Before proceeding to the main substance, I should like to relay an important comment from EdStat's Dale Berger (2005):
"Those interested in the 'Gold Standard' issue may wish to read or see the 'debate' between [psychologist] Mark Lipsey and [philosopher] Michael Scriven last summer. It is available in text or streaming video through the link <http://www.cgu.edu/pages/2668.asp>."
In his AERA-C post of 18 Apr 2005 with the above title, Dennis Roberts (2005) wrote [bracketed by lines "RRRRRR. . . ."]:
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR At 08:54 AM 4/18/2005 [Jason Osborne (2005)] wrote:
"I have been amazed that this conversation has been going on as long as it has . . . and the lack of fiery rebuttal bothers me as well. While I agree that RCTs are not ALWAYS appropriate, as Richard. . . .[Hake (2005a)]. . . suggests, they are and should be the gold standard in terms of creating STRONG inference."
ON the other side of the coin ... it also amazes me when people can't see that while education is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination ...PRODUCTS from this system in large part are highly intelligent ... invent things ... make scientific discoveries ... solve medical problems ... lead governments ... fly 767s ... orbit the planet ... build the Golden Gate Bridge ... and just a zillion other accomplishments THAT for the most part ... started back in their school days.
School, w/o RCT, does make a huge difference in peoples' lives ...While it might be nice when the opportunity arises to do more RCT in school settings ... it's not the gold standard. Look at the accomplishments of students as they become adults ... THAT's the proof.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Great minds run in the same direction. Dennis's point that, judging from its products, the old-time education was not so bad, was also made by POD's Mike Theall (2005a) who wrote [bracketed by lines "TTTTTT. . ."; my insertion of a,b,c] :
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT a. For the majority, education does a pretty good job. . . .
b. . . . while all the critics scream for "reform" in education, we don't hear much screaming about reforming anything else. Our business & political critics need to do a lot of housecleaning before casting any stones. Law, medicine, and other professions aren't perfect either and rather than accepting any responsibility for their mistakes, they simply point to education as a handy scapegoat. Frankly, I'm tired of the hypocrisy. . . . .
c. . . . We all know and admire scores of teachers who are dedicated, thoughtful, capable, and hard-working. Let's remember these people in our statements and let's fight for the recognition and credit they and education deserve.. . . .
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
My response [Hake (2005b)] was (with apologies to those who have seen this previously):
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I enthusiastically agree with Mike Theall's points "b" and "c," and with Mike Chejlava's (2005) comment regarding the reality of C.P. Snow's "culture gap," so apparent in the posts of Theall (2005), Chejlava (2005), and the POD discussion list generally.
However, I vehemently disagree with Mike Theall's point "a," that
"FOR THE MAJORITY, EDUCATION DOES A PRETTY GOOD JOB."
In Hake (2000) I listed a few examples of the science illiteracy of the general population (and even the elite graduates of Harvard and MIT) for whom education has NOT done a "pretty good job" (see that article for the references):
EVIDENCE FOR SCIENTIFIC ILLITERACY (a few of many examples)
A. Science and Engineering Indicators (NSF, 1998), Chap. 7, "Science and
Technology"; on the web at <http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind98/start.htm>: "..... it appears that only 11 percent of Americans can define the term 'molecule.' . . . A large proportion of the population knows that a molecule is a small piece of matter, but is unable to relate it to an atom or a cell, which are also small pieces of matter. And, despite substantial media attention to deep space probes and pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope, only 48 percent of Americans know that the earth goes around the sun once each year .. Only 27 percent of Americans understand the nature of scientific inquiry well enough to be able to make informed judgments about the scientific basis of results reported in the media. Public understanding of the nature of scientific inquiry was measured through questions about the meaning of scientific study and the reasons for the use of control groups in
experiments."
B. Eugenie C. Scott, "Not (Just) in Kansas Anymore," Science 228, 813-815 (2000); on the web at <http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/288/5467/813>: "In August of 1999, after months of wrangling, the Kansas State Board of Education passed its state science education standards. Against the recommendations of a committee of 27 scientists and teachers, the board voted to strip from the standards all mention of the Big Bang, the age of the Earth, and any reference to organisms having descended from the same ancestors: in other words evolutionary astronomy, geology, and biology. Teachers were informed that evolution would not be included in the state high-school assessment exams, greatly decreasing the likelihood that the subject would be taught . . . As the media probed for more stories, the National Center for Science Education (where I work. . . <http://www.natcenscied.org/> . . .) informed the sometimes incredulous press that, yes, indeed, antievolutionism is a widespread problem in American kindergarten through high school or 'K-12' education."
C. Jerome Epstein, "Cognitive Development in an Integrated Mathematics and Science Program," J. of College Science Teaching, 12/97 & 1/98, pp. 194-201:
"While it is now well known that large numbers of students arrive at
college with large educational and cognitive deficits, many faculty and administrative colleagues are not aware that many students lost all sense of meaning or understanding in elementary school. . . .In large numbers our students. . .[at Bloomfield College (NJ) and Lehman (CUNY)] . . . cannot order a set of fractions and decimals and cannot place them on a number line. Many do not comprehend division by a fraction and have no concrete comprehension of the process of division itself. Reading rulers where there are other than 10 subdivisions, basic operational meaning of area and volume, are pervasive difficulties. Most cannot deal with proportional reasoning nor any sort of problem that has to be translated from English. Our diagnostic test, which has been given now at more than a dozen institutions shows that there are such students everywhere. . . .(even Wellesley! - see J. Epstein, "What is the Real Level of Our Students," 1999, unpublished).
D. Woodie Flowers "Why change, Been doin' it this way for 4000 years!" ASME Mechanical Engineering Education Conference: Drivers and Strategies of Major Program Change, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, March 26-29, 2000; on the web as PowerPoint plus video at <http://hitchcock.dlt.asu.edu/media2/cresmet/flowers/>. (Download the
free RealPlayer.):
Slide 42, 43: BBC videotape Simple Minds showing MIT graduates having trouble getting a flashlight bulb to light, given one bulb, one battery, and one piece of wire. This is the MIT counterpart of Harvard's "A Private Universe," a videotape showing Harvard graduating seniors confidently explaining that the seasons are caused by yearly variation in the distance of the Earth from the Sun! And if such occurs at MIT and Harvard, how about Podunk State?
For "A Private Universe" consult <http://www.learner.org/resources/series28.html>. For an equivalent of the Simple Minds videotape go to Minds of Our Own at
<http://www.learner.org/resources/series26.html>. The latter gives a description of three Minds of Our Own videotapes available, including the MIT footage: "Why is it that students can graduate from MIT and Harvard, yet not know how to solve a simple third-grade problem in science: lighting a light bulb with a battery and wire? Through the example of an experienced teacher, the program takes a hard look at why teaching fails, even when he uses all of the traditional tricks of the trade. The program shows how new research, used by teachers committed to finding solutions to problems, is reshaping what goes on in the nation's schools."
But why should one be concerned about the science illiteracy of the general population? Because life-threatening science-related societal problems [e.g., terrorism; overpopulation (doubles about every 35 years); threat of weapons of mass destruction; human welfare (starvation, homelessness, unemployment,
drugs, epidemics, AIDS, etc.); pollution of air, water, land, food; global warming; ozone depletion; deforestation; loss of biodiversity; etc., etc., etc.] cannot be resolved when a scientifically illiterate society elects scientifically illiterate leaders.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University 24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake> <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>
"The global population is precariously large, and will become much more so before peaking some time after 2050. Humanity overall is improving per capita
production, health, and longevity. But it is doing so by eating up the planet's capital, including natural resources and biological diversity millions of years old. Homo sapiens is approaching the limit of its food and water supply. Unlike any species before, it is also changing the world's atmosphere and climate, lowering and polluting water tables, shrinking forests, and spreading deserts. Most of the stress originates directly or indirectly from a handful of industrialized countries. Their proven formulas for prosperity are being eagerly adopted by the rest of the world. The emulation cannot be sustained, not with the same levels of consumption and waste. Even if the industrialization of the developing countries is only partially successful, the environmental aftershock will dwarf the population explosion that preceded it."
E.O. Wilson in "Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge" (Knopf, 1998)
REFERENCES
Berger, D. 2005. "Re: Should Randomized Control Trials Be the Gold Standard of Educational Research? online at
<http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0504&L=edstat-l&T=0&O=D&X=5892603D63E947357B&Y=rrhake%40earthlink%2Enet&P=6741>. Post of 18 Apr 2005 21:52:50-0700 to EdStat. The encyclopedic URL indicates that EdStat is one of the few discussion lists whose archives are closed to non subscribers :-( - WHY ??. However, it takes only a few minutes to subscribe by following the simple directions at
<http://lists.psu.edu/archives/edstat-l.html> / "Join or leave the list (or change settings)" where "/" means "click on." If you're busy, then subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under "Miscellaneous." Then, as a subscriber, you may access the archives and/or post messages at any time, while receiving NO MAIL from the list!
Chejlava, M. 2005. "Re: Random Thought: Leave Them Asking," POD post of 21 Feb 2005 11:07:14-0500; online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0502&L=pod&O=D&P=25059>.
Hake, R.R. 2000. "The General Population's Ignorance of Science Related Societal Issues: A Challenge for the University," AAPT Announcer 30(2): 105; online as ref. 11 at <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake> or download directly by clicking on <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/GuelphSocietyG.pdf> (2.1MB).
Based on an earlier libretto with the leitmotiv: "The road to U.S. science literacy begins with effective university science courses for pre-college teachers." The opera dramatizes the fact that the failure of universities THROUGHOUT THE UNIVERSE to properly educate pre-college teachers is responsible for our failure to observe any signs of extraterrestrial intelligence.
Hake, R.R. 2005a. Re: Should Randomized Control Trials Be the Gold Standard of Educational Research? online at
<http://lists.asu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0504&L=aera-l&T=0&O=D&P=2100>. Post of 17/18 Apr 2005 to AERA-C, AERA-D, AERA-G, AERA-H, AERA-J, AERA-K, AERA-L,
AP-Physics, ASSESS, Biopi-L, Chemed-L, EvalTalk, Math-Learn, Phys-L, PhysLrnR, Physhare, POD, STLHE-L, & TIPS.
Hake, R.R. 2005b. "Attacks on Education (was Random Thought: Leave Them Asking)" online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0502&L=pod&P=R20579&I=-3>. Post of 21 Feb 2005 10:33:05-0800 to AERA-J, AERA-L, AP-Physics, Biopi-L, Chemed-L, PhysLrnR, Phys-L, Physhare, Physoc, & POD.
Osborne, J. 2005. "should randomized control trials be the gold standard?" online at
<http://lists.asu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0504c&L=aera-c&D=0&T=0&P=467&F=P>. Post of 18 Apr 2005 08:54:11-0400 to AERA-C.
Roberts, D. 2005. Re: should randomized control trials be the gold standard? online at <http://lists.asu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0504c&L=aera-c&T=0&O=D&P=598>. Post of 18 Apr 2005 10:47:40-0400 to AERA-C.
Snow, C.P. 1959. "The two cultures and the scientific revolution." Available in a 1993 "Canto" edition tiled "The Two Cultures," illustrated by Stefan Collini and published by Cambridge University Press. The publisher states "This reissue of Snow's controversial Rede lecture of 1959 and its successor piece 'A Second Look' has a new introduction that charts the history and context of the famous debate on the cultural split between the humanities and the sciences."
Theall, M. 2005a. "Re: Random Thought: Leave Them Asking," POD post of
21 Feb 2005 08:30:48-0500, online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0502&L=pod&O=D&P=24726>. For Theall's response to Hake (2005b) see Theall (2005b).
Theall, M. 2005b. "Re: Attacks on Education (was Random Thought: Leave Them Asking)," POD post of 21 Feb 2005 15:27:38-0500, online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0502&L=pod&P=R21044&I=-3>.
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
