how cool is Tuesday? -the Wakefield Doctrine’ “…today we invite you to contribute to the Wakefield Doctrine…sort of

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)


So we used to have people, (mostly scotts, btw), who would say, “I like the Doctrine, it’s fun and funny and sometimes, by letting me know how clarks and rogers think and feel, it helps me be a better Predator! But, it would be a lot quicker if you just had a test or a quiz or something that your Readers could read and answer questions and, at the end, know which of the three personality types they are!!! You know?!!  Can you do that?!  Can, you huh? Can you??! Come on!! I know you can….  !!!”

Sure. We could do that. In fact, we did. And if you take the Assessment and follow directions on scoring, you’ll more than likely get the correct answer to which of the three is your predominant worldview.* But, two things:

  1. if we accept the premise that having an ‘objective’ test or measure for Readers to use to facilitate their learning, the bigger the test the better. No! really! That’s not just my opinion, it’s a damn fact1  or not
  2. I believe we said in the last Post that this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers first and foremost is meant to be fun and, statistics and tediously precise measurement and math and such is not! (Unless you’re a roger and then it’s like being in church or on a date (and it’s a sure thing) or building a ship-in-a-bottle or having a dinner party and the table looks exactly like the photo in the cookbook or you’re riding your 27 speed, hybrid-carbon-fiber-with-the-speedometer-that-goes-to-something-totally-silly-like-60mph, callibrated-ergo-meter and 2 mirrors on  your .0003 drag co-efficient helmet and you look around at the other riders and realize that you’re in front ….then you’re total in heaven)
  3. that being said, I would like to have more sample questions/scenarios/life situations for the Assessment and…. and, if anyone has any ideas how I can keep track of the results (there is currently no way to know how many people have taken the Assessment and, of them, how many are clarks or scotts or rogers), I’m totally open to suggestion. (Well, I am a clark! lol)
  4. So. Go take the Assessment. Come back here. In the Comments Section below, write us a little life scenario. Don’t worry about coming up with the ‘what would you do’…although, if you know what the three answers should be, go ahead and include them! As you can see, if the current Assessment,  if your life situation works as an Assessment Question, we’ll totally give you credit.

Be sure to play along today!


* except when your score comes out evenly distributed among the three, then you’ll know for total certain, which of the three personality types you are…lol

1) our friends at ‘the wikipedia’ say this about that:

In statistics, statistical significance (or a statistically significant result) is attained when a p-value is less than the significance level. The p-value is the probability of obtaining at least as extreme results given that the null hypothesis is true whereas the significance or alpha (α) level is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis given that it is true. As a matter of good scientific practice, a significance level is chosen before data collection and is usually set to 0.05 (5%). Other significance levels (e.g., 0.01) may be used, depending on the field of study


clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one


  1. Got predominantly As, surprise surprise

  2. ivywalker says:

    I remember taking it and coming out entirely clark… although I know I have a secondary roger… otherwise when it started showing all clarks I would have just given it up…

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      no! say that you wouldn’t!! nothing wrong with a secondary roger… too much… well, as long as it’s kept under control

      some of our best friends are rogers! Kristi and Michelle to name just two!

  3. dyannedillon says:

    Umm, I got overwhelmingly Clark answers….

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      yeah, right

      'a scott is a scott is a scott…even when playing'

      thank you for the inspiration for today’s post!

      • dyannedillon says:

        11 Clarks. 4 Scotts. 4 Rogers.

        • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

          seeing as how we have you in the fold… (well, the crumpled-up paper of clarkhood)… there’s a movie that I know you’re gonna love!

          Richard Linklater’s break-through masterpiece, ‘Slacker’

          no, no! you’re totally welcome… let me know when you’ve had a chance to see it… I’ll tell you my favorite scenes

  4. Must add that I got a few Cs too. So I guess it’s Clark-Roger for me.

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      …you are much like Kristi (and as kind) in your secondary clarklike aspect is developed such that you have that element of ….kindness that leavens the rogerian tendency to stern correctness