I know it has been quite some time since I have posted. Over the summer I began taking graduate courses in Applied Statistics. In the spring I intend to apply for the master's program at Colorado State University (distance). If they don't admit me then I'll do the certificate program. The masters degree would finish in 2018 and the certificate at the end of next year.
Of course that hasn't left me a lot of time for study, so I've had to prioritize. I've focused almost exclusively on papers for my Exploring the Christian Way of Life project and will continue pursuing that focus while I'm in graduate school. I have recently completed the second major paper and will post it in three or four parts in early January. Until I'm done with school, posting will be very sporadic, my apologies, and I am grateful to those of you who continue to read.
I haven't read much outside of things related to my forthcoming paper, but right now I am reading Framing Paul by Douglas Campbell. It's his attempt to build a chronological framework for studying Paul based first on Paul's epistles. As always, his work is methodologically rigorous and enjoyable to read. One particular point he makes that needs wider notice is the poor use of statistics as it relates to style in assessing authenticity. Most studies are very very naive statistically and not really very useful. As someone who has some background in statistics, I completely agree.
Of course that hasn't left me a lot of time for study, so I've had to prioritize. I've focused almost exclusively on papers for my Exploring the Christian Way of Life project and will continue pursuing that focus while I'm in graduate school. I have recently completed the second major paper and will post it in three or four parts in early January. Until I'm done with school, posting will be very sporadic, my apologies, and I am grateful to those of you who continue to read.
I haven't read much outside of things related to my forthcoming paper, but right now I am reading Framing Paul by Douglas Campbell. It's his attempt to build a chronological framework for studying Paul based first on Paul's epistles. As always, his work is methodologically rigorous and enjoyable to read. One particular point he makes that needs wider notice is the poor use of statistics as it relates to style in assessing authenticity. Most studies are very very naive statistically and not really very useful. As someone who has some background in statistics, I completely agree.
Comments
Post a Comment