A case against using traditional orthography (T.O.) as a learning medium and in favor of using the Initial Teaching Alphabet (i.t.a.) is presented. The following points were noted: (1) Most children are taught to read as we and our ancestors before us were by an alphabet which is at least 1,000 years old and took its form from the convenience and expediency of the writer rather than consideration for the learner. (2) We persist in using an out-of-date medium for learning because of man's innate conservatism and distrust of anything new. (3) Since many educational authorities accept the fact that i.t.a. cannot harm the child's ability to read eventually in T.O., it is not necessary to delay the use of an alphabet especially designed to make it easier for children to learn to read. (4) Even children with an inadequate linquistic background can learn to read in i.t.a. and thus add the benefit of print to the benefit of speech in developing their ability to understand and learn the English language. (5) Since the transition from i.t.a. to T.O. is made without difficulty, it is not necessary to review our present alphabet. It is only as a learning alphabet that it proves to be inadequate and detrimental to so many children in the initial stages of reading. Tables are included. (DH)