Dan Willingham’s video about the lunchmeat “learning styles” (LS) has generated lots of discussion in the proverbial blogosphere. Matthew Tabor has a post with links to six sources. It’s pretty interesting that so much of the buzz about the video has focused on the putative auditory-visual LS. Dan pretty expressly aimed at an extended list of the things early in the video. But, A-V’s the one he used to make the points, and that’s probably good, because it’s probably the most popular of the bologna approaches.
Over on Ken’s D-Ed Reckoning, I dropped a comment on his post (and his post provides a good exposition on the subject of LS. In my comment, I promised to post an image showing the relative benefits of basing reading instruction on auditory-vs-visual LS. styles. It’s at the right. The yellow columns are standards for (left to right) weak effects (0.2), modest effects (0.3), pretty good effects (0.5), and outstanding effects (0.7). The purple bar is the effect size (0.144) that Kavale and Forness (1987) found when they analyzed 39 studies (205 effect sizes) of modality-based reading instruction.
Continue reading ‘More discussion of Dan’s LS video’
Sphere: Related Content
Here’s a “Welcome” to Kylie Sturgess and Podblack Cat. I’m routinely pleased to find folks with whom I share skepticism about the bologna that masquerades as reasoned discourse in education. Because of Ms. Sturgess’ focus on skepticism, education, and science, I’m noting here that I’ve added her site to the blogroll on Teach Effectively.
Continue reading ‘Podblack Cat’
Sphere: Related Content
Orac, whom regular readers will recognize from a few earlier posts, has a lengthy-but-informative piece about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) that I read a day or so ago. In “The infiltration of woo into mainstream academic medicine: The media notices,” Orac explains that he is glad that some news media are recognizing the fluffy nature of some popular medical treatments.
Along with Dr. R.W. and few others, I’ve made a bit of a name for myself in the medical blogosphere by bemoaning the infiltration of non-science- and non-evidence-based medicine into academia. It’s not a particularly popular viewpoint. The prevailing attitude seems to be: Why be so negative? It’s all good. Moreover, with a credulous media eager to publish stories of “healing” and “humanistic” medicine, those of us who remain skeptical of applying unproven and/or untested remedies in an academic setting, thus giving them the imprimatur of academic medicine and the respect associated with it, are easily painted as dinosaurs, unable to get with the plan, unaccepting of the new order of medicine.
Continue reading ‘Bologna takes a lick’
Sphere: Related Content
Bogus Bowl II
O.K, folks, here’s a second installment in the Bogus Bowl. Bogus Bowl I will close Saturday night (9 Feb 08), so jump over there (click on “polls” in the top navigation element) and vote in the first one if you’ve not done so already. Then come back here and vote on this one…. Or vice versa.
In this one, we’re examing reasons that educators give for shirking what I’ve sometimes called the “instructional obligation.” It’s your chance to consider alternative rationales for not teaching.
Sphere: Related ContentContinue reading ‘Bogus Bowl II’