Really important piece. I also think it's important to call out that not ALL interventions accelerate equally! And obviously that acceleration piece is essential if we want to catch kids up.
A lot of our teachers have found incredible success using EBLI and Reading Simplified, which just get kids reading real stuff faster than Orton Gillingham-inspired interventions.
I think we're approaching a place where most people accept that systematic phonics is a standard of care, which means we need to start talking about the differences between different phonics programs and approaches.
I’m my experience as a teacher and a tutor, if a student in elementary school was behind, it takes a year and 2-3 hours per week of intervention with a tutor for one hour. In middle school, it took two years. High school-3 sessions with me per week minimum…this article it so important. Early, in depth intervention is essential!
Except for my first 2 students, I wean off dyslexic students in less than 4 months of 2 hour lessons per week. You may read about one such student with a psychology assessment which no teacher would want to teach.
Although this article was focused on reading, the issue of falling behind also occurs in math. The problem here is that math is cumulative: for instance, you need to master addition in order to understand multiplication, which you need to understand fractions, which you need to understand percentages and proportions, etc. So when a student falls behind at one stage, the next stage becomes effectively impossible. Also, the stages are getting more and more challenging -- multiplication is harder to understand than addition, and fractions are very hard for many people to grasp, and so on. So if a student is falling behind at one point, it's now really hard to get back on track because there's new material, and it's ever harder than the concepts that the student is struggling to master.
It’s actually very simple! We can use screening data to flag students at risk. Then, we administer a diagnostic to those students to learn more. From there, we use an evidenced based intervention to close gaps identified by the diagnostic. Then, we progress monitor. Meanwhile, we provide robust tier 1 instruction aligned with the science. 95% of kids will learn to read this way.
My son who had been in a good Montessori preschool program could not sound out “CAT” in Kindergarten. His teacher wasn’t concerned, but I was as this is a kid who spoke in full, complex sentences at age 18 months, and we have dyslexia on both sides of the family.
He got Lindamood-Bell intensive intervention and moved not reading CAT to reading at a 3rd grade level by the end of Kindergarten.
Just to share my outlier experience: I was 5 years behind on reading/writing but in just two years in middle school, I got a college level from binge reading Wikipedia. Then in high school I started my pro gaming career. Don’t want to just say “IQ genetics diff” but it does matter a lot.
Great piece, great steps - and as a caregiver - want to remind others that conversations are helpful but also put concerns and data requests IN WRITING. Always IN WRITING!!
I believe the thesis of this article but the charts don’t actually prove what the author thinks they’re proving. To truly prove that odds of catching up decline over time you would not use a fixed date, you’d want to use a sliding window eg “of students behind in year X, what % caught up 3 years later”. Otherwise you’re just measuring the linear passage of time.
Well, that's just a different question. As I note in the post, the % of kindergartners who catch up by the end of 3rd grade is only 49%. The original Amplify piece also finds that the percentage of kids who enter the year behind who catch up by the end of that particular year also declines over time.
When I started teaching kids certified dyslexic in 2004 I read hundreds of articles on the internet on dyslexia. Many articles reported that kids are dyslexic because of phonological awareness deficit. After teaching more than 20 kids by end of 2010 I wrote over 100 comments/articles on social media disagreeing with that theory. That theory was debunked in or around 2017 by research students who had visited my blog. You may read a few of my posts by Googling Luqman Michel Phonological awareness.
Many of the so-called educators/researchers blocked me. Today I posted my second part of 3 parts on those who blocked me. You may read it at
I agree with the concerns and the interpretation of the data, but why in the world would you wait all the way until Step 5 to start reading at home with your child? Isn’t that the top indicator of reading success? Read with your kids often, early, and enthusiastically!
Sometimes I think we misinterpret this information. I agree we should not wait, but some students will take more time regardless. It is not surprising that the gap gets larger as fluent students read more and struggling students are still working on decoding. It is also true (although few understand) that some dyslexic students can get early remediation and appear to be able to read simple chapter books and still struggle to read fluently in later elementary. That the reality of dyslexia. For students who struggle to learn to read, even excellent remediation takes time and is best done over an extended period of time that also enables (with accommodation) the student to stay on track in other content areas. Schools are poorly set up for this reality. My best remediated dyslexic student did not read fluently until 6th grade. He is now a top high school AP student. The only reason he is a top student now is that we homeschooled to fill in the gap. If he had been in school, he would not have been proficient in 3rd or 4th or 5th, and that would have carried over to his other subjects. The real problem is the requirement that dyslexic kids be proficient in reading by third grade and that schools pose such of harsh penalty on kids who are not. Neither of these things is necessary. They too are policy choices. I have written about this here https://open.substack.com/pub/jessicajkulynych/p/the-3rd-grade-trap?r=281tn&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
IMO this makes a different point than the one you think it is - about ability, not teaching. Kids have different natural abilities - ones with poor abilities start off poor. ones with great abilities start off great, and continue great. Early on, they're just likely to be miscategorized.
Most people here assume their kid is great, but just has poor instruction. The data I've examined suggests this is overwhelmingly rare. Kids fit into a 'band' of ability - they can absolutely move inside that band, but rarely does a dud become a prodigy, or visa-versa.
Nothing wrong with encouraging reading to kids and reading practice (hugely beneficial for development, bonding, etc.) However, my guess is the small percentage of beneficiaries of this message aren't reading substack!
I find that kind of thinking dangerously pessimistic. We're not talking about prodigies here; we're talking about basic reading skills. And the evidence suggests that ~95% of kids can learn to read if taught well: https://www.pedagogynongrata.com/the-95-rule
Really important piece. I also think it's important to call out that not ALL interventions accelerate equally! And obviously that acceleration piece is essential if we want to catch kids up.
A lot of our teachers have found incredible success using EBLI and Reading Simplified, which just get kids reading real stuff faster than Orton Gillingham-inspired interventions.
Read about an interventionist who exited nearly students from intervention last year (Title 1 School, many MLLs): https://scienceofreadingclassroom.substack.com/p/accelerating-student-progress-with?utm_source=publication-search
And here's a piece from a 1st grade teacher, who got all of her children reading chapter books by the end of the year (47% started the year at benchmark) :https://scienceofreadingclassroom.substack.com/p/teaching-less-and-learning-more-five
I think we're approaching a place where most people accept that systematic phonics is a standard of care, which means we need to start talking about the differences between different phonics programs and approaches.
It is not phonics or WL that is the problem. It is the way letter sounds are taught wrongly.
Please read two testimonials before you write me off.
https://www.dyslexiafriend.com/2021/09/tips-to-australian-teacher.html (From Australia. You may Google her name. She is an accomplished teacher.)
https://www.dyslexiafriend.com/2023/05/testimonial-from-california.html (A grandma from California).
There is more where the above comes from.
Ready to discuss?
I’m my experience as a teacher and a tutor, if a student in elementary school was behind, it takes a year and 2-3 hours per week of intervention with a tutor for one hour. In middle school, it took two years. High school-3 sessions with me per week minimum…this article it so important. Early, in depth intervention is essential!
Except for my first 2 students, I wean off dyslexic students in less than 4 months of 2 hour lessons per week. You may read about one such student with a psychology assessment which no teacher would want to teach.
https://www.dyslexiafriend.com/2024/11/psychological-assessment-report.html
Although this article was focused on reading, the issue of falling behind also occurs in math. The problem here is that math is cumulative: for instance, you need to master addition in order to understand multiplication, which you need to understand fractions, which you need to understand percentages and proportions, etc. So when a student falls behind at one stage, the next stage becomes effectively impossible. Also, the stages are getting more and more challenging -- multiplication is harder to understand than addition, and fractions are very hard for many people to grasp, and so on. So if a student is falling behind at one point, it's now really hard to get back on track because there's new material, and it's ever harder than the concepts that the student is struggling to master.
Well said, Theodore, I completely agree. Fwiw, here's a piece I wrote looking at early math gaps by state: https://weareallsolvers.org/math-gaps-emerge-early-students-deserve-early-interventions/
Has anyone ever sat down with a kid and asked him why he was unable to do certain math problems but was subsequently able to?
I have taught many dyslexic kids math too. I know why they could not do math problems and are now professionals.
'So when a student falls behind at one stage, the next stage becomes effectively impossible.'
Yes! This is the same with kids who shut down/disengage from learning to read and leave school as illiterates.
So well said!
Thank you for this post. So clear, urgent, and actionable. Will share widely!
How will we act if we don't know why kids can't read in the first place?
It’s actually very simple! We can use screening data to flag students at risk. Then, we administer a diagnostic to those students to learn more. From there, we use an evidenced based intervention to close gaps identified by the diagnostic. Then, we progress monitor. Meanwhile, we provide robust tier 1 instruction aligned with the science. 95% of kids will learn to read this way.
My son who had been in a good Montessori preschool program could not sound out “CAT” in Kindergarten. His teacher wasn’t concerned, but I was as this is a kid who spoke in full, complex sentences at age 18 months, and we have dyslexia on both sides of the family.
He got Lindamood-Bell intensive intervention and moved not reading CAT to reading at a 3rd grade level by the end of Kindergarten.
Don’t wait is right!
Just to share my outlier experience: I was 5 years behind on reading/writing but in just two years in middle school, I got a college level from binge reading Wikipedia. Then in high school I started my pro gaming career. Don’t want to just say “IQ genetics diff” but it does matter a lot.
Great piece, great steps - and as a caregiver - want to remind others that conversations are helpful but also put concerns and data requests IN WRITING. Always IN WRITING!!
I did a full scale intervention with my kiddo and it paid off big time.
Yes reading is fundamental! I read with my kids every night … they could read before they went to kindergarten
If my kid was off track - I would work with them at home in my opinion
Good piece but this doesn’t really apply to the English language learners. Research says they need time to reach proficiency and grade level reading.
I believe the thesis of this article but the charts don’t actually prove what the author thinks they’re proving. To truly prove that odds of catching up decline over time you would not use a fixed date, you’d want to use a sliding window eg “of students behind in year X, what % caught up 3 years later”. Otherwise you’re just measuring the linear passage of time.
Well, that's just a different question. As I note in the post, the % of kindergartners who catch up by the end of 3rd grade is only 49%. The original Amplify piece also finds that the percentage of kids who enter the year behind who catch up by the end of that particular year also declines over time.
When I started teaching kids certified dyslexic in 2004 I read hundreds of articles on the internet on dyslexia. Many articles reported that kids are dyslexic because of phonological awareness deficit. After teaching more than 20 kids by end of 2010 I wrote over 100 comments/articles on social media disagreeing with that theory. That theory was debunked in or around 2017 by research students who had visited my blog. You may read a few of my posts by Googling Luqman Michel Phonological awareness.
Many of the so-called educators/researchers blocked me. Today I posted my second part of 3 parts on those who blocked me. You may read it at
https://www.dyslexiafriend.com/2025/10/the-silencing-of-dissent-why-dyslexia_30.html
Yes, I agree with you that parents should not wait but what are they to do?
Does anyone know why the intelligent kids can't read?
I know why almost all the kids with no acuity problems can't read and I have been shouting at the top of my voice since 2010.
Get me kids in grades 1 to 3 who can't read and I will pinpoint the reason why they can't.
The reasons are explained in my book Shut Down Kids available on Amazon.
I agree with the concerns and the interpretation of the data, but why in the world would you wait all the way until Step 5 to start reading at home with your child? Isn’t that the top indicator of reading success? Read with your kids often, early, and enthusiastically!
Sometimes I think we misinterpret this information. I agree we should not wait, but some students will take more time regardless. It is not surprising that the gap gets larger as fluent students read more and struggling students are still working on decoding. It is also true (although few understand) that some dyslexic students can get early remediation and appear to be able to read simple chapter books and still struggle to read fluently in later elementary. That the reality of dyslexia. For students who struggle to learn to read, even excellent remediation takes time and is best done over an extended period of time that also enables (with accommodation) the student to stay on track in other content areas. Schools are poorly set up for this reality. My best remediated dyslexic student did not read fluently until 6th grade. He is now a top high school AP student. The only reason he is a top student now is that we homeschooled to fill in the gap. If he had been in school, he would not have been proficient in 3rd or 4th or 5th, and that would have carried over to his other subjects. The real problem is the requirement that dyslexic kids be proficient in reading by third grade and that schools pose such of harsh penalty on kids who are not. Neither of these things is necessary. They too are policy choices. I have written about this here https://open.substack.com/pub/jessicajkulynych/p/the-3rd-grade-trap?r=281tn&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
IMO this makes a different point than the one you think it is - about ability, not teaching. Kids have different natural abilities - ones with poor abilities start off poor. ones with great abilities start off great, and continue great. Early on, they're just likely to be miscategorized.
Most people here assume their kid is great, but just has poor instruction. The data I've examined suggests this is overwhelmingly rare. Kids fit into a 'band' of ability - they can absolutely move inside that band, but rarely does a dud become a prodigy, or visa-versa.
Nothing wrong with encouraging reading to kids and reading practice (hugely beneficial for development, bonding, etc.) However, my guess is the small percentage of beneficiaries of this message aren't reading substack!
I find that kind of thinking dangerously pessimistic. We're not talking about prodigies here; we're talking about basic reading skills. And the evidence suggests that ~95% of kids can learn to read if taught well: https://www.pedagogynongrata.com/the-95-rule
Or see the results this Ohio district is getting year after year: https://www.chadaldeman.com/p/steubenville-still-great
This again is not how fade out works