My comments on a Substack Article by David Didau
Luqman Michel
Dec 16, 2025
Here are comments on Substack that I made on 16.12.2025 which has not received any response.
David Didau wrote: “We discount evidence that challenges us and overvalue evidence that confirms what we already think. The aim of research should not be to prove ourselves right but to find out where we are wrong.”
For years I've taught over 80 children labeled "dyslexic"—intelligent kids who couldn't read well despite average or above-average IQs. I've seen the same patterns: confusion from mixed phonics cues, shutdown from nonsense-word drills, and frustration from methods that don't align with how the brain actually learns to read. My approach is different, targeted, and fast: Give me a child with no vision or hearing issues who's behind grade level, and I'll get them reading proficiently in 4 months or less—with only 2 hours per week via Zoom.
The best part? It's completely free upfront. Parents pay nothing until they're satisfied their child is reading at (or above) grade level—and only if they choose to contribute afterward. No contracts, no pressure.
Around February 9, 2026, I came across a video by an English-speaking teacher based in Thailand. Her teaching style was engaging, so I subscribed to her channel to explore more content. However, I was disappointed to find a video on teaching Pinyin that promotes a non-standard approach.
In the video (available here: LINK), around the 4:10 mark, the teacher explains: "We use finals to make the letter clearer." She then demonstrates teaching Mandarin initials by pairing them with finals—similar to the traditional Bopomofo (Zhuyin) method—claiming that pronouncing the initials alone (as they might sound in English) is unclear, so they should always be taught with an added final for accuracy.
The "玻坡摸佛" (Bofomopo) Mnemonic and Its Impact on Early Reading
As someone who has closely observed and documented grade 1 Pinyin teaching in mainland China through numerous videos, I have identified a persistent issue: the widespread use of the rote mnemonic "玻坡摸佛" (bō pō mō fō, often shortened to "bofomopo") for the labial initials b p m f. While this chant is traditional and helps many children quickly memorize the four initials, it frequently creates fixed-vowel interference that hinders proper blending (拼读) and leads some kids—especially those with dyslexia-like sensitivities or phonological processing challenges—to shut down from reading Pinyin and, consequently, characters.
On October 25, 2025, China's Cyberspace Administration (CAC) rolled out a major regulatory change: online influencers and content creators must now hold verified professional credentials—university degrees, licenses, certifications, or official stamps—to discuss "sensitive" or "serious" topics like education, medicine, law, or finance. Platforms such as Douyin (TikTok's Chinese version), Bilibili, and Weibo are required to verify these qualifications, with penalties including fines up to 100,000 yuan (~$14,000 USD), content removal, account suspensions, or permanent bans for non-compliance.
I’ve discovered a paradox: when help is offered freely, many dismiss it; when a high fee is attached, people suddenly perceive value. Parents often post desperate pleas for guidance, yet when genuine, no‑strings‑attached support is extended, they hesitate or disappear.
Challenging the Phonics-Only Fix for "Dyslexic" Kids
This morning, 4 February 2026, I came across Melinda Karshner's thoughtful Substack post, "We Were Sold Another Story" (Feb 04, 2026). As a parent of a dyslexic child and an advocate who's been in the trenches, she raises valid frustrations about how the big push for Structured Literacy and heavy phonics hasn't delivered the promised miracle for many kids—especially those with dyslexia. She describes her own daughter's ongoing struggles (shutdowns, anxiety, headaches) despite intensive phonics through programs like Fundations and Into Reading, sometimes three times a day. She rightly calls out box-checking curricula that look perfect on paper but fail in practice: mismatched pacing, lack of depth, no rich texts for application, and overload that ignores nuance and real engagement.
The phrase often attributed to George Carlin — "never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups" — is catchy, but it misdiagnoses the problem. It suggests that dysfunction arises from individual stupidity, when in reality, the danger lies in systemic misdirection and the dynamics of group behavior.
The image above and its message resonate deeply with me, especially in the field of reading instruction and dyslexia
"You must always be willing to truly consider evidence that contradicts
your beliefs, and admit the possibility that you may be wrong.
Intelligence isn't knowing everything, it's the ability to challenge
everything you know."
Today, 29 January 2026, I read a post on LinkedIn by Sheron “The Ethicist” Fraser-Burgess, MSc. It invited educators to share ethical dilemmas they’ve faced, anonymous or named, to shape monthly dialogues.
After more than 20 years tutoring children labeled “dyslexic,” I’ve reached a clear conclusion: most reading struggles are not incurable brain-based disorders. They are often dysteachia—preventable failure caused by confusing, mismatched, or dogmatic instruction, later mislabeled as dyslexia. Children shut down, disengage, and fall behind not because they cannot learn, but because the system blocks clear, evidence-based paths to success.
The Missing Piece—Shame Avoidance in Intelligent Children
A recent LinkedIn post powerfully captured the hidden toll of modern teaching: the constant emotional labor required to be present for 20+ students, regulate the classroom, respond with empathy, and manage behavior—all without adequate structural support. The author rightly points out that student misbehaviour often communicates unmet needs, but teachers' burnout, disengagement, or departure from the profession communicates something too: care without backup has limits. Student well-being and teacher well-being truly are the same priority, and sustainable classrooms require counseling teams, shared leadership on behaviour systems, and policies that don't place the entire emotional burden on one adult.
A Balanced Approach to Teaching Reading to Dyslexic Students
In a recent LinkedIn post, reading consultant Brian Vieira argued strongly against sight word or whole word instruction, calling it the “worst way” to teach reading. He emphasized the superiority of phonics-based methods, pointing to the vast number of English words, the finite set of speech sounds, and scientific evidence favoring sound processing over memorization.
I’ve seen it countless times in my work with ‘dyslexic’ students: the moment when a child is present in body but absent in mind. They hear the words, but they’re not really listening. They’re not processing. Their mind has quietly “switched off.”
And truth be told, this isn’t unique to dyslexia. It’s something all of us experience in everyday life.
We’ve already seen how poor teaching methods—whether Whole Word or phonics—can leave children confused about the very basics of reading. But what happens when decoding looks fine, yet comprehension falters? Too often, the label “dyslexia” is applied without asking the harder question: is the real issue fluency, or language itself?
Why Reading Aloud Still Matters
Yesterday, I reflected on the challenges children face when learning to read, and the importance of balancing phonics with sight word instruction. Today, I want to turn to something equally vital but often overlooked: the power of reading aloud.
If decoding skills are the mechanics of reading, then reading aloud is the heart—it brings stories to life, nurtures comprehension, and builds the emotional connection that makes books more than just words on a page.
