In a message dated 2/25/2000 4:44:26 PM Pacific Standard Time,
retroman@turbont.net writes:
<< there is no way a person of any dominant ability is >>
OK there it is, right there in that word dominant. I see it again and again.
Your need to retain yoru dominance shows itself again and again.
Mike we are saying the same thing, you would like to keep the superiority of
intelligence. I see little difference in your case tha nmine, except you are
seeing your assertations as justifiable from your position of superiority,
and I am casting a less complimentary slant on your case.
(And you add a lot of needless piddle about crying your yeys out and
"feelings">: - )
I am going to put it out there one more time and then stop bothering the list
with my own piddle. Inherently it's useless, and since Howard Gardner is a
respected child psychologist and Mike Lorrey is not, little will be lost if
all the Mikes and Micks in the world hate him and what he represents.
But the bottom line is, this practice of teaching has in fact *enabled* "less
dominant" intelligence to gain validatin, which build self esteem in kids,
which in turn opens them up to new learning capabilties. They develop the
fdominant skills of logic and verbal skill more rapidly, learn more and get
more out of life.
To bemoan the fact, after the fact, -- all becasue it is egaletarian (a much
more acurate word than PC) is not productive, it is... ahem... RETRO
No mo'
Queen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:04:12 MDT