Monday 16 November 2009

I'm gonna sing about baby Jesus!


Nothing says "Holiday" better than the rich a capella sound of 72 Christians, four Jews and an atheist. Under the direction of Dr. Greg Lyne, Voices in Harmony will perform a variety of traditional seasonal works including "It’s the Most Wonderful Time of the Year" (Pola and Wyle), "Hallelujah Chorus" (Handel), "Hodie Christus Natus Est" (Gregorian Chant), and the obligatory Hanukah number Feast of Lights. Joining as special guests are the Santa Clara Chorale under the direction of Ryan James Brandau, performing several outstanding pieces including "Ave Maria" (Busto). Plus, there will be a kids' chorus, and a sing-a-long!

PURCHASE BY PHONE
(408)792-4111

PURCHASE ONLINE
Buy Now


Tickets are also available at the
SJ Convention Center Box Office and Ticketmaster locations.
Box Office hours are Monday - Friday, 9am to 5pm

For more information, visit us at www.vihchorus.org or

facebook myspace


Sunday 15 November 2009

Gladwell's Igon Value Problem


For years I've felt quite alone in my opinion that Malcolm Gladwell is a fake (merely one rung above Victoria Knight-McDowell and Kevin Trudeau, and only because Gladwell probably believes his own claptrap). After all, he sells a gazillion books, and speaks at TED (although Karen Amrstrong does both as well, so there you go).

That's why it was great to read Harvard Professor Steven Pinker’s review of Gladwell’s latest product, What The Dog Saw, in today's New York Times Book Review.

Gladwell frequently holds forth about statistics and psychology, and his lack of technical grounding in these subjects can be jarring. He provides misleading definitions of “homology,” “saggital plane” and “power law” and quotes an expert speaking about an “igon value” (that’s eigenvalue, a basic concept in linear algebra). In the spirit of Gladwell, who likes to give portentous names to his aperçus, I will call this the Igon Value Problem: when a writer’s education on a topic consists in interviewing an expert, he is apt to offer generalizations that are banal, obtuse or flat wrong.

...The problem with Gladwell’s generalizations about prediction is that he never zeroes in on the essence of a statistical problem and instead overinterprets some of its trappings... Gladwell bamboozles his readers with pseudoparadoxes...

For example, Gladwell observes that teaching qualification tests are imperfect indicators of success, and concludes therefore that they shouldn’t be used at all. Instead “teaching should be open to anyone with a pulse and a college degree,” whose first year results should serve as the basis for future employment. That is a provocative sound bite that sounds wise if you assess it for no longer than it takes to Blink! But Gladwell neglects to consider the costs of such a tactic, nor the impact on the poor students who are subjected to all those failed first year experiments. Who has time for this? By Gladwell’s logic, based on their imperfections we should dispense entirely with the police department, antibiotics and Hillary Clinton.

Does today's book review mean that my view of Gladwell is no longer an Outlier? If Pinker reaches enough readers, perhaps we'll see a Tipping Point