[NIFL-AALPD:1806] PD & Scientific Analysis - Read first

From: George demetrion (gdemetrion@msn.com)
Date: Sun Dec 12 2004 - 21:50:10 EST


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 iBD2oAU14083; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:50:10 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:50:10 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <BAY4-F2FCA7739BE3D231E28EFDC5AB0@phx.gbl>
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: "George demetrion" <gdemetrion@msn.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1806] PD & Scientific Analysis - Read first
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Status: O
Content-Length: 4466
Lines: 99

Hello Andrea and others,

I've posted this before in another context, but the framework might do just 
as well herein setting out a scientific-based study of the impact of 
professional development.  The following from scientific philosopher Karl 
Popper could just as well come from the 6th chapter of John Dewey's 
magisterial Logic: The Theory of Inquiry, titled "Patterns of Inquiry."  But 
Popper will do just as well. Here's his schematic framework for an 
empirically-based scientific study on any topic:


(1)   A clear exposition of the problem—, or if the problem may be assumed 
to be well known, a clear reference to it and to an exposition of 
it…[including any clarifications of] the always shifting problem situation 
(italics in original).

(2)   A more detailed survey of the relevant hypotheses bearing on the 
problem (and of the experiments bearing on the hypotheses, indicating the 
degree to which these are able to contribute to the appraisal of the 
hypotheses).

(3)   A more specific statement of the hypothesis (or hypotheses) which the 
author intends to propose, or to discuss, or to test experimentally.

(4)   A description of the experiments and the results.

(5)   An evaluation:  whether the problem situation has changed; and if so, 
how.

(6)   Suggestions for further work arising from the work reported (Realism 
and the Aim of Science, pp. 50-51).


     Provisional Problem Statement

What is the impact of professional development in the field of adult 
literacy on local programs and to what extent does such influence enhance 
the literacy development of students?


Assume for the moment that this is a reasonable problem statement, or if you 
prefer, state another one.  Then, on a Popperian-based scientific 
investigation one would work through the rest of the steps.  Perhaps, if 
you'd like, we can move on to a detailed survey of the hypotheses bearing on 
the problem and to the types of experiments that would help to evaluate the 
strengths of such hypotheses.  A critical point here is that a Popperian 
experiment is not synonymous with experimental design as Popper argues that 
one should not seek for greater exactitude and certainty than what the 
problem allows for.

To get the ball started I'll suggest a hypothesis that one of the most 
potent influences of PD is that of knowledge diffusion--that typically the 
impact is less of a direct nature, but rather on how, the extent to which 
and by whom potent ideas become disseminated as well as how they are 
internalized and modified at the local level.  This hypothesis, too, could 
be refined, but if one stays with it for the moment for the sake of moving 
the discussion forward, the next step (still working on Popper's second 
stage, is the articulation of and setting up of the types of experiments 
which would lend support or refute the hypothesis.  I will not attempt that 
effort here, perhaps someone else will.  Assuming the hypotheses identified 
get a first past, they are further refined and tested until one can make a 
reasonably enduring statement, what Dewey refers to as a "warranted 
assertion" about the impact of PD at the local level.

In a following message, I'll lay out the basic framework of Dewey's pattern 
of inquiry.  What Dewey and Popper both have in common is a problem-centered 
focus as the basis for setting up a scientific investigation and the drawing 
on whatever sets of hypotheses, data, and data analysis is required in 
moving progressively toward resolution.  The similarities between Popper and 
Dewey's methodologies and those articulated in practitioner-based inquiry 
should not be missed.


George Demetrion



----- Original Message -----
From: AWilder106@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 8:15 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1805] Re: Is all pd "good" pd?

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