with him.

And it felt like it was better for their family.

Yeah, I mean, in our case, we've talked about on this channel a lot that we have a daughter who's dyslexic and she's a teenager now. And I know for me, it was definitely kind of a, I guess, relief to finally get the diagnosis when we did, because it was like I knew she was a smart, intelligent, capable person. And then getting that diagnosis, then it explained, like, why she was having so much trouble learning to read in school and stuff.

Yeah, yeah, I think that's, it's just interesting when you look at all the other kinds of screenings we do for children. You know, everything from, like, vision screenings to cavity screenings. And we usually convey the results, you know, in a very open and obvious way. And it just feels weird that that's not done with dyslexia. Yeah, it's interesting. I mean, it does feel like it's maybe still some stigma or that kind of thing around it, like we said, with the scariness earlier and all of that, too.

Did you, one other follow-up, I think, on the sort of comparison of BVSD and DPS and then just in general in the schools. Did you encounter any kind of resistance or did anyone talk about kind of any resistance to this from a training perspective that teachers don't feel like they are properly trained to identify and even discuss dyslexia? Yes, I 100% heard that from teachers and even teachers who had had pretty extensive training in the science of reading.

They said things like, historically, we weren't allowed to say dyslexia or we were discouraged from saying it. That was kind of the realm of the medical establishment or psychologists. Like, we've, it's been conveyed to us, like, we don't have the expertise to bring this up. And so I do, like, I do sympathize with that. Like, if you're told that for years and you're told that during your training and when you're in practice, like, you probably would shy away from using that word.

and that was the, the, the retired special ed director who I interviewed for the story on Denver. He, that was a big thing he said is teachers need more training on dyslexia, which really extends beyond the science of reading training. So kindergarten through third grade teachers have already had to get science of reading training that's mandated by the state. But what that special ed director said or former special ed director said was that's, that training's good, but it's not enough.

It's not, it doesn't go deep into dyslexia. And that's where there's kind of a disconnect with a lot of teachers feeling like they shouldn't say the word or it's better left for someone else. and so I think that's kind of maybe an area where Colorado or individual districts may look next is like, what, what level of training are we providing specifically on dyslexia, not just reading instruction? That's really helpful to hear about because I hadn't heard it quite to that detail before.

And so I think it's helpful to, in understanding where teachers are at with it. And, and then it helps us understand sort of what the problem is too. So, and like why sometimes there's that disconnect. I mean, it's for very specific reasons. It sounds like, let's, let's expand out to the legislative level. So you also did reporting on Colorado's attempt to pass a universal screening law. So if you want to do, would you want to tell us a little bit about that, what the status of it is now, how, you know, what are the requirements now, as opposed to what would be put in if that would pass?

Yeah, so, universal dyslexia screening legislation has failed, I think a few times now, two to three times. and there's been a couple reasons for that. One is that some of this legislation was being considered right around when the pandemic hit or that first year. And I think there's been a sense over the last few years that teachers and administrators are overburdened. So many new requirements have been put on them partially due to the redact, but also partially due to trying to help kids recover lost learning, due to the pandemic.

And there's sort of been this like mantra, like enough to stop putting more mandates on us. We're stressed out. We're burned out. People are threatening to leave the profession. Like just let's have a status quo for a few years. So I think that's part of the issue with the, why the legislation has failed. I think there's also a misconception that's Colorado has required dyslexia screening. and if you look on like some of these national clearing houses that show what kind of dyslexia legislation different states have, Colorado is listed as having dyslexia screening, universal dyslexia screening.

And I think what the disconnect is in part is Colorado requires these thrice yearly read act assessments to have the capacity to screen for dyslexia, but that's not the same as districts doing dyslexia screening. And as we've seen, like some districts do it, some districts do it, but don't call it that some districts don't do it. So I think it's, it's incorrect that Colorado requires universal dyslexia screening. Wow. That is an interesting disconnect because I think, yeah, I mean, most of us would assume that the capacity for it equals the implementation of it, but yeah, that's interesting.

So it does not equal that. Yeah. And I, I think one of the issues is like some of the assessments they're called read act interim assessments. If you add different subtests, they could screen for dyslexia, but not every district adds those subtests that would make it a complete dyslexia assessment or dyslexia screening. So yeah, having the capacity doesn't mean you're doing it. Hmm. Do you have any sense of whether, the state legislature is going to pursue this, actually true universal screening, bill anytime soon, or is it kind of dead?

not this legislative session, which is almost over. There won't be any dyslexia legislation. I mean, I guess the future who knows. I do think in the past year, I've seen like more reporting on the fact that, there is this disconnect between what you might hear lawmakers say, like, oh, we have dyslexia screening. Or where, what you might see in these national clearing houses. And the fact that it's, it's not as specific.

It's more like have the capacity to screen. So I think that disconnect is becoming more publicized. And so maybe next year. but honestly it's failed a few times. So, I really don't know what the future holds. Yeah. Do you have a sense of how Colorado compares to other states or, or there's other states that, sort of are known through your reporting for being, you know, sort of better or worse out actually following through or like what the status is.

If you sort of look at the country as a whole, even though it's mostly state by state, I think. Yeah. So I just was looking at, I think it was like the national center for improving literacy, what they said states do for, dyslexia legislation. And I think they report that 41 states have dyslexia screening requirements, but Colorado's on that list. So that gives me pause about how accurate that list is. And, I, I do know that some states do have universal dyslexia screening mandates.

I honestly can't tell you which one's off the top of my head, but I think some take it quite seriously and it's explicit in a way that Colorado's is not. So, but when I see 41, I just, I don't fully believe that is happening in the vast majority of states. That's interesting. Yeah. That's a really, to, to really emphasize that again, I think that's really important point to, to get out there that that data might, I think we can call it misleading, I guess.

Yeah. And I think it, it is, I mean, these people who compile these laws, like sometimes you're left to sort of interpret. Yeah. Does having a capacity to screen for dyslexia, is that universal dyslexia screening or not? And it, it's not entirely clear. Yeah. That makes sense. I guess, shifting gears a little bit, away from the specifics, of, of the legislation, legislative, efforts, just sort of overall in your reporting around dyslexia.

is there anything that's really surprised you or like, what would you say has surprised you the most that you've learned through this reporting? I think one of the early things that surprised me, and I think this is a misconception a lot of people have is, that, the letters are not seen backwards. I'm sure you've heard that before that there's, you know, people think that, kids with dyslexia or people with dyslexia see the letters like turned around or backwards.

and I actually asked a student that once at a school that was specifically for dyslexia students with dyslexia, and she didn't really know what I was talking about. And finally, the principal had to step in and say, you know, that's a little bit of a myth, that that's how children see the letters. So that was an early, learning for me, but actually I think the prevalence has been a big surprise to me, like learning that, you know, 15 to 20% of students have dyslexia.

Like when you look at it that way, let's say 20% at the top end, you know, that's one in five kids. And so when you look at an average classroom of 25 kids, that's maybe five students with dyslexia, which means every teacher is seeing it. Yeah. Yeah. And I think, I think sometimes, you know, people may be, I'd be like, how can it be that many? Why wouldn't we be seeing it?

But I, you know, just from my perspective of, you know, our own journey and also just as we've gone through with the channel and interviewing people, I think it's because, you know, there's still that individualization, right? There's still individualization in terms of, how kids accommodate like themselves and, just in other strengths to bear and on just all kinds of different ways. so that's just something for everyone to keep in mind out there that I think that's what, it's not going to look so cookie cutter that it feels like, well, then why wouldn't you just see it?

It just isn't like that and how it shows up. Yeah, definitely. Yeah. Like I, I think I heard the phrase recently that, that it's a spectrum disorder and that, you know, you can have anywhere from very mild to very severe and maybe the kids with mild dyslexia don't, wouldn't throw up a big red flag for the teacher. Right. Yeah. And I mean, that's something we've observed, in public schools and, you know, talking to other parents as well.

And, and I don't, don't want to throw any teachers under the bus. They're, you know, mostly great and, and, and, just somewhat overburdened, that, you know, unless, unless a kid is exhibiting really significantly below grade level work, they're, they're liable to fall through the cracks. Like if they're, if they're just kind of average, it might be that they, you know, they're not going to get any special attention. but they might have some dyslexia that, that are some form of dyslexia that was, is being kind of, they figured out compensation mechanisms or whatever.

Or they're spending a lot more time on it, on the homework, all of them. So I'm curious if you have any thoughts on questions that parents could ask their teachers or their school or like anything, any suggestions for how to address, the situation. I mean, I think parents should definitely ask if their school is screening for dyslexia. I feel like in most of Colorado, they'll probably get a no, but it's still worth asking.

I think it's worth putting on maybe the principal's radar that that's something that might be important to them. but even, you know, if the school doesn't screen for dyslexia, all Colorado schools have to screen for basically, weak reading skills. And so at the very least, you'll know, you know, where your child is. And I think maybe explicitly asking for their scores, but not just the scores, but the weak areas within the test.

So I think that can give parents information for what they could do at home with their kid, or maybe just further questions to ask. Like if they're struggling with phonemic awareness, like what is that? And what is the teacher doing to help with that? Right, right. Yeah. I think it's important because I mean, globally, that's sort of, in a way it just means getting involved, right? Not assuming that the school's handling things in exactly the way that might cover everything that you, your child might need.

yeah, I think that's really good advice. Yeah. And I guess, similarly, any, any sort of advice for parents on what they should be, asking their school administration, you know, school boards, what should they be looking for in school board candidates, that kind of thing. I think they should definitely be asking about screening, of, of their school board candidates and their school board. I think board members may not really know if their district is screening or not.

I mean, and even in Denver, which is the largest district in the state, you have a school board that has specifically, specifically, required the superintendent to implement a universal dyslexia screening. so Denver parents might want to say, how come you're not calling it dyslexia screening, or how come I'm not getting a little report saying whether my child has risk factors or doesn't have risk factors. so I think like that disclosure matters maybe as much as the screening process.

Yeah. So, yeah, it sounds like it just having your voice sort of heard in whatever way you can, can be important at those other levels. Yeah. I mean, school boards deal with so many different issues. So I think it does help them to know that parents care about that and maybe not every parent, but some parents may want a, a screening process or something more explicit. Yeah. Did you have any final thoughts you'd like to share with us or, you know, anything you'd like people to know about, about dyslexia and dyslexic people?

What do you think?

I mean, I guess one thing that we didn't talk about quite as much was Colorado's shift toward the science of reading, which helps all children learn to read, including students with dyslexia. And I feel like in the last five years, since about 2019, Colorado has, and a lot of states have actually made a shift where they're not allowing, sort of these, debunked methods to be used. and some curriculums are now off limits that school districts have used for years and weren't necessarily effective.

And I think people would say the kids that they were most ineffective for are kids with dyslexia and other reading struggles. So I do think Colorado has made some good progress in, in that way they require, you know, I think it's a 40 hour, 30 or 40 hour training of all kindergarten through third grade teachers, elementary principals now have to get a version of that training as well in the science of reading.

So I think there's, there's been some strides made that I think will help students with dyslexia and other struggling readers too. Yeah, that's, that's so important. Again, I just, even bringing it up, like it just makes it clear, I think how, how really complex and how there are all these different pieces to it, especially when we get into the public policy, and educational aspects of it. So yeah, the curriculum, that's another, another very important piece.

Yeah, for sure. well, I think that, that wraps up our time here. thank you very much. And, we'll post, in the show notes, we'll, link to, your recent stories about dyslexia. Well, thank you so much for sharing all of this insight and all of your research. It's so helpful. And, and of course, thank you so much for the work you do. Of course. Thank you for having me.