International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation. This article reviews a variety of case management models have been developed over the past two decades. The clinical case management model is a response to the problems inherent in identifying these resources. It thus recognises that case managers may need to provide services directly and hence act as clinicians.
Philosophy and Education, 2nd edition. F RANKENA Philosophy of education is a field characterized not only by broad theoretical eclecticism but also by a perennial dispute, which started in the mid-twentieth century, over what the scope and purposes of the discipline even ought to be.
In the "Philosophy of Education" article that was included in the previous edition of this encyclopedia, William Frankena wrote, "In a sense there is no such thing as the philosophy of education" p.
During certain periods of the history of the philosophy of education, there have been dominant perspectives, to be sure: At one time, the field was defined around canonical works on education by great philosophers Plato of ancient Greece, the eighteenth-century Swiss-born Frenchman Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and others ; at other times, the field was dominated, in the United States at least, by the figure of John Dewey — and educational Progressivism; at other times, the field was characterized by an austere analytical approach that explicitly rejected much of what had come before in the field as not even being proper "philosophy" at all.
But even during these periods of dominance there were sharp internal disputes within the field such as feminist criticisms of the "Great Man" approach to philosophy of education and vigorous critiques of the analytical method. Such disputes can be read off the history of the professional societies, journals, and graduate programs that institutionalize the field, and they can be documented through a succession of previous encyclopedia articles, which by definition attempt to define and delimit their subject matter.
These sorts of struggles over the maintenance of the disciplinary boundary, and the attempt to define and enforce certain methods as paramount, are hardly unique to philosophy of education. But such concerns have so preoccupied its practitioners that at times these very questions seem to become the substance of the discipline, nearly to the exclusion of thinking about actual educational problems.
And so it is not very surprising to find, for example, a book such as Philosophers on Education. Consisting of a series of essays written by professional philosophers entirely outside the discipline of philosophy of education, the collection cites almost none of the work published within the discipline; because the philosophers have no doubts about the status of the discipline of philosophy of education, they have few qualms about speaking authoritatively about what philosophy has to say to educators.
On the other hand, a fruitful topic for reflection is whether a more self-critical approach to philosophy of education, even if at times it seems to be pulling up its own roots for examination, might prove more productive for thinking about education, because this very tendency toward self-criticism keeps fundamental questions alive and open to reexamination.
Any encyclopedia article must take a stance in relation to such disputes. However much one attempts to be comprehensive and dispassionate in describing the scope and purpose of a field, it is impossible to write anything about it without imagining some argument, somewhere, that would put such claims to challenge.
This is especially true of "categorical" approaches, that is, those built around a list of types of philosophy of education, or of discrete schools of thought, or of specific disciplinary methods.
During the period of particular diversity and interdisciplinarity in the field that has continued into the twenty-first century, such characterizations seem especially artificial—but even worse than this, potentially imperial and exclusionary. And so the challenge is to find a way of characterizing the field that is true to its eclecticism but that also looks back reflexively at the effects of such characterizations, including itself, in the dynamics of disciplinary boundary maintenance and methodological rule-setting that are continually under dispute.
One way to begin such an examination is by thinking about the impulses that draw one into this activity at all: What is philosophy of education for? Perhaps these impulses can be more easily generalized about the field than any particular set of categories, schools of thought, or disciplinary methods.
Moreover, these impulses cut across and interrelate approaches that might otherwise look quite different.
And they coexist as impulses within broad philosophical movements, and even within the thought of individual philosophers themselves, sometimes conflicting in a way that might help explain the tendency toward reflexive self-examination and uncertainty that so exercises philosophy of education as a field.
The Prescriptive Impulse The first impulse is prescriptive. In many respects this is the oldest and most pervasive inclination: These prescriptive inclinations are in many respects what people expect from philosophy of education: It is what people usually mean when they talk about having a "philosophy of education.
For many years, working out the details of these "philosophies of education" was considered the main substance of the field, and the debates among the "isms" were typically at the very basic level debates among fundamentally different philosophical premises. An implication of this approach was that disagreements tended to be broadly "paradigmatic" in the sense that they were based on all-or-none commitments; one could not, of course, talk about a synthesis of realist and idealist worldviews.
These will be characterized as critically oriented philosophies below, but at this stage it is important to see that these perspectives can be equally driven by the prescriptive impulse: The Analytical Impulse The second impulse that drives much of philosophy of education is analytical.
In a broad sense this includes not only philosophical approaches specifically termed "analytical philosophy" such as conceptual analysis or ordinary language analysisbut also a broader orientation that approaches the philosophical task as spelling out a set of rational conditions that educational aims and practices ought to satisfy, while leaving it up to other public deliberative processes to work out what they might be in specific.
The analytical impulse is often seen as expressing a certain philosophical modesty: Here metaphors such as referees who try to adjudicate an ongoing activity but remain nonpartisan within it, or groundskeepers who pull up weeds and prepare the soil but do not decide what to plant, tend to predominate in how this version of philosophy of education is presented and justified to others.
The idea that philosophy provides a set of tools, and that "doing philosophy of education" as opposed to "having a philosophy of education" offers a more workmanlike self-conception of the philosopher, stands in sharp contrast with the idea of philosophy as a system-building endeavor.
Of course, it must be said that this impulse is not entirely free of the prescriptive inclination, either. For one thing, there is a prescriptiveness about the very tools, criteria, principles, and analytical distinctions that get imported into how problems are framed.
These are implicitly and often explicitly presented as educational ideals themselves: However rationally defended these might be, they will undoubtedly appear to some as imposed from "on high. This is not meant as a criticism of the analytical orientation, but it just shows how these impulses can and do coexist, even within accounts that regard themselves as primarily one or the other.
The Critical Impulse Similarly, the third impulse, a critical orientation, can coexist with either or both of the others.
In each category, countries differ on a variety of factors, but they also have differing amounts of the three basic components of the American stratification system: wealth (as . Philosophy of education is a field characterized not only by broad theoretical eclecticism but also by a perennial dispute, which started in the mid-twentieth century, over what the scope and purposes of the discipline even ought to be. Theories of Education! Home; Study Guides; Sociology; Theories of Education; All Subjects Symbolic interactionists limit their analysis of education to what they directly observe happening in the classroom. They focus on how teacher expectations influence student performance, perceptions, and attitudes. Politics in the United States.
The critical impulse, like the analytical one, shares the characteristic of trying to clear the ground of misconceptions and ideologies, where these misrepresent the needs and interests of disadvantaged groups; like the prescriptive impulse, the critical impulse is driven by a positive conception of a better, more just and equitable, society.
Where the critical impulse differs from the others is in its conception of the contribution philosophy can play in serving these ends. From this orientation, philosophy is not just a set of tools or an abstract, programmatic theory; it is itself a substantive personal and political commitment, and it grows out of deeper inclinations to protect and serve the interests of specific groups.
Hence the key philosophical ideas stressed in critically oriented philosophies of education reflection, counterhegemony, a critique of power, an emphasis upon difference, and so on derive their force from their capacity to challenge a presumably oppressive dominant society and enable put-upon individuals and groups to recognize and question their circumstances and to be moved to change them.A: The History Of Physical Education In United States, California was the first state that made physical education classes compulsory in al its schools.
This took place in the year of as the importance of physical education was growing fast. In the United States, the gradient in health outcomes by educational attainment has steepened over the last four decades 7,8 in all regions of the United States, 9 producing a larger gap in health status between Americans with high and low education.
TO THE EDUCATION SYSTEM. IN THE UNITED STATES. BY. ANTONELLA CORSI-BUNKER. AMERICAN EDUCATION SYSTEM: AN OVERVIEW.
planning for changing educational needs in the community, and often even establishing to combining test results from three point sections (math, critical reading, and writing), along with other subsections.
AN ANALYSIS OF THE THREE SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Through Analysis, A Compare and Contrast Of the Three Sociological Perspectives: Functionalist, Conflict, and Interactionist This paper discusses three approaches that can be taken when studying Sociology. Justifying inequality 1 Justifying Inequality: A Social Psychological Analysis of Beliefs about Poverty and the Poor Heather E.
Bullock A news story reports that . Social welfare policy is a required foundation area of study in the accredited social-work programs of the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE). The study of social welfare is not a recent innovation; its antecedents can be traced to the late s and early s.