I agree that waiting until third grade to identify and intervene is unacceptable. But we need to be VERY careful with the claim that early intervention can somehow remove a child’s dyslexia designation. Early intervention does not cure dyslexia. It can dramatically improve reading outcomes, reduce the severity of reading difficulties, and help children become accurate, fluent, proficient readers. But becoming a proficient reader does not necessarily mean a child is no longer dyslexic. Dyslexia is a neurodevelopmental learning disability, not simply a gap in reading achievement. A child may respond beautifully to evidence-based instruction and STILL have underlying difficulties with phonological processing, rapid naming, spelling, automaticity, or written language. When we confuse successful intervention with the elimination of a disability, we risk removing the very supports that helped the child succeed. We also need to distinguish between a child who was at risk for reading difficulties and whose difficulties were prevented through early instruction, and a child who has been comprehensively evaluated and identified with dyslexia. Those are not interchangeable. Yes, early identification and intervention should absolutely be the goal. But so should comprehensive evaluations, appropriate identification, accommodations, and continued support when needed. The goal should never be to make the dyslexia designation disappear. The goal is to make sure dyslexia doesn’t prevent a child from becoming a successful reader. And success in reading should never be used, by itself, as evidence that a disability no longer exists.