Talk:John Hattie
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Magnolia677 in topic Proposed merge with Visible Learning
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 15 August 2022. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Proposed merge with Visible Learning edit
primary notability is as his theory DGG ( talk ) 04:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree. Visible learning is a topic. John is a person. John's work is much much more than this. You don't subsume the theory of relativity into Einstein's bio.--203.96.75.150 (talk) 00:37, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
I also disagree with this proposal. John is a renowned educator and researcher, increasingly so. His work should be seen as separate. Other researchers have now studied/developed visible learning as well, and it is unlikely that this concept will remain recognised as solely Hattie's work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.201.66.66 (talk) 03:51, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
- No. Hattie is notable on his own. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:59, 29 September 2015 (UTC)