SEPTEMBER 8 — Years ago, when I was teaching a class of six-year-olds in a kindergarten, one girl concerned me deeply. She had been attending the kindergarten since the age of four, yet after three years she was still struggling to read. She was often described as “lazy” and a “slow learner”.
As her classroom teacher, however, I felt that these labels did not explain what I was seeing. She was trying, but reading remained unusually difficult for her. At that time, I had never heard of dyslexia.
During a conversation with a close friend, I described the difficulties I had observed. My friend simply asked, “Could she have dyslexia?”
That question stayed with me. I began reading about dyslexia and realised that many of the characteristics described were similar to what I had been observing. I shared my concerns with the principal, and together we invited the child’s parents for a discussion. I suggested that they seek further assessment from Persatuan Dyslexia Malaysia. She was subsequently assessed and identified as having dyslexia.
About a year later, I met her mother again. She told me that her daughter was now able to read and was preparing to return to mainstream schooling. I have never forgotten that child. Her experience taught me how easily a persistent learning difficulty can be misunderstood when it is seen simply as laziness, low ability or a lack of effort.
That experience comes to mind when I look at Malaysia’s current literacy concerns. In a written Dewan Rakyat reply on 12 March 2024, the Ministry of Education reported that, as of 18 December 2023, 154,853 students from Form One to Form Five were at Tahap Penguasaan 1 or 2 in Bahasa Melayu, within its reporting on students who had yet to master basic reading, writing and numeracy skills.
This figure certainly does not mean that 154,853 students have dyslexia. Difficulties with literacy may arise from many factors, including interrupted learning, language exposure, attendance, teaching experiences and other learning needs.
However, the figure should prompt us to ask a more important question: among students whose reading difficulties continue despite years of schooling and intervention, could some have an underlying learning difficulty that has never been recognised?
International data also suggest that reading remains a significant challenge for many Malaysian adolescents. According to PISA 2022, only 42 per cent of Malaysian 15-year-olds achieved Level 2 or above in reading, compared with an OECD average of 74 per cent.
This means that around 58 per cent of Malaysian participants performed below the minimum proficiency benchmark used by PISA.
It does not mean that these students cannot read, nor does it indicate that they have dyslexia. Rather, it suggests that many may struggle with the increasingly complex reading demands they encounter as they progress through school.
Recent Malaysian research makes the issue of identification particularly important. A 2026 study involving 2,410 secondary-school students across five states examined a dyslexia screening instrument and highlighted concerns surrounding late-diagnosed, misdiagnosed and late-emerging dyslexia.
A related study published in PLOS ONE noted that some cases among secondary-school students may remain unidentified partly because screening tools for older students have been limited.
By the time students reach secondary school, the demands of learning have changed considerably. Texts become longer and more complex, instructions become denser, vocabulary becomes more specialised, and assessment increasingly depends on independent reading and written responses. For a student with an unidentified reading difficulty, repeated struggles can gradually affect academic performance, confidence and willingness to participate. The problem may not be a lack of ability or effort, but that the underlying barrier has never been properly understood or supported.
This is why the response cannot be limited to simply placing struggling students in more remedial reading classes. Malaysia needs a clearer identification–intervention–referral pathway across both primary and secondary education. Students with persistent reading difficulties should first receive appropriate targeted intervention, with their progress carefully monitored. When difficulties continue despite appropriate support, there should be a clear pathway for further assessment. Screening can help identify students who may require closer attention, but it should guide further investigation rather than become a diagnosis or label on its own.
Teachers are central to this process. They are not expected to diagnose dyslexia, nor should they be. But teachers need sufficient knowledge to recognise when a student’s pattern of difficulty may require closer attention and when referral for further assessment should be considered.
I know this because I was once the teacher who did not know what dyslexia was. What made a difference for that six-year-old was not that I knew the answer immediately. It was that I began to question the label of “lazy,” looked more carefully at what she was experiencing, and sought appropriate help.
If thousands of young people are reaching secondary school with significant literacy difficulties, the question should not simply be why they have failed to keep up. We should also ask whether their needs were recognised early enough, whether the intervention they received addressed the actual difficulty, and whether there was a clear route to appropriate assessment and support.
*The author is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Education, Universiti Malaya, and can be reached at [email protected]
** This is the personal opinion of the writers or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
