Welcome to Speedie Readies. Join the Three Learning Corners, and access the orthographically mapped One, Two, Three and Away! series of books online. Show the Code with Phonemies! Train as a Tutor.
There is no “settled science” in literacy instruction.
The Science (of Reading) is Not Settled. The how of teaching reading is not settled science, as research is still evolving and there is disagreement among experts on the best instructional methods. While there is a strong scientific consensus that explicit instruction in phonics is crucial because reading is not a natural skill, there are ongoing debates about how to implement this, which programs are most effective, and how best to teach comprehension. The complexity of reading and individual student differences mean that a single "one-size-fits-all" approach such as whole class synthetic phonics programmes are not doing to be effective for all learners. The data supports this.
The science of reading shows that phonics is essential because children who understand how letters and sounds connect do not struggle to learn to read and spell, and the opposite is also true. Speedie Readies: Show the Code is the first system that makes these connections visible for every word in English, and the tutor course teaches you how to use the technology so children can move into genuine self-teaching without memorising whole words or relying on rules. Tutors who offer this become the most sought after tutor in the area, because every parents wants the approach that empowers and finally works for their children!
There is no research evidence identifying a single, empirically validated method for initiating children’s understanding of how letters and sounds connect through phonics.
In particular, there is no empirical evidence demonstrating that synthetic phonics programmes are the most effective means of developing orthographic knowledge, or that they provide sufficient instructional support to ensure all children become fluent readers, as claimed by the Department for Education. (DfE, 2021)
There is, however, robust evidence that after more than a decade of mandated synthetic phonics instruction in England, approximately one in four children still do not reach expected reading proficiency by age eleven (DfE, 2024).
What we can do now is show the code to those at risk of struggling to see or process it. While phonics programmes continue to be explored and refined, we can make an opaque orthography visible to all with Phonemies. Add them to your existing whole-class phonics programme so that every child can see how letters and sounds connect. It is like giving children glasses or a hearing aid so they can finally access what was already there.
Get started at home or in the classroom - this is vital for children aged 5 - 8.
“My dyslexia means that I don’t think in straight lines.”
My heart sank. And it is only the first of several I will see today.
I started to comment, “Why do you assign this to dyslexia?” but deleted it. What is the point? When people believe something strongly, they will not care what evidence shows. Their identities are tied to dyslexia.
Even if the Delphi Dyslexia Study and IDA definition do not support it.
To think entrepreneurial spirit/ creativity is because of dyslexia rather than simply part of who they are is troubling. It is the same gifts' we'd see if that child never struggled with reading.
I recently compared the IDA definition with the Delphi consensus. The updated comparison is here: https://www.dyslexiawhisperers.com/what-is-dyslexia
The pdf is a work in progress.
No one in the research community supports the Made by Dyslexia idea of "dyslexic thinking".
But it shows how easily fact and belief separate. There are poison labels on the bottle, yet people will still drink bleach if someone they idolise tells them it works.
Children in Finland are being taught to understand facts from fiction. Teachers (and children) need something like this, around dyslexia. And phonics!
Someone recently kept spamming my Facebook page after I posted that we show the letters and sounds in words with Phonemies - no-one else is doing this for all words. It's not an 'approach' we are making an opaque orthography visible for all. But when you don't understand the science, and are easily led, you don't understand how ridiculous you might sound.
We should always question science, and that is what makes it brilliant. We only know what we know until we know more, but there must be a basis in evidence.
Most people do not realise that the precise HOW of teaching phonics is NOT settled science. We know that children need a systematic kick-start to connect letters and sounds, but the how is not working for 1 in 4 taught with a whole class synthetic phonics programme. They need more support to self-teach and move towards orthographic mapping.
People have said, for years, that dyslexia means struggling to read despite adequate instruction. But what counts as adequate? The IDA says to look at peers, yet 1 in 4 in England still cannot read well enough by age eleven. With failure rates this high, that benchmark is meaningless.
The idea that dyslexia comes with gifts or special thinking distracts from prevention. If people believe it brings advantages, they are less likely to screen in the early years and prevent the dyslexia paradox. Children must be reading by seven so that intervention is not required.
In January we launch a Speedie Readies pilot showing that a TA can effectively support the one in four with just a TA, ten minutes a day, from Term 2 of Reception using word mapping tech and mapped books. Children still attend classroom synthetic phonics lessons.
Fill the phonics gaps early, no wait to fail. Show the code children are not easily seeing or processing. Prevent the dyslexia paradox.
If a five-year-old does not think in straight lines, that is simply how they think. They will still think that way when we ensure they never struggle with reading and spelling. Gifts are better nurtured without struggle, surely?
​
A comparison between the IDA and Delphi Dyslexia Study definitions.
Parents and teachers may also need training to evaluate the claims made about the science of reading and dyslexia.
