Supporting children with dyslexia starts with preparing their teachers

A child pauses at a word, tries it, then looks to the teacher for help. Telling the word to the child can get the sentence moving. Working out what to teach so the child can read similar words independently takes a different kind of expertise. That expertise is especially important for children with dyslexia, which involves persistent difficulties with word reading and spelling. Reading may be inaccurate, slow or effortful, and the pattern varies between children. Recognising dyslexia is only the first step. Helping requires teaching that targets the skills involved, and that depends on teachers understanding how spoken and written language works. Research suggests that children at risk of dyslexia benefit most from such high-quality explicit teaching. In this article, we explain what teachers need to know, what we learned from our research, and why it matters for dyslexia. Research shows that many children with dyslexia struggle to identify or work with sounds in spoken language, which can make learning the relationships between sounds and letters harder. However, their difficulties are not all the same, and one reading attempt cannot determine what teaching they need. This is where expert knowledge matters. Read “reach” and “react” aloud. You probably have little difficulty with either. But how would you explain why the letters “ea” make different sounds in each word? In reach, the letters work together to represent one sound, the long “e” sound. In react, the word’s structure changes how we group the letters: it divides into re + act. The “e” ends the prefix re-, and the a starts act, so they represent separate vowel sounds. A prefix is a meaningful word part added at the beginning of a word. Recognising such parts draws on morphology: knowledge of word structure. Now consider a pupil who tries to read react using the “ea” sound from reach. They may be applying a familiar letter–sound relationship without recognising where the word divides. A teacher could check whether the child can read and understand act, then build re + act and explain how the parts combine in pronunciation and meaning. The child would then practise reading the word, with later checks to see whether they could do so independently. This is why explicit language knowledge matters. The teacher needs to understand how sounds, letters and word structure interact, then use that understanding to interpret the student’s attempt and choose a useful explanation. Teachers need the knowledge and practical skill to decide what to teach next. Being able to read fluently ourselves does not automatically equip us to do that. What our research found In our study of teachers working in the first three years of primary school in Scotland, 122 teachers completed a knowledge assessment. Their weakest area was phonics, decoding and encoding: understanding relationships between letters and sounds and using them to read and spell. On average, they answered 53% of questions in this area correctly. This knowledge helps teachers explicitly teach word reading and spelling, two skills that dyslexia affects. Different spelling mistakes need to be tackled in different ways. Tania Kolinko/Shutterstock One teacher from our study captured the uncertainty: “I can identify when readers are struggling but do not yet have the right skills and experience to help them.” They described “feeling deflated and like I’m failing”. The concern extends beyond Scotland. A 2026 meta-analysis of 143 studies, most conducted in English-speaking countries, identified gaps in teachers’ language and literacy knowledge. Building knowledge and the skill to use it Teacher education should make this expertise an explicit part of preparation. Trainees need to understand sound–letter relationships and word structure (morphology) explicitly. They also need to learn how to assess what a child understands and decide what to teach next. There is evidence that preparation can build this knowledge. A review of 20 studies of teacher preparation and training found that programmes allowing teachers to apply their learning under expert guidance produced the largest gains in teacher knowledge. It also reported preliminary evidence of benefits for children’s word reading. Knowledge development and supported practice belong together. Our study, Book Buddies, offers one example. In this Scottish programme, trainee teachers combined explicit language and literacy coursework with tutoring children in their second year of primary school who needed additional reading support. Over ten weeks, each child received two individual sessions a week. Trainees rehearsed lessons with peers, used assessment to choose a starting point, monitored progress weekly and adjusted lessons with feedback from teacher educators. Before-and-after assessments showed gains in trainees’ literacy knowledge and reported confidence, and in children’s word reading. For teachers already working in schools, continuing professional development should address any gaps in the knowledge and practical skills they need. Schools and local authorities can provide this support through targeted continuing professional development, with dedicated time to review pupils’ work, rehearse explanations and receive feedback, as set out in Education Endowment Foundation guidance. Teachers should not have to acquire this expertise by chance. Universities, school leaders and local authorities share responsibility for providing knowledgeable mentors, dedicated time and suitable resources. Confidence should grow from supported experience, while success should be judged through changes in teaching and pupils’ progress. The teacher who felt they were failing had already recognised a child’s difficulty. They needed better preparation to know how to respond. When a child struggles to read and looks to their teacher for help, that teacher should have the knowledge and practical skills to turn the moment into an opportunity for learning.