In an era where current music education practices emphasize inclusive pedagogy, students with developmental dyslexia remain significantly understudied. Although previous research in this field has explored the cause-and-effect relationship between dyslexia and music, most of these studies have grouped participants into a single category, namely, children under the age of 18. This broad approach overlooks essential developmental differences that occur across childhood and adolescence. To address this limitation, this paper specifically focuses on children aged 5 to 8, corresponding to the schematic phase of musical development in Hargreaves and Galton’s (1996) model. This age group was chosen because it is a critical period during which children acquire core musical skills such as rhythm, melody, and notation reading. It also often coincides with the start of formal schooling, the beginning of structured music instruction, and the first screenings for developmental dyslexia. This paper critically examines the differences in musical development between children with and without dyslexia using the Hargreaves and Galton model as a framework. A review of existing literature highlights areas where children with dyslexia often face ongoing challenges, including rhythm and temporal processing (Overy et al., 2003; Huss et al., 2011), auditory discrimination, memorization of musical material, motor coordination, and visual-spatial decoding of classical music notation (Flach et al., 2016). The literature demonstrates that these difficulties can lead to delays or mistakes in beat synchronization, reduced sensitivity to pitch changes, and hinder the reading of symbolic musical representations.Recognizing these points of divergence offers valuable insights for educators seeking to create more inclusive and equitable teaching environments. This paper will conclude with several evidence-based suggestions to assist young students with developmental dyslexia in music education. These include multisensory methods that combine auditory, visual, and kinesthetic learning; scaffolded instruction to reduce cognitive load; adaptations to written notation; and the integration of technological tools that personalize instruction.