This discussion piqued my interest on 2 levels: the first being the actual teaching of reading skills and the second on the general topic of research. As a speech/language pathologist (SLP), way back  in the 90s, I attended a life-changing course in my school district about visual language (NOT visual LEARNING) that among other ideas, showed that many children that have visual language systems just could not learn to read by using phonics. For them, life is almost like a series of movies and words are seen as gestalts that are recognized by the shape of the word. So, for example, the word "house", if one were to make a frame following the shape the word, there would be a rectangle with an upward extension where the "h" is. So a child would see the shape of that word, which was taught to them by associating a drawing of house with it, and "read" house. How would they then tell the difference between "house" and "burns" since those both have the same shape? The letters in the frame are details which give them clues as to what the word is. This would be like drawing the outline of a tree by drawing a trunk with 2 straight lines and then a pillowy top. Most everyone would know that's a tree and that's like the frame of the word, but then to give it definition, you could draw some branches in the tree, a squirrel hole in the trunk, a bird on a branch-details. That sets it apart from other trees you may draw and likewise, the letters in the word are details that help the child read the word. This style of language is based in the agrarian society that many people used to live in where reading was not necessary. (I don't remember all of the details of this now but it is extremely interesting.)  Many other people, me included, learn reading phonetically. The key, I believe, and I think special education teachers, including SLPs, are well-equipped to do this, is to figure out the language and learning styles of each child and use the approach that works best with a particular child. Special education teachers/SLPs, as a matter of their daily work, have to tailor what they do with each individual child and what each child needs. The schools in the US do need decreased caseloads for special ed teachers, and SLPs to really ensure each child gets what is needed. Of course, that takes money, and we wouldn't want to give public education too much money, because, you know, then the masses would learn too much and, well, what would THAT do for democracy? I never noticed a political difference in the various approaches to teaching reading, however, I would attribute this to the fact that so many people here that one would assume to be more liberal politically speaking, are, in fact, very conservative. We may be outliers here because everything is so polarized.

The other aspect of this discussion that interested me is that of the evidence, or should I say, the lack there of, backing up Yascha Mounk's assertions. I now work with the birth to 3 year old population as an SLP and everything I do with language and feeding is evidence-based which means it has to be back up by research. I can't just say to a parent, I had this great idea that we give should give your 18 month old some tastes like spicy salsa or a sour lemon. I have to have research to back it up. And indeed, there is research saying that if a child has sensory feeding issues, sometimes intense tastes are needed to "wake" the mouth up, basically because otherwise everything tastes and feels like "mush" which means the child may refuse to eat or may not chew food and may choke/gag. In Mounk's Firing Line interview, when asked for information, he gave anecdotal information but was not able to back it up with any facts. He did this several times and not was he able to give research to back it up when challenged. He just said I talked to this person who said this and that person who said that, just as you were saying David. As he said that, I thought, well, most of the people I talk to here in this ruby red place think like I do so does that mean that Paulding County Georgia is now a democratic stronghold??? YAY! Stop the presses!!! Alas. Nothing could be further from the truth, but that's who I talk to so I could have done what it sounded like he did. As a Ph.D., he should really do better, much better, getting his point across AND having research to back. Not to mention the fact that until I do see some actual research saying that I shouldn't be all in for Black Lives Matter and LGBTQIA+ rights and Women's rights and Indigenous rights, etc. because I'll be causing harm that will backfire, I think that I will continue to fight for ALL "the things". I feel like I am strong enough and smart enough to hold many ideas in my head at one time. I do need to work on coaching people in these environs about how to determine if they are reading information from reliable sources or from sources that are meant to inflame them or spread misinformation. One day at a time...one foot in front of the other.