You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Endeavors in science can give us an iteratively clearer idea of what we're working with. That's it. If you put any greater pressure on science to tell you what to *do,* you'll be prone to desiring that it tell you certain things *are* or *are not.*
To avoid this trap, it's *absolutely* necessary to take an attitude of policy neutrality. Pursue the outcomes you want, but try to avoid attaching your ego/identity/status to your current strategy for getting there. Make moves based on what you know, but expect to have to pivot
ex: I really like the idea of teaching reading through less-directed immersion. It fits very neatly into my broader ideas about children and learning. But there's a pretty substantial body of evidence suggesting that in classroom environments, it just doesn't work well.
It took me a long time to acknowledge that I was scouring the work for reasons to dismiss it. And I found them; you'll *always* find them — flaws in methodology, overstated conclusions, etc. But it's still strong work that shows my preferred strategy doesn't work in all contexts.
I don't love eating humble pie. I didn't tweet about this. I tweet about a lot of things I read and think about throughout the day, but I couldn't sell my brain on that one. "Here's this thing I find only partially convincing that complicates my deeply-held perspective. Yay!"
When you're trying to incite some significant change in the world, it's natural to want a clean, legible path to doing it. And it's natural to want clean messaging around it. But that cuts against honesty — it just does. And it ultimately cuts against your own preferred outcomes.
What's your inspiration for these thoughts? Really helping me align my mind this morning.
Bravo! I tend to decompose these things into 3 axis: 1. The initial conditions; the current state; what we're working with, 2. The means, methods, actions, functions we have to affect change to that state, and 3. The purpose, goal, endstate, future we want to bring about.
Science can tell us about 1 and 2, but not 3. 3 is a moral decision. Policy can be about 1 and 2, but which policy is right depends on what 3 looks like. We should listen to understand what parts 3 we can agree on. But everyone's personal 3 is ultimately their own to freedom.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
