Talk:Schaffer method

Recommended Deletion or Absorb into Paragraph article

Again, this article has dubious notability-- though it has its Having studied Paragraph Theory, the Schaffer Paragraph is mostly unknown in Writing Studies. Besides the current citations, can anyone vouch for its notability in K-12 English Education outside of a handful of California schools? Based on actual notability and influence in the field, I don't think that this page can continue as is. I recommend moving this information to the Paragraph article, then deleting this stand-alone article. This would keep the Schaffer Paragraph in its larger context. ShanBendigedig1 (talk) 01:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Climate Change

Am I the only one feeling that the addition of the example about global warming is a bit out of place ? Like, showing how to construct a proper paragraph of argumentation, or something, using such a bit of pseudoscience (global warming on other planets, that no serious climate change skeptic use anymore) that it is kinda ridiculous ? OK, I removed the otu of place reference to global warming, please, editors, find a better example that does not lead to ridiculous edit wars. 132.168.26.91 (talk) 08:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Usually essays are debates of some sort, that's why this example is suitable. -- penubag  (talk) 07:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Does this writer know real teaching methods?

This part of the first paragraph needs re-thinking and re-phrasing: " ... using it hinders students from formulating their ideas to an extent and does not allow critical thinking."

Do most students move on from this particular organization pattern for writing? Of course, they do. However, I do think the reference in here that this organizational pattern does not allow critical thinking is off-base. Beyond mere organization of types of sentences, the whole point of teaching this is for students to come up with their own "commentary" sentences. That's where the critical thinking comes in. If students write true commentary sentences, they will have learned to think critically about what they wrote as detail sentences. Students will have explained those details -- or they need to rephrase! That's the point!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.15.164.28 (talk) 15:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Debating Deletion

This article seems to be in a pretty bad way. There are currently no sources, the grammar is all over the place, format is inconsistent with other articles, and I can't really find any source that isn't affiliated with it somehow (i.e. I don't think that pages of teachers who teach this method count as a source.), so I'm thinking about posting this to WP:AFD if I can't find any sources in a few days. Thought I would give anyone working on the article a heads-up. CharmlessCoin (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

That is very counter productive; why not try and fix it yourself? Deletion is definitely not the answer as this article is a fine stub. Of course not perfect, but that's why it's a wiki, people can edit it. -- penubag  (talk) 08:28, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

That's what I meant by "if I can't find any sources in a few days." I see that a few have been added (certainly enough to avoid deletion), and I'm still looking for a few more outside of what's already here. Cleaning it up a little is on my todo list when I get some time! CharmlessCoin (talk) 16:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)