tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-514796601118085561.post3006966090806141045..comments2023-11-26T00:30:14.205-08:00Comments on Net Gen Skeptic: What's the Big Deal?Mark Bullenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13566965958559257348noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-514796601118085561.post-78759363385709467162010-06-30T12:59:40.568-07:002010-06-30T12:59:40.568-07:00Thanks for your comment Zanne and good point about...Thanks for your comment Zanne and good point about IQ testing. I recently read 'IQ: A Smart History of a Failed Idea' which details the unfounded assumptions underlying this. Despite that, it is still widely used.<br /><br />MarkMark Bullenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13566965958559257348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-514796601118085561.post-73430366659192509682010-06-30T10:51:48.484-07:002010-06-30T10:51:48.484-07:00Mark,
And there are more. The U.S. has a long his...Mark, <br />And there are more. The U.S. has a long history of pseudoscience informing educational policy and practice. Two of the most infamous are the assumptions underpinning the bell-curve and IQ testing. That was the 20th century. It was uglier in the 19th. Some of our most popularized constructs have been (and still are) grounded on racist and/or sexist assumptions and ideologies. In addition, the unfilled promises of educational technologies transforming teaching and learning have been documented since the 50s if not earlier. Skinner's teaching machine comes to mind. In short, ample precedents have been set for which skepticism towards sweeping claims is necessary.<br /><br />I point to this blog often :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com