> On Mon, 26 Aug 96 Judy Seigel Wrote
> >Peter, you may simply have proved that Scopick & Pollard are not very good
> teachers... Of course the Fotempera process, which I haven't tried, <
> I think this statement is totally unprofessional,what ever you may think of
> David and Johns writing this does not give you cause to caste doubt on
> there professional ability as teachers, you weren't there so you do not
> know, If I had been using the gum process I would have had similar
> problems.
Perhaps, Pete, my remark didn't come across as intended -- joking,
albeit with a point behind it. Perhaps I should have appended a smiley
face, tho I believe tone of a statement should be apparent in the
writing, and the face redundant.
In any event, I apologize for being so flip -- but I stand by my point,
which is that the experience you describe does not prove that gum is too
inconsistent for beginners. Perhaps the *event* is thus "proved," but not
the "explanation."
As illustration, I cited my own, contrary, experience in teaching, in
which a wide range of beginners achieve results in the satisfactory to
excellent range readily enough. And lest we forget, surely every teacher
has observed that sometimes the most dazzling and gratifying results come
down the road a bit, when a student has had trouble, but hung in. This is
not of necessity because a process is "inconsistent."
(I'll mention the published article from which I drew such invidious
conclusions by name & number if I can find it, though I assume you are
familiar with it and would agree that it augured ill for the teaching of
gum -- richly larded as it was with statements questionable at best.)
> BTW what is sui generis ?
It's Latin, meaning in a class by itself, or peculiar.
Judy