IncluLiteracy: Structured Literacy Grounded in the Science of Reading.
A research-informed adaptive literacy platform for students who experience reading difficulties, including dyslexia, low-vision profiles, and language-processing differences. Built on peer-reviewed Science-of-Reading evidence — orthographic mapping (Ehri, 2014), structured-literacy meta-analysis (Hall et al., 2023), and dosage-calibrated phonemic awareness (Erbeli et al., 2024) — with adaptive text rendering that adjusts to each learner's functional profile without requiring disability disclosure.
Available in the IncluShift Thrive app
Sound It Out
c a t
Tap each sound to blend
You decoded that word correctly
Peer-Reviewed Evidence Base
Tier-1 Science of Reading Research. No Marketing Claims.
IncluLiteracy is built on the strongest available peer-reviewed evidence — 40 years of dyslexia intervention research, validated phonemic-awareness screening tools, and randomized-controlled trials of assistive technology. Every feature traces to a published study in a top-tier journal, a federal commission, or a meta-analysis, and the citation base has been ruthlessly audited to exclude popular-science books, advocacy-organization briefs, and other non-peer-reviewed sources.
Structured Literacy — 40 Years of Evidence
IncluLiteracy operationalizes the structured-literacy framework validated by Hall et al.'s 2023 systematic review of 53 reading intervention studies for elementary students with or at risk for dyslexia (random-effects effect size g = 0.33 on norm-referenced outcomes). Instruction is systematic, explicit, cumulative, and diagnostic. The platform enforces Erbeli et al.'s 2024 dosage-response finding that phonemic-awareness instruction must be paired with letters beyond 10.2 cumulative hours — a safety and efficacy constraint no competitor currently enforces at the telemetry layer.
Hall, C. S., et al. (2023). Forty years of reading intervention research for elementary students with or at risk for dyslexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 58(2), 285–312. · Erbeli, F., et al. (2024). A meta-analysis on the optimal cumulative dosage of early phonemic awareness instruction. Scientific Studies of Reading, 28(4), 309–331.
Dyslexia-Aware Rendering: Spacing, Not Fonts
IncluLiteracy applies generous inter-letter, inter-word, and line spacing by default (1.2–1.5× baseline), which Marinus et al.'s 2016 controlled experiment found improves reading speed for students with dyslexia. Specialized “dyslexia fonts” are offered as an option but are NOT the default: peer-reviewed studies (Wery & Diliberto, 2017; Kuster et al., 2018) establish that spacing — not font shape — drives readability gains. Color overlays are offered as a “reading comfort” option, not a treatment claim, consistent with the 2025 evidence synthesis from the Centre for Educational Neuroscience.
Marinus, E., et al. (2016). Research in Developmental Disabilities, 49–50, 136–148. · Wery, J. J. & Diliberto, J. A. (2017). Annals of Dyslexia, 67, 114–127. · Kuster, S. M., et al. (2018). Annals of Dyslexia, 68, 25–42.
Adaptive Phonological Awareness Screening
IncluLiteracy includes an adaptive phonological-awareness screener modeled on the Rapid Online Assessment of Reading (ROAR-PA), which Yeatman et al. (2024, Scientific Reports) validated against the gold-standard Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, Second Edition, with a criterion correlation of r = 0.80, Cronbach alpha of 0.96, and dyslexia-risk area-under-the-curve of 0.83 in a sample exceeding 1,000 children Pre-K through fourth grade. The screener takes 10–15 minutes per student and classifies results as at-benchmark, some-risk, or at-risk — never using diagnostic language in student-facing strings.
Yeatman, J. D., et al. (2024). Rapid Online Assessment of Reading — Phonological Awareness. Scientific Reports, 14, 10098.
Text-to-Speech as IDEA-Compliant Assistive Technology
Word-synchronized text-to-speech is a default feature, not an add-on, per Wood et al.'s 2018 meta-analysis of 22 studies (N > 1,500 students with reading disabilities), which established an overall effect of d = 0.35 for TTS on reading comprehension, rising to d = 0.61 for students with severe reading impairment. Reading rate defaults to 140–180 words per minute per Keelor et al. (2020). IDEA § 300.34(c)(1) entitles every eligible U.S. student with a disability to such assistive technology; IncluLiteracy delivers it as standard.
Wood, S. G., Moxley, J. H., Tighe, E. L., & Wagner, R. K. (2018). Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(1), 73–84.
District Integration
Reading Progress Flows Directly to the IEP Dashboard.
Every decoding exercise, fluency passage, and comprehension check generates FERPA-compliant telemetry that syncs to the IncluShift OS — giving reading specialists real-time progress data mapped directly to IEP literacy goals.
Literacy Progress Dashboards
Phonemic awareness, decoding accuracy, fluency rates, and comprehension scores displayed per student, per classroom, per grade level.
FERPA-Compliant Data Pipeline
All reading performance data encrypted at the edge with zero-PII architecture before syncing to district dashboards.
Tier 2/3 Screening Flags (Non-Diagnostic)
Persistent decoding-struggle patterns raise non-diagnostic Tier 2/3 screening flags for educator follow-up per the Castles, Rastle & Nation (2018) consensus framework. Classifications are INTERNAL to educator dashboards only and never surface diagnostic labels to students, in accordance with Steele & Aronson (1995) stereotype-threat research and Shifrer (2013) labeling-effect findings.
Student Chromebook
IncluLiteracy Web App
Edge Encryption
Zero-PII Transit Layer
IncluShift OS
Literacy Progress Dashboard