Read on Twitter
‘Neutral objectivity trips over itself to find ways to avoid telling the truth. Neutral objectivity insists we use clunky euphemisms like “officer-involved shooting.”’
This piece on the debate within journalism is quite relevant to media RE literacy.
1/ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/opinion/objectivity-black-journalists-coronavirus.html
This piece on the debate within journalism is quite relevant to media RE literacy.
1/ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/opinion/objectivity-black-journalists-coronavirus.html
Regarding phonics:
@ehanford's reporting has been praised precisely BC she didn't present the issue as two-sided. She researched, presented the research findings, and unpacked resistance to implementing research-aligned practices, without ambiguity.
2/ https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read
@ehanford's reporting has been praised precisely BC she didn't present the issue as two-sided. She researched, presented the research findings, and unpacked resistance to implementing research-aligned practices, without ambiguity.
2/ https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read
Conversely, recent NYTimes coverage on phonics drew outcry literacy advocates precisely because it felt like it was explaining two sides of a debate, rather than illuminating the issue in a way that a reader (teacher, parent) would know what's right.
3/ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/15/us/reading-phonics.html
3/ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/15/us/reading-phonics.html
I mean, look at the title. Look at how this copy centers the notion of two sides.
"Contested"
"growing debate"
(Also, false equivalency between doing phonics and a love of reading when ALL strong-on-phonics curricula are built around beloved books, but I digress.)
4/
"Contested"
"growing debate"
(Also, false equivalency between doing phonics and a love of reading when ALL strong-on-phonics curricula are built around beloved books, but I digress.)
4/
The NYTimes piece came out on the heels of critiques of the Reading Workshop curriculum in EdWeek reporting & in a detailed review of the curriculum by 7 experts.
Yet TCRWP author Calkins is given more voice in the piece than those reading experts.
5/ https://eduvaites.org/2020/01/25/understanding-the-concerns-about-teachers-college-reading-workshop/
Yet TCRWP author Calkins is given more voice in the piece than those reading experts.
5/ https://eduvaites.org/2020/01/25/understanding-the-concerns-about-teachers-college-reading-workshop/
A few folks have already pointed out that my 'digression' in tweet 4 isn't really a digression. That's true. Let's unpack it.
Fact: every curriculum in this blog is built around whole texts. Kids spend MORE TIME working with books than doing phonics.
6/ https://eduvaites.org/2019/07/11/school-yourself-phonics-edition/
Fact: every curriculum in this blog is built around whole texts. Kids spend MORE TIME working with books than doing phonics.
6/ https://eduvaites.org/2019/07/11/school-yourself-phonics-edition/
The v. idea that phonics work detracts from work with whole texts or love of reading is a red herring.
It's the false narrative promoted by those who resist quality phonics instruction.
This red herring made the lede of the only NYTimes article on phonics in recent years.
7/
It's the false narrative promoted by those who resist quality phonics instruction.
This red herring made the lede of the only NYTimes article on phonics in recent years.
7/
I'd LOVE to see journalists dive in and debunk that red herring. The curricula provide receipts about what really happens in classrooms (or what's designed to happen, anyway).
I'll walk any journalist that wants to do this work through the high-quality curricula myself...
8/
I'll walk any journalist that wants to do this work through the high-quality curricula myself...
8/
Or I'll introduce Ed's using the curricula who can give *the evidence* that the red herring is a red herring.
And – that would be morally-centered journalism, which shows the accuracy of one side in a debate.
9/
And – that would be morally-centered journalism, which shows the accuracy of one side in a debate.
9/
After the NYTimes piece published, author @DanaGoldstein wrote a thread to respond to the outcry, ending in this conclusion.
It made some folks feel better ("at least she saw where the evidence points"). Yet the article carries little of this clarity.
10/ https://twitter.com/DanaGoldstein/status/1229191733608669185?s=20
It made some folks feel better ("at least she saw where the evidence points"). Yet the article carries little of this clarity.
10/ https://twitter.com/DanaGoldstein/status/1229191733608669185?s=20
In any case, I am grateful for the work of journalists like @s_e_schwartz, who don't create ambiguity when they present the issues with reading curricula. No 'two sides' here.
11/ https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2019/12/04/the-most-popular-reading-programs-arent-backed.html
11/ https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2019/12/04/the-most-popular-reading-programs-arent-backed.html
And this unambiguous reporting:
"Evidence suggests that the practice may be less beneficial than teachers think: It can exacerbate achievement gaps and even slow reading growth for some children." @SarahDSparks
12/ https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/08/29/are-classroom-reading-groups-the-best-way.html?cmp=soc-li-shr
"Evidence suggests that the practice may be less beneficial than teachers think: It can exacerbate achievement gaps and even slow reading growth for some children." @SarahDSparks
12/ https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/08/29/are-classroom-reading-groups-the-best-way.html?cmp=soc-li-shr
More evidence-centered, unambiguous reporting would serve us all. Educators and the increasingly-invested parents.
I must add: Reading researchers express A LOT of frustration that they don't get many calls from journalists. That shouldn't be. Perhaps it's a key corrective.
13/
I must add: Reading researchers express A LOT of frustration that they don't get many calls from journalists. That shouldn't be. Perhaps it's a key corrective.
13/
I hope journos will add @TheFCRR @DTWillingham @ReadingShanahan @GaabLab @nellkduke @carolyn_strom @TimRasinski1 @SusanBneuman @annecastles @Kathy_Rastle Marilyn Jager Adams, Lily Wong Filmore, etc. to their call lists on reading stories.
14/14
14/14
