Hard Evidence vrs. Consensus

Bill G. Aldridge ( (no email) )
Tue, 28 Jan 1997 11:52:30 -0800

Colleagues:
In contrary to the radical constructivists and post-modernists, consensus
is not a viable mechanism for arriving at useful conclusions in science or
in pedagogy. Indeed, consensus moves us to the low common denominator of
mutual ignorance, superstition, and mythololgy.
Were we to use consensus as our criterion, the earth would be declared
flat, pi would be exactly 3, there would be creationism science, there
would be aliens from other planets landing on Earth, etc.,etc.,etc.
Hard research evidence does not require consensus; it usually precedes
consensus by some 10 to 100 or perhaps even 1000 years.

Let me provide a primer on mostly very old, but hard evidence, on how
people learn science and that everybody can do it, given the right
conditions (there is much more):

Arons, A. B. (1983), "Achieving Wider Scientific Literacy," Daedalus,
Spring 1983.

Arons, A. B. and Karplus, R., (1976), "Implications of Accumulating Data on
Levels of
Intellectual Development," Am. J. Phys. 44, 396.

Arons, A. B. (1990), A Guide to Introductory Physics Teaching (John Wiley &
Sons, New
York).

Bruner, J. S., (1960), The Process of Education (Cambridge Harvard
University Press,
Cambridge).

Dempter, F. (1988), "The Spacing Effect: A Case History in the Failure to
Apply the Results of
Psychological Research," American Psychologist 43, 627.

Driver, R. (1984-1989), The Children's Learning In Science Project,
Monographs on
Preconceptions in Science (Center for Studies in Science and Mathematics
Education,
Department of Education, University of Leeds, England).

Karplus, R. (1977), "Science Teaching and the Development of Reasoning," J.
Res. Sci. Ed. 14,
169.

Oakes, J. 1990. Multiplying Inequalities. The Effects of Race, Social
Class, and Tracking on Opportunities to Learn Mathematics and Science.
(Rand, Santa Monica, CA)

Piaget, J. (1973), To Understand is to Invent: The Future of Education.
(Grossman Publishers,
New York).

The problem is that our "Scholars" seldom read anything but their own
literature, if that, and something like Dempster's work is totally
neglected. The entire area of research in cognitive psychology where most
scholarly publications appear in journals other than those of the
educationists (JRST and AREA's pubs), are seldom read, studied or cited.

Bill Aldridge

_____________________________________________________________________________

TEECH Leadership Development Discussion

To send a response, send mail to teech_leadership@teech.terc.edu
To unsubscribe from the list, send mail to ntlist_manager@teech.terc.edu
In the body of the message: unsubscribe teech_leadership <email-address>
View or post messages from the Web at http://hub.terc.edu/terc/teech.html
______________________________________________________________________________