- What is the background of the person — what is his/her area of expertise?
- What is the constraint being pointed out and what’s the solution proposed?
- the person has expertise in pedagogy
- the person identifies lack of appropriate pedagogy as the constraint and offers solution along those lines.
- Did the person identify the problem as pedagogy because he/she is expert in that area and sees scope of improvement there? OR
- Did the person consider all the existing constraints for analysis and then identify pedagogy as the constraint?
- Ask the area of expertise of the person. (Let’s say the person answers pedagogy/curriculum)
- Ask — Do you think there is any other constraint more important than pedagogy?
- Repeat the question two several times. Suppose say, the person says — governance, ask — what apart from governance and pedagogy is the problem.
- After the person identifies several aspects as constraints, ask — why didn’t you mention these earlier?
the reform agenda being suggested by the quantitative research on the economics of education is seeking to reform the “conventional” wisdom on input -based policies, it is worth thinking about where this conventional wisdom gets formed. At present, it comes from Schools of Education (and related disciplines) where there is a limited amount of quantitative training of students, and where there is a greater emphasis on the history and philosophy of education and of the role of education in shaping society.
the issue is not the pedagogy. The issue is — why is that such problems have long not been identified and corrected?