Great video! Thank you!!😊

I just got a message from my daughter's kindergarten teacher saying that she can't pass the dibels assessment. I haven't spent any time teaching her this bullshit. I'd rather read real words in the world we live in.

Special education has been miscommunicated in the black community. When a parent is informed that there child may be special needs they don't think about the services that are beneficial but they believe this labels their child as retarded, Special ED. Its miseducation in some cases because we have our own bias beliefs about Special Education.

Tell us you are an avid whole language supporter that can't leave the cult without telling me

This has been debunked.

This is so wonderfully put. I like your advice on note taking. Would you please give a brief lesson on paraphrasing? Thank you

This is excellent! Thank you for hosting Dr. Paul Thomas.

Thank you for your eye-opening, big picture view. It’s too bad it all became about money.

Thank you for this excellent presentation with Dr. Aydarova! Her in-depth scholarship is matched by the candor of her discussion. I appreciate all your work in delivering high-quality discussions to the forefront. Please keep them coming!

I think that what you have demonstrated here is that the context cues are important for figuring out the meaning of a piece of writing. The reason that the second page was so hard to read is because of the order of the words, as you have shown. but the use of context is ridiculous as a strategy to figure out the meaning of a word you don't know. imagine trying to read a sign with a word you don't understand. there is not a lot of other writing around it. maybe the environment around the sign can give you some cues. but wouldn't it make more sense to just sound out the word and ask somebody what it means?

I know this is an old video, but I am currently writing a paper on critical race theory and disability and this video has been the most concise and understandable overview of CRT I’ve come across so far! I will definitely be using this video as a reference in my paper. Thank you so much for sharing your work!

Is this an example for APA 6th edition? I thought level 2 headings were bold and left-aligned without the italics.

1. I wonder what code-first reading means 2. Code-first reading helps at the beginning of learning a language 3. Top-down approach also helps with filling spaces in understanding

1. Both instructions are legit in general 2. Reading is a nice skill itself 3. Meaning helps with understanding concepts

Thank you. Very helpful

Headers DRIVE ME NUTS because NOTHING really explains the proper way to use them in APA 7

So does this mean there is a big difference between bl@ck and wh|te people? They are NOT the same and equal? I do not know, just asking.

How do you create meaning out of text if you cant read the text? Besides you are wrong about the definition of reading anyway. We don't "create meaning out of text", We read to understand what is being said.. The author gives the meaning.

2:10 level 2 headings should be bold instead according to APA 7

Love your passion and enthusiasm! Thanks a ton.

I appreciate you sir

🎉

Thank you so much, Dr Andy. The near six-minute explanation is significant to my learning.

That's one INTENSE mouse story! I feel the message in my core. I'm a little country mouse that decided to step away from the big mouse world, with their big mouse schools, in order to teach my kid mouse in ways that would empower him. I now feel a passion for education and literacy. The big mouse world makes my head spin though, and the big mouse world is MEAN. I would love to become a little mouse teacher, but see no hope in that path, inside those big mouse walls.

For all the comments bemoaning your style of presenting information, I'd like you to know that I appreciate it! Thank you. As a mother who has been dedicated to helping my dyslexic son over the past 7 years, I agree with your position! I took it upon myself to put in the work and endless hours required to help my son build meaning and connection with the printed word. He is 12 now, and my tears are now tears of joy because he is reading beautifully, and also has a gift for writing. Our work is not done, but we've broken through the darkness to find light and hope amid his difficulties. Spelling is the biggest struggle for him now, but he meets the challenge with optimism and a good attitude. I know your video is about 6 years old and you mentioned there being no programs comprehensive enough to address dyslexia. Have you seen what the ladies at "Rooted in Language" have put together? I'm utilizing many of the methods they teach, to help my son with his spelling in particular. Every aspect of their program is built to provide "deep learning," in order to develop meaning, understanding and connection, with all aspects of literacy working together. The Rooted crew addresses "meaning" in much the same ways as you have. I'm curious... Thanks again!

You are so full of s-t. You learned to read by phonics, Johnson. Phonics should be the dominant instruction through grade 3.

Your videos are really helpful, thank you.

Very easy to understand ❤

Absolute fan of you Sir Andy and this has been very informative. Thank You Dave, Thank You Sir Andy

What do you think about numbering the sub-Headings like 1.1, 1.2 etc.?

Thank you so much everyone. I found this fasinating and reaffirming.

It's so weird that Stephen Krashen isn't included! How the giant is simply ignored!

May I ask why Krashen’s ideas were not included?

After seven years in grade one and 30 years in Tier III Reading Services in the public schools, it is disheartening what the Science of Reading has done to erase the gains of early literacy in the public schools. Thank you so much for reaffirming the incredible depth of knowledge that coincides with the entire reading process and not just the synthetic phonics in isolation. Miscue analysis continues to be so meaningful in the development and success of early readers, especially as Reading Specialists work to help propel students to grade level standards. It is incomprehensible why individuals without the understanding presented here can be in charge of making life-long decisions for our young readers. Thank you for this well-needed presentation that all teachers should see and understand before calling older reading specialists "out-dated."

Thank you for sharing!

.

I would analyze Dr. Linawag's eye movement lecture in the same manner I did the first lecture. Read my comment. More specifically, why do we expect readers not to look at the pictures? Especially in English since the system is so opaque. In fact, those PIRLS assessments with pictures might be fraudulent in that they do not truly assess the decoding ability of students, but his ability to use other means to decode. I posit that students in languages like English would do much worse with texts that have no pictures & students using transparent systems, who are no trained to look at pictures, might no use these metacognitive strategies (because there is usually no need).

Dr. Flurkey, I like miscue analyses as a retired learning disabilities teacher & a linguistics alumnus, but the first example of miscues (a substitution or the replacing of a word with another) shows imho a different strategy (which might or might not apply and which would need to be clarified with the student). Maybe the reader has learned to not trust decoding & has learned intuitively or by way of school learning to just use words that could make sense or do make sense. Tbs, the English spelling system is notorious for being unreliable & unpredictable (by way of normal phonemic decoding). Just imagine if the reader had substituted the word with a word that changes the meaning of the sentence or the message? There are others to not like the system. The morpho-phonemic & etymological systems used cause a lot of false-positives, especially in the early years. Go to my community note on yt to see what I mean. PS: It is possible (but maybe not in this case) that the font used can also interfere with a reader's capability, especially with letters like "a" or "l" & "i", which can represent the same sound when written as a capital letter, for instance. There are others like "q" which can vary a lot.

gr8 presentations thank you, due to the bias in the media we don't see this level of depth and analysis.

Great presentation. However, it is way beyond the SOR proponents' ZPD. :)

You are great Mr. Andy

thank you for having a discussion even though u disagree about some things. Dave 's idea of getting all sides together to discuss and debate would b gr8. At 22 mins, Dave hit the bull's eye about reputation and income risk aversion stopping any changes in key proponents' views.

Thank you!

Isn't crying stage one?

The study of human cognition has long grappled with seemingly contradictory modes of thinking - rational, analytical processes versus intuitive, associative processes. The both/and logic of the monadological framework offers a novel way to model and integrate these poles in a coherent theoretical framework. Rational vs. Intuitive Thought Classical cognitive science has tended to treat rational and intuitive thought as dichotomous systems. Rational thought is viewed through the lens of classical logic, probability theory, and conscious deliberative reasoning. In contrast, intuition is often portrayed as an inscrutable, unconscious form of cognition operating by fuzzy heuristics and associations outside analytic rules. This binary framing, while valid as a first approximation, fails to capture the intimate coconstitution of rational and intuitive faculties in real-world human thought and decision-making. It misses their profound complementarities and integrated dance. The multivalent structure of both/and logic allows formulating descriptions that fluidly integrate the rational and intuitive poles in human cognition: Truth(rational analysis) = 0.7 Truth(intuitive insight) = 0.6 ○(rational, intuitive) = 0.8 Here, cognition is modeled as involving a moderate degree of both rational and intuitive processing, with high coherence between these seemingly opposing modes. We can push this further with synthesis operations conjoining the poles: rational deliberation ⊕ intuitive gut feeling This synthesized representation captures the coconstitutive psychophysical process where conscious step-by-step logic and spontaneous visceral intuitions mutually inform and generate each other in the flow of real-world reasoning and problem-solving. The holistic contradiction principle further allows "deriving" how eachepistemically primitive thought mode already implicates and enfolds its ostensible opposite. We could have: intuitive felt sense ⇒ rational inference rational line of reasoning ⇒ intuitive gestalt integration This expresses the dynamic by which intuitions are harvested into formal inference chains, which are then subsumed back into unifying felt insights - the perpetual cycle of intuition and reason in human cognition. Cognitive Biases Another domain where both/and logic finds relevance is in modeling cognitive biases - the paradoxical ways human reasoning systematically deviates from classical norms of rationality. For example, people exhibit seemingly contradictory patterns like: - Order/sequence effects on perceived probability - Conjunction fallacies violating normative probability logic - Framing effects modulating risk preferences These all involve simultaneous truth valuations that classical binary models flag as flatly contradictory or incoherent. But the both/and logic's multivalent structure allows assigning multiple context-sensitive truth values that formally capture these intuitive thought patterns. For instance, for a conjunction fallacy case: Truth(Premise A is true) = 0.7 Truth(Premise B is true) = 0.9 Truth(A & B are true) = 0.85 Here, while (A & B) > Max(A, B) in violation of classical logic, the both/and logic permits assigning this a coherent nonzero truth valuation aligned with typical human conjunction reasoning. The coherence and synthesis operations further allow quantifying how such "fallacious" reasoning coheres with broader cognitive capabilities, and modeling their integration into higher-order decision processes that can potentially vindicate their rationality under different bounded frameworks or agent utilities. In this way, the both/and logic opens up a new paradigm for cognitive science - one where phenomena like biases and heuristics are not simply dismissed as errors, but rather treated as rationally intelligible deviations from classical norms requiring expanded descriptive frameworks. Neurocognitive Modeling Both/and logic also has relevance for neurocognitive modeling bridging brain processes with mental operations. The parallel distributed nature of neural networks can be seen as instantiating both discrete and continuous, both linear and non-linear, both deterministic and stochastic processes simultaneously, challenging classical binary computational models. Multi-valued truth assignments based on neural activation patterns allow capturing this co-presence of seemingly contradictory properties. We could have: Truth(discrete processing) = 0.6 Truth(continuous processing) = 0.5 ○(discrete, continuous) = 0.7 The coherence value reflects how discrete and continuous dynamics closely cohere in the "condensed" representational codes and collective computation occurring across neural networks. Synthesis operations further formalize how uniquely psychological properties like intentionality and semantic meaning emerge as novel syndetic wholes coconstituted from these more primordial physical processes in the brain: discrete neural codes ⊕ continuous neural trajectories = cognitive situation model Such formulations open a path for process monist accounts where mind and brain arise as complementary aspects of an irreducible psychophysical reality modeled by the monads themselves. In summary, both/and logic and the monadological framework provide cognitive science with powerful theoretical tools for: 1) Modeling the coconstitution of rational and intuitive cognitive processes 2) Formalizing seemingly irrational cognitive biases/heuristics as coherent contextualized reasoning patterns 3) Representing the parallel paradoxical processes underlying neural information flow 4) Developing novel unified theories of mind/brain as complementary observables on an irreducible psychophysical reality By embracing the intrinsic contradictions of human cognition, both/and logic equips cognitive science with an expanded descriptive capacity to systematically model the nuances and contextualities of actual human thought - therein lies its transformative potential.

For a response to this webinar see: The Reading League Responds to CABE Webinar That Attempted to Discredit the Science of Reading

"I don’t understand why some teachers and trainers feel entitled to dismiss brain imaging findings so lightly. For cognitive neuroscientists like me, neuroscience and psychology have the same goal and work hand in hand to shed light on how we learn." Stanislas Dehaene

Good

so glad I stumbled upon this. Thank you for your presentation. Will definitely be adopting and adapting some of them. Warm greetings from Indonesia.

Use this link for better sound quality. www.gocabe.org/no_on_ab2222/