home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!lll-winken!overload.lbl.gov!zeus.ieee.org!europa.asd.contel.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!SENDIT.NODAK.EDU!SACKMAN
- From: sackman@sendit.NoDak.edu ((Gleason Sackmann))
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edtech
- Subject: Bangkok Project--Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory (fwd)
- Message-ID: <EDTECH%92101511152758@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
- Date: 15 Oct 92 15:07:10 GMT
- Sender: "EDTECH - Educational Technology" <EDTECH@OHSTVMA.BITNET>
- Lines: 46
- Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Approved-By: "EDTECH Moderator" <21765EDT@MSU.BITNET>
-
- BANGKOK PROJECT:
-
- Forwarded message:
-
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:27:00 -0400
- From: <N0G@psuvm.psu.edu>
- Subject: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory
- To: KWB107@psuvm.psu.edu
- In-Reply-To: KWB107 AT PSUVM.PSU.EDU -- Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:39:00 -0400
-
- You ask "elaborate on your perceived differences between the two" and I
- think you mean by "the two" the educational theory as opposed to what you
- call a scientific theory... I dont accept, for the moment, the proposition
- that educational theory should be "looser" than some other kind of theory
- called "Scientific". Should be.. I said.. I recognize that at present most
- educational theories are less well grounded in empirical data. It is a chicken
- and egg problem isnt it... We have no well accepted summaries of knowledge
- about distance learning and teaching. Therefore people gather information
- that is a-theoretical... it neither refutes or confirms any theory.. some
- distance teaching universities sweep up mountains of facts that do little
- to advance knowledge in general... they know how many men or women there are
- in each region, how old they are, their grades, etc.. all useful to plan the
- system, but of no contribution to development of basic understanding about
- how people learn and teach... So we have theories with weak foundations in
- fact, and facts unrelated to theories.... I hope this discussion will help
- break us out of this circle... ... we can be more scientific, without yet
- reaching the stage of being able to test hypotheses in experimental design..I
- personally think the experimental method is an important and the most
- sophisticated form or research.. and I also like qualitative, ethnographic
- and other inductive research... I dont think we are ready yet for much
- hypothetico-deductive research... but we should aspire to it.. in other words
- we might be "looser" and not what you call scientific now... but we can get
- less loose if we applied discipline in our qualitative methods, aspire and
- seek ways of testing by experiment... and build research from our theories..
- and seek to developo them in light of the information we discover... I dont
- know if this is answering your question... anyway I am more interested in
- hearing what other people think... I would like to get some consensus views
- on these issues to take forward to Bangkok... so let's hear from you....
- Michael Moore.
-
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Gleason Sackman BBS: sackman@sendit.nodak.edu
- Coordinator Internet: sackman@plains.nodak.edu
- SENDIT - NoDak's K-12 Telcom Network Bitnet: sackman@plains.bitnet
- BOX 5164, NDSU Computer Center Voice: (701)237-8109
- Fargo, ND 58105 Fax: (701)237-8541
-