Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id iBD1CmU13129; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:12:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:12:48 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4E6BBA38.569403C2.0A349A3F@aol.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: AWilder106@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1805] Re: Is all pd "good" pd? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Status: O Content-Length: 602 Lines: 7 Catherine, My memory is getting a bit dim, now, but I think Tom was saying that there is not a demonstrated--measured--link between PD and improvement in student performance. NOT that PD is "pretty much worthless," but that it's worth has not been measured. That's the lacuna I noticed. That set me off into a fantasy of how a "scientific evidence-based" study would be constructed. If you think about it, it would be pretty hard! Science without the quotes is what we are about here, not "science" as it is being referenced, which is a kind of parody of real science, as I know you agree. Andrea
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:01 EST