Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Education/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Education. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

→

Haywood Community College

This article needs some attention from someone more familiar with the area. There is currently a dispute regarding the inclusion of some material in the article which appears to have references, though they are offline refs. Any help at Talk:Haywood Community College is appreciated. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Metacognition

The section on metacognition does not belong in this article.96.49.151.83 (talk) 01:50, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

LLL in the workplace

This article lacks a critical analysis of LLL in the workplace. for example, academic scholars have pointed out that that that LLL is being practiced in many workplace environments is not as benign as this article would suggests. LLL can be used by organizations in the workplace as a means of worker control and surveillance. It commodifies learning and normalizes labour-market conditions of employment instability. It considers the worker perpetually inadequate and places the burden of corporate, individual and even country success on the worker. As spending on training in organizations has been dropping over the last 20 years, this means that the time and money for training is becoming the responsibility of the worker. Increased levels of education across North America have not resulted in reduced employment rates, nor has it coincided with a parallel increase in education needed. Thus, scholars have indicated that this "education inflation" creates under-employment and skills mismatch. The learning that is valued in the workplace LLL discourse and practice is only that which will contribute to profit. It ignores the varied types of learning and various types of knowledge and skill that are represented in scholarly academic discourse about LLL. Furthermore, it is important to realize that most of the workplace learning that does happen is available only to those who already have substantial education. Thus, the gap between those who HAVE and HAVE-NOT with respect to knowledge/skills is widening. The discourses and practices of LLL as they are today in the neoliberal postindustrial business world, are based almost exclusively on Human Capital Theory and bare little resemblance to the discourses in academia in general, and in education in particular. 96.49.151.83 (talk) 02:03, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

oops- LLL

Sorry. I'm new to this. The previous 2 posts refer to the article on Lifelong learning. 96.49.151.83 (talk) 02:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Jacob Frank now a mascot for Wikipedia sister project Wikiversity

Hi, I'm developing Jacob Frank (an 18th-century Jew who developed a significant religious movement called Frankism, which believed in "purification through transgression") as a mascot for Wikipedia's sister project Wikiversity. Wikiversity aims to be an online open school and university, and was also created to host original research. Because of its nature, it's open to educational resources in almost any format. Wikiversity's mascots appear on User talk pages when new Users are welcomed. In my opinion, the Wikiversity mascots could be used more fully as an opportunity to teach. The previously developed Wikiversity mascots lack intrinsic educational value. For example, they include a jack-o-lantern, a goat and twin babies not noticeably tied to anything else. In contrast, Jacob Frank is tied to a chapter of history that is relatively little-known and is probably interesting to some people who might not have heard of him beforehand. I'm also hoping to use his professed ignorance in real life and his doctrine of "purification through transgression" to introduce the Wikiversity policies of "Be bold" and "Ignore all rules" (Wikipedia has very similar policies with the same names). I would appreciate your going over to Wikiversity to provide feedback on the pages about the mascot: v:User:JacobFrank and v:Template:JacobFrank. The Template is left on new Users' talk pages; the Userpage is linked from the template and provides more information about Jacob Frank. Also, any ideas for other Wikiversity mascots? Thanks. --AFriedman (talk) 04:31, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Education/Archive 5/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Education/Archive 5/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.

If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 01:03, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

DELTA

I think the last comments for the DELTA post about it not being a 'professional' teaching qualification like PGCE misses the point. Chosing to do one thing and not another thing does not mean you are 'not' the other thing any more than you are not a whole list of other things. If someone plays rugby, not football, we don't say, "Well, he's a rugby player, therefore he cannot play football". It's redundant because he is also not a tennis player, or a golf player, and so on. And what? DELTA is a postgrad qualification in its own right. It is not a 'professional' teaching qualification only from a 'state' school perspective. That's because DELTA teachers mostly work in the private sector. They are still professional teachers in every sense of the word - i.e., they are paid to teach, and they know their stuff. Another simple way to look at it is that a PGDip beats a PGCert, not that you'd think so from this article.

So, why the seemingly negative stance? A "my-qualification-is-better-than-yours" complex; or a "my-qualifications-are-never-good-enough-and-now-I-want-that-one" complex? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.36.179.66 (talk) 02:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Not familiar with the context, but I agree in principle. The article should present the credential as is. Contrasting with another credential (or anything else) is "contra-indicated" as they say in the medical field. Unless the article is entitled "comparing x with y" which would be unusual. I'm not familiar with what "Delta" is. An article? Student7 (talk) 19:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I assume that the context is DELTA (ELT).

Context, BTW, is exactly why a bit of compare-and-contrast description is useful in these articles.

Just like you would describe a piece of anatomy by its relative location ("above This, next to That") and by association to similar things ("smaller and thinner than the Greater Thing"), you should explain how certifications compare with each other. This comparison should be based on concrete and specific facts, not vague statements like "This is better" or "That is more desirable". We should tell readers, for example, that DELTA is a private certification rather than a government license; the two are not interchangeable. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Periodic Table (Simon Basher book)

Your project's input is solicited. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:49, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Quiz bowl

I added this article to the project due to it being a primarily high school and college academic competition. If anyone disagrees with this, they can remove it. As is, the article needs major work, an assessment, and importance rating. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 22:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Concerns with article Transformative Teacher Education

The article Transformative Teacher Education has been proposed for deletion and is currently being discussed at Articles for Deletion. The discussion includes concern over whether the article is a good faith attempt to summarise existing sources, or whether it constitutes original research and synthesis. Those discussing it would appreciate contributions to the debate from those with experience in this area. - DustFormsWords (talk) 08:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Problematic edits by an anonymous editor

It's entirely possible that all of 75.94.77.100 (talk · contribs)'s edits are proper, but there are no sources for any of their edits, all to various grading systems. Could someone knowledgeable take a look at the IP's edits? Woogee (talk) 05:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not looking. My thought is 1) revert them. WP:BURDEN is on the editor OR 2) label them with {{fact}}. Then they stay for some indeterminate period. AND 3) leave a note on IP's page explaining your actions. Your mesg here seems responsible enough! We trust you! :) Student7 (talk) 01:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Missing education topics

I've updated my list of missing education topics - Skysmith (talk) 13:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Intuition

--Docjp (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)--Docjp (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)The subject of intuition should be included in any meaningful discussion of education, or educational curricula, however, it rarely is. The reason for this is that the majority of individuals in the field of education are or tend to be Left-Hemisphere of the brain oriented, and are therefore limited to "thinking" as their primary means of understanding Life. Unknown to these individuals is the fact that their "intellectualism" [which means one who is limited to the use of the Left-Hemisphere of the brain for understanding Life ("Life" being a term including all dimensions, both physical and Esoteric, that Man can access) is a "compensation" by their MIND realms for a diminished access to the faculty of intuition. For those thus limited, an explanation of this limitation is known in the field of mental health as the term "Scotoma", as mentioned in the works of Fritz Perls. One of the interesting aspects of Scotoma, or <http://about-psychology.com/DM-SI.html>DM=SI</a> is that the person thus limited has no idea that such a limitation exists, and his or her MIND will strongly resist such a suggestion.--Docjp (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)--Docjp (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Classroom design

FYI, we have an article about classroom design at AFD. Colonel Warden (talk) 11:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Computers in the classroom

New article: Computers in the classroom. Needs lots of work, and I have raised some concerns to the editor. If anyone cares to help, please do! — Timneu22 · talk 16:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Luis Radford

Please help improve the new page Luis Radford. Tkuvho (talk) 16:39, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Revival of WikiProject Homeschooling

Several users (myself included) are in the process of reviving WikiProject Homeschooling. Any help from users, experienced or otherwise, would be greatly appreciated. Discussion can be found here. Thank you! On behalf of WikiProject Homeschooling, PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 22:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed category merger: "Educational_philosophy" into "Philosophy of education"

See the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_June_6#Category:Educational_philosophy.Greg Bard 23:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Problems with article on Special education

I wonder if any members of this project can help with the article on Special education as the current editors are at an impasse. The article needs to discuss special education on a global basis. We currently have editors from the UK and the US who are in disagreement, and it has not been possible to establish a common framework and common language to develop the article. As the article currently stands it is written from an American viewpoint with mostly American references. The US-specific terminology (eg, mainstreaming, resource room, etc) is not familiar to non-US readers, which makes the article very difficult to understand. Assistance would be particularly appreciated from anyone with a knowledge of special education in Third World countries. Dahliarose (talk) 11:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles in Scope of This Project

You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 04:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

It would be great to see more participants in this project editing those articles, which have many implications for education policy and education practice. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 23:05, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Category:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject

Participants in this WikiProject may be interested in Category:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject.—Wavelength (talk) 00:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Branch campuses

Satellite campus (AfD discussion) is, as you can see, currently nominated for deletion. You may know this subject better by its alternative name of a branch campus. If you do, you might want to contribute to the discussion. Or, indeed, to help work on the article, given how bad Wikipedia currently is compared to the proprietary encyclopaedias when it comes to this subject. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 02:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting Discussion (maybe)

Regarding Early Childhood education, there is a discussion about Kindergarten and Preschool Education: Talk:Preschool_education#Organising_Early_Childhood_Education. It would be nice to get some more people to look at this - cheers --Boy.pockets (talk) 05:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

"template"

I'm probably barging into an open door, but while writing Master of Design I stumbled on remnants of an old "template" in Professional Doctorate in Engineering and Master of Arts in Liberal Studies. I suppose that was a template which was decided against? Should it be removed? --Muhandes (talk) 07:22, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

seems like no one cares, so I removed it. --Muhandes (talk) 18:09, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Notice of ArbCom decision on Race and intelligence and related articles

The Arbitration Commmittee case on race and intelligence has just been decided. Thus articles that are either in the Race and intelligence controversy category or mentioned in the findings of the 2010 Arbitration Committee case on Race and intelligence or closely related to those are subject to active arbitration remedies that you may wish to review. The case decision seems to have resulted in an immediate improvement in the editing environment of several articles that previously were very contentious. Peaceful, collaborative editing that turns to sources and upholds Wikipedia policy is enjoyable editing. I thought I should let participants on this WikiProject know that this improved atmosphere now exists, because some of the articles related to that case have long been marked as part of this project. Your participation in editing those articles is welcomed and encouraged. You can look up sources to help improve articles in the source lists I have been compiling to share with all Wikipedians. And because the source lists span several different topics, and those topics fit quite a few articles in this WikiProject in whole or in part, suggesting new sources would be a very kind thing to do. The atmosphere has improved a lot, so the articles can improve a lot. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 01:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

wikiproject school years

Hi, I am proposing that many articles under the following category be merged. [1] it appears to me, particularly asinine to have a separate page for 5th grade, 6th grade etc. the pages contain minimal information, most of which is essentially repeated or could be easily extrapolated from a single article explaining the system behind the grading systems. I checked the associated wikiproject and it appears to be dormant for 2 years and so may not be followed any more. that is why i brought this here. Drag-5 (talk) 13:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Education articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Education articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Teachers vs. Child Care Providers: By Michael Vanderhoof

I have been in the profession of Early Childhood Education for over 20yrs. and the reason there are so many children "kicked-out" of preschool is due to the fact that there is a difference between "Teachers" and "Child-Care Providers". Here is the difference, Teachers have certification and college degrees and Child-Care Providers DO NOT! This is a huge difference between the two titles...and the children are the ones who suffer when all is said and done. The State of Texas requires that Child-Care Providers need to have a total of 15 mandatory training hours in order to work at a state licensed center, this is a huge joke. In the public school setting, children are with "teachers" who have certification by the state to work with these children and in most situations a B.A. or a Master's Degree in Early Childhood Education. So, why is the there such a huge gap between the two titles? This is due to the state of Texas and other local states around the country who have a "Minimal Standards" to the requirements in the laws... THIS NEEDS TO BE CHANGED!

I am finishing an Action Research Project for my Master's Degree that will be complete in June of 2011. The topic is on pre-k children being labeled by "Teachers" and kicked out of school without intervention. This happens to a huge number of children every year and is three times more likely than children ages K-12 grades, according to a 2005 study. Many child-care centers or private preschools (as they like to be called) hire individuals who have no background in the area of Early Childhood Education. This is allowed for them to do because the state does NOT have a policy in place that raises the standards on this issue. Many of these child-care centers have no resources for intervention, and even if some of them do, they are more likely to not use the resources because the administration of these schools don't want to "cause waves" with the open pocket-book of the parent. In most situations, these schools have an unwritten policy of "three strikes and your out" type program. However, the situation is different depending on who the child belongs to... and also if other parents are complaining and threatening to pull their children if the "problem child" is allowed to stay in the school... SAD!

It is my mission to finish this ARP and present my findings to the Texas Board of Education and also the Department of Child-Care Licensing, to ensure that EVERY child white, black, hispanic, and etc... has the same rights to intervention as children do in the Public School Systems across the country! The future of our chidren are at risk, and laws need to be changed to not only protect our children, but to make sure that our children are being taught by individuals that have education, and not just a few "baby-sitting" reference letters to work with the children of this great nation! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.181.176.81 (talk) 20:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

SCI-FUN

Hi, I was wondering if anybody could help me. I started trying to edit the Sci-Fun page a few weeks ago and have run into a few difficulties. Somebody has tagged it as reading like an advert, despite the fact that throughout I tried to state facts of what SCI-FUN does without ever offering praise or opinion. Somebody has also noted in the discussion page that I should not be writing the article as I work for SCI-FUN and this is against Wikipaedia's neutrality policy. I'm now in a dilema, in that I apparently can't edit the article because I'm not neutral, but if it does not get edited it may be marked for deletion.

Would anybody be able to help me out please? Could someone please read it to see if you think it reads like an advert, then either edit it if it does, or remove the tag if it doesn't.

Thanks in advance for your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.60.53 (talk) 08:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Educology

Could anyone please look at, and help to improve, the new article Educology? Cheers, Chzz ► 05:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Forest School

We at Bredon School have just started our ownForest School in our 13 acre forest. It is such an amazing resource.

I was interested to find out how many of you out there have ever used such a teaching tool. Do you have any good advice or ideas as to making the best out of it?

Have a look at the new resouce at our school website: http://www.bredonschool.org/content/view/237/58/

Jonasmallwood (talk) 15:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Freshmen playing Varsity level in College

'I might be wrong but this is my understanding that I have, in 1971 as a freshmen I started for The University of Hawai'i Rainbows who played Nebraska in the Honolulu stadium. I lettered as a freshmen along with Elton Shintaku who was also a freshman as a tight end. I lettered the four years I was there and you had to play a certain amount of quarters to letter.

Maybe you have your information a little mix up but as a freshman i played agaunst the likes of Arizona St., Oregan, Nebraska, and that was no jayvee teams. to my belief we were the first freshmen to play varsity college, Division II like Grambling etal.

I hope this information can help. like i said i might be wrong Aloha Manny DeSoto class of 1974....Imua Rainbows —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.150.203.242 (talk) 07:45, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Why are education articles so bad?

I've been cleaning up grammar errors and other problems in education-related articles again, and I want to know: Why is this such a big problem in articles about education? Wikipedia has scientists and computer geeks and healthcare professionals producing readable, grammatically correct, informative articles -- why aren't teachers doing the same? Teachers really ought to be better than average at explaining the basic concepts related to their profession, and most of these articles are distinctly below average.

Do teachers not care if Wikipedia is misinforming and confusing their communities about basic concepts in the field? Don't you think that having a mess in article after article after article reflects badly on the profession?

What can we do to fix this? Perhaps a room full of computers at a teaching conference? WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:26, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

This is an interesting question and an interesting problem. Most of the education-related articles I watchlist are related to my concerns about education of gifted students, so I don't see the generality of the education-related articles here. The psychology articles that make up the core of my watchlist have the problem of lots of POV-pushing, in many cases, so I find I have to inline cite absolutely every edit I make to article text on those. Many of the education articles can probably go with a substantive fix first, footnote later approach. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 23:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The articles on education of people with disabilities suffer from POV pushing, and also from confusion about the difference between "in my local area" and "everywhere in the world".

But I'm actually thinking of articles like reading comprehension and traditional education, which deal primarily with the 85% of kids in the middle. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:55, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I am a new editor, leary of posting on this subject as I feel many education articles are/have been infiltrated by phychology pov's. I too agree with spelling and grammer in education articles being less than acceptable. I disagree with having to psychoanalyse education topics that are inundated with pov psyco semantic unrelated stuff which basically leaves the education data stripped naked or blatantly left out in the left field of some psychology major's dissertations. ~~I could go out on a limb and suggest that education is being attacked and abused by those who want to destroy it for some undefinable reasons.~~ But I won't. Forgive me for slipping off into a pov of my own. So now I ask "Are we men or are we mice?" (Women please do not take offense, please. For if it were up to you, something would probably have been done by now.) I avidly support Wikipedia, believe in its mission, and choose to improve it however I might be able. Education and Wikipedia seem to go hand in hand, after all is it not a common goal of knowledge that is involved here? I vote to have education articles tagged with education project first, and psychololgy tagged second, in that order, because education was not created under psychology. Oops, there's that pov again. sorry. O = M _C ⁴ 15:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I have proofed this comment for spelling and grammer. I hope I have not missed any errors. I believe similar care should take place in/on education articles. O = M _C ⁴ 15:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Virtual High School

An editor is determined to make Virtual High School into a blatant advertisement for the company. I'm tired of babysitting the article with no support from others so I'm removing it from my watchlist. Someone else can spend their time reverting edits. ElKevbo (talk) 21:22, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I nominated it for speedy deletion as advertising. That puts the page on my watchlist, of course. I'll see what happens. Thanks for your efforts. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 23:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:09, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed merger of Adult learner and Mature student

Both of these articles fall under the scope of this Wikiproject, so I thought I would post here to see if anyone has an opinion on possibly merging the two articles (they seem to refer to the same concept, with AL being the US term and MS being the UK term), as well as recommendations on which is the better main article title if they are merged. I have opened a discussion at Talk:Adult learner. Thank you for your input. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:28, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Rfc

Another editor and I were wondering whether a doctoral candidate should be included under Dropping out. Or see Talk:Dropping_out#Doctorate. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 13:05, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Say Yes to Education

Would people please take a look at this article, Say Yes to Education, and see if you can add anything? Also, the article has an orphan tag. I was able to add a couple of links to other articles. Can anyone think of any other articles to link it to? All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

As I understand the term orphan, the article needs to be linked-to from another article to cure the orphan status. Is this correct? O = M _C ⁴ 15:23, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Educational Sciences

why there is no article on educaional sciences? it is not refered as a branch of Social Sciences in the social sciences article, either. i see the issue is not in your list. weird...

--78.166.104.87 (talk) 08:48, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Liberal education

I'm currently working on the liberal education article. I would appreciate some guidance from someone more knowledgeable than I. :) Notes are posted on the talk page. Edge3 (talk) 08:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

You might consider the similarities and differences between the liberal education article and the article on educational perennialism. You might even want to link to that article, which provides a somewhat more focused perspective on many of the same issues. TheDean (talk) 20:33, 19 May 2011 (UTC)