Some blog followers may be interested in a recent discussion-list post of the above title [Hake (2009a). The abstract reads:
ABSTRACT: In response to my post "Is Scientifically-based Education an Oxymoron?" [Hake (2009b) The late great Jerry Bracey wrote:
“Jay Mathews did indeed invite readers to kick sand in our faces. I suggest, however, it might be wise to read [my book] before doing such."
I agree and APOLOGIZE for kicking sand in Bracey's face by criticizing Bracey's Lesson #8: Scientifically-based Education is an Oxymoron and the Bracey/Mathews comments as given by Mathews, who may have oversimplified Bracey's position. Bracey also suggests that objections to Lesson #8 would be strengthened if a few poets could be enlisted to argue for a science of education. But a poet has already done so - myself! ;-) whose poetic prowess is proven by presentation of a perfect poem. . . . .[see signature quote].
To access the complete 12 kB post, please click on http://tinyurl.com/kmrse2.
A famous curmudgeon named Bracey,
Thought a science of ed was cracy,
Each student's sentient
And has her own penchant
So science won't work - prima facie.
Richard Hake (2009)
Hake, R.R. 2009a. “Is Scientifically-based Education an Oxymoron? Reply To Bracey,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/kmrse2. Post of 11 Jul 2009 16:04:43-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract only was also transmitted to various discussion lists.
Hake, R.R. 2009b. “Is Scientifically-based Education an Oxymoron?” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/n9cyjy . Post of 7 Jul 2009 17:03:51-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract only was transmitted to various discussion lists and is also at http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-scientifically-based-education.html with a provision for comments.