Get a copy from Amazon. LINK.
(Note: This will be my last post until the end of the month)
For decades, debates around reading instruction have been mired in dogma and vested interests. One lightning rod is the “3-cueing” system. Critics dismiss it as mere “guessing.” But when used thoughtfully — alongside strong phonics foundations — it can be a powerful confirmation tool, not a replacement.
In 2020, before my book 'Teach Your Child to Read' was officially published, I decided to send a printed copy to a dear teacher friend of mine in Perth, Australia. Ms. Lena Loganathan had recently retired from full-time classroom teaching but was still actively tutoring senior high school students in Years 11 and 12. Knowing her passion for education, I was curious to hear her thoughts on the method. To my surprise and delight, Lena didn’t just read the book — she photocopied it and immediately put it into action. She encouraged her older tutoring students to use the lessons to teach younger children how to read. At that time, I had already been using the same structured approach successfully with dyslexic children in Grades 1 to 3, watching them gain confidence and make rapid progress.
Get a copy of Teach your Child to Read a complete programme for only $16. (LINK)
For years I have argued that the human brain has an innate capacity for reading, just as it does for spoken language. The difference is not in the brain’s ability, but in the quality of input it receives.
Think of it this way: A Malaysian child will not speak Japanese without hearing Japanese. The capacity is innate; the specific language is learned through exposure. Reading works the same way. The brain is pre-wired with potential (as shown by newborn connectivity to the future visual word form area), but it needs accurate, consistent print and sound input to wire the connections efficiently.
After more than a year of polite, evidence-based outreach to leading Chinese learning platforms, Purple Culture has stayed completely silent.
Dig Mandarin at least replied — but said nothing of substance.
On 2 August 2024, they wrote: “To make the instructions clearer... we often add a vowel afterward when pronouncing the initials to strengthen the pronunciation in our traditional Pinyin teaching method. For example, ‘b’ is pronounced as ‘b+o’... This method does not affect the spelling... but helps learners better understand the pronunciation.”
Why the Silence on Questions That Could Slash Illiteracy?
Purple Culture (purpleculture.net) positions itself as a go-to educational website for Chinese learners worldwide. It offers excellent free tools: Pinyin charts with audio, text-to-Pinyin converters, practice sheet generators, dictionaries, and resources for teachers and students. Headquartered with ties to Hong Kong and Beijing, it serves millions seeking accurate Mandarin mastery.
In a recent LinkedIn discussion, Professor Graham Kendall and Dr. Alice Hughes (University of Melbourne) emphasised the importance of formal peer review for any claim to become part of the scientific record. I pushed back firmly: when it comes to teaching children to read, some problems are glaringly obvious from real classroom experience. Real results with real children should drive immediate change — not be delayed for years by academic gatekeeping.
Flushing Out the Top Brains: U.S. and China’s Shared Tragedy
The U.S. has already shown us how to cripple its brightest children: teach letters with extraneous sounds. Logical kids hear buh for b, muh for m, and immediately detect the inconsistency. They shut down, not because they are “dyslexic,” but because the system itself is broken. The result? Curious, analytical children are flushed out of classrooms, mislabeled, and silenced.
Since 2004, I have been teaching children labelled "dyslexic" to read English by stripping away the "noise." I have seen time and again that when you remove extraneous sounds—like teaching 'b' as "buh"—the "dyslexia" often vanishes within weeks.
Now, we are seeing the exact same disaster unfold with Pinyin.
The Death of Clean Pinyin
In a recent discussion on Twitter (Now X) a teacher Jen@jenteach13 said:
You want to fix education?
Let teachers remove kids who make it impossible for everyone else to learn.
Recent studies show a startling trend in China: reported dyslexia prevalence has jumped from roughly 3.9% a decade ago to as high as 12.6% in recent urban research. While the biological traits of dyslexia remain stable, our instructional methods have shifted, creating a generation of students who appear to be struggling with reading but are actually victims of a confusing phonetic hybrid.
The Rise of the "Phantom Vowel"
We know the brain can learn to read. Some children, like Emma Hartnell-Baker, pick up Enid Blyton at age three with no instruction. But most aren’t so lucky. They need teaching — and the science is clear: everything hinges on connecting letters to sounds.
The following tweet captures a maddening truth:
Education is one of the few fields where people with no training feel entitled to dictate methods, policies, and “best practices.” Nobody would let a passerby advise a surgeon mid-operation or redesign an engineer’s bridge. Yet in classrooms—especially in reading instruction—voices from policymakers, academics, influencers, and even trainers who’ve never sat with a failing child often carry more weight than those who have.
The Star today reports a dual crisis for Chinese students in Malaysia: fewer candidates, fewer top scorers in the SPM. The shock is palpable. But let’s be blunt—this collapse didn’t come out of nowhere. It is the direct consequence of wrong teaching imported from China, and the silence of educators who refused to confront it.
The Bopomofo Infiltration
In 2004, I began teaching a bright young child to read. Like many educators at the time, I turned to the internet for guidance and encountered countless articles claiming that the primary cause of dyslexia was a phonological awareness deficit. This idea—that children with dyslexia struggle mainly because they can't properly perceive or manipulate the sounds in spoken language—dominated the conversation.
Not a single adult has ever openly discussed why many kids misbehave. Many who misbehave are intelligent kids.
This observation comes from years of working with struggling readers. The pattern is unmistakable: bright, capable children are often the ones who act out the most in class.
