Source: Professional Insights Newsletter – Spring 2026 – British Dyslexia Association
Dr. Ioanna K. Tsiriotakis holds a PhD in Cognitive Psychology and specialises in literacy and writing development, with a focus on self-regulation, metacognition, and evidence-based writing instruction for learners with dyslexia and related learning differences. She completed postdoctoral work in the Faculty of Education at the University of British Columbia and is Founder of Phonology Private Tutoring, based in Vancouver, Canada
Specialist teachers and assessors frequently observe a familiar pattern: learners with dyslexia make meaningful gains in reading accuracy and fluency following structured, evidence-based instruction, while written expression remains constrained. This discrepancy is well documented in literacy research (Berninger et al., 2015; Graham, 2019) and reflects the fact that reading and writing, although related, impose distinct cognitive and linguistic demands.
Reading is primarily a recognition task: words are present in print, and the reader decodes, maps orthography to phonology, and constructs meaning from externally provided language. Writing, by contrast, is a complex text production task. Even brief written production requires idea generation, lexical selection, syntactic organisation, spelling retrieval, transcription (handwriting or typing), application of conventions, and ongoing monitoring of meaning. These simultaneous demands place substantially greater pressure on attention and working memory than reading typically does (McCutchen, 2011; Kim et al., 2020).
For learners with dyslexia, writing is particularly vulnerable because it draws heavily on skills that may remain effortful even after reading improves. Persistent weaknesses in spelling retrieval and transcription fluency consume cognitive resources, limiting capacity for sentence construction, cohesion, and idea development (Berninger et al., 2015). Students may therefore produce limited text, rely on simpler structures than in oral expression, or avoid writing tasks. This pattern reflects cognitive load constraints rather than motivational deficits (McCutchen, 2011).
Reading progress does not automatically transfer because decoding instruction does not explicitly address composition processes such as planning, organising ideas, elaborating, and revising for clarity. Meta-analytic reviews indicate that writing improves most when instruction is explicit and strategy-based: teaching students to plan before drafting, compose with clear goal structures, and revise meaningfully, alongside targeted support for spelling and sentence-level skills (Graham & Harris, 2018; Graham, 2019).
In practice, this may involve modelling a brief plan before writing a paragraph, using simple visual organisers to structure ideas, and guiding students to reread their work aloud to check whether it communicates intended meaning.
Self-regulation further distinguishes writing from reading. Writing requires internal task management: setting goals, sustaining attention, monitoring coherence, and evaluating whether the text communicates intended meaning. When planning and monitoring routines are not explicitly modelled and scaffolded, writing demands can exceed working-memory capacity, resulting in “freezing,” rushed production, or reduced output despite well-developed oral ideas (Graham & Harris, 2018; McCutchen, 2011).
Instructional implications follow directly. Effective support includes explicit teaching of sentence and paragraph structures, structured planning and revision routines, feedback targeting meaning as well as conventions, and appropriate accommodations (e.g., word processing or speech-to-text) where warranted. Reading gains provide an essential foundation, but writing requires systematic, sustained instruction to enable learners with dyslexia to translate knowledge into coherent text.
References
Berninger, V. W., Richards, T. L., & Abbott, R. D. (2015).
Differential diagnosis of dysgraphia, dyslexia, and oral
and written language learning disability: Behavioral and
neuroimaging evidence. Reading and Writing, 28(8),
1119–1153.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9565-0
Graham, S. (2019). Changing how writing is taught.
Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 277–303.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821125
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2018). An examination
of the design principles underlying a self-regulated
strategy development model for writing. In R. Fidalgo,
K. R. Harris, & M. Braaksma (Eds.), Design principles for
teaching effective writing (pp. 13–37). Brill.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004270480_002
Kim, Y.-S. G., Al Otaiba, S., Sidler, J. F., & Gruelich, L.
(2020). Toward an integrated model of reading and
writing: A meta-analytic review. Reading and Writing,
33(3), 511–545.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09959-1
McCutchen, D. (2011). From novice to expert: Implications
of language skills and writing-relevant knowledge for
memory during the development of writing skill. Journal
of Writing Research, 3(1), 51–68.
https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2011.03.01.3