"The time has come," the Walrus said,

"To talk of many things"[horizontal ellipsis] - From "Through the Looking-Glass," Lewis Carroll, 1832-1898

Diane J. Sawyer, the issue editor for Volume 26, Number 2, of Topics in Language Disorders, holds the Murfree Chair of Excellence in Dyslexic Studies at Middle Tennessee State University. She also directs the Tennessee Center for the Study and Treatment of Dyslexia. Her research, teaching, and leadership positions have prepared her well to invite readers of this issue to talk of many things regarding "Dyslexia in the Current Context," if not "Of shoes - and ships - and sealing-wax - Of cabbages - and kings."

There is indeed plenty to talk about in the current context of dyslexia without attempting to squeeze through the looking glass. Unlike the characters of Carroll's imagination who seemed to delight in confusing poor Alice, Sawyer has skillfully pulled together a variety of experts who achieve coherence regarding a topic that could so easily become more confusing. As Sawyer (2006) indicates in her foreword, the authors of this issue "take the reader on a stimulating and thought-provoking journey through research, practice, and policy issues that serve to describe the current context in which we understand, question, and address the syndrome of dyslexia" (p. 93). Along the journey, the authors cover a wide range of topics from how dyslexia was conceptualized originally as a case of "word blindness" (Morgan, 1896) to how it is conceptualized currently as reflecting core deficits involving phonological concepts, rapid naming, or both, and in relationship to broader language aspects. Along with explaining current views of the phenotype of dyslexia, Sawyer takes readers into the context of recent advances offered by neurobiology and genetics that show promise for illuminating even further issues of heritability and brain bases for the symptoms of dyslexia.

Getting a handle on the nature of dyslexia can seem like an interaction with a Cheshire cat. The body keeps disappearing and jumping from place to place as it is called by different names in different settings. One may well wonder whether it is the phenomenon that differs or only what people call it. Somehow Snowling and Hayiou-Thomas manage to stabilize the shifting picture well enough for readers to see outlines of the body of evidence regarding similarities and differences between dyslexia and specific language impairment. Highly respected researchers themselves, they make use of aspects of a model that emphasizes the need to consider both phonological skills and all the other aspects of language for sorting out the distinctions among conditions, but they also warn against perceiving only the prominent cat's smile (phonology-related word-level decoding skills) even though it may be what characterizes dyslexia best. The authors remind readers "that intervention programs that neglect language skills beyond phonology run the risk of leaving untreated fundamental skills that are important for both decoding and reading comprehension" (Snowling & Hayiou-Thomas, 2006, p. 122).

The other three articles in this issue focus on elements of context external to learners with dyslexia rather than internal, but still critical to their progress and well-being. Building on concepts introduced by Snowling and Hayiou-Thomas, Roberts and Scott provide a clear and clinically relevant description of how a "Simple View" of reading, such as that proposed by Gough and Tunmer (1986) and elaborated by Catts and Kamhi (2005), can inform clinical practice addressing both oral and written language development. The consideration of word-level knowledge, which encompasses vocabulary and related morphological and phonological information along with their orthographic representations, is only one dimension of ability; it is crossed with (multiplied by, in their formula) a second dimension of syntactic and discourse-level knowledge that supports comprehension. Clinicians who apply this model to their assessment and intervention practices should have a powerful model for making clinical practice with individuals with language and literacy disorders less confusing.

Riddick's introduction to steps taken in England to make general education schools and teachers more "friendly" to students with dyslexia would have likely been heralded by young Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, who was the boy later to become known as Lewis Carroll. Notes by an Internet biographer (Karoline Leach; retrieved April 14, 2006, from http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/carroll/bio1.html) noted that "It is often said that he was naturally left-handed and suffered severe psychological trauma by being forced to counteract this tendency, but there is no documentary evidence to support this." Leach also described one unhappy period in the life of the adolescent author when he attended a school for 3 years that he found decisively unfriendly. Leach quoted Carroll's later autobiographical remarks as, "I cannot say[horizontal ellipsis]that any earthly considerations would induce me to go through my three years again." Riddick's sensitivity to students' responses to unfriendly school settings, which she attributes at least partially to teachers being uninformed about the nature of dyslexia, has given her a strong voice of advocacy. Her respect for the effects that a learning difference, such as dyslexia, can have on a young person's self-concept, and even more importantly, her understanding of how to engage with policy makers to help systems change, is inspirational as well as informative. In addition, she offers evidence about reduction in the number of students with Statements of Educational Need on the basis of having dyslexia. This positive consequence of changing a school district's culture resonates with American readers who are attempting to make similar changes as part of response to intervention initiatives.

Barbara Foorman and Stephanie Nixon touch on the possibilities of preventative initiatives as well. They set their discussion of response to instruction initiatives and other aspects of current practice in the context of a long line of policies that have made American schools friendlier to learners who differ in a variety of ways. They also emphasize the criticalness of training teachers well to understand language development, reading development, their interactions and disorders.

As Topics in Language Disorders readers benefit from "talk of many things" in this issue, all of which are relevant to understanding dyslexia and its treatment in the current context, we are confident that the journey will be more sensible than the one Alice took through the looking glass. Sawyer and her authors have invited us into a conversation that seems to be going somewhere and makes a good deal of sense. There is plenty left to learn as well, however, and the authors whet our appetite for more, so for some of us it may continue to seem that "We're late--we're late, for a very important date."

Nickola Wolf Nelson, PhD

Editor

Katharine G. Butler, PhD

Editor Emerita

REFERENCES