The three stages of defending bad research

It’s been 11 days since the NCTQ report on teacher ed (see my comment from earlier this week), and we’re already into the third stage of defending bad research.

  1. It’s great research, and the conclusions are essential to understand and spread.
  2. It’s flawed research, but we should give it some credibility since it tracks with what we knew before.
  3. It has “started a useful debate.”

Alas for consistency, if we’ve known the conclusions for a long time, it’s a little late to say the bad research has done us a service by starting a discussion.

By the way, a pro tip on long-term relationships: if you completely screw up, do not say you were “just trying to start a discussion.”

If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader, and sign up for my irregular newsletter below!