Commentary.

The article presents comments of Murray L. Wax on Roger Kahn and William J. Bowers' research paper "The Social Context of the Rank-and-File Student Activist: A Test of Four Hypotheses." Wax doubts whether one can learn anything about real activists by the kind of survey technique employed by Kahn and Bowers, and insofar as Kahn and Bowers are implying that they have performed such "a test of four hypotheses" they are misleading not only the readership of the journal Sociology of Education, but more importantly those who will read elsewhere abstracts or abbreviated versions of their essay. Responding to Wax's comments, Kahn and Bower states that the basic problem with Wax's critique is that it is doctrinaire and superficial. The fact is, of course, that a great deal was learnt about activists through the kind of survey technique employed. The consistent findings being referred to in the introduction of the research paper make this evident. Bowers and Kahn opined that the contributors and readers alike require and deserve more serious, thoughtful criticism and not polemics delivered in the guise of criticism.