Wednesday, June 20, 2007
My second comment on Clark Aldrich blog
I find the website to be emerging as both informative and persuasive in its apparent organization, and content - and the use of one case study, especially here in the form of comparing a class to teach behaviors that used one group who just read case studies and another that used case studies and a tool to practice the behaviors - is superficially significant, but not convincing without a more thorough evaluation and comparison of other known alternatives to teaching behaviors and the big and middle skills - I would be a failure if I tried to teach a class on behavioral modeling and learning if I used only printed materials and reading exercises. Am I out of line here? I just don't see the significant value add of VL without more information and a link to the original research. It feels like this might be pulled out of context a bit for the sake of persuasion. Whaddya think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Your comment about the VL case studies is relevant, not necessarily because those three blog entries should have been longer or more detailed, but because no research, no matter how structured, will actually convince people. People intuitively fight results, even if done by third parties (as was done in the three VL cases), and even if showing significant improvements over traditional methodology (as was done here), and even if using a variety of detailed evaluation methodology. I was asked by one PhD student who wanted my help to set up a "fair" comparison between sim based and non-sim based methodologies, and frankly, I couldn't help him. I am not even sure what the impact would be if such a perfect comparison was created. Big issue!
Post a Comment