Folks,
Let's not criticize the Texas research, since it was the first year of
a multi-year study with only partial implementation in the initial
year. We all have great hopes that the study of technology immersion
will yield useful information. We should give it a year or two.
Historically, significant interventions -- technology, curriculum,
pedagogy -- often result in lower test scores during their initial
year, as teachers learn anew and change their standard practice.
Let's go after the journalists who look for a story hook that will
capture an audience, regardless of how much they misconstrue our
findings. We, as researchers, have an obligation to work with
journalists to help them find powerful hooks for complex and difficult
stories. We need to simplify how we portray our research and clearly
state our conclusions and methods, incorporating our qualifiers as we
need to. We need to take our time, checking periodically for
comprehension, offering to be available for further questions, and
providing written summaries when possible.
As someone who has been studying the use and impact of one-to-one
laptop programs for the past ten years, I was disturbed by the
reportage and the conclusions drawn by the reporter; and as someone who
conducts evaluations of professional development for science
journalists, I realize how much work is needed to prepare and inform
those who will be presenting our findings to the general public.
Most of the time, we're happy just to be mentioned -- and have our name
spelled correctly.
Saul
========================================================
Saul Rockman / Rockman Et Al
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
49 Geary Street, Suite 530 San Francisco, CA 94108
ph (415) 544-0788 fax (415) 544-0789 www.rockman.com
Cell: 415/407-7033
========================================================
On Jul 23, 2006, at 12:27 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am not sure who decided upon the efficacy of the laptop study or who
thought of the headline, but I believe anyone familiar with the basic
tenets of science would have a good laugh at the idea that such a
study 'proves' anything. Even 'hard science' reearchers of a research
study for which one can have rigorous controls in place to account for
unforeseen variables would not use the word prove after one study. In
education, there are so many variables--unforeseen, unseen,
unrecognized, hidden, ideological, etc., that most of such research is
bogus. How about a study to see if students of well-paid teachers
performed 'better' than poorly-paid ones? You won't see such a study
because state legislatures don't want to pay teachers more money.
_______________________________________________
DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list
DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org
http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE
in the body of the message.
