Return-Path: <nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g4MCqXO09784; Wed, 22 May 2002 08:52:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 08:52:33 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <v04210102b91143828023@[128.148.147.35]> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Janet Isserlis <Janet_Isserlis@Brown.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-FAMILY:1112] Re: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:2167] Re: and, to add X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Status: O Content-Length: 877 Lines: 21 Gail and all My purpose in posting titles here (and I can only speak for myself) is to alert colleagues to other rigorous and important work that I believe can be useful in shaping both policy and practice. I know that there has been much discussion of late on the NLA list about rigor, evidence and scientific research; certainly the pieces that I cited meet those criteria as far as I can tell. I wonder if we want - on the women's and family lists - to explore what we mean when we talk about research? Janet Isserlis >Friends, If the purpose of adding titles is to help extend CAAL's >list, this is just a reminder that a major criterion is that the >work should be based on original, hard research, equal in rigor to >the "scientific" research done in other disciplines -- though we >realize this isn't always easy to determine. Many thanks. Gail S >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:41:04 EST