Monday, March 31, 2014

Re: Charter Schools: A Marketplace for Profits or Ideas?

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion list post “Re: Charter Schools: A Marketplace for Profits or Ideas?” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

**********************************************
ABSTRACT: In a discussion “Charter Schools: A Marketplace for Profits or Ideas?” Bill Moyers http://bit.ly/1feQ5iw interviewed Diane Ravitch, who stated:

“The lure of getting federal money made many states change their laws to open the door to many, many more charter schools. . . . . . . Public education is becoming big business as bankers, hedge fund managers, and private equity investors are entering what they consider to be an ‘emerging market.’ As Rupert Murdoch put it http://bit.ly/1pAwGMh after purchasing an education technology company, ‘When it comes to K through 12 education, we see a $500 billion sector in the US alone’ . . . . . . I think what’s at stake is the future of American public education. I believe it is one of the foundation stones of our democracy: So an attack on public education is an attack on democracy.”

See also “Here is the Bill Moyers Interview in Full” [Ravitch (2014)] at http://bit.ly/1mFTAmo.

Over 4 decades ago economist Albert O. Hirschman (1970) in Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States http://bit.ly/11QKoRB, made a case against charter-schools similar to that made by Ravitch. He first quoted the conservative economist Milton Friedman who argued that SCHOOL VOUCHERS SHOULD REPLACE THE CURRENT PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM, writing “Parents could express their views about schools directly, by withdrawing their children from one school and sending them to another.”

Hirschman then countered (my italics): “[Friedman's opinion] is a near perfect example of the ECONOMIST'S BIAS IN FAVOR OF EXIT AND AGAINST VOICE: In the first place, Friedman considers withdrawal or exit as the ‘direct’ way of expressing one's unfavorable views of an organization. A person less well trained in economics might naively suggest that the direct way of expressing views is to express them! Secondly, the decision to voice one’s views and efforts to make them prevail are contemptuously referred to by Friedman as a resort to ‘cumbrous political channels.’ But what else is the political, and indeed the democratic, process than the digging, the use, and hopefully the slow improvement of these very channels?"
**********************************************

To access the complete 57 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1hcMHkF.


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands; President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 31 March 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Re: Charter Schools: A Marketplace for Profits or Ideas?” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1hcMHkF. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Re: Developing research-based curricula in college-based higher education

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion list post “Re: Developing research-based curricula in college-based higher education” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

******************************************
ABSTRACT: Alan Jenkins, in his POD post “Developing research-based curricula in college-based higher education” at http://bit.ly/1goohbN uses the term “research-based curricula” to mean: (a) “curricula emphasizing research or inquiry BY students,” NOT (b) “curricula shown to be effective in promoting higher-order learning by education research.”

For a review of the latter see e.g.: (1) Adapting to a Changing World - Challenges and Opportunities in Undergraduate Physics Education [NRC (2013)] http://bit.ly/126os6j; and (2) “Teaching and physics education research: bridging the gap” [Fraser et al. (2014) http://bit.ly/1qITBqi.

For anti-inquiry arguments see “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching” [Kirschner et al. (2006)] http://bit.ly/duJVG4 and counters by Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007) http://bit.ly/aKUD5s; Kuhn (2007) http://bit.ly/ekxUvD; Schmidt et al. (2007) http://bit.ly/9uwVc8; & Hake (2010) http://bit.ly/aGlkjm.
******************************************

To access the complete 61kB post please click on http://bit.ly/Ou3skL.


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands; President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 16 March 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Re: Developing research-based curricula in college-based higher education,”online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/Ou3skL. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.


Sunday, March 9, 2014

Re: What's In a Selfie?

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion list post “Re: What’s In a Selfie?” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

***************************************************
ABSTRACT: Jerry Becker (2014) at http://bit.ly/1ikCCon forwarded Tom Whitby’s “What's In a Selfie?” http://bit.ly/1edkNEY to Math-Teach. The “social media” extolled by Whitby appear to be what are sometimes called “Web 2.0 Social Media” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0. It's not clear that they have big advantages over Listserves – see e.g.: “The value of email discussion lists” [Grow (2009)] at http://bit.ly/daJ7bp and “Listserves Are a 21Century Tool With Advantages Over 'Web 2.0 Social Media' #2” [Hake (2012)] at http://bit.ly/y2M2t3.
***************************************************

To access the complete 53 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1lgtNhc.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands; President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 09 March 2014.]
Hake, R.R. “Re: What’s In a Selfie?” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1lgtNhc. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.


Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Reich, McKibbon, & Hansen: Three Academicians Who Have Spoken Out on Social Issues

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Reich, McKibbon, & Hansen: Three Academicians Who Have Spoken Out on Social Issues” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

**************************************************
In response to my post “Re: Professors We Need You!” [Hake (2014)] at http://bit.ly/1hw62E1 regarding Nicholas Kristof’s “Professors, We Need You!” at http://nyti.ms/1oIs7jD and “Bridging the Moat Around Universities at http://nyti.ms/1kOp8Wi, Christopher Green of the TIPS list responded at http://bit.ly/1dZrWfA [slightly edited; my URLs]:

“Kristof missed the boat on this one. If [Kristof] wants to know why professors are reluctant to enter public debate, he needs to address the quality of public debate in the US political arena. Both the governor of Wisconsin http://bit.ly/1c5FUrS and attorney general of Virginia http://bit.ly/NftpnE have recently used the powers of their offices to investigate and threaten the livelihoods of professors who opposed their political agendas (labor unions and climate change, respectively). [Politicians] have essentially demanded that professors NOT bring their expertise to bear on public debate and professors, understandably, have mostly complied.”

Thankfully, not ALL academicians have complied, e.g.:

(a) UC-Berkeley's Robert Reich http://bit.ly/1fga1Tm, an outspoken champion of labor unions http://bit.ly/1c8scER and tireless critic of income and wealth inequality – see e.g., Beyond Outrage http://amzn.to/1ebN6CI;

(b) Middlebury College’s Bill McKibbon http://bit.ly/1fhrKKb who has been lobbying for action to deter climate change for over two decades – see e.g. The End of Nature http://amzn.to/1p1wIgN and consider his organization http://350.org/;

(c) Columbia’s James Hansen (2010, 2014) http://bit.ly/omiMY3 who alerted the world to anthropogenic global warming in 1981 http://nyti.ms/1gwHUMm. In a recent draft Renewable Energy, Nuclear Power, and Galileo: Do Scientists Have a Duty to Expose Popular Misconceptions? http://bit.ly/1goLfgs, Hansen rebuffs 4 widespread misconceptions: human life is endangered by nuclear power; renewable energy sources alone are sufficient; killing nuclear would make the world safer; and renewable energy is cheaper and faster than nuclear power. Below I quote Hansen at some length because: (1) nuclear power is so controversial; and (2) so doing allows me to insert references, hot-links, and comments.
*************************************************

To access the complete 106 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1k9QuX5.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands; President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 26 Feb 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Reich, McKibbon, & Hansen: Three Academicians Who Have Spoken Out on Social Issues,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1k9QuX5.The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.




Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Re: Professors We Need You!

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list “Re: Professors We Need You!” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

**************************************************
The LrnAsst List’s Norman Stahl at http://bit.ly/O06Tjn and Nick Voge at http://bit.ly/1j8wBMT have called attention to Nicholas Kristof’s NYT Opinion piece "Professors, We Need You!" at http://nyti.ms/1oIs7jD.

In a subsequent blog entry “Bridging the Moat Around Universities” http://nyti.ms/1kOp8Wi, Kristof:

(a) wrote: “[Professors, We Need You! was] about the unfortunate way America has marginalized university professors – and, perhaps sadder still, the way they have marginalized themselves from public debate”;

(b) posted 313 comments (as of 19 Feb 2014 09:04-0800) on his opinion piece, about equally divided between approval and disapproval.

One of more substantive comments is by Aaron Barlow, faculty editor of the AAUP magazine Academe who pointed to “Public Intellectuals and the AAUP” (Schrecker at http://bit.ly/NZH5E5, and “The Case for Academics as Public Intellectuals” (Behm, Rankins-Robertson, & Roen (BRR) at http://bit.ly/1dDTZky. (BRR + commentors on BRR + myself) list about 40 academicians who have “bridged the moat around universities.”

But the fact that at least 40 [out of a total of over a million higher-education faculty] have “bridged the moat” does not negate Kristof’s general claim that “[professors] have marginalized themselves.”
**************************************************


To access the complete 61 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1hw62E1.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands; President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.


REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 19 Feb 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Re: Professors We Need You!” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1hw62E1. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Friday, February 14, 2014

Curmudgeonly Comments Concomitant to Corrigan’s “To Lecture or Not to Lecture?”

Some blog followers might be interested in an article “Curmudgeonly Comments Concomitant to Corrigan’s ‘To Lecture or Not to Lecture?’,”
[Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

*******************************************************
ABSTRACT:
Paul Corrigan has ably reviewed the contentious debate over lecturing. In the present article I borrow from and supplement Corrigan’s Atlantic article “To Lecture or Not to Lecture?” at http://bit.ly/1cGQaKW and his blog entry “Beyond the Lecturing Debate” at http://bit.ly/1eKAR0A so as to include discussion of the following:

1. Lecturing is prevalent but “active learning” is advised by researchers.

2. Nevertheless, some academics defend “lectures.”

3. But such academics often advocate lecturing along with “active learning.”

4. Corrigan distinguishes “lecturing” from “Lecturing.”

5. Physics education research emphasizes higher-level learning and distinguishes “lecture” from “passive-student-lecture.”

6. Positive and negative depictions of the lecture.

7. Depictions of “active learning.”

8. Literary and YouTube criticism of the passive-student-lecture.

9. Nine anti-passive-student-lecture articles.

10. Twelve pro-lecture articles or books.

11. Should One Lecture or Not Lecture?
******************************************************


To access the complete 2.9 MB article please click on http://bit.ly/1nA6z5e.


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands; President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

“People have nowadays . . . got a strange opinion that everything should be taught by lectures. Now, I cannot see that lectures can do so much good as reading the books from which the lectures are taken. Lectures were once useful; but now, when we can all read, and books are so numerous, lectures are unnecessary.” - Samuel Johnson http://bit.ly/17PdW5Y, via James Boswell (1791) at http://bit.ly/qfDXPz.


REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 14 Feb 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Curmudgeonly Comments Concomitant to Corrigan’s ‘To Lecture or Not to Lecture?’,” online as a 2.9 MB pdf at http://bit.ly/1nA6z5e. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Friday, January 31, 2014

The Defiant Parents: Testing’s Discontents – Response to Hunt

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion list post “The Defiant Parents: Testing’s Discontents – Response to Hunt” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

***************************************************
ABSTRACT: In a post “Re: The Defiant Parents: Testing's Discontents” [Hake (2014)] at http://bit.ly/1mYwWoa, I pointed to the “vigorous leadership, voluminous messaging, and pro-public-/anti-private-education positions of (a) Diane Ravitch and (b) FairTest http://www.fairtest.org/. Then I commented that neither appeared to be informed regarding the virtues of rigorous measurement of students' higher-order learning by means of zero-stakes formative evaluation “designed and used to improve an intervention, especially when it is still being developed” [JCSEE, copied onto p. 132 by Frechtling et al. (2010) at http://bit.ly/1aYcgYn.

In response, Russ Hunt (2014) at http://bit.ly/1hSsq6L wrote: “The virtues of rigorous testing aren't really the point: it's how the tests are administered and what uses they’re put to that Ravitch and Fair Test (and I) are concerned with.”

However, it IS to the point for many of those who wish to enhance students’ higher-level learning, as I have emphasized in, e.g.:

1. “Lessons from the Physics Education Reform Effort” [Hake (2002)] at http://bit.ly/aL87VT;

2. “The Physics Education Reform Effort: A Possible Model for Higher Education” [Hake (2005)] at http://bit.ly/9aicfh;

3. “Should We Measure Change? Yes!” [Hake (2007a)] at http://bit.ly/d6WVKO (2.5 MB);

4. “Re: pre-to-post tests as measures of learning/teaching” [Hake (2008a)] at http://bit.ly/MmPxwp;

5. “Design-Based Research in Physics Education Research: A Review” [Hake (2008b)] at http://bit.ly/9kORMZ (1.1 MB);

6. “The Impact of Concept Inventories On Physics Education and Its Relevance For Engineering Education” [Hake (2011a)] at http://bit.ly/nmPY8F (8.7 MB);

7. “SET's Are Not Valid Gauges of Students' Higher-Level Learning #2” [Hake (2011b)] at http://bit.ly/jLZaz5;

8. “The NRC Finally Comes to Its Senses on Improving STEM Education” [Hake (2013a)] at http://bit.ly/154M5yf; and

9. “Can the Cognitive Impact of Calculus Courses be Enhanced?” Hake (2013b)] at http://bit.ly/1loHgC4 (2.7 MB).
***************************************************

To access the complete 66 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1lqiR4u.


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands; President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

“Physics educators have led the way in developing and using objective tests to compare student learning gains in different types of courses, and chemists, biologists, and others are now developing similar instruments. These tests provide convincing evidence that students assimilate new knowledge more effectively in courses including active, inquiry-based, and collaborative learning, assisted by information technology, than in traditional courses.” - Wood & Gentile (2003).


REFERENCES [URLs shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 31 Jan 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “The Defiant Parents: Testing's Discontents – Response to Hunt,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1lqiR4u. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Wood, W.B., & J.M. Gentile. 2003. “Teaching in a research context,” Science 302: 1510; 28 November; online as a 213 kB pdf http://bit.ly/SyhOvL, thanks to Ecoplexity http://bit.ly/152aFQ9.