Get a copy of 'Teach Your Child to Read' LINK
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.
This is not just my opinion. In over a hundred tutoring sessions, children who had been written off as dyslexic became fluent once given clean letter sounds (no added schwa on stops), systematic blending, high-frequency word practice, and confidence-building reading aloud. The pattern is unmistakable: wrong teaching—not neurological deficit—is the primary barrier. Yet misinformation spreads unchecked, dissenting voices are silenced, and families pay the price.
Ethical Dilemmas That Block Student Success
1. Unsubstantiated Claims That Oversimplify
Popular posts and programs promise miracles—like mastering just 10 letter sounds to unlock thousands of words. These gain traction because they sound hopeful and simple. But English orthography is complex, and oversimplification misleads teachers and parents into ineffective methods.
Ethical tension: Do we challenge appealing but unproven ideas, risking collegial friction, or stay silent while children suffer avoidable failure? Silence feels like complicity.
2. Suppression of Dialogue Through Gatekeeping
I’ve commented thoughtfully on influential content—raising concerns about materials that risk student “shutdown”—only to be blocked or deleted. For example, questioning aspects of David Boulton’s work led to exclusion. Similar patterns appear across “Science of Reading” and dyslexia communities: tough questions met with evasion or outright gatekeeping.
Ethical tension: Should experts engage critics to refine understanding and help struggling readers, or protect authority and products by silencing dissent? Blocking creates echo chambers where preventable issues—like teaching curriculum-disabled children instead of labeling them disabled—go unaddressed.
3. Lack of Transparency When Positions Shift
In 2015, Timothy Shanahan asserted phonological awareness deficit (PAD) was the primary cause of dyslexia, citing data that it explained 86% of elementary reading problems. I challenged this, pointing out that children in consistent orthographies (Malay, Pinyin) often read fluently despite similar challenges. By 2017, Shanahan revised his view, noting lower incidence in some populations—but without acknowledging prior debates or practitioner input.
Ethical tension: When evidence evolves, should experts openly credit contributions and build collective knowledge, or revise quietly to maintain authority? Lack of transparency erodes trust and slows progress.
The Bigger Picture: Dysteachia vs. Dyslexia
These dilemmas are not isolated. They reflect systemic gatekeeping in the reading wars:
Protecting dogmas over desperate families
Repackaging old theories without addressing critiques
Prioritizing status and products over outcomes
As I wrote earlier this month in “My Journey Fighting Illiteracy” (Jan 4, 2026):
“We’re creating dysteachia—preventable reading failure through poor instruction—and mislabeling it as incurable dyslexia. And the gatekeeping? It’s a big disservice to every child who could thrive with simpler, common-sense fixes.”
From my sessions, the truth is clear: when confusion is removed—clean sounds, structured blending, Dolch word memorization, reading aloud for meaning—most children labeled dyslexic read fluently within months. They are not “cured” of a deficit; the barriers were instructional, not neurological.
The Core Ethical Question
When practices, protections, or silences prevent student success, whose interests come first?
Children’s right to effective instruction?
Or the egos, narratives, and industries built around prolonged struggle?
The stakes are high. Wrong teaching creates shutdown, shame, and disengagement. Correct teaching restores confidence, fluency, and joy. The ethical path is clear: prioritize evidence, openness, and children over gatekeeping.
Call to Dialogue
I share this not to provoke, but to invite dialogue. If you are an educator, parent, researcher, or advocate tired of preventable failure, let’s talk—named or anonymously. Comment below or reach out.
We need a community that values transparency, challenges dogma, and puts children first. Because literacy is not a privilege—it’s a right.
No comments:
Post a Comment