Funny you should ask, and I've often wondered the same thing. I was forced to read it as an undergraduate (by our fellow colleague Royce White). I found it dry but elegant, and I guess I do consider it a classic. However, I quickly rejected the idea of making my Methods students read it. I guess I figured it was too old-school and that they weren't up for the challenge. I'd be happy to be convinced otherwise. Others?
Patrick >>> On 1/27/2009 at 1:31 PM, Michael Britt <[email protected]> wrote: > When I was a young man (attending grad school in a log cabin) my profs > had me read Stanley and Campbell's "Experimental and Quasiexperimental > Designs for Research" chapter. At the time it was considered a > classic (translation: boring as all get-out, but extremely valuable). > For a few years I forced my undergrad research and stats students to > read it. I was just wondering: does anyone require this book? And > is it still considered a classic? > > Michael > > > Michael Britt > [email protected] > www.thepsychfiles.com > --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
