A Waterloo for Publishing or for the University?

June 25th, 2010

Cathy Davidson raised a series of issues in her reaction to a lawsuit known as Cambridge University Press, et al. v. Patton et al.

“My larger point?  We are in a confusing and damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t moment for publishing.  Scholarly publishing loses money.  Scholars who do not publish (at present) lose careers.  How do we balance these complex and intertwined issues in a sane way?  That is our question.”

Jim Groom has some thoughts on one aspect of this question — the issue of credit, or reputation, generated by journal publication:

“And, often times, but not always, that class [of author] is accompanied by three letters after their name and a long list of publications in similar journals which often, but not always, gives them entrè into the journal in the first place. Is this necessarily bad? No. Does it help certain ideas circulate to a particular audience? Yes. Are we putting too much power in the hands of these journals by reacting this way to the idea of credit? Absolutely.”

And as a result of highly valuing publishing in journals, we have created a system that is producing an avalanche of low-quality research.

Cathy’s question makes me think of the work of physicist A. Garrett Lisi, who is working outside the traditional academe system and who’s practice gave me insight to understand other ways of thinking about credit/reputation and also about gathering feedback for learning from a community:

“Lisi is developing social and intellectual capital by his strategy of working in public, and has posted a “pre-print” of some of his work in the highly visible High Energy Physics – Theory section of arXiv entitled ‘An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything.’

“The Wikipedia entry on Lisi’s paper gives a picture of how the work has generated social capital and become a focus of theoretical debate. The paper has been accumulating peer reviews (in the form of blog posts) and a number of citations including in refereed Physics journals as well as comments on the social news website Reddit.com.”

So, I think Cathy is pointing us to a multi-faced conversation about moving beyond the University (see John Seely Brown or Charles Ledbetter or Clay Shirkey) each of whom is exploring forces that I think will probably address Cathy’s “damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t moment” by rendering traditional publishers in academe irrelevant.

In her post Cathy says

“Shouldn’t we be teaching the genre [scholarly monograph] to our undergraduates (because we believe it is intrinsically worthy enough to determine someone’s career in the academy) as an estimable form? … [If we] require at least one scholarly monograph in every English class, … we show respect to the genre we say that we live by and we give back something to the publishers who, right now, are expected to publish our work but who experience abysmal sales of it.”

Here, I think Cathy’s comment brings academic publishing into the national conversation about university accountability to stakeholders (the students and those investing in them). Molly Corbett Broad wrote in the Chronicle about the political landscape for accreditation and accountability “The administration has already indicated a willingness to take action when it believes that higher-education institutions are not adequately serving students’ interests.” (alas it is “premium content” that you may not be able to access) I think Corbett and Shirkey are talking about forces that may render more than just traditional academic publishing irrelevant.

It strikes me that the scholarly monograph, as a discipline for the mind, could be useful, but it might not be a form “worth studying in every English class.” It might be more useful for students to be developing skills in peer-to-peer pedagogies, based in forms like blogs and wikis, that operate in a context of information abundance rather than to be studying a form based on information scarcity and expensive publication; a form that will not be used by most students in their future careers.

Why do I focus on credit/reputation and legitimate peripheral participation rather than the academic monograph in a conversation about accountability for learning outcomes? Because, I think discovering conversations, contributing and getting feedback are important aspects of peer-to-peer learning beyond the university. Good feedback is a tool for growth, both for the author and for the community of lurkers (see John Seely Brown on legitimate peripheral participation.)

As to Cambridge University Press, et al. v. Patton et al., I think it will be a passing blip, swept away by much larger forces transforming learning.

PS. And thinking about feedback and peer-to-peer learning is why I’m posting this in my blog  (  )  and then cross-posting it as a comment in Cathy’s blog at HASTAC. HASTAC’s blogs do not appear to support Trackback, so  I can’t comment to Cathy in my blog, and consequently I need to post a comment in hers. Which means I need to create a HASTAC identity (see these objections to creating accounts everywhere). Further, a HASTAC comment does not track back to the people I cite – making it even harder for them to discover and join the conversation.

Bookmark and Share

My Arms Still Hurt

June 9th, 2010

I need to find a place to document what is happening with my arms (both the left one operated in Feb and the “good” one). My hope is to see a pattern, or that one of my readers will see a pattern or understand the mechanics and provide some coaching.

History of my case can be found here. Surgery to removal of sling, and a report on the physical therapy to regain motion. I am under orders not to do strengthening exercises. I am continuing my stretch exercises post-PT and am increasing the range of motion, especially elevation over my head.

There are two observations (pain & popping) that I’m making on the left and right sides, each. These have been going since the surgery, or perhaps before. I am going to make notes of things after today June 9 (Surgery was 4 months ago, Feb 3)

Pop: like cracking a knuckle, a physical jolt and I hear a sound. It involves the shoulder joint. The pop is associated with a temporary sensation that does not rise to the level of pain. Some times the discomfort from the pop lasts seconds, other times it might still be there an hour later.

Pain: is in the muscle, not in the joint. It occurs in two locations: 1)  on the front or the outside corner of the shoulder, in a 1/2 inch line running down the roundness of the rotator cuff muscles. 2) in the front of the main mass of the bicep muscle, several inches below the joint. This pain is a slice, 1-2 inches long. Each pain is transitory and ends when the triggering action ends.

UPDATES I realized that I need to try to track the events that are repeat causes and easily described and then check over time if they continue to happen, so, I’m dating each item each time it happens with the hopes of seeing patterns.

Left Arm – Pop

1. Sitting in a chair, lifting left elbow to rest it on the back of the adjacent chair. June 9

2. Best example of pop. I was reaching for a loaf of bread at the back of the kitchen counter. I used both hands, arms fully extended, directly in front of my body. I needed to lift the loaf 10″ to get over something at the front of the counter. Each hand started the lifting movement, but the left got “stuck” and didn’t rise for a moment, then popped. July 2.

Left Arm – Pain

1. Corner of shoulder. Holding fridge door open with right hand, reaching sideways to upper shelf to get cat food can. I tell myself “Hold shoulder down, raise hand” which might help with the movement if not with the pain, June 9, June 15

2. Corner of shoulder. Left hand scratching left ear, elbow straight in front. Takes a little while for the burn to build up. June 9 June 15

3. Corner of shoulder. Lying on left side so shoulder is down and bearing weight. Pain is mild, but I can’t lie that way more than 10 minutes. I’ve been noticing it for at least a week running up to July 9.

Right Arm – Pop

1. sitting in driver seat of car, raising arm to place hand on top of passenger seat back June 9

2. Lying in bed on left side, reaching right arm down to thigh to move blanket and sheet off prior to getting out of bed. Moving from behind midline to front. June 9

3. Wiping kitchen counter, moving left across in front of stomach. June 9 June 15

4. Wiping counter, moving right out away from body June 15

5. Grabbing top corner of car door to swing it open, starting with arm partly extended, shoulder high, and moving left across body. June 15

6. The general statement about popping is when I make large arm movements, often with no particular load applied, like waving goodbye, or the examples above. These are continuing to happen as of July 9, but no one event is easily reproduced.

Right Arm – Pain

1. Corner of shoulder. Turning steering wheel right-handed. Turning the wheel left, with right hand moving from 2 o’clock to 10 o’clock position. Turning the wheel right, with right hand moving from 4 o’clock to 8 o’clock position June 9

2. Corner of shoulder. Reaching behind midline, rotating outward to reach waist high toilet paper dispenser June 9 June 15

3. Bicep. When standing, reaching down at full extension of arm, ahead of mid-line, to flush institutional toilet. June 9

4. Corner of shoulder. Leaning on elbow on arm rest of a chair (the “thinker” pose) June 9

5. Corner of shoulder. Lying on right side so shoulder is down and bearing weight. Pain is mild, but I can’t lie that way more than 10 minutes. I’ve been noticing it for at least a week running up to July 9.

Actions I choose not to do

I do not make any rapid arm movements, e.g., tossing a wad of paper to the trash can. I’m afraid of popping more than pain. I tried tossing a stone with my daughter, it hurt the right arm.

Bookmark and Share

I’m in the clouds

April 14th, 2010

Moving from a laptop to the iPad is moving me into the cloud. The iPad is not a local storage device, so I don’t create documents there. I create them here, on the web, which means I’m naturally more focused on creating for the web.

This realization, and a conversation today about how to organize our office study group (aka Design Circle) has me re-reading my previous post (a manifesto) for changing our unit’s web strategy.

Our study group met today to look at Gary’s summary of the three broad strands of the curriculum we invented for ourselves two weeks ago. Gary suggested that we each might study within the three strands differently, or with different emphasis.  In addition to the topical strands, we discussed a “course question” We didn’t nail down one question today. Perhaps with more time we can, or perhaps we should not, preferring instead to have personal questions that overlap, much as our roles and interests are personal but overlapping. And with our course questions in hand, what products do we anticipate creating as evidence of our learning accomplishments? Again, these are likely to be individual or small team. For example, Gary and I need to create a presentation for a conference April 28. And how will we assess our evidence of learning?

Thinking about our study group, and the different member’s differing needs/desires/strategies for storing and sharing documents, I concluded that we are (or need to be) embarking on creating our Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) rather than a singular unit resource.

But that makes a new problem, if we are a group of individuals, how do we do something as a collective unit? We probably also need a unit resource where we post to the web our various learning products.

A common store could hold our work products, but what about our reading lists and recommended readings. We already have a group in Diigo for sharing bookmarks. I get a digest from there of what others have bookmarked, but have not gotten systematic at re-Diigo-ing the items that ring my chimes. The result is I’ve read something, but I can’t find it, so I can’t recommend and share it.

But I could re-Diigo (like Re-Tweet) the links I read and value, and that would have an interesting effect, we’d know when several people valued the same item:

A Diigo Bookmark

This is the information about a bookmark in Diigo. Note that 3 people have saved this link.

This way we can find our own stuff, organized the way we want to tag it, but we can also learn of one another and our overlapping reading interests:

Three people bookmarked and tagged this linkWho is George? I might want to follow him, or look at other things he tags as “Teaching Innovation.”

I also am guessing that we could combine the RSS from several Diigo users so that the common items (those with more than one “vote”) come through a filter. This would make a means to vote on the most important readings and a way to “de-clutter” the recommended readings that we are collectively sharing out.

Bookmark and Share

Changing my user name

April 11th, 2010

I’m learning a new thing about my iPad — I knew it about my iPhone, but now it’s becoming really significant. Its my username with an underscore and the way I use special characters in some of my passwords . I’ve been thinking about switching my identity to my Gmail and away from my WSU one, and now I’m going to start. This is going to be a big annoyance, but I think it will make the iPad more useful.

Bookmark and Share

Using my iPad

April 9th, 2010

I’m going to write in my blog something about my new iPad

The sentence above was captured using the free Dragon Dictate then copied to here. As on the iPhone that software is surprisingly good without training.

Now I’m typing on the keyboard. You cannot drag your fingers at all or you get stray letters. But Apple’s auto correct in is a help fixing up typos.

I’ve found a tool that claims to let me work in Google Docs on the iPhone, but not on the iPad yet. So at present my writing tools are here, in HTML mode (WYSIWYG) mode does not work. The other option is in the email tool.

There is a lot of hype out there, after 2hrs playing around, I’m in the iPad is great camp. More another time.

Bookmark and Share

Lake Wobegone University: All teachers above average

April 6th, 2010

WSU teaching and courses are all above average! I got into a conversation on the bus with a faculty member in Economics about assessment of teaching and learning.

In Fall 2009, as in many semesters past, the College of Ag, Human and Natural Resource sciences asked two questions at the end of its course evaluations. Here is the data on 282 courses with 5756 student ratings spread among them:

What is your overall rating of the instructor in this course?
What is your overall rating of this course?
With possible responses: Outstanding, Above Average, Average, Below Average, Poor

Comment below on the quality of these questions, or on the meaning and utility of this data.

Bookmark and Share

Reimagining both learning & learning institutions

March 21st, 2010

Over the course of the 2008-09 school year, colleagues and I at WSU were thinking about institution-based vs community-based learning models. A strong sample of that work is in our AAC&U presentation from April 2009. There are two charts that are important to our thinking, Learning Spectrum and Four Strategies. We think that changing to a community-based model will have an impact on how the university is organized.

This year we got involved with the MacArthur Foundation/HASTAC Digital Media and Learning Competition as a result of looking for colleagues interested in ideas that could transform the university (and the Land Grant mission) in line with the thinking above (see our DML entry).

Yesterday I ran into two related ideas that bring me back to thinking about these topics.

Chris Hughes (co-founder of Facebook) is launching Jumo, The site says:

“There are no magic solutions to the challenges our world faces. But there are millions of people around the globe who work each day to improve the lives of others. Unfortunately, there are millions more who don’t know how to meaningfully help [emphasis mine].

Jumo brings together everyday individuals and organizations to speed the pace of global change.”

Perhaps thinking along parallel lines, Jane McGonigal’s TED talk: “Gaming can make a better world explored the idea that some of the traits gamers exhibit, including collaboration and a passion for the quest, could be tapped to work on some of the world’s problems. She ended by pointing to a game called Evoke that is trying to explore that hypothesis.

Evoke encourages players to develop these skills: collaboration, courage, creativity, entrepreneurship, local insight, knowledge share, resourcefulness, sustainability and vision. Its a list that has more in common with ideas of Daniel Pink or the 21st century media literacies of Howard Rheingold than 20th century efforts like WSU’s Critical Thinking Rubric (not to fault it, but it comes from a Learning 1.0 context). I recognize Evoke’s list of skills in our thinking above about a transformed university.

Those ideas are even more interesting in light of Tom Vander Ark‘s comments in November 2009 on How Social Networking Will Transform Learning:

I’m betting on social learning platforms as a lever for improvement at scale in education. Instead of a classroom as the primary organizing principle, social networks will become the primary building block of learning communities (both formal and informal). Smart recommendation engines will queue personalized content. Tutoring, training, and collaboration tools will be applications that run on social networks. New schools will be formed around these capabilities. Teachers in existing schools will adopt free tools yielding viral, bureaucracy-cutting productivity improvement.”

Vander Ark was Executive Director at the Gates Foundation and now he’s a partner in a private equity fund focused on innovative learning tools and formats. At the Gates Foundation he undoubtedly had a role in funding Gates’ bets on improving education, including strategies he lists based on people, schools, policy and community. Now he says he’s betting on a different strategy,  one that seems to align with the projects and ideas outlined above.

For awhile I’ve been stuck thinking about how these community-based learning could advance without leadership, or at least cooperation, from the university. I thought the university was a key player because it holds the ability to credential higher learning. And that credentialing power seemed to lock it into a dominant place in the marketplace.

Recently, I came across an argument that some learners may not care about  earning university credentials. The example was a person who owns a business and wants some business training (accounting, management, etc). For this person, the knowledge may be valuable, but the credential inconsequential.

That opened me up to see other alternatives to credentialing. The Evoke game promises to identify top players, based on the skills they demonstrate. For this week Evoke says: “Your LEARN mission this week is to figure out: Who else is inventing creative, sustainable ways to power our everyday lives? Find someone working on a creative electricity project, or a sustainable energy project — and tell the network about their big idea.”

This is all building toward the 10th week when participants will submit an “Evocation” (think of this as a thesis proposal): “Based on the Evokation you submit, and your overall participation in the Evoke network missions, quests, and discussions, we will choose a number of you to continue the journey with us and change the world in unimaginable ways. Selection includes winning a $1000 investment in the project among other “credentialling.”

Evoke’s funding comes from the World Bank. Another funding model might be micro-lending. Kushal Chakrabarti, CEO, Vittana recently posted about Vittana’s new venture into micro-lending for student education loans.

Could these ideas be combined? Could they offer a different path to education for some learners, bypassing the university’s credentialing?

All images thanks to Jayme Jacobson

Bookmark and Share

Free at Last! (of the sling)

March 18th, 2010

Week of
March 15. March 18 – Just back from the Doc and starting the next 6-week phase which is Physical Therapy to increase flexibility, but not strengthening.  Doc’s two simple rules: 1) keep hand where you can see it 2) don’t lift anything heavier than 12 oz can of pop.

The latter will be hard. The mode of failure will be silent, there will be no pain. The failure will be degradation of the developing new cartilage from the micro-fracture treatment, which will eventually flake, slough off, and I’ll be a candidate for shoulder replacement. (Might have been nice to know this before now as I have progressively begun to cheat, both in and out of the sling.)

Week of March 22: First visit to Physical Therapy Monday 7am. This guy measures rotation from a different zero point than my chair uses. Rather than getting 60, he measures me at 25. So machine – 35. I managed to do mt chairs 160/60 this AM, and am now trying to do wider rotation w/o elevation (faster cycle time). I got to 130/80. Going high and wide was harder than just going wide at elevation 30. I’d need to push the chair to 160/95 to match the Doc’s goals with the PT’s measurement scheme. The PT also gave me non-chair way to do the same exercises. I’ll go to PT Mon & Wed for next 6 weeks.

Tues 23rd Pretty stiff and sore this AM after pushing yesterday. I’ve relapsed. Just did 115/80 by building up from 80/65. The chair goes away today or tomorrow, unless the Doc gives a reprieve. I got the reprieve to March 31 and I’m regretting pushing because the relapse Tues aft is worse.

Wed 24th This AM my PT encouraged that 60 to 80 was a big jump, and that elevation was more important now than rotation. We agreed I’d attempt to get back to 160/60 and then use the next week of CPM machine to move from 60 upward, perhaps 4 degrees for each of 5 days. This AM I got back to 160/60.

Week of March 29: PT this AM helped me not relapse in the chair. I’ve regained the desired elevation, and intend to expand the rotation slowly this week until the chair goes away. Small personal victory, I can now carry a small bar of soap in my left hand to wash my right arm pit.

Criteria for Progression to Phase 2

  • At least 6 weeks of recovery has elapsed
  • Painless passive ROM to (see data here)
    • 140° of forward flexion
    • 40° of external rotation
    • 60-80° of abduction (swing arm out from side) (not sure if I can do this, its not part of the machine)

Shoulder Motion

Goals

  • 140° of forward flexion – progress to 160° (see graphs below)
  • 40° of external rotation – progress to 60°
  • 60-80° of abduction – progress to 90°

Exercises

  • Continue with passive ROM exercises to achieve above goals. (looks like I can get there in one day)
  • Begin active-assisted ROM exercises for the above goals.
  • Progress to active ROM exercises as tolerated after full motion achieved with active-assisted
  • exercises.
  • Light passive stretching at end ROMs.

Restrictions

  • No strengthening/resisted motions of the shoulder until 12 weeks after surgery.
  • During phase 2, no Active Range of Motion (AROM) exercises for patients with massive tears.

Immobilization

  • Discontinuation of sling or abduction orthosis.
  • Use for comfort only.

Pain Control

  • NSAIDs for patients with persistent discomfort following surgery.
  • Therapeutic modalities
  • Ice, ultrasound, HVGS.
  • Moist heat before therapy, ice at end of session.

NOTE: Blue data is first 6 weeks, red data is 2nd 6 weeks on new regime

Bookmark and Share

Who is preparing us for the Grand Challenges

March 16th, 2010

This post is in response to a post by Cathy Davidson on HASTAC 2010:  Grand Challenges and Global Innovations coming up April 15-17.  She says ‘David and I are thinking ahead to our address on “The Future of Thinking:  Learning Institutions in a Digital Age.”   We will have a bicoastal conversation, and then a live chat, still in the planning stages.   So we’d love you to send us questions that might form the basis of that conversation on any aspect of our educational futures.’

This is a long preamble that ends in a question for Cathy and David in the last paragraph:

On March 5, 2010 the US Dept of Education released the National Educational Technology Plan 2010 (NETP) which says on page 4:

What and How People Need to Learn

Whether the domain is English Language arts, mathematics, sciences, social studies, history, art, or music, 21st century competencies and expertise such as critical thinking, complex problem solving, collaboration, and multimedia communication (emphasis added) should be woven into all content areas. These competencies are necessary to become expert learners, which we all must be if we are to adapt to our rapidly changing world over the course of our lives…

This NETP plan is titled “Learning Powered by Technology” but this list of learning goals does not depend on technology (except perhaps the multimedia) and none of the list depends (or acknowledges) the growing hyperconnectivity of the Internet or the shift from an information scarcity economy to one of information abundance.

Nearly simultaneously, the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) opened to comment its proposal for K-12 standards. The CCSSI standards purport to be getting students ready for college and the workplace.

In the Writing Standards for History/Social Studies and Science grades 11-12, I find, “6.   Demonstrate command of technology, including the Internet, to produce, publish, and update work in response to ongoing feedback, including fresh arguments or new information.”  Which is interesting, especially when taken with this sidebar: “New technologies have broadened and expanded the role that speaking and listening play in acquiring and sharing knowledge and have tightened their link to other forms of communication. The Internet has accelerated the speed at which connections between speaking, listening, reading, and writing can be made, requiring that students be ready to use these modalities nearly simultaneously. (emphasis added) Technology itself is changing quickly, creating a new urgency for students to be adaptable in response to change.”

“Collaboration” is mentioned along with “comprehension,” in terms of social manners (good listening skills) but not in terms of skills in finding collaborators or learning communities on the Internet. “Social” is only mentioned in terms of “social studies,” and “community” does not appear in the document.

While its not surprising that CCSSI does not endorse learning using the Internet, except as mediated by public schools, it does not seem to recognize the wealth of resources, skills, and social capital that  learners potentially are bringing into the school setting.

Its interesting to contrast the NETP list, or the CCSSI with Howard Rhiengold’s 21′st century media literacy skills, or John Seely Brown’s thoughts on Learning 2.0 and communities of practice, or Cathy Davidson’s ideas of ‘collaboration by difference.’ Recently, David Gelernter, in Time to Start Taking the Internet Seriously said:

“Modern search engines combine the functions of libraries and business directories on a global scale, in a flash: a lightning bolt of brilliant engineering. These search engines are indispensable — just like word processors. But they solve an easy problem. It has always been harder to find the right person than the right fact. Human experience and expertise are the most valuable resources on the Internet — if we could find them. Using a search engine to find (or be found by) the right person is a harder, more subtle problem than ordinary Internet search

and

“The traditional web site is static, but the Internet specializes in flowing, changing information. The ‘velocity of information’ is important — not just the facts but their rate and direction of flow. Today’s typical website is like a stained glass window, many small panels leaded together. There is no good way to change stained glass, and no one expects it to change. So it’s not surprising that the Internet is now being overtaken by a different kind of cyberstructure.

and

“The structure called a cyberstream or lifestream is better suited to the Internet than a conventional website because it shows information-in-motion, a rushing flow of fresh information instead of a stagnant pool.”

Under “search” CCSSI says: “[Students will be able to] tailor their searches online to acquire useful information efficiently, and they integrate what they learn
using technology with what they learn offline,” which is a far cry from Gelernter’s  “the Internet specializes in flowing, changing information. The ‘velocity of information’ is important — not just the facts but their rate and direction of flow.”

Contemporaneous with the publication of NETP 2010 and the CCSSI, EDGE.org posted responses to its Question 2010: “How Has The Internet Changed The Way You Think?”

David Dalrymple, MIT, says:

“Filtering, not remembering, is the most important skill for those who use the Internet.

“I see today’s Internet as having three primary, broad consequences: 1) information is no longer stored and retrieved by people, but is managed externally, by the Internet, 2) it is increasingly challenging and important for people to maintain their focus in a world where distractions are available anywhere, and 3) the Internet enables us to talk to and hear from people around the world effortlessly.”

What David does not say, that I think is also important, is 4) the self generation of online systems for managing personal knowledge.  As a blogger, wiki contributor, and social bookmarker. I am building a digital footprint and a personal exosomatic memory!  I sometimes refer to the traces I have left to see what I was personally up to. Rarely, now, but as our productivity and capacity expands, we must be becoming more dependent on this exosomatic system. (I keep saying that, exosomatic because I use my website as a auto or personal blog of notes to myself, my memory displaced from my body.)

There seems to be a large disconnect between the NETP & CCSSI and the latter conversations.

Who will lead the transformation from our current institutions, K-20, to institutions that would support 21st century learning implied by a highly networked, information rich and information producing society facing global problems on an unprecedented scale?

Bookmark and Share

I missed the bus – thoughts on indirect assessment

March 9th, 2010

I missed the bus to work today. I knew time was tight as I was going out the door. As I went along, I gained confidence I would make it, because I saw one of the school buses that I usually meet. And some kids waiting for another school bus (I usually see two school buses). And I saw the city buses at the bus transfer point (but I could not see my bus meeting them).

ALAS, none of that indirect evidence measured where my bus was on its route. As I rounded the Kibbie Dome I saw my bus picking up a rider at my stop and heading away.

I’m noting this as part of the conversation I’m part of about direct and indirect evidence of student learning outcomes. This is an example of the failure of relying on indirect evidence.

Bookmark and Share