I've never heard of it, and just googled - so please take this for the expert (not) opinion it is!
She may be using legitimate techniques, but her marketing approach makes me squirm. Here's the kind of claims that make me cautious when I'm looking at novel remediation offers:
* 'I alone know the magic fix, and can offer this thing no one else can' (if it's evidence-based, it's published and public info, and is being used by an increasing range of providers)
* 'My way is quick and easy' (remediation sucks. Wouldn't it be lovely to magically "re-wire the brain"? But all the research points to systematic, repetitive, direct instruction, slowly in small bits with *lots* of practice. sigh)
* Vague claims to be "neuroscience-y", lots of buzzwords, no links to actual real research testing this intervention, or even anything like it
* 'I will fix everything - any LD, or auditory or visual processing - with the same, one, solution' (yes, there's lots of overlap and comorbidity, but you still can't fix dyslexia with an FM receiver, or fix visual processing with reading remediation)
* Any claim to deal with dyslexia that doesn't start with an Orton-Gillingham based remediation program, the well-proven, gold standard approach (TBH, I usually start here, and stop reading pretty quick if I see dyslexia without O-G)
Wish I could be more positive, but hope this is of some help nonetheless.
