 |
 |
All joking apart, this treatment, we are told, is as successful for improving memory and balance in those who are genetically affected from birth (ie dyslexics) as for those suffering a temporary loss due to prolonged periods of weightlessness. Why stop there? Memory and balance are both affected following a stroke, so is anyone using the treatment on that? Practice can maximise what functionality we may be capable of, but it doesn't "cure". Fifteen years ago we worked with physios and OTs who were often surprised by the degree of control that clients achieved over muscles that had been written off as useless when the client had to rely on the movement to operate a switch to work a computer. There was no miracle involved, expert opinion had simply been wrong in estimating the degree of damage as well as what determination could overcome. DSA assessors commit this cardinal sin if they begin an interview with the thought "So you are dyslexic, which means you can't do so-and-so and will need such-and-such." The upshot is reports of remarkable similarity that owe less to thinking than to cut'n'paste. Also, let's not forget the "halo" effect. Between about 1950 and 1980 there were several primary school maths schemes that were given similar prominence in the media as revolutionising teaching and producing remarkable results. (I remember one screaming "Eight year olds calculate square roots".) They all fizzled out and when a Nuffield research project tried to find out why, they concluded that exceptional progress owed more to the dedicated enthusiasm of a small group of teachers, led by some charismatic professor of maths, given something new and exciting to do, rather than to the methods themselves. When the methods were used more widely they never managed to have the same impact. Dave Laycock Head of CCPD Computer Centre for People with Disabilities University of Westminster 72 Great Portland Street London W1N 5AL tel. 020 7911-5161 fax. 020 7911-5162 WWW home page: http://www.wmin.ac.uk/ccpd/