Hi Sarah,
I've just read Doug's work, and the summary page of
other teachers in the group.
I like the clarity, the accessibility, the ease with
which it is possible to gain entry into 'what it's all
about'. There is very little 'put-off' factor of
obscure language. The lay-out is striking , and
facilitates understanding.
In my experience Practitioner research is unlikely to
be read by busy professionals unless it has immediate
impact, accessibility and resonance for colleagues.
Just one thought about "quality", "validity and
rigour"........ Jack's questions:
The Critical Thinking Scaffolds have direct
application to the e-seminar Review Stage, so I hope
you won't mind me posting this e-mail.
Do these guys write a short reflexive piece
addressing their claims to know?
Kind regards
Brian
--- Sarah Fletcher <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> I've just tried the link - it seems to be fine.
> Perhaps there was a problem with
> the Carnegie Foundation server when you tried it? I
> do hope you can see Doug's
> work now - please can you let me know? Thank you for
> your message to him. I
> know that he will be delighted that you have
> understood his posting.through
> teacherresearch.net and Doug's name
>
http://www.cfkeep.org/html/snapshot.php?id=32079684857353
>
> Warm regards
>
>
> Sarah
>
>
>
> >
Brian E. Wakeman
Education adviser
Dunstable
Beds
|