Dyslexia support evidence shows which reading skills need teaching, which classroom adjustments help the pupil participate, what support actually happened and what changed at review. SENCos should keep those questions connected.
A diagnosis doesn't supply a complete teaching plan, and a reading score can't diagnose dyslexia. Start with the pupil's strengths, difficulties and experience, then agree a specific teaching response and a date to check it.
This guide concerns school practice in England. The British Dyslexia Association confirms Dyslexia Awareness Week runs from 5 to 11 October 2026. Its theme, Dyslexia in real life: At work, focuses on the workplace.
Schools can use the timing to improve their own support records without presenting the theme as a school campaign.
Separate recognition from the teaching decision
The NHS guidance on dyslexia in children, reviewed in March 2026, describes difficulties primarily affecting reading, writing and spelling. Intelligence is unaffected.
The idea that dyslexia means low intelligence therefore misreads the difficulty. Equally, a pupil who explains an idea confidently may still need explicit help reading the words on the page. Record both the strength and the barrier.
Another unhelpful rule is to wait for a label before improving teaching. In England, the SEND Code of Practice directs schools to assess need, plan support with pupil and parent contributions, implement it and review its effect.
Low attainment alone doesn't necessarily mean SEN. Gather evidence, respond to the difficulty and discuss specialist advice where needed.
The NHS identifies specialist teachers and educational psychologists as routes for a dyslexia assessment. The BDA explains that screening indicates possible difficulties but does not diagnose dyslexia.
Be precise about the reading problem. Difficulty decoding unfamiliar words, slow or effortful reading, weak vocabulary and difficulty understanding a text need different teaching decisions.
The Department for Education's Reading framework distinguishes decoding and fluency, including for older pupils. It recommends systematic synthetic phonics for pupils with dyslexia who need help decoding.
That doesn't mean phonics alone answers every reading difficulty. Match assessment and teaching to the skill, and use age-appropriate materials.
Keep access and skill development visible separately. Listening to a text may help a pupil join a history discussion while reading instruction addresses word reading.
Success in the discussion doesn't establish improved independent decoding. Nor should access to the lesson depend on first completing a reading intervention.
Ask what the pupil can understand and contribute, alongside what they can currently read unaided.
Keep one reading-support record
Use the following record for one agreed review period. It is an editorial template, not a diagnostic instrument or an additional statutory form. Link to evidence already held securely instead of copying whole reports.
Agree the teaching target with the class teacher, SENCo, pupil and family, recording any contributions still to obtain.
- Reading profile and starting evidence
- Record strengths, the particular difficulty, assessment date, assessor, task or instrument and conditions. Separate decoding, fluency, comprehension and spelling observations. Note language and curriculum context. Keep the original result and uncertainty available. A single reading age is an approximate summary and cannot describe the full profile.
- Classroom access and adjustment use
- Name the barrier, agreed response, lesson context and responsible adult. Record whether the adjustment was available and used, then what the pupil could do with it. Ask the pupil whether it helped, created extra effort or felt awkward. Review individual needs rather than prescribing the same adjustment to every dyslexic pupil.
- Teaching target and delivered dose
- State the skill, programme or teaching approach, adult, planned frequency and duration. For the review period, distinguish sessions planned, delivered, confirmed missed and lacking a record. Record participation and material changes to delivery. An empty entry means unknown delivery. It cannot establish absence or a completed session.
- Progress, experience and the next decision
- Compare evidence using the same method where appropriate, or explain changed conditions. Include an ordinary classroom task and pupil and parent views. Identify which access or reading outcome changed, what remains difficult and what cannot yet be concluded. Name the decision owner, next action, review date and evidence that would change the plan.
The EEF's Improving Literacy in Key Stage 2 guidance supports assessment-informed, targeted literacy teaching. Its focus is ages seven to eleven, with potential relevance beyond that phase.
Choose guidance and materials appropriate to the pupil's age and needs. A programme name on a provision map leaves the teaching question unanswered until someone checks what was taught and how the pupil responded.
Read the record as the evidence arrives
The following synthetic example describes no real pupil, school or Student Radar customer. Its session counts illustrate record interpretation, not a recommended intervention dose or expected rate of progress.
At the starting review, a pupil contributes thoughtful spoken explanations in science but finds unfamiliar written words difficult to decode. Staff record the task and assessment conditions.
They agree a focused reading target and provide access to curriculum text through an appropriate listening option. The pupil says that this makes it easier to contribute, while reading aloud without preparation remains difficult.
At the next review, the recorded reading result looks similar. The first question is whether the pupil received the teaching being evaluated.
Of twelve planned sessions, seven have delivery and participation records, three were confirmed cancelled and two have no delivery entry.
This is seven recorded sessions out of twelve planned; staff can't quietly count the two blanks as either delivered or missed.
Timetable records then show that the confirmed cancellations coincided with another scheduled activity. The SENCo asks who can protect the teaching time and who will clarify the missing entries.
Calling the programme ineffective would overlook the unresolved delivery question. Calling the pupil unwilling would add a claim the evidence doesn't support.
Meanwhile, classroom work and pupil voice suggest that the listening option has supported science participation. That is access evidence, even though independent word reading hasn't demonstrably improved.
Staff retain the adjustment, agree dependable teaching time and set another review with the teacher and family. They decide what reading evidence to collect and whether specialist advice is needed.
No session count determines that decision automatically.
In Student Radar, Assessment Reports, Pupil Passports and Outcome Tracking provide places to review recorded assessment, describe support and review plan targets. Staff can use those records together when preparing this discussion.
This article's template is a practitioner model, not a built-in dyslexia assessment or a promise that every field is automatically joined. Staff remain responsible for checking delivery evidence and deciding what the findings mean.
What this evidence cannot establish
School records can support a referral or professional discussion. They can't diagnose dyslexia, establish intelligence or prove why a pupil has difficulty.
A higher score after support doesn't by itself establish that the intervention caused the change. Different texts, adult prompting, practice and assessment conditions may alter the comparison.
Record those differences before drawing a conclusion.
Don't promise that a particular font, colour or presentation choice treats dyslexia. If an individual reports greater comfort or easier access, record that experience honestly and check its purpose.
It doesn't establish a reading-treatment effect. Keep decisions about reading instruction grounded in the assessed skill and relevant evidence, and seek suitable specialist advice for unresolved concerns.
Before the next review, choose one pupil's current reading-support record and check whether it answers the four prompts above.
Ask the teacher to confirm the starting evidence, the delivery owner to resolve unknown sessions and the pupil and family to contribute their views. Put the decision and next review date in the record.
For the wider review cycle, use our Assess, Plan, Do, Review evidence guide. You can also explore the Student Radar SEND workflow.
Sources and further reading
- British Dyslexia Association: awareness events, 2026 campaign dates and theme, checked 5 October 2026.
- British Dyslexia Association: dyslexia screening, no publication or update date displayed; checked 5 October 2026.
- NHS: dyslexia in children, reviewed 11 March 2026.
- DfE and Department of Health: SEND Code of Practice, January 2015 guidance; publication page updated 12 September 2024. Chapter 6 covers school support in England.
- DfE: The reading framework, publication page updated 22 September 2023; current linked framework checked 5 October 2026.
- EEF: Improving Literacy in Key Stage 2, second edition, 26 November 2021.