Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Re: A Question: Where Does Current Reform Come From? #2” [Hake (2011b)].
The abstract reads:
************************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to my post “Re: A Question: Where Does Current Reform Come From?" [Hake (2011a)], Baker Mitchell of the SClistserv list wrote (paraphrasing): “We are in danger of getting tangled in nomenclature. . . there is a body of practice known as ‘Direct Instruction’ (big D, big I) that is based in large part on interactive engagement (little i, little e) and enjoys great success in its teaching.”
That we “are in danger of getting tangled in nomenclature” is the theme of my article “Language Ambiguities in Education Research” [Hake (2008)] at http://bit.ly/bHTebD, rejected by the insular editors of the Journal of Learning Sciences.
I stress the fact that the operational definitions provide a means of avoiding nomenclatural entanglement by language ambiguities.
***********************************************
To access the complete 13 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/kj94oT.
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)
rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
“When we say force. . . [[or Direct Instruction]].. . . is the cause of motion. . . .[[or learning]]. . . . we talk metaphysics, and this definition, if we were content with it, would be absolutely sterile. For a definition to be of any use, it must teach us to measure force . . . .[[or Direct Instruction]]. . . ; moreover, that suffices; it is not at all necessary that it teach us what force. . . [[or Direct Instruction]]. . . . is in itself, nor whether it is the cause or the effect of motion. . . .[[or learning]]. . . ."
Henri Poincare (1905)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 28 June 2011.]
Hake, R.R. 2011a. “Re: A Question: Where Does Current Reform Come From?” on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/iHzGwm. Post of 26 Jun 2011 15:07:50-0700 to Math-Teach, AERA-L, and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 19 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake’sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/izN28y with a provision for comments.
Hake, R.R. 2011b. “Re: A Question: Where Does Current Reform Come From? #2,” on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/kj94oT. Post of 28 Jun 2011 15:29:54-0700 to SClistserv, AERA-L, and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 13 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
Poincare, H. 1905. Science and Hypothesis, Walter Scott Publishing; online at http://bit.ly/9hVfA8 thanks to the Mead Project. Amazon.com information on a 1952 version by Dover is at http://amzn.to/d1w47d with a searchable “Look Inside” feature. A Wikipedia entry on Poincare is at http://bit.ly/b4jGVS.
Showing posts with label Journal of Learning Sciences. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Journal of Learning Sciences. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Operational Definitions
Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Operational Definitions” [Hake (2011)].
The abstract reads:
****************************************
ABSTRACT: Alan Bender (2011), in a POD post “Open inquiry is bad? (in some intro tech courses),” wrote (paraphrasing) : “I wonder how the terms ‘learning centered’ and ‘instruction centered’ tend to be understood, particularly by those who hear them for the first times. . . . . What definitions for such phrases might promote more thought about paradigms/ideologies?”
In my opinion, “OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS” might promote more thought about paradigms/ideologies and attendant ambiguous phrases such as “learning centered,” “instruction centered,” “active learning,” “direct instruction,” “inquiry,” “open inquiry,” “student centered,” “learning centered,” “discovery,” etc., etc., etc. . . .
See e.g.: “Language Ambiguities in Education Research” [Hake (2008)] at http://bit.ly/bHTebD , and “Education Research Employing Operational Definitions Can Enhance the Teaching Art” [Hake (2010)] at http://bit.ly/aGlkjm.
****************************************
To access the complete 7 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/l1ADtf.
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)
rrhake@earthlink.net>
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
“When we say force is the cause of motion we talk metaphysics, and this definition, if we were content with it, would be absolutely sterile. For a definition to be of any use, it must teach us to *measure* force; moreover, that suffices; it is not at all necessary that it teach us what force is *in itself*, nor whether it is the cause or the effect of motion.”
Henri Poincare (1905)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 22 June 2011.]
Hake, R.R. 2011. “Operational Definitions,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/l1ADtf. Post of 22 Jun 2011 19:19:14-0700
to POD, AERA-L, and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 7 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
The abstract reads:
****************************************
ABSTRACT: Alan Bender (2011), in a POD post “Open inquiry is bad? (in some intro tech courses),” wrote (paraphrasing) : “I wonder how the terms ‘learning centered’ and ‘instruction centered’ tend to be understood, particularly by those who hear them for the first times. . . . . What definitions for such phrases might promote more thought about paradigms/ideologies?”
In my opinion, “OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS” might promote more thought about paradigms/ideologies and attendant ambiguous phrases such as “learning centered,” “instruction centered,” “active learning,” “direct instruction,” “inquiry,” “open inquiry,” “student centered,” “learning centered,” “discovery,” etc., etc., etc. . . .
See e.g.: “Language Ambiguities in Education Research” [Hake (2008)] at http://bit.ly/bHTebD , and “Education Research Employing Operational Definitions Can Enhance the Teaching Art” [Hake (2010)] at http://bit.ly/aGlkjm.
****************************************
To access the complete 7 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/l1ADtf.
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)
rrhake@earthlink.net>
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
“When we say force is the cause of motion we talk metaphysics, and this definition, if we were content with it, would be absolutely sterile. For a definition to be of any use, it must teach us to *measure* force; moreover, that suffices; it is not at all necessary that it teach us what force is *in itself*, nor whether it is the cause or the effect of motion.”
Henri Poincare (1905)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 22 June 2011.]
Hake, R.R. 2011. “Operational Definitions,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/l1ADtf. Post of 22 Jun 2011 19:19:14-0700
to POD, AERA-L, and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 7 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle #2
Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle #2” [Hake (2011b)].
The abstract reads:
****************************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to my PhysLrnR post “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle” [Hake (2011)] Paul Camp (2011) wrote: “ ‘Doing research in a classroom’ is not the same thing as a design experiment.”
OF COURSE, I DID NOT CLAIM THAT IT WAS! Furthermore, in articles referenced in Hake (2011a) I explain:
(a) that Design-Based Research (DBR) is NOT the same thing as a “doing research in the classroom,” but nevertheless
(b) some Physics Education Research (PER) qualifies as DBR as characterized by cognitive scientist Anthony Kelly.
*****************************************************
To access the complete 19 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/mcytTv.
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)
rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
“Thanks for the opportunity to let off a bit of steam.”
Economics Nobelist Paul Krugman when asked to describe
instances in which journals had rejected his papers – see
Gans & Shepherd (1994). Anyone for doing a
Gans/Shepherd-type study for the PER and CS fields?
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 21 June 2011.]
Gans, J.S. & G.B. Shepherd. 1994. “How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(1): 165-179; online as a 1.6 MB pdf at http://bit.ly/mRd589.
Hake, R.R. 2011a. “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/mhVOAp. Post of 20 Jun 2011 13:16:58-0700 to AERA-L and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 17 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/ly8fwX with a provision for comments.
Hake, R.R. 2011b. “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle #2,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/mcytTv. Post of 21 Jun 2011 09:13:34-0700 to AERA-L and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 19 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
The abstract reads:
****************************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to my PhysLrnR post “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle” [Hake (2011)] Paul Camp (2011) wrote: “ ‘Doing research in a classroom’ is not the same thing as a design experiment.”
OF COURSE, I DID NOT CLAIM THAT IT WAS! Furthermore, in articles referenced in Hake (2011a) I explain:
(a) that Design-Based Research (DBR) is NOT the same thing as a “doing research in the classroom,” but nevertheless
(b) some Physics Education Research (PER) qualifies as DBR as characterized by cognitive scientist Anthony Kelly.
*****************************************************
To access the complete 19 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/mcytTv.
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)
rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
“Thanks for the opportunity to let off a bit of steam.”
Economics Nobelist Paul Krugman when asked to describe
instances in which journals had rejected his papers – see
Gans & Shepherd (1994). Anyone for doing a
Gans/Shepherd-type study for the PER and CS fields?
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 21 June 2011.]
Gans, J.S. & G.B. Shepherd. 1994. “How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(1): 165-179; online as a 1.6 MB pdf at http://bit.ly/mRd589.
Hake, R.R. 2011a. “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/mhVOAp. Post of 20 Jun 2011 13:16:58-0700 to AERA-L and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 17 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/ly8fwX with a provision for comments.
Hake, R.R. 2011b. “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle #2,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/mcytTv. Post of 21 Jun 2011 09:13:34-0700 to AERA-L and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 19 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle
Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle” [Hake (2011)].
The abstract reads:
*********************************************
ABSTRACT: PhysLrnR Paul Camp wrote (paraphrasing): “Primary references to Design-Based Research (DBR) http://bit.ly/mfy8gB are cognitive scientists Ann Brown (1992) and Allan Collins (1992). Some [physics education researchers] may not know that it was ‘Not Invented Here’ (NIH), which is one of my hobbyhorses.”
One of my hobbyhorses, in turn, is attempting (with zero success) to enlighten cognitive scientists (CS’s) who are oblivious or dismissive of the contributions of Physics Education Research (PER). Some CS’s may not know that although Ann Brown and Allan Collins evidently coined the term “design experiments” neither she nor Allan Collins were the first to utilize such experiments.
In “Cognitive Science and Physics Education Research: What We've Got Here Is Failure to Communicate” [Hake (2007)] I wrote:
“Cognitive scientist Allan Collins (1999) wrote: ‘Recently researchers have begun to study teaching and learning in the context of real-world learning environments,’ evidently unaware that Physics Education Researchers HAD BEEN DOING CLASSROOM RESEARCH FOR ABOUT THREE DECADES. . . . . Will articles such as this in the multidisciplinary Journal of the Learning Sciences (JLS) assuage, to any extent, past failures of CS’s to communicate with PER’s and vice versa?”
The answer to the last question is “NO!” JLS editor David Hammer, himself a former PER, in summarizing referee objections stated:
“. . . .they also all take issue with casting the issue specifically between CS and PER, or that the problems of ambiguity and inconsistency in the terms and constructs at play in education research can be addressed by researchers reading across fields. I think they're right on both counts.”
Hammer and the referees are entitled to their opinions but I think they are woefully wrong on both counts.
*********************************************
To access the complete 17 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/mhVOAp.
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)
rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
“He who knows only his own generation
Remains always a child.”
Cicero (in Orator)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 20 June 2011.]
Hake, R.R. 2011. “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/mhVOAp. Post of 20 Jun 2011 13:16:58-0700 to AERA-L and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 17 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
The abstract reads:
*********************************************
ABSTRACT: PhysLrnR Paul Camp wrote (paraphrasing): “Primary references to Design-Based Research (DBR) http://bit.ly/mfy8gB are cognitive scientists Ann Brown (1992) and Allan Collins (1992). Some [physics education researchers] may not know that it was ‘Not Invented Here’ (NIH), which is one of my hobbyhorses.”
One of my hobbyhorses, in turn, is attempting (with zero success) to enlighten cognitive scientists (CS’s) who are oblivious or dismissive of the contributions of Physics Education Research (PER). Some CS’s may not know that although Ann Brown and Allan Collins evidently coined the term “design experiments” neither she nor Allan Collins were the first to utilize such experiments.
In “Cognitive Science and Physics Education Research: What We've Got Here Is Failure to Communicate” [Hake (2007)] I wrote:
“Cognitive scientist Allan Collins (1999) wrote: ‘Recently researchers have begun to study teaching and learning in the context of real-world learning environments,’ evidently unaware that Physics Education Researchers HAD BEEN DOING CLASSROOM RESEARCH FOR ABOUT THREE DECADES. . . . . Will articles such as this in the multidisciplinary Journal of the Learning Sciences (JLS) assuage, to any extent, past failures of CS’s to communicate with PER’s and vice versa?”
The answer to the last question is “NO!” JLS editor David Hammer, himself a former PER, in summarizing referee objections stated:
“. . . .they also all take issue with casting the issue specifically between CS and PER, or that the problems of ambiguity and inconsistency in the terms and constructs at play in education research can be addressed by researchers reading across fields. I think they're right on both counts.”
Hammer and the referees are entitled to their opinions but I think they are woefully wrong on both counts.
*********************************************
To access the complete 17 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/mhVOAp.
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)
rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
“He who knows only his own generation
Remains always a child.”
Cicero (in Orator)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 20 June 2011.]
Hake, R.R. 2011. “Design-Based Research: Old PER Wine in a New Bottle,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/mhVOAp. Post of 20 Jun 2011 13:16:58-0700 to AERA-L and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 17 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Re: All about constructivism
Some blog followers may be interested in a recent discussion-list post of the above title [Hake (2009)]. The abstract reads:
ABSTRACT: Doug Holton, in a "Learning Sciences and Educational Technology Group (LSET)" post titled "All about constructivism," alerted readers to the fact that Alexander Riegler has placed radical constructivist Ernst von Glasersfeld's papers on the web at http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/EvG/ .
These might serve as an antidote to “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching” by Kirschner et al. (2006).
Holton references responses to Kirschner et al. (2006) by Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007), Schmidt et al. (2007), & Kuhn (2007)], but the most definitive rejoinder is “Language Ambiguities in Education Research” [Hake (2008)], mindlessly rejected by the Journal of Learning Sciences.
To access the complete 6 kB post please click on http://tinyurl.com/mb8pl2 .
REFERENCES
Hake, R.R. 2008. “Language Ambiguities in Education Research,” submitted to the Journal of Learning Sciences on 21 August; online as ref. 54 at http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake .
Hake, R.R. 2009. "Re: All about constructivism," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/mb8pl2. Post of 22 Jul 2009 10:30:43-0700 to AERA-L, IFETS, LSET, Net-Gold, PBL, PhysLrnR, PsychTeacher, TIPS, & WBTOLL-L.
Kirschner, P.A. , J. Sweller, & R.E. Clark. 2006. “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching,” Educational Psychologist 41(2): 75-86; online as a 176 kB pdf at http://tinyurl.com/3xmp2m .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
