Comments on: Bummer Boy takes on Gladwell, Part 1

By: john

john — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 19:06:06 +0000

I think I might have seen your site a few years ago, but I’m not sure

By: Educational Insanity » Blog Archive » There’s something here…

Mon, 19 Jul 2010 02:36:00 +0000

[...] can quibble about the quality of Gladwell’s work, and I’m on record with a negative take on some of his work. But, what I won’t stand for are individuals given a stage and a big audience (of educators!) [...]

By: Jon Becker

Jon Becker — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 00:48:36 +0000

Darren (and Will), to be honest, I’ve not read The Element (nor, BTW, have I read any of Gardner’s books; tough I’ve read many articles by him). I think one huge difference between Robinson and Gladwell is expertise. Robinson’s been involved in arts education nearly all of his professional life. He is a credible writer on issues of learning.

Expertise/credibility is important to me. So is “doing your homework.” Darren, if there is so much overlap with Gardner’s ideas, and Gardner’s theories are valid/reliable, then I think Robinson would have an obligation to give more credit to Gardner.

By: Darren Draper

Darren Draper — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:48:36 +0000

Will,

I’ve read Robinson’s The Element and have one fairly substantial concern about the book. While Robinson spends the entire book discussing the idea that people learn, behave, and perform best under certain circumstances (i.e., when they’re in their “element”) – he makes little mention of Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory. In fact, he only discusses Gardner in passing with one or two measly paragraphs.

Why not give credit where credit is due?

Or perhaps I’ve missed something in the book? It just seemed to me that if you’d seen Robinson’s TED talk and read Howard Gardner’s work, then you’d already heard the overall message of The Element.

Regardless, great series of posts, Jon. I also really enjoyed your reflections on NECC (with Bri) and your summary of EBC.

By: sylvia martinez

sylvia martinez — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:01:23 +0000

I still contend you deserve to be called “Dr. Bummer Boy”

By: Educational Insanity » Blog Archive » Bummer Boy takes on Gladwell, Part 2

Wed, 08 Jul 2009 03:08:33 +0000

[...] Part 1, I took a philosophical approach to my critique of Malcolm Gladwell and his book, Outliers. I [...]

By: NECC 2009: Opening Keynote Malcolm Gladwell « Ubiquitous Thoughts

NECC 2009: Opening Keynote Malcolm Gladwell « Ubiquitous Thoughts — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:38:07 +0000

[...] of the keynote is here, here, and here. Scott McLeod posted a few more useful links, including this critique by “Bummer Boy”. Liz Davis wonders how to put Gladwell’s ideas into [...]

By: Andrew B. Watt

Andrew B. Watt — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:44:42 +0000

I’m moderately fond of Mr. Gladwell, but I was more than a little offended at the idea of a recycled speech. I followed his examples and anecdotes, and I think he’s on the right track, but it would have been nice to see some actual data.

By: Brad Ovenell-Carter

Brad Ovenell-Carter — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:23:18 +0000

I take Gladwell's point. But I also felt the same thing you did, Bummer Boy, when I was listening in on MG's keynote through Twitter. He was, as far as I could tell from the Tweets, making a hasty generalization (you of all people might like the Fallacy Files) There were similar stories of going a bridge to far a few years back when neuroscience was all the rage in education circles. John T. Bruer's piece, Education and the Brain: A Bridge to Far, makes a good critique.

By: Will Richardsonw

Will Richardsonw — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:40:18 +0000

Wondering if you have the same analysis of Ken Robinson’s “The Element” which follows this structure as well. Read it?