Martin Bloomfield's Wake-Up Call and the Evasive Echo Chamber
If Julian Elliott is the evasive maestro, Dr. Martin Bloomfield is the unwitting spotlight – shining light on the dyslexia farce without realizing it. In his 2024 interview with Elliott, Bloomfield probes the "dyslexic" label's ghosts, only to get half-answers that circle back to square one. But here's the rub: After decades of "research," why are these pros still asking basic questions? In this Evening News follow-up, we dissect Bloomfield's chat, spotlight the dodges, and call out the broader academic blackout. Educators who won't reply aren't just rude – they're roadblocks to literacy for millions. Buckle up; the con unravels further.
Bloomfield's Innocent Question: A Mirror to the Madness
At minute 29:18 of their YouTube sit-down, Bloomfield drops a gem: "Have you found or maybe have you debunked that certain reading interventions don't work with some kids and that these may be the kids that would previously have been called dyslexic or something that they need specific interventions or is that not?"
Elliott's reply? A meandering yes-and-no: "Yeah, yeah but the point is that that separation... doesn't cut off so-called dyslexic kids and other poor readers... This takes us back to the Reading Wars and what's now called the science of reading... Kids don't do well in classrooms where they have what you might describe as whole language." Translation: No magic bullet for "dyslexics" – just poor readers vs. good ones. And illiteracy rates? Stuck flat through whole-language and phonics eras. Elliott's right – but why stop there?
After decades of studies, Bloomfield and Elliott sound like freshmen: "Why can't some kids read?" Naïve? Or willful blindness? My answer, screamed from rooftops since 2010: Wrong letter sounds. Teach them right – pure, crisp phonemes – and "special interventions" evaporate. No multisensory fluff. No accommodations. Just results. I've eradicated "dyslexia" in 80+ cases with two-hour weekly sessions. Bloomfield's probe exposes the emperor's new clothes: If experts can't differentiate "dyslexics" from strugglers (as Elliott confirms), why the billion-dollar label?
The Twitter Blackout: When "Experts" Hit Mute
Bloomfield's question echoes the voids I've hit in public forums. Rewind to a 2020/2021 Twitter thread: Alanna, that Aussie mom, shares her win – son flips from phonics flop to reading fiend after my tweaks. Why? Fixed sounds unlocked decoding. The "experts"? Mute button engaged.
Dr. Sam Bommarito: "Right teacher" cop-out. Timothy Shanahan: Echoes his 2015 dismissal of my 50-student sample as "too small." (One grain of rice, folks!) The rest? Nothing. Bloomfield, interviewing Elliott, could've bridged this – but their chat stays cozy, no shout-outs to grassroots fixes. It's an echo chamber: Question the con, get ghosted.
Even on Facebook, the dodge persists. Dr. Julie Safri pushes "structured literacy" as dyslexia-specific magic. I counter: Elliott himself says no unique teaching needed. Her reply? Sidestep my challenge: "Show me a kid who sounds out letters perfectly but can't read." Instead, vague "don't oversimplify." Classic evasion – import outside noise to avoid the point.
Vested Interests: The Real "Persistent Problem"
Elliott nails it: Dyslexia's a business. Bloomfield's interview nods to failed interventions, but neither names the culprits – profs like them, churning papers while kids shut down. My Shut Down Kids details the three triggers: Botched sounds, frustration loops, disengagement spirals. Eradicate them? Illiteracy plummets. But that kills the grants.
Testimonials bury the doubt: Rose's IQ-130 son, pre- and post-reports linked. California grandma's remote win. Alanna's phonics refugee, now eager. These aren't anecdotes; they're antidotes to the silence.
Bloomfield, your questions deserve answers. Elliott, honour that 2010 email. All you non-repliers: The public sees through the fog. Kids deserve readers, not roadblocks.
No comments:
Post a Comment