{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017939518195797026, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.177215189873418, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book Review: Starting points (for teaching mathematics in middle and secondary schools)

it maintains a range of neat balances between erudition and over-simplification, experimental and observational social psychology, behaviourist and mentalist psychology, Iowa and Chicago Symbolic Interaction, educational objectivity and prescription, and classroom problems and educational theory. There is a context within which such eclecticism may be decried. But it requires some interesting epistemological gymnastics. If we take a positivist view of the knowledge generation process and assume (pace Nagel) that there is no substantive difference in the generation and validation of knowledge as between the natural and social sciences, we will find that some aspects of the Kuhnian perspective can be applied to the social sciences. Particularly, we can preserve the notion that single paradigms emerge within what Berger came to call cognitive sub-disciplines to produce 'normal' periods. On a Kuhnian perspective we are in a crisis period. If this is so, working to maintain conflicting paradigms rather than participating in the battles between them may seem to be intellectually irresponsible. But one suspects that Hargreaves will have a rather short answer to such criticism. Putting it politely, he is concerned to communicate a range of understandings about social life in schools that are directly relevant to the tasks of teaching. I find it impossible to deny that Hargreaves' method of doing it is better than inviting intending or actual teachers to join in the paradigm battle. Their battles are more immediate. Hargreaves' understanding of the social process and concern for the ethical and moral questions of teaching communicate themselves easily to the reader. My guess is that they will be read by students with a sense that they are the views of an interesting colleague. If this is so, their own views on teaching will surely benefit.