Class notes, S J12

Teachers,

An article that gets to the essentials of bias:
"Fawcett is assuming that bias means ‘dishonesty’ where people deliberately make choices for their own advantage against what they know to be a better course of action, or ‘sloppiness’ where people don’t fully think through the issue.  But bias, as you can find out from picking up any social psychology paper from the past century, is where incentives change our behaviour usually without us having insight into the presence or effect of the influencer."

Class Notes, MJ 7

Teachers,

Welcome back.

First, an article from the WSJ on deception with math: "Other research has shown that even those who should be especially clear-sighted about numbers—scientific researchers, for example, and those who review their work for publication—are often uncomfortable with, and credulous about, mathematical material."

If reading an article and you feel like you are too undereducated or not smart to comprehend, remember this: " "The fact that these scientifically sloppy papers continue to be published means that the authors, reviewers and editors cannot comprehend the statistics, that they have not read the paper carefully, or both," said Prof. Vaux, of the University of Melbourne in Australia."

It gives a perceptive quote, one to carry with us into schools: ""Math makes a research paper look solid, but the real science lies not in math but in trying one's utmost to understand the real workings of the world," Prof. Eriksson said."

Once again, you demonstrate the gift for bring into discussion valuable insights and crucial ideas.  Some highlights:

• "Meaning questions" as seen by van Manen attempt a phenomenological approach to give voice and meaningfulness to the experience of your teaching.  Two strong types of questions are "What happens when I ... ?" which studies the effects and consequences of a particular pedagogical approach or decision, and "What is my pedagogical nature?" which examines how you respond over time to the constant change, the stochastic nature, of teaching (in other words, stuff happens; how do you respond?).
• Mr. Palomar gave us examples of how culture, norms and communication ground much of our relationships to people and things in the world. 
• We often live out scripts, ritual-like behavior with others, rather than respond in agentic ways. We often project meaning unto of the acts and messages of others, either because of our expectations of the relationships, the history we share with the other person or people we think that they represent, or, more intersubjectively, because we demonstrate empathy and make the effort to position-take with the other.
• We often detect meaning that may not be there. Do we pay attention to what people say, or to the contexts from which those messages emerge? How well do we pay attention to the distortions in our messages, assuming other's easily grasp our intentions and meaning-expectations?
• We communicate often through the use of concepts (schema) that may not withstand scrutiny.  How well do others understand the concepts we use?  At what point to we take a normal, taken-for-granted approach to what we experience and communicate, and at what point do we need to problematize experience and the communication process? How often are we victims of the 'focusing illusion,' where we take for granted that what experience is shared by others in its value and importance?
• Article critique and the peer review processes do not demand that you be an expert on the literature or the field. Rather, at best, they test your ability to explain what you understand. It is not necessarily the place to attempt to correct the authors' thinking or prove them in error.  Instead, it works to give researchers a constraint.  Whether the writing lacks clarity or language that attempts to persuade rather than inform is used, or the authors skimp on the methodological rigor (or description) or ... The critic and the peer reviewer offer a form of data.  The clarity of your effort elucidate your understandings, and the context/background which you bring to your attempts, is in service of science.

For class this upcoming Saturday (January 12), please prepare Mr. Palomar 1.3.1, 1.3.2, and 1.3.3.  Focus again on the kinds of data Mr. P gathers and his introspect method of analyzing the data.  What are some of the cognitive errors he makes?

Thanks.