> "Perhaps this is a teachable moment." But then again, perhaps not.
What I try to do with a popular article is view it as an ordinary person who came across it might---I do not assume it is directed at the academic community (that's what peer-reviewed journals are for). And I assume that this average reader will not conduct additional research and that he or she has no specific background with regard to what the article comments on. I think that this is a good way to read a popular article as it will give insight as to what the average person might take away from the article, and help highlight what is wrong with the article's presentation (for possible use in the classroom). That is the way I read popular articles. Yes the article mentions the committee but given that the main spokesperson for the position in the article is Kendler, (and given "For Kendler, there is a clear, bright line between normal grief and clinical depression") then it wouldn't be too out of line to think that he had a major influence on the decision--perhaps he is the chair or head of the committee (something the average person would probably know about the structure of a committee), and could press his opinion forward. In my view, Scott supplied information directly relevent to what the article was about. And this kind of information could easily have been included in the article to make it a more balanced presentation that the average reader would benefit from--if indeed the primary goal of the article was to inform, which I doubt and that is what I intended to highlight. However, the information that you (Mike P) supplied, while perhaps interesting, had little to nothing to do with the actual article (in my opinion). --Mike --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=4012 or send a blank email to leave-4012-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
