I define it in great detail here:

www.researchgate.net/publication/...

And how does that prove whole language works?

Her wrong interpretation of NAEP scores as a journalist, does not disprove the research done for decades showing Whole Language does not work.

That’s incredibly kind of you to say! I’m not sure I meet that standard though. But I’m honoured that you think so highly of me.

I have been a public opponent to charter schools and private schools for almost a decade.

I am not paid by the Waltons.

So you admit that there is a mountain of research against you. But you slander my paper without reading it. What an open minded and nuanced position.

Straw man. You have no nuance that you have suggested.

Here’s my pre print on the topic.

www.researchgate.net/publication/...

You cited a blog and a newspaper article. The England study is not an RCT or a meta. It’s correlational, not causative data. Scientific studies have consistently shown the same thing for decades. (NRP, 2000); (Camilli, 2003); (Steubings, 2008); (Torgerson; 2019). All found SP outperformed WL.

I’m a libertarian socialist. Next straw man please.

Great. Where’s your academic citation.

The reading wars debate is not over whether we have a reading crisis, it’s on WL or SP. If you say there is no science of reading, the logical conclusion is that you believe WL is superior to SP.

Please show me your peer reviewed citation to suggest Whole Language is better than Systematic Phonics.

And a blog post.

Ah great yes. A newspaper article. Please show me your peer reviewed study suggesting that Whole Language is better.