🚀 go-pugleaf

Date:   Tue, 13 Oct 1992 11:10:00 -0400
From: <N0G@psuvm.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: Moore;dist.ed.theory
To: KWB107@psuvm.psu.edu
 
thanks to KWB107 for starting the ball rolling....
I feel more comfortable with some of your suggestions than others...
I feel fairly comfortable with
---explanation of phenomenon
--a model
not so sure about Philosophical construct
less comfortable with proposed guidelines or "a position"
perhaps you could explain what you mean by some of these, especially
the last two. I have taken the view that a theory is essentially
a parsimonious, i.e. as simple as possible, (hard for academics and
other pedants) description of what is known about a phenomenon at any
given time. As such it is of course constantly changing as new 
knowledge
becomes available and also suggests where new knowledge is needed.
The ideal theory to me is a map in a geography book. A map of, lets say
the planet Mars, tells us simply what is known, what is blank nad is 
updated as we discover more.... a theory in education should be
the phenomena of teaching and learning and the organization of those,
reduced to simple terms, or lines, or figures, or....???? 
is this too simple an idea?
is it not big enough to accomodate for example what you call
"a position"?
Write  me... Michael Moore.



--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!23.0!Nancy.Petersen
Internet: Nancy.Petersen@p0.f23.n105.z1.fidonet.org