recentpopularlog in

robertogreco : peerreview   14

This is why you shouldn’t believe that exciting new medical study - Vox
"In 2003, researchers writing in the American Journal of Medicine discovered something that should change how you think about medical news. They looked at 101 studies published in top scientific journals between 1979 and 1983 that claimed a new therapy or medical technology was very promising. Only five, they found out, made it to market within a decade. Only one (ACE inhibitors, a pharmaceutical drug) was still extensively used at the time of their publication.



It’s a fact that all studies are biased and flawed in their own unique ways. The truth usually lies somewhere in a flurry of research on the same question. This means real insights don't come by way of miraculous, one-off findings or divinely ordained eureka moments; they happen after a long, plodding process of vetting and repeating tests, and peer-to-peer discussion. The aim is to make sure findings are accurate and not the result of a quirk in one experiment or the biased crusade of a lone researcher.

As science is working itself out, we reporters and our audiences seize on "promising findings." It's exciting to hear about a brand new idea that maybe — just maybe — could revolutionize medicine and stop some scourge people suffer through. We're often prodded along by overhyping scientists like Zamboni, who are under their own pressure to attract research funding and publications.

We don't wait for scientific consensus; we report a little too early, and we lead patients and policymakers down wasteful, harmful, or redundant paths that end in dashed hope and failed medicine.

This tendency could be minimized if we could only remember that the overwhelming majority of studies in medicine fail."



"We now live in an age of unprecedented scientific exploration. Through the internet, we have this world of knowledge at our fingertips. But more information means more bad information, and the need for skepticism has never been greater.

[graph]

I often wonder whether there is any value in reporting very early research. Journals now publish their findings, and the public seizes on them, but this wasn't always the case: journals were meant for peer-to-peer discussion, not mass consumption.

Working in the current system, we reporters feed on press releases from journals and it's difficult to resist the siren call of flashy findings. We are incentivized to find novel things to write about, just as scientists and research institutions need to attract attention to their work. Patients, of course, want better medicines, better procedures — and hope.

But this cycle is hurting us, and it's obscuring the truths research has to offer. (Despite the very early and tenuous science behind liberation therapy, MS sufferers traveled the world seeking it out, and launched political movements calling for resources to fund the treatment.)

For my part, I've tried to report new studies in context, and use systematic reviews — meta-analyses of all the best studies on clinical questions — wherever possible. When scientists or other members of the media prematurely blow up a novel breakthrough, I've tried to convey the reality that it's probably not a breakthrough at all. The more I do this, the more I realize the truth in what Harvard's Oreskes, Stanford's John Ioannidis, and many other respected researchers have reiterated over the years: we need to look past the newest science to where knowledge has accumulated. There, we'll find insights that will help us have healthier lives and societies.

As we turn away from the magic pills and miracle treatments, I think we'll focus more on the things that actually matter to health — like education, equality, the environment.

It's not always easy, and the forces pushing us to the cutting edge are powerful. But I try to proceed cautiously, to remind myself that most of what I'm seeing today is hopelessly flawed, that there's value in looking back."

[via: http://finalbossform.com/post/114498001935/jtotheizzoe-that-new-scientific-breakthrough
who quotes http://finalbossform.com/post/114498001935/jtotheizzoe-that-new-scientific-breakthrough

"That “new scientific breakthrough discovery” you just read about on that news site/blog/Facebook page? It’s almost certainly wrong. This article from Vox is a seriously important thing that, if you care about science, you really need to read, like right now.

My take: The tendency of the media to report on what is *NEW* in science is indicative of what I think is the largest perspective gap between scientists and nonscientists.

The general public (<- apologies, I hate how homogenous that word is, because there is no single “general public”, but I have to use it here) seems to crave novelty and has a tendency to view every scientific finding as forwardprogress and individually meaningful, but science is a an ongoing process of self-correction and repetition. It doesn’t have an “end” and any single study is almost certainly wrong, or at the very least doesn’t tell the full story.

This is why I have tried to steer clear of reporting on “breaking” science news in my own efforts here on OKTBS. Science communicators and journalists, we need to make a commitment to covering science as a process and not as a series of breakthroughs. When science IS reported that way, we run the risk of losing people’s trust when science later must later correct or contradict itself, which is something that will absolutely happen, because that’s what science does. We must also make people comfortable with the idea uncertainty and science-as-a-process is a good thing!"]
juliabelluz  science  scientificmethod  criticalthinking  joehanson  journalism  research  medicine  2015  peerreview  journals  skepticism  popmedia  media  massmedia  pressreleases 
march 2015 by robertogreco
Kay Ryan on creative writing "workshops" - Austin Kleon
"Kay Ryan on creative writing "workshops" [http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/article/171211 ]
Workshop. In the old days before creative writing programs, a workshop was a place, often a basement, where you sawed or hammered, drilled or planed something. You could not simply workshop something. Now you can. You can take something you wrote by yourself to a group and get it workshopped. Sometimes it probably is a lot like getting it hammered. Other writers read your work, give their reactions, and make suggestions for change. A writer might bring a piece back for more workshopping later, even. I have to assume that the writer respects these other writers’ opinions, and that just scares the daylights out of me. It doesn’t matter if their opinions really are respectable; I just think the writer has given up way too much inside. Let’s not share. Really. Go off in your own direction way too far, get lost, test the metal of your work in your own acids. These are experiments you can perform down in that old kind of workshop, where Dad used to hide out from too many other people’s claims on him.


See also: Brian Kitely on the subject [http://www.austinkleon.com/2009/06/24/how/ ]:
The standard American workshop is a lazy construction. The teacher asks students to bring in stories or poems to class, sometimes copied and handed out ahead of time, sometimes not. The class and its final arbiter (usually the teacher) judge the merits of the story or poem. Few ask the question, “Where does a story come from?” The standard American workshop presumes that you cannot teach creativity or instincts or beginnings. It takes what it can once the process has already been started. Most writing teachers say, “Okay, bring in a story and we’ll take it apart and put it back together again.” I say, “Let’s see what we can do to find some stories.” The average workshop is often a profoundly conservative force in fiction writers’ lives, encouraging the simplifying and routinizing of stories….I use exercises in my workshops to derange student stories, to find new possibilities, to foster strangeness and irregularity, as much as to encourage revision and cleaning up after yourself, and I don’t worry much about success or failure.
"
austinkleon  2010  kayryan  briankitely  writing  workshops  sharing  process  peerreview  storytelling  strangeness  makingthestrange  irregularity  discovery  revision  howwewrite 
october 2014 by robertogreco
9/15-9/28 Unit 1: Why We Need a Why | Connected Courses
"Title: The End of Higher Education

Description: As shrinking budgets, skeptical publics, and rising alternatives continue to threaten the end of higher education, we host this conversation as a contemplation of what the end – or purpose – of higher education should be. We will also reflect on how individual teachers might find their own core reason for teaching a specific class, and ways to build buy-in to that reason among students."

[Direct link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFcjrwaJV0E ]

"Why We Need a Why:

As we design our courses, we have to address three questions:

What is to be taught/learned?

How should it be learned?

Why should it be learned?

We usually start by addressing the “What” question first. We have a course title or subject area and we begin populating our syllabus with the “whats” to be learned. Or, we peruse textbooks looking for the text that we think best covers the field. If we have time, we address the “How” question by considering how we can best teach the material. We sharpen our teaching technique, seek out better examples for the more difficult concepts, compile photos and videos to improve our presentations, and seek other ways to get the students engaged with the material. We may jump to incorporate the latest tools and techniques, whether it is social or interactive media or a new technique like a flipped classroom. Our syllabus, teaching materials, and educational technology in order, we rush into the semester, rarely asking, “Why?”

Starting with “Why” changes everything. When I, Mike Wesch, first started contemplating the “why” of my digital ethnography course, I realized that what I was really hoping to do was to teach my students “critical thinking.” I place “critical thinking” in quotes here because I had not yet given a great deal of thought about what I meant by the term, but I did immediately recognize that my previous “how” was completely inadequate to the task. I had spent most of my time thinking up elaborate and memorable performances (like the “shake your tailfeather” dance featured in this video) so that they would remember the concepts. Their task in my class was to simply memorize the material as performed by the authority (me) at the front of the room. Indeed, all of my teaching to that point had been in service of a very thin, unquestioned, and ultimately wrong notion of learning as the simple acquisition of knowledge.

As I contemplated the “real why” of my course further, I soon recognized that anthropology was not a bunch of content and bold faced terms that can be highlighted in a text book, but was instead a way of looking at the world. Actually, that is not quite right. It is not just a way of looking at the world. It is a way of being in the world. To underscore the difference, consider that it is one thing to be able to give a definition of cultural relativism (perhaps the most bold-faced of bold-faced terms in anthropology which means “cultural norms and values derive their meaning within a specific social context”) or even to apply it to some specific phenomenon, but it is quite another to fully incorporate that understanding and recognize yourself as a culturally and temporally bounded entity mired in cultural biases and taken-for-granted assumptions that you can only attempt to transcend.

To adopt such an understanding is often transformative and psychologically disruptive. It is not to be taken lightly, and no student will dare take on such disruption if it is not clear that there is a good reason to do so. As Neil Postman has noted, you can try to engineer the learning of what-bits (The End of Higher Education, Postman), but “to become a different person because of something you have learned — to appropriate an insight, a concept, a vision, so that your world is altered — is a different matter. For that to happen, you need a reason.” This also means asking hard questions about how new technology and techniques can support real student transformation and not simply reinforce old patterns with new tools."
michaelwesch  cathydavidson  randybass  2014  highered  highereducation  purpose  education  colleges  universities  pedagogy  theywhy  learning  howwelearn  why  howweteach  teaching  crits  studioclassroom  criticism  designthinking  design  critique  constructivecriticism  writing  howwewrite  revision  peerreview  learningcontracts  classconstitutions  student-ledlearning  mooc  moocs  authenticity  tcsnmy  ownership  lcproject  openstudioproject  contracts  cv  classideas  deschooling  unschooling  community  communities  communitiesoflearning  learningcommunities  profiteering  difficulty  economics  engagement 
september 2014 by robertogreco
Imagine Design Create
"…What’s holding design back?

…short answer…art schools…[where m]ost design programs are housed…art school teaching still follows a medieval model: Master & apprentice.

Studio courses are mostly about socialization— sharing & creating tacit knowledge through direct experience. Students learn by watching one another. Teachers rarely espouse principles. Learning proceeds from specific to specific. Knowledge remains tacit.

Practice is much the same as education. Over the course of a career, most designers learn to design better. But what they learn is highly idiosyncratic, dependent on their unique context. The knowledge designers gain usually retires with them.

Rarely do designers distill rules from experience, codify new methods, test & improve them, & pass them on to others. Rarely do designers move from tacit to explicit. …

Design doesn’t have feedback loops that include funding, research, publishing, tenure, and teaching, These feedback loops ensure quality. Without them…"
criticaleducation  mentorships  masters  apprenticeships  knowledge  miltonglaser  nicholasnegroponte  graphicdesign  learning  teaching  experience  designcriticism  criticism  peerreview  2011  via:anne  hughdubberly  education  arteducation  artschools  design  artschool 
december 2012 by robertogreco
Hypothes.is | The Internet, peer reviewed.
"An open-source, community-moderated, distributed platform for sentence-level annotation of the Web."

"Hypothes.is will be a distributed, open-source platform for the collaborative evaluation of information. It will enable sentence-level critique of written words combined with a sophisticated yet easy-to-use model of community peer-review. It will work as an overlay on top of any stable content, including news, blogs, scientific articles, books, terms of service, ballot initiatives, legislation and regulations, software code and more-without requiring participation of the underlying site."
hypothes.is  annotation  peerreview  truth  journalism  policy  feednack  politics  transparency  danwhaley  johnperrybarlow  philbourne  garrettcamp  stevehazel  kaliyahamlin  brewsterkahle  stacyjackson  jonathannelson  andrealunsford  mikealrogers  paulresnick  rufuspollock  samzaid  marksurman  nateoostendorp  jaredkopf  thedeloder  darianrodriguezheyman  salimismail  johndubois  adamchristian  charlesbazerman 
october 2011 by robertogreco
Social contagions debunked: Reports of infectious obesity and divorce were grossly overstated. - By Dave Johns - Slate Magazine
"But just because contagion is important in one context doesn't mean something like obesity spreads like a virus—much less one that can infect someone as remote from you as your son's best friend's mother. (For the record, I & my best friend's mother will eat our hats if it turns out to be true, as Christakis & Fowler claim, that loneliness is infectious, too.) Yes, we influence each other all the time, in how we talk & how we dress & what kinds of screwball videos we watch on the Internet. But careful studies of our social networks reveal what may be a more powerful & pervasive effect: We tend to form ties w/ the people who are most like us to begin with. The mother who blames her son's boozebag friends for his wild behavior must face up to the fact that he prefers the fast crowd in the first place. We are all connected, yes, but the way those links get made could be the most important part of the story."

[via: http://mindhacks.com/2011/07/05/doubts-about-social-contagion/ ]
[Previously: http://www.slate.com/id/2250102/pagenum/all/ ]

[Update: There are some dead links, but one of the articles is here: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2011/07/disconnected.single.html ]
contagion  socialcontagion  jamesfowler  nicholaschristakis  rosemcdermott  statistics  mathematics  research  publishing  socialscience  socialnetworking  socialnetworks  evidence  sciencejournalism  journalism  politics  policy  science  peerreview  media  2011  obesity  behavior  divorce  davejohns 
july 2011 by robertogreco
Education reform: Seeing like a superintendent | The Economist
"What goes on in a classroom is a social phenomenon that can't be effectively captured through standardised measurements. But they need a number. So they're creating standardised measurements to get one. But immediately, the application of the measurement and its incentives changes the way the phenomenon is organised. A complex, creative process is stripped down to a mechanical one designed to produce high test scores. The old-growth forest is replaced with rows of Norway spruce." Ms Goldstein writes: "In the social sciences, there is an oft-repeated aphorism called Campbell's Law, named after Donald Campbell, the psychologist who pioneered the study of human creativity: "The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor." In short, incentives corrupt…"
education  reform  via:preoccupations  standardizedtesting  valueadded  teaching  tcsnmy  learning  2011  corruption  standardization  policy  politics  decisionmaking  government  us  publicschools  unschooling  deschooling  metrics  measurement  campbellslaw  quantitativetesting  improvement  finland  southkorea  korea  peerreview  masterteachers  planning  lessonplans 
april 2011 by robertogreco
Pedagogical Promiscuity and "Assessment for Learning" - Artichoke
"What kind of “assessment for learning” is appropriate in the age of Google and Wikipedia? Facebook and You Tube? Smart phones and text messaging? Twitter and blogging? (after Manovich on Soft Cinema).…

It seems that exposure to the multiliteracies most advantage those who are already advantaged.

There is a lot more thinking needed here – but it seems plausible that thinking critically about what kind of “assessment for learning” is appropriate in the age of [insert your preferred descriptor] is useful thinking. It may protect us (and our students) from futurist induced pedagogical promiscuity next year – by preventing the indiscriminate adoption of too many different pedagogical approaches."
assessment  learning  education  openeducation  openphd  artichoke  affluence  wealth  disparity  schools  literacy  literacies  technology  knowledge  curriculum  future  policy  digital  digitallearning  blogs  blogging  commenting  peerreview  peer-assessment  newmedia  charlesleadbeater  twitter  usergenerated  content  artichokeblog  pamhook 
december 2010 by robertogreco
Write More - Grade Less
"There is a better way. The key is to teach the basic aspects of writing and the criteria in our scoring guides carefully, explicitly and frequently, making sure that students write a sufficient number of both short and long papers. It is critical that in the course of instruction we provide student and professional exemplars—so that students can learn to peer-edit and self-evaluate their work at each stage, before submitting it to the teacher." [Specific recommendations follow.]
teaching  writing  via:rushtheiceberg  tcsnmy  classideas  editing  peerreview  grammar  voice  thesisstatements 
december 2010 by robertogreco
Kids Create -- and Critique on -- Social Networks | Edutopia
"Digital Youth Network runs...Remix World...modeled on popular online social networks such as Facebook...students & mentors who use it have Web pages that contain pictures, profile information & links to their friends' pages. They can post digital artwork -- such as videos -- on their pages, comment on friends' pages & participate in discussions with other users through the Remix World forums. By providing students a place to share their work and ideas, Remix World allows them to solicit feedback and give constructive criticism. Some students have found the process of sharing on Remix World so compelling that they've gone on to post to public sites, such as YouTube or open social networks...Self-Directed Learning: When students are motivated to create work that they share online, it ignites an independent learning cycle driven by their ideas & energized by responses from peers...Internet makes it easier and less daunting for students to find information or plug into expert communities"
education  technology  teaching  edutopia  socialnetworks  youth  socialmedia  tcsnmy  peerreview  constructivecriticism  self-directedlearning  digitalyouthnetwork  ning  remixworld  internet  online  sharing 
june 2009 by robertogreco
Hacking Education | Union Square Ventures: A New York Venture Capital Fund Focused on Early Stage & Startup Investing
"So in the end, the technologist's enthusiasm for radically reinventing education was tempered by an increased awareness of the broader social role that our educational institutions play and a greater appreciation for the political will needed to bring the full benefits of the web to public schools. The academics and educators heard about a number of interesting experiments that use peer production, game dynamics, super distribution, and the ubiquitous connectivity of the web to create meaningful demonstrations of what can be done. The challenge for all of us it to find ways to exploit technology to reduce the cost and increase the accessibility of education; build political support for the structural changes needed to make this a reality in public schools and architect a transition from the current industrial model of education to a network based model while minimizing social dislocation." via: http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/05/hacking-education.html
hackingeducation  education  learning  unschooling  deschooling  schools  peerreview  technology  future  teaching  creativity  socialmedia  tcsnmy  lcproject  gamechanging  danahboyd  fredwilson 
may 2009 by robertogreco
Been Up To: Quick Version: Thoughts On Teaching [peer review: type out samples of strong and weak writing]
"“Create two piles,” I said. “Which ones passed and which ones did not? There will be three paragraphs in each pile.” Great conversations ensued, both in the small groups and as a class. Some shocking revelations occurred (”That one didn’t pas
peerreview  teaching  writing 
may 2008 by robertogreco
Science Journal - WSJ.com
"We all make mistakes and, if you believe medical scholar John Ioannidis, scientists make more than their fair share. By his calculations, most published research findings are wrong."
medicine  research  science  statistics  studies  data  critique  analysis  peerreview 
september 2007 by robertogreco

Copy this bookmark:





to read