550:. While it does take quite a bit more training and a significant publication record to become a tenured university professor than to become a teacher, I think notability within a profession should be judged mainly by the degree of accomplishment within that profession, and not compared with any other profession. Selectivity of a particular award is determined both by the reputation and prestige of the award (as viewed by others) and by how difficult/easy it is for the practitioners of that profession to get the award. Being a Fellow of AMS myself, I must admit that I don't view it as a particularly high honor, and I am pretty sure that I am not going to be invited to the White House any time soon -:) Let me also stress that apart from NTHF, Haskvitz has a significant number of other national-level honors verified by independent sources (see my first post above), such as the 1990 Reader's Digest American Heroes in Education award, 1989 National Council for Social Sciences award, Baylor University's 1996 Robert Foster Cherry Award for Great Teachers, 1999 USA TODAY's All-USA Teacher First Team and others. Taken individually, it could be argued that none of these awards, but itself, makes a teacher notable. But I think that collectively they do. At a minimum, the detailed bio of Haskvitz at NTHF and the other links provided in my first post, seem to me to satisfy
575:
significant as well. I would suggest that the editors take the time to learn about teachers and the honors and awards that are offered and what it takes to earn them. As for the Cherry Award, being the only public school teacher to be so honored is certainly deserving of mention as well as the award itself. The fact that other teachers don't have entries in
Knowledge is of no merit. Knowledge was developed as an inclusive, populist publication that does not negate an award or honor because the editor(s) don't feel it is significant value even though it was rendered by a panel of experts. You site the selection to honors by other groups as more impressive and are thus comparing apples and oranges. I would strongly suggest that you not downplay accomplishments because of your bias. As for your comments about academic accomplishments at the highest level being reason for inclusion in some groups is based on a set of standards. The same standards that USA Today, Reader's Digest, the National Teachers Hall of Fame and others have. Indeed, the Cherry Award, according to its website, recognizes his achievements with such a set of standards.
770:
program. He also has been featured in school and college textbooks, on NPR, on all major television networks, and in editorials from CBS and from the Los
Angeles Times. His research has been cited in several works and was published in Phi Delta Kappan, the top education journal. He was on the first page of USA Today as one of their All American educators. As an aside, his website, www.reacheverychild.com is apparently one of the oldest educational websites (1997) and his work was noted by Tech Learning as a technology leader. His work was also noted in Time magazine and a section of Newsweek was about his program. The Los Angeles Times has 15 articles about him. He has been selected as an outstanding alumnus at two colleges and his high school. As for the argument about the National Teachers Hall of Fame, when President Obama is part of the ceremony that tells you the significance of the honor (
436:– the annual number of inductees has absolutely nothing to do with selectivity. (This is confirmed by any thought experiment that finds an individual creating a new national society and inducting only himself.) Rather, it has everything to do with the hierarchy (like it or not) of the scholar/educator infrastructure. As has been observed many times, being a scholar at a first-tier university or institute is extremely exclusive and most of those people are notable (whether they have articles or not) by the very activities required to obtain those posts. This is comparable to our policy that athletes who compete in the highest professional leagues are notable
774:) and it should not be downplayed. As for the book, Motorvation, it is a workbook, not a textbook. I don't know why anyone would want to delete someone with this record of achievement. And, the listing is apparently incomplete. The California Water Agencies gave him their highest education award, the California Department of Agriculture did as well and he also received the George Washington medal from the Freedom Foundation. Reader's Digest not only named him a Hero in Education, but made a video about his program.
758:"The Robert Foster Cherry Award for Great Teaching honors outstanding professors in the English-speaking world who are distinguished for their ability to communicate as classroom teachers. Individuals nominated for the award should have a proven record as an extraordinary teacher with a positive, inspiring, and long-lasting effect on students, along with a record of distinguished scholarship."
616:. It has nothing to do with whether his awards were "rendered by a panel of experts". Yes WP is inclusive, in a sense, but this should not be confused with being indiscriminate. As I said above, there are countless national and regional awards in secondary education and WP is not a directory of every educator who has won some of these. Sorry.
810:. You've now made 2 unsigned edits from an anonymous IP, but you should know that this actually exposes a lot of information like what location from which you're editing ;) "I don't know why anyone would want to delete someone with this record of achievement" – this is not at all the issue, rather, it is one of
405:
highest degree of professional achievement and recognition in the U.S. for school teachers and it is a much more selectve honor than being a fellow of a national academic professional society. Also, the presence of multiple other national-level professional awards (and not just being a NTHF member)
400:
is a much less selective honor than being a member of the NTHF. There already several hundred fellows of AMS (in just a couple of years of existence of the program), with about 50 inducted each year. By comparison, there are only 5 inductees in the NTHF per year, while the number of school teachers
395:
do not yet have
Knowledge articles implies that being a member of NTHF does not automatically make a teacher notable. We only currently have WP articles about a fraction of notable academics, and the presence/absence of such articles is more of a reflection on the who the active WP editors are than
769:
The
California School Board Association indicated that they could not recall any teacher that has three Golden Bells, which are based on the success of his program and students. Larry Martz, national affairs editor of Newsweek wrote Making School Better and Haskvitz included a chapter about his
574:
All of the delete notes are done probably done by non-educators. Ignoring the value of the
National Teachers Hall of Fame, USA Today, Learning Magazine and others is simple wrong headed. You must compete for these awards. His acknowledgement as alumni of the year by institutions of learning is
777:
There is more. Someone wrote "delete" because public school teachers are usually not worthy of inclusion. That may be true, but what accomplishment has he failed to earn? It makes no sense for
Knowledge to exclude public school teachers. I found this article that might provide some insight
508:
659:-- per Nsk92 -- these are the types of major awards for secondary school teachers that go far beyond the typical or even exceptional teacher. MacArthur and Nobel prize are as irrelevant to secondary school notability as number of World Cup goals is to a professor. --
296:. It is correct that high school teachers are usually not notable unless they show exceptional achievements. However, in this case such achievements are indeed present. In particular, the subject received several national-level honors: an indictee of the
546:
Yeah, I was probably too rush in saying that NTHF is the highest national honor for teachers. However, it still appears to me to be quite a significant honor. E.g. this year
President Obama had a reception for the 2014 inductees at the White
765:
He also received the
National Council for Social Studies award as National Middle Level Teacher of the Year, National Exemplary Program, and Christa McAuliffe Award. They said they has never been done by anyone else in their memory.
396:
on the actual notability of the subjects. It is generally accepted, I believe, that being an elected fellow of a professional national academic society makes an academic notable. However, being a fellow of something like the
164:
604:. The problem in this case is that the awards themselves are not widely recognized, so it clouds matters tremendously. To furnish some context, the kinds of awards that conclusively demonstrate notability are
215:
235:
785:
I would suggest that the page might be trimmed a bit (rate your teacher is silly), but delete it never. By the way, Jamie
Escalante is also a member of the National Teachers Hall of Fame.
158:
519:, which represent scholarly activity at the highest level and for which reams of archival sourcing are available. Could we have articles on Haskvitz and the others in
600:
I can't speak for others, but the assumption stated in your first sentence is flat wrong – I am approaching 20 years as an educator (HS students and college level),
117:
255:
735:
notability. However, in the specific case of
Haskvitz there seems to be enough media coverage in reliable sources to just barely push him past the
306:
492:
124:
320:, etc. The National Teachers Hall of Fame page about Haskvitz lists a whole bunch of other awards as well, see also articles about him, e.g.
771:
548:
792:
582:
90:
85:
94:
476:
401:
in the U.S. is much much bigger than the number of math college professors. My understanding is that being a member of NTHF is
17:
686:
524:
520:
496:
449:
433:
392:
364:
article itself should probably be tested by an AfD.) Other aspects of notability claimed in the article, like being rated at
361:
352:
297:
77:
179:
516:
429:
397:
146:
677:
Of course, but with all due respect, I'm surprised that the implication was lost on you. Said more plainly: there simply
472:
318:
203:
488:
843:
609:
40:
706:
528:
504:
140:
796:
779:
586:
823:
800:
743:
718:
668:
651:
625:
590:
563:
540:
423:
385:
339:
287:
267:
247:
227:
207:
136:
59:
839:
772:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/latest_news_and_features/article_0a6a0835-30c7-5c86-8a60-bcfed1f012b8.html
303:
199:
81:
36:
819:
788:
714:
664:
621:
578:
536:
381:
283:
186:
705:
who's teaching career was depicted in a motion picture. This bio does not and crosses the line into
278:. School teachers are not usually notable unless they show exception achievements. Not quite here.
172:
73:
65:
432:
or any of the other discipline-specific societies is enormously more prestigious than election to
324:
465:
56:
762:
Haskvitz apparently meet all of these standards, the only public school teacher to ever do so.
647:
309:
263:
243:
223:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
838:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
356:
100 people listed have WP pages, the few that do are notable for other obvious reasons (e.g.
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
523:? Probably, at least for the fraction for which some acknowledgement of their membership in
152:
815:
710:
702:
660:
617:
559:
532:
512:
500:
419:
377:
357:
335:
279:
313:
740:
355:(NTHF) might suffice, but when you look at that page, you find almost none of the : -->
736:
690:
639:
551:
444:
to say that such individuals cannot be notable, but rather that they are not notable
411:
407:
327:
321:
196:
53:
480:
811:
694:
643:
448:
and require more clear evidence of achievement/notability/etc. Your assertion that
316:
259:
239:
219:
111:
681:
any awards at the secondary level that render a secondary school teacher notable
347:. None of the awards are of the recognized prestige that render Haskvitz notable
605:
555:
415:
331:
456:
highest honor for teachers is highly debatable, especially since there are
689:, nor any of the other obscure awards listed in this bio. This means that
780:
http://www.wvusd.k12.ca.us/apps/news/show_news.jsp?REC_ID=269064&id=1
499:
itself, this organization was founded in 1989 by local organizations in
484:
759:
373:
300:
693:
is probably the most appropriate guideline and this requires solid
461:
515:. Again, this is hardly comparable to the national societies like
503:(including the Emporia Area Chamber of Commerce) and is housed at
360:), and that the only sources there are NTHF's own web pages. (The
469:
365:
832:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
731:, I don't believe that these awards should be considered confer
216:
list of United States of America-related deletion discussions
236:
list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
302:, 1990 Reader's Digest American Heroes in Education award
440:. Selectivity/prestige decrease down the line, which is
406:
in Haskvitz case, is, IMO, certainly enough to pass the
107:
103:
99:
171:
391:
I don't think that the fact that most members of the
312:'s 1996 Robert Foster Cherry Award for Great Teachers
305:, 1989 National Council for Social Sciences award
511:seems to consist mostly of articles in the local
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
846:). No further edits should be made to this page.
701:consider to be notable have this, for example
372:listed in WorldCat, so it may be unpublished.
315:, 1999 USA TODAY's All-USA Teacher First Team
185:
8:
495:, and well you get the idea). Regarding the
489:Guilder-Lehrman National Teacher of the Year
370:Motorvation: A Math Book for the Unmotivated
256:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
254:Note: This debate has been included in the
234:Note: This debate has been included in the
214:Note: This debate has been included in the
642:sources can be found, this may be rescued.
368:are not significant. I don't see his book
253:
233:
213:
483:, the several dozen national awards from
754:On the Cherry Award: Selection Criteria
351:. I thought maybe his election to the
782:) and includes honors not mentioned.
7:
760:http://www.baylor.edu/cherry_awards/
493:ACTFL National Teacher of the Year
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
685:, not the "Cherry award", not
527:could be found. Would this be
497:National Teachers Hall of Fame
434:National Teachers Hall of Fame
393:National Teachers Hall of Fame
353:National Teachers Hall of Fame
298:National Teachers Hall of Fame
1:
398:American Mathematical Society
473:National Teacher of the Year
863:
466:CEE National Teacher Award
460:national teaching awards (
428:Being elected a fellow of
374:He sounds like a great guy
477:NCSS Teachers of the Year
835:Please do not modify it.
824:05:58, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
801:03:06, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
744:01:25, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
719:17:54, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
669:03:38, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
652:14:57, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
626:17:53, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
591:17:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
564:09:42, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
541:21:10, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
505:Emporia State University
424:19:03, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
386:15:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
376:, but he's not notable.
340:13:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
326:, etc. Certainly passes
288:04:09, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
268:03:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
248:03:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
228:03:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
208:18:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
60:11:34, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
481:VFW Teacher of the Year
661:Michael Scott Cuthbert
602:but that is irrelevant
462:AAPG Excellence Award
808:Just So You're Aware
697:. Teachers that we
531:? Yes, absolutely.
366:ratemyteachers.com
48:The result was
791:comment added by
707:WP:INDISCRIMINATE
667:
581:comment added by
529:WP:INDISCRIMINATE
310:Baylor University
270:
250:
230:
854:
837:
803:
663:
593:
200:John from Idegon
190:
189:
175:
127:
115:
97:
34:
862:
861:
857:
856:
855:
853:
852:
851:
850:
844:deletion review
833:
786:
703:Jaime Escalante
576:
513:Emporia Gazette
501:Emporia, Kansas
358:Jaime Escalante
132:
123:
88:
72:
69:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
860:
858:
849:
848:
828:
827:
756:
755:
748:
747:
725:
724:
723:
722:
672:
671:
654:
632:
631:
630:
629:
595:
594:
572:
571:
570:
569:
568:
567:
566:
342:
291:
272:
271:
251:
231:
195:Does not meet
193:
192:
129:
68:
63:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
859:
847:
845:
841:
836:
830:
829:
825:
821:
817:
813:
809:
806:
805:
804:
802:
798:
794:
790:
783:
781:
775:
773:
767:
763:
761:
753:
750:
749:
745:
742:
738:
734:
730:
727:
726:
720:
716:
712:
708:
704:
700:
696:
692:
688:
684:
680:
676:
675:
674:
673:
670:
666:
662:
658:
655:
653:
649:
645:
641:
637:
634:
633:
627:
623:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
599:
598:
597:
596:
592:
588:
584:
580:
573:
565:
561:
557:
554:in his case.
553:
549:
545:
544:
542:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
506:
502:
498:
494:
490:
486:
482:
478:
474:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
431:
427:
426:
425:
421:
417:
413:
409:
404:
399:
394:
390:
389:
387:
383:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
359:
354:
350:
346:
343:
341:
337:
333:
329:
325:
322:
319:
317:
314:
311:
307:
304:
301:
299:
295:
292:
289:
285:
281:
277:
274:
273:
269:
265:
261:
257:
252:
249:
245:
241:
237:
232:
229:
225:
221:
217:
212:
211:
210:
209:
205:
201:
198:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
130:
126:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:Alan Haskvitz
71:
70:
67:
66:Alan Haskvitz
64:
62:
61:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
834:
831:
807:
793:71.84.88.220
787:— Preceding
784:
776:
768:
764:
757:
751:
732:
728:
698:
682:
678:
656:
635:
613:
601:
583:71.84.88.220
577:— Preceding
457:
453:
445:
441:
437:
402:
369:
348:
344:
293:
275:
194:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
120:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
159:free images
816:Agricola44
711:Agricola44
618:Agricola44
610:MacArthurs
533:Agricola44
378:Agricola44
280:Xxanthippe
840:talk page
741:Lankiveil
733:automatic
729:Weak Keep
458:countless
260:• Gene93k
240:• Gene93k
220:• Gene93k
37:talk page
842:or in a
789:unsigned
640:assuming
579:unsigned
509:coverage
118:View log
54:RoySmith
39:or in a
812:sources
644:Bearian
636:Comment
507:. It's
165:WP refs
153:scholar
91:protect
86:history
737:WP:GNG
691:WP:GNG
683:per se
679:aren't
665:(talk)
606:Nobels
552:WP:GNG
446:per se
438:per se
414:bars.
412:WP:BIO
408:WP:GNG
349:per se
345:Delete
328:WP:BIO
276:Delete
197:WP:GNG
137:Google
95:delete
57:(talk)
695:WP:RS
614:et al
556:Nsk92
547:House
470:CCSSO
416:Nsk92
332:Nsk92
180:JSTOR
141:books
125:Stats
112:views
104:watch
100:links
52:. --
16:<
820:talk
797:talk
752:KEEP
715:talk
687:NTHF
657:Keep
648:talk
622:talk
587:talk
560:talk
537:talk
525:NTHF
521:NTHF
485:NSTA
450:NTHF
420:talk
410:and
382:talk
362:NTHF
336:talk
294:Keep
284:talk
264:talk
244:talk
224:talk
204:talk
173:FENS
147:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
739:.
517:AMS
454:the
452:is
442:not
430:AMS
403:the
187:TWL
116:– (
822:)
814:.
799:)
717:)
709:.
699:do
650:)
638:-
624:)
612:,
608:,
589:)
562:)
543:.
539:)
491:,
487:,
479:,
475:,
468:,
464:,
422:)
388:.
384:)
338:)
330:.
323:,
308:,
286:)
266:)
258:.
246:)
238:.
226:)
218:.
206:)
167:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
826:.
818:(
795:(
778:(
746:.
721:.
713:(
646:(
628:.
620:(
585:(
558:(
535:(
418:(
380:(
334:(
290:.
282:(
262:(
242:(
222:(
202:(
191:)
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
131:(
128:)
121:·
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.