Parents, educators, and policymakers are often eager to find solutions that will help students with dyslexia overcome their reading difficulties. Unfortunately, several interventions have been marketed as treatments for dyslexia despite lacking scientific support. In some cases, these methods may even divert valuable time and resources away from evidence-based instruction that is proven to be effective. This article examines four interventions that research has consistently found to be ineffective for treating dyslexia.
Colored Overlays and Colored Lenses
The use of colored overlays or tinted glasses has gained popularity as a supposed treatment for dyslexia. Proponents argue that modifying the background color of text can reduce visual stress and improve reading fluency. However, systematic research does not support these claims. A systematic review of the literature found no consistent evidence that these tools improve reading performance. Any observed benefits in clinical or anecdotal settings are more likely explained by placebo effects, practice effects, or the Hawthorne effect, rather than genuine improvements in reading ability.
Specialized Fonts Designed for People with Dyslexia
Fonts such as Dyslexie and OpenDyslexic have been marketed as aids to improve reading for individuals with dyslexia. These fonts are designed with heavier bottoms, unique shapes, and wider spacing between letters, with the claim that they reduce letter reversals and confusion. However, scientific evaluations show no measurable improvement in reading outcomes. Studies demonstrate that children with and without dyslexia did not read better with specialized fonts compared to standard fonts like Arial, and many did not prefer them either.
Vision Therapy
Vision therapy, sometimes referred to as visual training, is another treatment that has been promoted for students with dyslexia. Programs may include eye muscle exercises, ocular pursuit and tracking activities, or the use of specialized glasses and prisms. Advocates claim that these methods improve reading by strengthening the eyes or improving visual processing.
However, there is no scientific evidence that dyslexia is caused by visual deficits, nor that vision therapy improves reading. A joint technical report from leading professional organizations concluded that visual training and related therapies are not effective treatments for dyslexia or learning disabilities. Vision-based treatments do not enhance educational outcomes, and students who undergo vision therapy do not respond better to instruction than those who do not.
Working Memory Training Programs
Computerized programs that claim to strengthen working memory have also been marketed as a solution for dyslexia. The idea is that by training working memory, students may improve their ability to hold and manipulate information, which is crucial for reading and language learning. While these programs may improve performance on specific memory tasks, evidence shows that the effects do not generalize to improved reading or academic skills.
Meta-analytic reviews reveal that these programs produce only short-term, task-specific improvements that do not transfer to real-world skills such as reading comprehension or general intelligence. This suggests that while working memory training may appear promising in the short term, it does not address the core deficits of dyslexia or improve academic outcomes.
Implications for Parents and Educators
The persistence of these ineffective treatments demonstrates the importance of relying on rigorous, peer-reviewed research when selecting interventions for dyslexia. Parents and educators may feel drawn to alternative programs that appear innovative or promise quick results. However, the scientific evidence is clear: interventions such as colored overlays, specialized fonts, vision therapy, and working memory training do not improve reading outcomes for students with dyslexia.
Instead, the most effective approach to dyslexia intervention remains structured literacy instruction. Evidence-based methods grounded in the Science of Reading emphasize phonological awareness, explicit phonics instruction, fluency practice, vocabulary development, and comprehension strategies. These approaches have consistently been shown to produce meaningful improvements in reading ability for students with dyslexia.
By focusing on interventions supported by research, educators and families can ensure that students receive the instruction they need, rather than investing time and resources in methods that offer no real benefit.
References
Griffiths, P. G., Taylor, R. H., Henderson, L. M., & Barrett, B. T. (2016). The effect of coloured overlays and lenses on reading: A systematic review of the literature. Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, 36(5), 519–544.
Handler, S. M., Fierson, W. M., et al. (2011). Joint technical report: Learning disabilities, dyslexia, and vision. Pediatrics, 127(3), e818–e856.
Kuster, S. M., van Weerdenburg, M., Gompel, M., & Bosman, A. M. (2018). Dyslexie font does not benefit reading in children with or without dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 68(1), 25–42.
Melby-Lervåg, M., Redick, T., & Hulme, C. (2016). Working memory training does not improve performance on measures of intelligence or other measures of far transfer: Evidence from a meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 512–534.
