The study aimed to examine the phonological processing profile for students with and without reading disabilities in cycle 1 schools of basic education in the Governorate of Muscat, Sultanate of Oman. The study participants included 306 students, 165 students with reading disabilities and 141 students without reading disabilities. The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP) and Working Memory Test (WMT) were administered to the participants. The results of the study showed that the mean score of students without reading disabilities was higher than that of students of reading disabilities in all measures of phonological processing, and that there are statistically significant differences on the case of students in all scales of composite phonological processing, and there are statistically significant differences for the grade on students' scores in the scales of phonological awareness, phonological memory, rapid naming and alternative scale of rapid naming. There are also statistically significant differences for the interaction between the grade and the case on the students' grades in the rapid naming. There is no statistically significant effect of gender, case-gender interaction, class-gender interaction,gender-case-grade interaction on students' scores on composite phonological processing scales. The results also resulted in statistically significant differences between students with reading disabilities and student without reading disabilities attributed to the interaction between the grade and the case, while there is no statistically significant effect of the interaction between the case and the gender and the interaction between the grade and the case and the gender in the sub-acoustic phonological processing scales. The results also indicate a statistically significant correlation between the phonological awareness test and the working memory test among students with and student without reading disabilities. The phonological memory test was only significant with students with reading disabilities. As for the sub-tests, the word pronunciation test after deleting part of it, and the test of merging syllables indicated a statistically significant relationship with the working memory test with students with reading disabilities and student without reading disabilities, while the test of remembering numbers and the test of the rapid naming of things were only significant with students with reading disabilities. In light of the results, we hope that phonological processing skills will be incorporated into the school curriculum, and that comprehensive testing of phonological processing will be used as a diagnostic tool for students in basic education.