Do not think about, write about or deal with human behavior without determining the effects of incentives.
We’re Smarter Than Data–OR–We Don’t Have to Show You Any Stinkin’ Data–We Have Standards
This is from an Engelmann piece in Education Week wherein he points out that, while all Dalmatians have spots, not all dogs with spots are Dalmations. Educationally this means that while successful programs to teach reading has certain components, the presence of these components do not mean the program will be successful. “… California’s Ventura County Star carried an article on March 15, 2003, titled "Effective Reading Program Must Go. " A school in the district, it said, "was the only school in Ventura County and one of 109 in the state to get the citation … for showing exemplary progress." The district was replacing the program with one that has no strong data of effectiveness, but that had been adopted by California because it meets the state "standards."
The county superintendent justified the move this way: "We want to make sure all schools are using the same curriculum. Why not something based on the standards that are going to be taught?" So in the end, the state not only identifies mutts as Dalmatians, but rejects true Dalmatians because they don’t meet the state-created definition of "Dalmatians."”
We’ll change something that is working for something we “know” will work because it conforms to our “standards”. This approach has never worked because “Standards” are not a program, they are the reflected shadow of a part of a program.
Engelmann, S. (2004). The Dalmatian and Its Spots. Education Week.
Cheerio and ttfn,
Grant Coulson
Cui Bono—Cherchez Les Contingencies
