User talk:Andrew Davidson/Education

Afrikaanse Hoër Seunskool
What was "inappropriate" about it? I don't think there's a removal clause about that even if it was. One would think the important thing would be if it was promotional. Not personal judgements about "appropriateness." Whatever that means. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)


 * WP:G11 starts by explaining that "This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopaedia articles..." Note the emphasis on the words exclusively and fundamentally.  The article was not exclusively promotional and did not require a fundamental rewrite.  The tag was therefore inappropriate.
 * Note also that the page has existed for over 15 years and has been edited by nearly 300 editors. Their acceptance of the page indicates a substantial consensus that the content is reasonably acceptable.
 * Andrew🐉(talk) 22:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I note the need to be "fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopaedia articles" perfectly well. You should note that an article with six sections, where the majority of them are extremely long and the vast majority are promotional in tone, that only has 4 references would take fundamental rewrite of the article to make it encyclopedia. Some would essentially blank it except for the first sentence, find sources, and rewrite the whole thing from scratch. Which the article would be fundamentally different from. That's the epitome of a fundamental rewrite.


 * Also note, that the guidelines about when speedy deletion is appropriate does not cover the age of the article or how many people have edited. It's cool if it's personal opinion that those things are important, but don't treat your own opinions like they are in any way authoritative. It's also slightly disingenuous to act like people editing an article has any more meaning behind it then that some people edited an article. Especially since a good number of those editors are SPAs that probably have COIs. It's pretty ridiculous to claim what COI editors do matters, other then being a good indicator that the article is clearly promotional and should be deleted. You got to really have some problems if you think otherwise. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Education Not for Sale
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Education Not for Sale. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 09:10, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Learning by teaching
Thanks for having help to rescue "Learning by teaching".Jeanpol (talk) 11:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. As that topic is difficult to work on, I suggest that you take a look at some other pedagogical topics.  They can be difficult too and so you may get some insights from the comparison.  For example, I started the flipped classroom topic – a different sort of role reversal in education.  That topic has attracted a lot of attention but probably still needs a lot of work.  Perhaps you can help with that... Andrew D. (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the answer. Of course I know other pedagogical topics like "flipped classroom". But the Learning by teaching method is working well since the 80ies and teacher who use it are very satisfied. One point is perhaps a little problem: "Learning by teaching" is not easy to apply, because teacher have to understand and master the theory and the technics. "Flipped classroom" is easy to integrate to LdL and is part of it. But LdL goes further than "flipped classroom" so the teacher have more to learn the system than when they use "flipped classroom". Here the theory of LdL: "Conceptualization as a source of happiness". Jeanpol (talk) 13:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As you can see, "flipped classroom" is wellknowd in Germany: Umgedrehter Unterricht and in France: Classe inversée.Jeanpol (talk) 14:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok. I had just looked at: started and didn't see flipped classroom. Your article is very comprehensive. I don't understand really why you mean, "(...) that topic is difficult to work on...(...)." In Germany the topic is wellknowd an many people work using "Learning by teaching". So for instance this group on facebook: Lernen durch Lehren.Jeanpol (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Re Learning by teaching Grüssen Sie alle! I was just passing by and saw the title, and wondered where it had come from. Initially it seemed to be an elaborate form of product placement. I looked for a solid reference and couldn't find one- eventually on the Austriam external link I came across the Uni. in Marburg- so if there was any academic rigour method described in the joke title it would be there. Alas. mein-flipped-classroom give a clear description of what it is thought to be. There is no learning through the teaching process described there- it sounds familiar, and it was an approach we used at Abraham Moss Centre Manchester 8 from 1975 to 1981 when it was replaced by more conventional techniques. See Ron Mitsons pages in ,

We called it Independant Resource based learning. Teachers made and selected the resources, in those days we sent relevant to the print room to be offset lithoed into booklets that were store in resource trolley- after a lead talk by the module leader the 11-14 year olds worked at their own level through the topic for 3 or 6 weeks- at the end they did a self evaluation test- and moved to the next module. We all worked (120 kids and 4 teachers)in an open area, and the puristssuggested that some kids would be doing Hums and other Maths along side each other at their own whim. This worked well for Humanities- was useless Modern Foriegn Languages, near impossible for all but basic Maths which relied on a serial build up of knowledge. By the time I joined the school walls had started to be erected and the whole shot had become more teacher centric. I loved it- but there were severe problems- producing the material took about 5 times as long as giving a teacher centric lesson. You couldn't get the staff who had the ability to help across the board. My wifes module on Basic Indonesian had the Maths specialists giving up. When she reverted to French, Spanish and German the result was the same. Exterior resource were very diffict for our inner city pupils to access. Above all you had to be a very strong diciplinarian to keep the kids in their seats. Our kids did not have the intrinsic motivation that the middle classes assume is inherent.

If we look at the concept of using Learning through Teaching- it has been around since before Billy Bunter. I often used it when supply teaching. It goes like this: ''Today you are supposed to be studying "the War poets" this note says they were called Wilfed Owen, and Siegried Sassoon- do you think that is a joke? Look, I don't know anything about them- perhaps you need to teach me. You have 20 minutes on the Internet to but together a 3 minute talk where you can tell the class all you have found out- start with Wikipedia- the lede will be good and look at the navbox at the bottom. Hey who is the class internet nerd? Right you don't do that task, but go round the class helping anyone that puts up a hand.'' That is learning by teaching! In the plenary, the students teach their peers the facts they have learned. Before the internet- you wrote them a note and sent them to the library.

So back to the articles- this article and flipped schools seem to be on pupil centric learning, rather than teacher centric. It would not be allowed in any state that has to teach to the National Curriculum. The term High School- in German means University- in the states it is the final 4 years of secondary- in the UK it a state 11-16 school. School in the US applies to tertiary education.

Viel spass, leute. ClemRutter (talk) 16:58, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * @ClemRutter If you are looking for solid references, I hope you find some here: Lernen durch Lehren.Jeanpol (talk) 19:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * @ClemRutterIt seems to be an elaborate form of product placement: Theory_of_relativity!Jeanpol (talk) 06:35, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Seemed not seems. Past tense. It will take a little time to read through all the references on Lernen durch Lehren. With the approach described- it seems to be one that I have been using since the 1970s but I can't find the references that describe it to the standards we use in en:wp. There are 45 references given in the articles but 40 of them are off-line in academic books to which I have no access, some are behind a paywall that you will nor notice if you are editing from a university ip. Looking at the other five- I am cautious of references that refer back to articles you have written or collaborated in, and cautious of articles that refer back to the wikipedia article, or a version in another language. The Sascha Stollhaus reference Stollhaus is probably the best. I am trying to verify the text- and I need more than we have got there.


 * Referring to the problem of writing education articles in English, I put it down to differing cultures. Educational theory is taken seriously in Germany and in the 1970, promotion in England was based on classroom effectiveness while in Rheinland-Pfalz- progression was based on the amount of study the teacher had done. Even today the theoretic knowledge needed to gain teacher status in Germany is light yearr ahead. ( I talk of differing cultures- and we have a totally different culture to that in the states.)Pedagogical theory is totally underrated in the UK.  I just don't think that the UK editor has the basic vocabulary- and again we are back to the lack of basic open references.--ClemRutter (talk) 10:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I think, the best way is to read my newest (and surely my last) article, published in a manual (june 2018): "Conceptualization as a source of happiness".Jeanpol (talk) 10:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you know this deletion page? Articles_for_deletion/Learning_by_teaching.Jeanpol (talk) 11:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Could you please look at this? Somebody wants to merge "peer-Learning" and "learning by teaching". I don't understand why "Learning by teaching" ever is menaced! Thank you very much! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Learning_by_teaching Jeanpol (talk) 09:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC) Jeanpol (talk) 09:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I have responded at that talk page
 * Thank you very much!!! You are a big help for me! Jeanpol (talk) 10:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Seven Myths about Education
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Seven Myths about Education&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 08:41, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

St Trinnean's School
Hello! Your submission of St Trinnean's School at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:53, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've responded at the nomination but fluffed the ping there so I'm repeating here too to make sure of notification. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 7,460 views even though it sadly did not get the picture slot. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:31, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia Education Greenhouse
Hi Andrew! This is Melissa Guadalupe Huertas from the Education team at the Wikimedia Foundation. I'm sending you this message because you expressed your interest in joining the Wikimedia & Education Greenhouse as a volunteer collaborator. Thank you so much for that! I'm currently contacting interested volunteers to confirm their participation and invite them to a videocall next week. During this short videocall we will go over shared roles, synchronize timelines, and get to know each other! I will also answer any questions you may have about your participation. I would really appreciate it if you could contact me via email (mguadalupe@wikimedia.org) to discuss further details. Cheers! --MGuadalupe (WMF) (talk) 23:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have replied by email. Andrew D. (talk) 13:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)