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]

Re: [Phys-l] STUDY SUGGESTS NO CHILD LAW MAY BE DUMBING DOWN STUDENTS



I'll repeeat: An expeerimental number is meaningless without a quoted uncertainty. The uncertainty comes in two parts, statistical and systematic. Systematic uncertainties are usually the hardest to pin down.
Regards,
Jack



On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Bernard Cleyet wrote:

I think the opinion is on the part of the editor of my source
(Progressive Review -- Sam Smith) extrapolating the results of a
British study to the US testing (NCLB).

I found the link to the original article is broken. Here's another
attempt:

<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080791/Dimming-How-
brainpower-todays-14-year-olds-slipped-radically-just-generation.html#>


bc thinks the study is valid.

p.s. Shayer (quoted in above article) is a researcher in Piagetan
development and "much" referenced. e.g.


http://www.daimi.au.dk/~mec/papers/journal/19--bulletin2006.pdf and

https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/archives/2005/09_2005/msg00033.html



On 2008, Nov 02, , at 08:14, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:

The word "may" is used a lot here. Is this a study or an opinion
piece? Reminds me of the "studies" showing how comic books were
dumbing us down when I was a kid (I'm 64 now).

Bob at PC

________________________________

From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu on behalf of
Bernard Cleyet
Sent: Sun 11/2/2008 1:37 AM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Cc: Nancy Seese
Subject: [Phys-l] STUDY SUGGESTS NO CHILD LAW MAY BE DUMBING DOWN
STUDENTS

cut

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


--
"Trust me. I have a lot of experience at this."
General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley