The study in question is... questionable, at best, IMO. Discussed elsewhere, and a comment there summarized (and led to further discussion) why the study is no

The study in question is... questionable, at best, IMO. Discussed elsewhere, and a comment there summarized (and led to further discussion) why the study is not as representative as we might assume. Link below [0], as it's simultaneously far too long to re-post here (especially from mobile), yet well worth the read. That said, for ease of reading, the opening paragraph starts: There's a lot of awful stuff that has been discussed already, but I feel like some of this is "catastrophized" because the researchers set up the subjects to fail by setting the standards in a way that you wouldn't expect the students to succeed. I agreed with the rebuttal to the study, and think the study is hardly all it's cracked up to be [0] https://tildes.net/~humanities/1nz8/they_dont_read_very_well_a_study_of_the_reading_comprehension_skills_of_english_majors_at_two#comment-fl8c https://tildes.net/~humanities/1nz8/they_dont_read_very_well...