@helenjwc @danieltybrown @CornwallMaths @andreapitt24 @NCETM @ThinkingMaths @RuthTrundley I've been thinking about the reductionist approaches, and how they claim to be research-based. I think this is true, but it's an artefact of research methodology. In a psychological experiment you simplify: you test first, change one thing, and test after, to look for an effect.+
@helenjwc @danieltybrown @CornwallMaths @andreapitt24 @NCETM @ThinkingMaths @RuthTrundley This scientific approach is very powerful in all sorts of ways. But it's going to point to and validate approaches that mirror its own methodology, the 'change one thing at a time and keep everything else the same' way of doing things.
@helenjwc @danieltybrown @CornwallMaths @andreapitt24 @NCETM @ThinkingMaths @RuthTrundley It reminds me of research with micro-organisms, say in the gut or another environment. Only certain of these that could manufacture what they needed from what they found on a Petri dish could be identified. +
@helenjwc @danieltybrown @CornwallMaths @andreapitt24 @NCETM @ThinkingMaths @RuthTrundley But with cheap fast DNA/RNA sequencing we now know that there are many more bacteria and archaea in these places, ones that are smaller and need each other to supply nutrients and can't be cultured independently on a Petri dish.
Certain tools only identify certain phenomena.
Certain tools only identify certain phenomena.
@helenjwc @danieltybrown @CornwallMaths @andreapitt24 @NCETM @ThinkingMaths @RuthTrundley A change-one-thing methodology, powerful as it is, won't be able to discover the benefits of a more ecological approach to learning.
