When Experts Disengage: A Response to Dr. Boulton and the Silence Around Shut-Down Kids

 

In Part 1, we revisited the insights of Dr. David Boulton, Dr. G. Reid Lyon, and Dr. Siegfried Engelmann—experts who, as early as 2003, understood that confusion, not disability, was the root cause of most reading difficulties. They knew that ambiguity in English orthography, when not properly addressed, leads children to disengage. They knew that instructional casualties far outnumber true cases of dyslexia. And yet, despite this clarity, the problem persists.

 

In Part 2, we turn to the uncomfortable truth: when independent voices try to engage with these experts, they are often ignored, dismissed, or blocked. I know this firsthand.

 

🧠 Knowing the Problem Isn’t Enough

Dr. Boulton’s work in Children of the Code is widely respected. He outlines three core issues:

 

Insufficient readiness for the challenge of learning

 

Unnatural confusion

 

Self-blame leading to shame, distraction, and avoidance

 

These are real. But what happens when someone outside the academic circle offers a practical solution?

 

I’ve taught shut-down kids for over a decade. I’ve identified why they disengage. I’ve shown that children who struggle with English often read fluently in Malay and Romanised Mandarin—languages that use the same alphabet but without ambiguity. I’ve written to Dr. Boulton, Dr. Lyon, and Dr. Engelmann. After a few exchanges, the conversation stopped. Later, I was removed as a connection.

 

🔇 Silencing the Messenger

When I commented publicly on Dr. Boulton’s LinkedIn post, two of the three video links he shared were removed shortly after. These videos, I believe, contained examples of phonics instruction that confuse children—exactly the kind of teaching I’ve warned against. Why remove them?

 

I’ve asked: why not spend money teaching children properly instead of building prisons and teaching kids in prison? Why not study the work of teachers who have successfully helped disengaged students? Why not test what works instead of defending what doesn’t?

 

Instead of answers, I received this:

 

“I don't want to engage further with you. I am not interested in being a platform for self-aggrandizing.”

 

This wasn’t about ego. It was about helping children. And when experts shut down dialogue, they mirror the very disengagement they claim to fight.

 

💡 What We Need to Teach

Commenters on my post echoed the urgency:

 

Don’t add vowel sounds to consonants.

 

Teach children that letters in English have more than one sound.

 

Help them unlearn incorrect methods before reteaching the right ones.

 

Accept that confusion—not motivation—is the barrier.

 

These are not radical ideas. They are practical, evidence-based, and proven in classrooms around the world.

 

🧭 The Path Forward

We must stop categorizing all struggling readers as dyslexic. We must stop defending flawed methods. And we must stop silencing those who challenge the status quo.

 

Instead, we must:

 

Openly evaluate all findings, regardless of source.

 

Encourage independent research and classroom-tested solutions.

 

Hold educational leaders accountable—not just for identifying problems, but for implementing change.

 

As one commenter put it:

 

“The search for solutions… is best served by openly evaluating all findings by interested parties.”

 

I’m ready to be grilled on what I’ve written. I welcome scrutiny. But I will not be shut down. Because every time a child disengages, it’s not just a reading failure—it’s a failure of the system to listen.