Let’s review. A couple of months ago, I recorded an online interview for a dyslexia summit. I also put together and recorded a short video presentation. These were both to be shown at a dyslexia summit. I was to then attend the online summit for a live question-and-answer session. On the day of the summit, I emailed to see what time I needed to be online. It was at this point that I was told that I had been disinvited. And my disinvitation had occurred without so much as a disinviting word. It was a gentle but wordless disinvitations.

Can you imagine such a thing?

The stated reason for my wordless disinvitation was that the writing tone used on some of my digital platforms “is fairly abrasive when speaking about those in other camps in the reading world”. In a previous excerpt, I examined how the abrasiveness of one’s writing tone is determined largely by the cognitive framework held by the reader. I also said that the wordless disinvitation I received was a form of silencing. And any abrasiveness in my writing tone pales in comparison with the continued abrasion endured by teachers and professors as well as the constant attacks on Lucy Calkins, Ken Goodman, and Marie Clay.

In this excerpt, we’ll examine reading camps.

It is very hard to have a serious and substantive discussion about a topic like reading instruction with somebody whose knowledge base is shallow and disjointed. You end up in a teaching role.

The abrasiveness of a writing tone is determined largely by the cognitive framework held by the reader. A cognitive framework is the mentally constructed structures that guide individuals in interpreting the world. It becomes the lens through which the world is viewed. Much like a theory, a cognitive framework is used to explain facts and understand phenomena.

Some see my writing as abrasive and ill-informed. Others see my writing as non-abrasive and insightful. Regardless, to silence, dismiss, or disinvite somebody based on their perceived tone … is … well, it’s the Science of Reading.