Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Narrative review highlights persistent misconceptions regarding dyslexia definition and remediation in educational settings, indicating the urgent need to replace pseudoscientific practices.
Despite a strong base of scientifically supported research on dyslexia, pervasive misunderstandings continue, particularly in the United States, where state legislation, instructional practices and parent advocacy intersect in ways that influence how dyslexia is identified and treated. Historical misinterpretations about the aetiology and characteristics of dyslexia, evolving definitions of dyslexia and differing ideological beliefs about how to operationalize identifying dyslexia in schools all contribute to uncertainty surrounding what dyslexia is and is not. Misunderstandings have led to a host of fad and pseudoscientific treatments for dyslexia that are unsupported by scientifically based reading research. Misinformation about dyslexia continues to be shared by well‐intentioned, but uninformed, advocates. Disinformation about dyslexia is also shared with education stakeholders for monetary gain. This article draws on scientifically based reading research to (a) illuminate current understandings and misunderstandings about dyslexia, (b) support evidence‐based treatments, (c) dispel fad and pseudoscientific treatments and (d) highlight areas needing additional research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Austin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: