[Maths-Education] Being outdated

Tue, 13 May 2003 18:37:52 +0100

--============_-1159275020==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

I couldn't understand why sensible people bother to respond to this 
assertion about important references being 'dated'.  But now I too 
have succumbed -- it's just too much!

If taken seriously, it would guarantee the persistence of a major 
failure of research in education - the cyclic regurgitation of old 
ideas in superficially new forms as 'new'.  This is not research but 
journalism.

While context-dependence is important in most studies, many key 
phenomena of learning, teaching and system change are stable over a 
fairly wide range of circumstances.   (Just visit a few random maths 
classrooms and remember your schooldays)

Over the last few decades, the field has begun to build a core of 
well-tested results. Such a core is crucial in any applied field, if 
research is to be a reliable guide for design and development -- ie 
to be influential on practice.  Still, a more systematic approach 
(more replication, fewer unsubstantiated claims of generality) is 
needed to define better the limits of demonstrated validity of 
interesting insights. This implies better recognition for such work, 
and less academic credit for disputatious commentary, or for neat 
little studies of unknown generality, often with unreplicable 
treatments.

Like other fields of research let us recognize that the time-scale 
for building comprehensive reliable knowledge is long.  Engineering 
and medicine, for example, have taken centuries rather than decades 
to reach their current state, gradually moving practice from 
craft-based to largely research-based; education can learn from them. 
Here too, when the public sees clear practical payoff from research 
in education, it will give it serious support (5% not 0.01% of 
turnover).

Until then, educational research will continue to be widely seen as 
inward-looking -- and of minimal influence.

Hugh
--============_-1159275020==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>RE: [Maths-Education] Being
outdated</title></head><body>
<div>I couldn't understand why sensible people bother to respond to
this assertion about important references being 'dated'.&nbsp; But now
I too have succumbed -- it's just too much!</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>If taken seriously, it would<b> guarantee</b> the persistence of
a major failure of research in education - the cyclic regurgitation
of old ideas in superficially new forms as 'new'.&nbsp; This is not
research but journalism.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>While context-dependence is important in most studies, many key
phenomena of learning, teaching and system change are stable over a
fairly wide range of circumstances.&nbsp;&nbsp; (Just visit a few
random maths classrooms and remember your schooldays)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Over the last few decades, the field has begun to build a core of
well-tested results. Such a core is crucial in any applied field, if
research is to be a reliable guide for design and development -- ie to
be influential on practice.&nbsp; Still, a more systematic approach
(more replication, fewer unsubstantiated claims of generality) is
needed to define better the limits of demonstrated validity of
interesting insights. This implies better recognition for such work,
and less academic credit for disputatious commentary, or for neat
little studies of unknown generality, often with unreplicable
treatments.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Like other fields of research let us recognize that the
time-scale for building comprehensive reliable knowledge is long.&nbsp;
Engineering and medicine, for example, have taken centuries rather
than decades to reach their current state, gradually moving practice
from craft-based to largely research-based; education can learn from
them. Here too, when the public sees clear practical payoff from
research in education, it will give it serious support (5% not 0.01%
of turnover).</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Until then, educational research will continue to be widely seen
as inward-looking -- and of minimal influence.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Hugh</div>
</body>
</html>
--============_-1159275020==_ma============--