[quoting Hart, 4 Dec 96] What therefore struck me about Charles Reigeluth's paper was its cultural bias and its focus on "American values" (a phrase which is not always a compliment in this part of the world.)
A part of the world where slave labor and human-rights abuses are winked at in order to make money. Some values!
Q: Has the current American monopoly of the information channels (Internet, Hollywood, AT&T, etc.) seduced it into the belief that McLuhan was right?
I don't know where this "monopoly" exists. Not in Japan, certainly. You almost never see American-produced products here (except sports).
I would like to suggest that John Anderson's work with cognitive tutors should be included in the "paradigm." Anderson is Canadian-born, so I hope he will be acceptable to all, since we are judging ideas by the birthplace of the authors.
http://sands.psy.cmu.edu/ACT/papers/Lessons_Learned-abs.html
I agree with the writer who complained about the word paradigm. This field is not advanced enough to have paradigms. A better word would be perspective, or point of view, or even, current popular trend.