I normally try to avoid responding to Ze'ev's post as they often tend to be "tediously repetitive, self-referential, and empty of useful content." However, I do admit they have one redeeming quality; i.e. they are not spread far and wide. So, I have a suggestion: Stop!
On Aug 19, 2012, at 2:25 PM, Ze'ev Wurman wrote:
> I normally try to avoid responding to Hake's messages as they tend to be > tediously repetitive, self-referential, and empty of useful content, not > to mention that they are spread far and wide to any mailing list that > cares to have him as a member irrespective of whether the message is > relevant to that group or not. In this case, however, I will make an > exception because it exceeds even Hake's average in its pomposity and > conceit. I am particularly drawn to Hake's parenthetical > pseudo-objective comment: > > "[paraphrasing in an attempt to eliminate at least some of Hansen's > ambiguity, illiteracy, imprecision, redundancy, and verbosity - Robert > please correct me if you think my paraphrasing distorts your intended > meaning]" > > One needs to go the the full post to see what raised Hake's ire. To > support his insult of "illiteracy" Hake raises Hansen's use of > "disinterested" adjective, arguing that "Hansen probably meant > "uninterested" not "disinterested," the latter meaning "not having a > personal interest, impartial." Yet Hake's expertise lies presumably in > physics, not in linguistic (or in education, despite Hake's > pretentions). Had he checked the Oxford English Dictionary he would have > seen that the *first* listed meaning is "Without interest or concern; > not interested, unconcerned" -- precisely the way Hansen used it. Only > the second OED meaning lists it as "Not influenced by interest; > impartial, unbiased, unprejudiced." So who is illiterate here? > > Hake then tries to reject Hansen's arguments. Unsuccessfully as far as I > am concerned, but that is neither here nor there. But nothing justifies > Hake's summary, except his own conceit and his own inflated self-image: > "Although Hansen seems to regard himself as an authority on education > and the epitome of the traditionally educated individual, IMHO his > Math-Teach posts stand testimony to his closed mind and the failure of > traditional methods of instruction." I can hardly find a better > description of Hake himself, replacing "traditional" with "PER." > > It is considered uncivil to pick on minor stylistic and grammatical > issues in blog posts and emails -- they are often written in haste and > include people from various cultures and linguistic backgrounds. The > focus should be on the content rather than on form. Yet this is > precisely what Hake does, and not for the first time -- it's just was so > bad this time that I couldn't hold off anymore on his arrogant rubbish. > And Hake's pseudo-solicitous "Robert please correct me if you think my > paraphrasing distorts your intended meaning" tries to rub it in even > more, exhibiting Hake's own typical small mindedness and pretentious > pseudo-academicism. > > Ze'ev > > On 8/19/2012 8:28 AM, Richard Hake wrote: >> >> Some subscribers to Math-Learn might be interested in a recent >> discussion-list post " What Mathematicians Might Learn From >> Physicists: Response to Hansen" [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads: >> >> ********************************************* >> ABSTRACT: In response to my post "What Mathematicians Might Learn >> From Physicists [Hake (2012b)] at <http://bit.ly/ROjN2T>, MathTeach's >> Robert Hansen (2012) at <http://bit.ly/S1Rcpn> first quoted from >> David Bressoud's (2012a) "Learning from the Physicists" at >> <http://bit.ly/MrAuyZ>: >> >> "Unfortunately, the experience of the physicists. . . . [[according >> to Henderson et al. at <http://bit.ly/MWSxIU>]]. . . ., demonstrates >> that the existence of research based instructional strategies. . . . >> [[RBIS]]. . . . together with documentation of their effectiveness is >> not sufficient to guarantee their widespread adoption. Why not?. . . >> . . The work that they have done via surveys of physics faculty >> demonstrates that the greatest problem is not in making faculty aware >> of what has been done, or even in getting faculty to try different >> approaches to teaching. THE GREATEST PROBLEM IS IN GETTING FACULTY TO >> STICK WITH THESE STRATEGIES." [My CAPS.] >> >> Hansen then proceeded to ignore Bressoud's answer: "The greatest >> problem is in getting faculty to stick with these strategies" as >> derived from Henderson et al. and gave his own answers to Bressoud's >> question: "Why doesn't the existence of RBIS together with >> documentation of their effectiveness guarantee their widespread >> adoption?" [paraphrasing in an attempt to eliminate at least some of >> Hansen's ambiguity, illiteracy, imprecision, redundancy, and >> verbosity - Robert please correct me if you think my paraphrasing >> distorts your intended meaning]: >> >> The physicists' research based instructional strategies [RBIS]: >> >> 1. appear very compromised, designed as they are for only >> academically uninterested terminal students; >> >> 2. lack the essentials for academically interested students: rigor, >> detail, development, and challenge; >> >> 3. claim to be "successful," but here the accepted notion of >> "success" is replaced with something entirely different; >> >> 4. doomed because they don't produce advocates. >> >> In this post I show that Hansen's four answers (above) to Bressoud's >> question are all blatantly incorrect. >> ********************************************* >> >> To access the complete 41 kB post please click on <http://bit.ly/NxE6kB>. >> >> Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University >> Links to Articles: <http://bit.ly/a6M5y0> >> Links to SDI Labs: <http://bit.ly/9nGd3M> >> Academia: <http://bit.ly/a8ixxm> >> Blog: <http://bit.ly/9yGsXh> >> Twitter <http://bit.ly/juvd52> >> GooglePlus: <http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE> >> >> REFERENCES [URL shortened by <http://bit.ly/> and accessed on 18 >> August 2012. >> Hake, R.R. 2012. " What Mathematicians Might Learn From Physicists: >> Response to Hansen" online on the OPEN AERA-L archives at >> <http://bit.ly/NxE6kB>. Post of 18 Aug 2012 14:55:51-0700 to AERA-L >> and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being >> transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog >> "Hake'sEdStuff" at <http://bit.ly/MEwmvH> with a provision for >> comments. >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> >> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >