:-) Good question, but your view of knowing is mistaken: I don't get to know only when data is shoved in front of me. Many other things are known from other sources. That doesn't make other sources of knowledge "touchy-feely", less reliable, or less valid (unless you have selected some "touchy-feely" neo-positivist commitments of your own).
No, I haven't given the same exam to both, but maybe I should. If you thought it would be useful, I'd be very inclined to do so! (But I only have 2 more weeks of school.)
I can say that there is a body of empirical research supporting the premise that reform classes vs. traditional classes often score about the same on traditional measures, but students in the reform classes finish the course with far richer understandings. This isn't a "feel-good" conclusion. You could find the literature yourself, of I could help if you liked.
Phil Larson 754 East Rockhill Road Upper Bucks Christian School Sellersville, PA 18102 (215) 536-9200
On Fri, 23 May 1997 09:50:12 -0700 Wayne Bishop <email@example.com> writes: >Phillip, > >>I must dissent: feeling good has nothing to do with it. > >>I also teach a fairly traditional Pre-Calc. And right now, my 8th >>grade Algebra 1 class students have as good a sense of the nature >>of linear, quadratic, rational, and exponential functions than do my >>juniors in Pre-Calc--and these latter students are no dummies. > >I'm (almost) from Missouri. Can you share with the group your >data-based >support for such an apparent "feel-good" conclusion? For example, >share >with us the exam that you gave to both classes that covered "the >nature of >linear, quadratic, rational, and exponential functions" and their >comparative results? > >Wayne. > >Wayne Bishop >Math & Comp Sci >Cal State LA >