Not exact matches
It's worth
noting that the Lancet findings are not without detractors, and some experts have even raised questions
about its
methodology.
In an increasingly interdisciplinary academy, many probationary faculty
note the ambiguity that arises from frequent changes in department chairs and differences of opinion within and among departments
about what areas of scholarship, what
methodologies, and what publication outlets count the most toward promotion.
The researchers themselves were unable to explain why the non-traditional program produced the best results and
noted that the results were contradictory to both current beliefs
about the functioning of muscles and classical training
methodology.
*
Note: This piece is mainly
about EPI's
methodology, but their report also includes a number of alarming statements
about teachers.
The authors
note that Oreskes»
methodology is further flawed because it also surveyed the opinions and writings of «nonscientists who may write
about climate, but are by no means experts on or even casually familiar with the science dealing with attribution — that is, attributing a specific climate effect (such as a temperature increase) to a specific cause (such as rising CO2 levels).»
The authors
note that Oreskes»
methodology is further flawed because it also surveyed the opinions and writings of «nonscientists who may write
about climate, but are by no means experts on or even casually familiar with the science dealing with attribution — that is, attributing a specific climate effect (such as a temperature increase) to a specific cause (such as rising CO
From the
methodology, the instructions to the authors for self - ratings: «
Note: we are not asking
about your personal opinion but whether each specific paper endorses or rejects (whether explicitly or implicitly) that humans cause global warming»:
I
noted the study in this blog (The Canadian Privacy Law Blog: Study on data breach fallout), and
noted that there was nothing in the original
about its
methodologies.
Any NCTQ report on teacher preparation should be considered with a huge grain of salt, given the problematic research
methodology (as
noted here and here) the organization uses and its predictable negative conclusions
about the state of teacher preparation programs.