Talk:Alfie Kohn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.
This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Kohn's website claims his next book, The Homework Myth: Why Our Kids Get Too Much of a Bad Thing, will be published in fall, 2006. -- Perspective 16:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

This page is almost entirely quotations and does not belong on Wikipedia. Unless serious changes are made, it should be nominated for deletion. I'd put up the appropriate template, but I don't know how to do it. If a more knowledgeable Wikipedian would do that, I'd really appreciate it.Emmett5 00:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't mean it needs deletion, just expansion. Alfie Kohn is a legitimately important figure in the world of education and parenting. Dave Walker 03:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Good point, expansion is always better than deletion.-Emmett5 04:56, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I removed the paragraph starting with "There are two ways of viewing his books." as that was clearly opinion. The paragraph could be rewritten, but as I was trying, I felt it would be better to remove. Details about Kohn's major works probably should be put elsewhere, and editorials such as the aforementioned quote removed.

I also removed the obvious advert that was starting with "Don't have time to read the book?"

Finally, I just want to say that I came to look at this entry because I thought I'd learn some objective things about Alfie Kohn and his work, and what I see here is a passable personal essay about his work. I'd like to see something more objective. I understand that the page is rated "start" quality by the ratings group. I would like to work towards making a better page. What other biographies of contemporary writers might be good to compare with?

--Mantator 14:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Amen Mantator, Amen!

Drunkencorgimaster 21:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Drunkencorgimaster 9/4/07



Contents

[edit] Credentials

Does anyone have any information about Kohn's credentials? Where did he go to college? What degree(s) does he hold? Why should he be considered an expert in the field of education? I find it odd that even his own web site does not contain any information about his educational background or experiences that would lend credence to his work. ~ME

I totally agree 100% with "ME." Does anyone know? ~AZ

"AZ" & "ME": What do you mean by "lend credence to his work"? He cites primary sources in every paragraph, he doesn't claim to have his own studies. As for his own website not containing information on his background: Go to the website, click on the FAQ link near the bottom right-hand corner. The third point in the FAQ is:

A surprising amount of mail has been arriving lately with requests for details about my personal history. Some people are simply curious. Some ask because they think this information will be useful for a class assignment. And some seem angry about what I’ve written and appear to be hoping to find some fact about me that will make them feel better about dismissing my ideas. [...] I’m more interested in calling attention to ideas than to the particulars of my background. That’s why my website is dedicated to the former rather than to the latter. I’d rather that my arguments were judged on their merits rather than filtered through a biographical lens.

- Dissembly 03:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The homework book makes a passing reference to his being a teacher, based on the context it seems likely it was upper middle school, or high school. Here's the citation: http://books.google.com/books?id=_pj54f1vSYAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=alfie+kohn&ei=zPQxR7OcL5yY7wLI1ITLAQ&sig=lLy2OlrsDptL_9A_LT0KfkaINlw#PPA89,M1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.176.194 (talk) 17:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The "Controversy" Section

The "Controversy" section of the article doesn't appear to have any information on actual controversies regarding Alfie Kohn; it's just someone's personal observation. I am removing it. - Dissembly 03:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok... at 01:47 on the 11 June 2007, "69.153.114.100" reverted the deleted "controversy" section (under a new name) with no explanation either in the edit history or on this Discussion page. (How many mindless reverts are acceptable, again?) The section of text contains blatant POV. I have removed the POV, but i am afraid that with the POV removed it is a rather uninteresting paragraph. (And there is still no reference to any controversy regarding Alfie Kohn or his arguments). Dissembly 09:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I wish to respond to the above reference to my comments as "mindless" and blatantly "POV." I have a Ph.D. and do not consider myself to be mindless. POV is not a word I am familiar with. I assume it stands for something, but I do not know what. I do not normally post on Wikipedia, but I feel strongly about this subject. I changed the title because you claimed it was not a controversy. Fine, but it is factual. It happened. How do you want me to title it? Wikipedia guidelines ask you to be factual. I was. It also asks you to be friendly. Is "mindless" friendly? Please tell me, Dissembly, how you want me to present this factual incident (to which I was a witness) and I will happily do it. (Drunkencorgimaster)7/19

-No response yet? 7/24

POV is a standard Wikimedia abbreviation for "point of view". All Wikimedia articles are supposed to have a NPOV (neutral point of view). See Neutral point of view for more information. Perhaps more to the point regarding your contribution are the Verifiability and No original research policies. Describing a personally witnessed event on a Wikipedia page (no matter how factual) constitutes original research and is not verifiable. The proper alternative is to describe the public record of an event, whether you personally witnessed it or not. Dissembly's "mindless" comment appears to refer to the revert and not to the content of your contribution. There have been many edit wars on Wikipedia. To help prevent them, it is expected that a revert include a reason, either in the Edit Summary or on the discussion page. "Mindless revert" was shorthand for "revert without an explanation in either the edit summary or the discussion page". Your contribution is not mindless (though I agree that it is outside Wikipedia policy), but your revert did not follow standard protocol. JMRyan 19:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quotation

Removing the following: At a workshop held in 2000 at Manlius Pebble Hill School in DeWitt, New York, Kohn spoke about the problems with the sole use of lecturing to teach curriculum items to elementary and secondary school students, arguing for active learning approaches in schools.

The lecture lasted two hours, and Kohn devoted an hour to a question-and-answer session, taking three questions and giving twenty minute answers to each question.

Reason: This seems biased to show he's a hypocrite. From personal communication with him, Kohn realizes the seeming hypocrisy. Also, he is paid to be a lecturer, but does run workshops more in line with what he preaches. Further, he also realizes that lecture has its place in the classroom. Just not the place at the forefront that it currently holds. QuiBobJinn 19:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification QuiBobJinn (really),

My comments ARE biased. I admit that, but I think it is silly to pretend that the rest of the page is somehow sanitarily objective. Let's be honest. There is no such thing as a truly neutral point of view. I am glad Alfie realizes he's a hypocrite. Sounds like Alfie is also being honest. (If you read this Alfie, good for you to admit that!) And for the record the workshop I suffered through was not what he preached. It was just the 'Sage on the Stage' with no imput from the audience. Maybe he has changed since 2000, -beats me.

So you defenders of Mr. Kohn have won this round, but are you really being intellectually honest by censoring the one small voice in the wilderness that dares question this man with a bunch of technicalities like 'POV' and 'Original Research?' Why are there four pro-Kohn quotatins on the page? Are they not 'POV'? I have no doubt that if I presented that episode (for the fourth time) with a verifiable source that was non-original research (A signed letter from Mannlius-Pebble Hill faculty for example) one of you Alfie-disciples would come up with yet another reason to take it off. What are you all so bloody afraid of? Where is the dialogue? Where is the give-and-take? WWAS? (What would Abelard Say?)

 -Drunkencorgimaster 9/4/04  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drunkencorgimaster (talk • contribs) 21:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Since POV seems to be OK if it is in a quote I have added an alternative voice to the quotes section to provide perspective and balance. If it is deleted for any reason whatsoever, I will report the action and file an objectivity complaint. The page is already well-over the fairness line in my opionion. --Drunkencorgimaster 23:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)Drunkencorgimaster (again)

Mr. Drunkencorgimaster -- since this is a biographical article, it is held to a higher standard. Please see the notice at the top of this page. I'd love to rip apart the Uffe Ravnskov article, for instance, but that just wouldn't be Cricket.
--Javance 04:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You guys are still pulling nonsense in this section. We have gone around and around on this. If the anti-Alfie quotations are going to be repeatedly removed than all quotations must go.--Drunkencorgimaster 15:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Shapiro

I doubt the manager of the Cleveland Indians has any strong pedagogical opinions. Removing Wiki link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javance (talk • contribs) 04:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)