Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: Should Randomized Control Trials Be the Gold Standard of Educational Research?



In my Phys-L post of 17 April titled "Re: Should Randomized Control
Trials Be the Gold Standard of Educational Research?" [Hake (2005)] I
wrote [***bracketed by lines "HHHHHHH. . . ." *** <--- look !!]:

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
In his Phys-L post of 16 Apr 2005 of the above title, Jack Uretsky
(2005) wrote [bracketed by lines "UUUUUUU. . . . ."]:

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
I don't understand. If you can't control the variables, how can you get
statistically "valid" results?

My expeerimentalizt friends (in particle physics) now divide
uncertainties into a +statistical" part and a "systematic" part.
These two parts must be combined somehow (how to combine is still IMO
an unsolved problem) in order to arrive at a meaningful statement of
uncertainty. When several experiments measure the same quantity,
then a comparison of quoted uncertainties gives one an intuitive
feeling for the uncertainty of our knowledge of the quantity being
measured.

I have seen nothing in the field of measuring teaching techniques that
tells me that we have much insight into how to make "statistically valid"
comparisons.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

In response Brian Whatcott (2005) wrote [***bracketed by lines
"WWWWWW. . . ." *** <--- look !!]:

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
At 04:30 PM 4/17/2005, Richard Hake, you wrote:
///

In his Phys-L post of 16 Apr 2005 of the above title, Jack Uretsky
(2005) wrote:
I don't understand. If you can't control the variables, how can you get
statistically "valid" results?

To which Richard responded:

My experimentalist friends (in particle physics) now divide
uncertainties into a "statistical" part and a "systematic" part.
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW


Unfortunately Brian misinterpreted my post Hake (2005). I did
***not*** respond

">My experimentalist friends (in particle physics) now divide
uncertainties into a "statistical" part and a "systematic" part."

Had I been a conventional reply button pusher (bane of discussion
lists) my post would have read as follows:

"Jack Uretsky wrote:

I don't understand. If you can't control the variables, how can you get
statistically "valid" results?

My expeerimentalizt friends (in particle physics) now divide
uncertainties into a +statistical" part and a "systematic" part.
These two parts must be combined somehow (how to combine is still IMO
an unsolved problem) in order to arrive at a meaningful statement of
uncertainty. When several experiments measure the same quantity,
then a comparison of quoted uncertainties gives one an intuitive
feeling for the uncertainty of our knowledge of the quantity being
measured.

I have seen nothing in the field of measuring teaching techniques that
tells me that we have much insight into how to make "statistically valid"
comparisons."

It appears that my unconventional formatting with the [bracketed by
"XXXXXX. . ."] only serves to confuse people.

Sorry.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<rrhake@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>

REFERENCES
Hake, R.R. 2005. "Re: Should Randomized Control Trials Be the Gold
Standard of Educational Research?" online at
<http://lists.nau.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0504&L=phys-l&O=D&P=20081>. Post of
17 Apr 2005 14:30:00-0700 to Math-Learn, Phys-L, and PhysLrnR.

Whatcott, B. 2005. "Re: Should Randomized Control Trials Be the Gold
Standard of Educational Research?" online at
<http://lists.nau.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0504&L=phys-l&O=D&P=20532>. Post of
17 Apr 2005 19:05:12-0500 to Phys-L.
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l