Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/The Practice of Learning Theories

The Practice of Learning Theories
There is a page in a this class project book where the original author stated:


 * The objective of this monograph is to contrast my personal teaching practice in a Houston Independent School District (HISD) elementary school against the major contributions of constructivist theorists, their epistemological considerations, and the practice derived from its framework, which are deeply connected and provide structuring forces upon each other (Ainley & Pratt, 2001).

Being essentially a personal essay with a particular POV, it is not possible for future authors to contribute new material to the page. An author of one of the referenced books also objects to comments about his work. More generally, the page contains original research and could also be seen to fall foul of the HOST and NPOV policies, so it should be deleted (or transwikied to WV). Recent Runes (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: Wikibooks is not a blog. Symbol redirect vote.svg Transwiki: I agree that the remainder of the book contains primarily original research after taking a look at the other pages. – Adrignola talk 15:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

This is just one page of a book containing other material with varying amounts of original research. Even after deleting this page, perhaps the rest of the book would be more suitable for Wikiversity. Recent Runes (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Interwiki transfer. Please encourage users to take work like this to Wikiversity. In fact, it's not necessary to have user permission to move a book to Wikiversity. Such a move is generally superior to deletion if there is any possible redeeming value, and in any case, it's a lot friendlier than a disappeared file! A soft redirect can be left in place for a time. I've not looked at the book itself, just saw this deletion request, and assuming that what is stated here is accurate, this would be very good for Wikiversity. The reasons given for deletion here would not apply to Wikiversity. There might be other reasons not stated that could be problems there, but we could deal with that, there. Quick solution, any editor could do it, would be to userfy temporarily.


 * However, I'm starting to work on general education resources at Wikiversity, and have access to a lot of people with expertise there. The author would be very welcome, indeed. --Abd (talk) 22:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Interwiki transfer. There are a number of essay pages in this book written from a personal perspective, but if this is acceptable in Wikiversity then perhaps they need not be deleted if the whole book is transwikied. Being a completed class project, I don't expect there will be many more contributions from past students now they have their grades. However, the book could still serve as an example and framework for new essay pages in this area as proposed by the course tutor in his closing remarks. From my limited knowledge of Wikiversity I suppose the material might be considered a learning project in Wikiversity:Category:Learning_theory. Recent Runes (talk) 17:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I have done a quick review of all the pages in the book, and saved my comments on the main talk page for the book. By my reckoning, there are about seven pages with similar problems to the one which kicked off this discussion. So, if the decision was to keep the book here, I think they all might need to be deleted. Recent Runes (talk) 00:40, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Transwiki WV per above. Kayau 06:21, 12 January 2011 (UTC)