Science
-
Upload
ebredberg -
Category
Technology
-
view
511 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Science
![Page 1: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Why Science?
• A definition: science is the process of establishing cause and effect
• Not 100% foolproof• At its best it recognises and
addresses the possibility of error and incompleteness
• A community of communicating practitioners
• The concept of peer-review
![Page 2: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Smart people can misread cause and effect:
• Severe sore throat and cough• Patient (US academic) seen at Beijing hospital• Offered choice of treatments:
– Erythromycin– "Chuanbeiye," with the chief ingredients listed as "snake
bile, tendril-leafed fritillary bulb, and almond, etc."
• Patient chose erythromycin despite assurances from translator that Chuanbeiye always worked for her.
• Patient got better, continued to put his faith in antiobiotics over traditional Chinese medicine.
![Page 3: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
What’s wrong with above picture?
• Majority of respiratory complaints like that described by the author are viral, not bacteriological
• Neither treatment was likely to work• Moral: skeptical scientific minds,
with incomplete information, can get it wrong, too.
![Page 4: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
What should we look for?
• Instructional techniques and programs that correspond with established understanding of FASD
• Assessment of effects that actually measure what is being addressed.
• Duration and applicability of effect (not just the result of cramming a bunch of information)
![Page 5: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
What should we look for? (2)
• If a program claims to be supported by research, check that research and desired effect match.
• If “analog skills” are addressed, look for research that they have direct bearing on disability.– Real analog skill for reading: phonological
processing– Unsubstantiated analog skill: eye movement
• Program tested by independent research, and replicated.
![Page 6: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
A little more about peer review
• Good science assumes possibilities of error, bias, statistical fumbles, contamination of effect, etc. etc.
• Findings, even if apparently very compelling, must be subjected to peer review before submitted to media. (e.g. “cold fusion”)
• Even with peer review, one study doth not a conclusion make.
![Page 7: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
DO NOT MAKE MAJOR LIFE DECISIONS ON THE BASIS OF
THE FINDINGS OF ONE STUDY!!!!
![Page 8: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Testimonials
• 1. Authorities: – Really smart people: Jarvik– Celebrities: Oprah– Moral Authorities: Floyd Redcrow
Westerman (?!)
• 2. People just like you…– really?– In what respects?
![Page 9: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Testimonials:
• Consider the logic:• How many testimonials would it take to
show effectiveness?– What can you infer from number of testimonial
regarding the ratio of successes to failures– What worked?
• Can the described effect be compared to that of other approaches?
• Consider the single-case phenomenon.– My “argument from Tylenol…”
![Page 10: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Science is only part of the picture.
• What else do you need to think about if the program you’re looking at is supported by legitimate research evidence?
![Page 11: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Does it really match your child’s needs?
• Beware the program that fixes: “Autism, LD, NLD, FASD, and ADHD, and CP.”– How do you know what your child’s
problem is?– Assessment (not baseline, but
diagnostic) should be independent of organisation offering treatment.
![Page 12: Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022070302/547cd07db4af9fc91f8b459c/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
IF IT SOUNDS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE,
…
IT PROBABLY IS.