Daniel Willingham: 'Who to believe on Twitter?'

News articles, interviews, research, events and lots more - ready for your comments.
User avatar
Debbie_Hepplewhite
Posts: 2089
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:42 pm

Daniel Willingham: 'Who to believe on Twitter?'

Postby Debbie_Hepplewhite » Sun Oct 13, 2019 11:31 pm

Daniel Willingham steps into a bit of a Twitter storm with his observations:

Who to believe in Twitter?



http://www.danielwillingham.com/daniel- ... 5ly4xuZvRc

A recent tweet caught my attention. It was posted by Sherry Sanden, a professor at Illinois State, in response to a thread from APM reporter Emily Hanford, well known to educators for her reporting in the last 18 months on the best way to teach reading and the state of reading instruction in the US. Hanford was responding (I think) to an abstract of a talk Sanden and colleague Deborah MacPhee were to present at ILA, which Hanford thought was inaccurate and possibly a response to her reporting. Hanford posted a series of 14 tweets supporting various aspects of her claims about reading, many with links to the scientific research she cited.

I know this is convoluted and honestly I don't think it matters much, but I'm trying to provide some context. Here's what I really wanted to get at.
This is one of Sanden’s tweets in reply to Hanford.


Sherry Sanden and Emily Hanford - the ladies named in Daniel Willingham's post - have contributed responses to Dan's comments. If you're interested in this topic, do go on to read the responses!

Return to “Around the World: News and Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests