Talk:Alfie Kohn

message: "Kohn’s article is misleading, does not accurately depict the available evidence
on positive reinforcement, demeans children and
practitioners, and—worst of all—may serve to limit the
use of a powerful, evidence-based practice for facilitating
children’s development." -- Phillip S. Strain and Gail E. Joseph, PhD  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.95.82 (talk) 04:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It deserves much more, but I started it with the following text: Kohn has been the subject of a significant amount of criticism.http://d-edreckoning.blogspot.com/2009/02/alfie-kohn-and-murray-gell-mann-amnesia_17.html  For example, cognitive scientist, Daniel Willingham has written that "Kohn consistently makes factual errors, oversimplifies the literature that he seeks to explain, and commits logical fallacies."http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/02/alfie-kohn-is-bad-for-you-and-dangerous-for-your-children/  -- 17:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism section

message: Does anyone have any information about Kohn's credentials? Where did he go to college? What degree(s) does he hold? Why should he be considered an expert in the field of education? I find it odd that even his own web site does not contain any information about his educational background or experiences that would lend credence to his work. ~ME
I totally agree 100% with "ME."  Does anyone know? ~AZ
"AZ" & "ME": What do you mean by "lend credence to his work"? He cites primary sources in every paragraph, he doesn't claim to have his own studies. As for his own website not containing information on his background: Go to the website, click on the FAQ link near the bottom right-hand corner. The third point in the FAQ is: 
:A surprising amount of mail has been arriving lately with requests for details about my personal history.  Some people are simply curious.  Some ask because they think this information will be useful for a class assignment.  And some seem angry about what I’ve written and appear to be hoping to find some fact about me that will make them feel better about dismissing my ideas. [...] I’m more interested in calling attention to ideas than to the particulars of my background.  That’s why my website is dedicated to the former rather than to the latter.  I’d rather that my arguments were judged on their merits rather than filtered through a biographical lens. 
- Dissembly 03:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  And here his books promote experiental learning.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.79.119 (talk) 15:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

text: It's one of two things - either someone who doesn't feel like saying his degree is or what I suspect, it's generally a "consolation prize" degree for when you get rejected from a PhD program. Chicago is notorious for them (they send out letters right after you're rejected from a PhD), but Columbia has them too.  Most of the time they're "Masters in the Liberal Arts" though, but Chicago has a MAPSS. It's basically the degree you get when you have too much money and not enough talent.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.79.119 (talk) 
Anyone have reference to him teaching college?  I can't find any.  --QuiBobJinn (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Credentials

message: The "Controversy" section of the article doesn't appear to have any information on actual controversies regarding Alfie Kohn; it's just someone's personal observation. I am removing it. - Dissembly 03:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The second paragraph in the lead makes it clear that he is controversial, and provides a list of many of the groups who generally disagree with him.  I think that's plenty of a reference.  John Darrow (talk) 01:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My thinking on this is that the fact that his views are controversial needs to be mentioned, and has.  There does not/should not be an actual section dedicated to controversy surrounding his views because my fear is that it will degenerate into people posting opposing views/supports for their views and neither side will view that section as balanced.  Reading that back, I think I just summarized the early history of this page.  
There are times and places to discuss/debate the value of Kohn's ideas.  Wikipedia isn't it.  --QuiBobJinn (talk) 18:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: The "Controversy" Section

message: I doubt the manager of the Cleveland Indians has any strong pedagogical opinions.  Removing Wiki link.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javance (talk • contribs) 04:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark Shapiro 

message: I've gone through and made this article as complete and unbiased as possible.  I realize that Kohn's views are controversial, that does not mean, however, that he shouldn't have as complete and unbiased of an article as possible.  I'd appreciate any feedback and suggested changes.  I'll be checking back every so often.
--QuiBobJinn (talk) 16:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major revision 

message: I am going to slowly go through (a section at a time) and try to cite as many sources as I can.  The issue is finding credible/independent ones since much of what I know is from AK's site.  I'm trying, though.  Any help is greatly appreciated. Once this is decently citated, who do we talk to about getting the banner removed/class of article changed from "start-class"? --QuiBobJinn (talk) 16:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: This was left by  in the article. Left without comment from myself. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:50, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment moved from article 

message: Took out the following sentence:  While Kohn's work has been criticized by some academics http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/02/alfie-kohn-is-bad-for-you-and-dangerous-for-your-children/http://www.mohawk.k12.pa.us/187110111293315897/lib/187110111293315897/_files/Praise_or_Not_To_Praise.pdf, it has also been noted how well-researched it is.http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1099&context=marketing_papers http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=book&id=3511 http://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/94BRcr.html
Reason:  The article already states that he is controversial and who finds him controversial.  Behaviorists would fall under academics.  There’s no point in having the debate in the article with dueling links.
Seriously? Non-behaviorist academics also criticize his writing, suggestions, and conclusions? Saying that he is controversial and that conservatives and "behaviorists" disagree gives a very misleading picture of who criticizes his writing. E.g what do theorists who work in child development and parenting think about his take on parenting? Does he misconstrue the findings? Does he draw the right lessons from the empirical work? G-girl
Removed the following:  Kohn is an independent writer who is not and has never been affiliated with any university faculty or research institution.
Reason: POV.  The only reason to include the phrase “and never has been” is to attempt to undermine Kohn’s work.  The article already states his credentials and that he is controversial.  If people really feel the need to delve into it, they are more than welcome to try google or other academic databases.  --QuiBobJinn (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent bout of changes 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.beacon.org/productdetails.cfm?SKU=0140
*:Triggered by \bbeacon\.org\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 17:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: So we've gone back and forth on inclusion of his divorce vs. not having it.  Personally, I think that and his children are irrelevant details.  But if they're going to be included, they don't need their own section.  Just include them in the bio section.  I don't want to start/continue a WIki-war over this, but my gut tells me the people trying to get this included have an anti-Alfie agenda and are trying to make/prove some point about him by including it in the article and highlighting it with its own section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by QuiBobJinn (talk • contribs) 17:19, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: An author of books about children: whether or not he is married or has children, seems relevant. 64.134.27.106 (talk) 19:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

text: QuiBobJinn, That all your edits are for this article seems "unusual", especially for an article about a living person. 166.137.246.66 (talk) 10:38, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life details 

message: Quotations sections do not belong on Wikipedia WP:NOT WP:QUOTE they go on Wikiquote instead. 64.4.93.100 (talk) 17:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That is an extremely narrow read of that policy.  From the same part -  "Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are relevant because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic"  I would say a list of Alfie Kohn quotations falls under this category considering it summarizes key points of his work in his own words.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by QuiBobJinn (talk • contribs) 01:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "Do not insert any number of quotations in a stand-alone quote section" WP:QUOTE. 64.4.93.100 (talk) 13:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Wikiquote 

message: Here is a quote someone wanted put at the top of this TALK page. I have given it it's own section rather than remove it.  I have no idea why it was included on this Talk page.  Maybe the original anonymous author can give us some context. Until they do, here it sits.  QuiBobJinn (talk) 02:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Quote without Context

message: Someone posted a COI tag and said "See talk page" and then left no place to talk about it. Are there specific sections or text that seem to warrant this tag?  I'm giving it two weeks and then taking it off if nothing comes to light. Preceding unsigned comment by QuiBobJinn. 
:The edit summary on the tag explains the problem perfectly clearly: "substantial content by one editor". And, QuiBobJinn, since you're the editor in question, it would behoove you to leave the tag there, else you would demonstrate clearly and unequivocally that you do have a conflict of interest. 32.218.40.10 (talk) 14:07, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of Interest Tag 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Alfie Kohn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080718171021/http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/12/opposing-view-4.html to http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/12/opposing-view-4.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120215123416/http://www.nais.org/publications/ismagazinearticle.cfm?Itemnumber=150652&sn.ItemNumber=145956 to http://www.nais.org/publications/ismagazinearticle.cfm?Itemnumber=150652&sn.ItemNumber=145956
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Recently this was added as the first descriptor. I have never encountered him described as a journalist nor do I find any reason to do so. Can someone please provide the reasoning for this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.129.194.71 (talk) 17:48, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journalist? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Alfie Kohn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100717025752/http://www.nais.org/publications/ismagazinearticle.cfm?ItemNumber=144263 to http://www.nais.org/publications/ismagazinearticle.cfm?ItemNumber=144263
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326134658/http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Involved/Volunteer/Appointed%20Groups/Past_Recipients_Orwell_Award.pdf to http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Involved/Volunteer/Appointed%20Groups/Past_Recipients_Orwell_Award.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified