| dc.contributor.author | MacInnis, Carole Marie. | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2014-10-21T12:35:53Z | |
| dc.date.available | 1994 | |
| dc.date.issued | 1994 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.other | AAINN98897 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10222/55449 | |
| dc.description | Many educators in the field of special education have been dissatisfied with the product-oriented, reductionist paradigm that has dominated the practice since public education began. These educators are constructivist in their orientation, and their impact, in the form of much debate in the literature, has been considerable. The focus of this study is on that debate, as the division in the field is causing a great deal of conflict and confusion. | en_US |
| dc.description | To clarify the problematic nature of this situation, an examination of the assumptions behind these two major paradigms (reductionist vs constructivist) was undertaken. Through an analysis of the work and practices of two leaders in the field of learning disabilities, Donald Deshler and Mary Poplin, whose respective work is situated in the opposing paradigms, this study offers an insight into the exact nature of the conflict that has arisen. | en_US |
| dc.description | Due to the complexity of the debate, a dialogic approach to the exploration of Deshler's and Poplin's beliefs and practices was used, with questions based on an in-depth interview with each. While dialogue has not often been incorporated into research methods, it proved most useful for clarifying positions and creating new understandings. | en_US |
| dc.description | Many issues emerged as problematic as the dialogue progressed, issues that reflected significant differences in beliefs and approaches to teaching held within each paradigm. This study offers a critical analysis of those issues. Among them were: (a) differences in terminology: terms common to both have different meanings due to the underlying assumptions held within the paradigm; (b) the politics of what is valued in the schools, and (c) several crucial differences in understanding of the learning process. All of these suggest paradigmatic differences worthy of further exploration. | en_US |
| dc.description | Thesis (Ph.D.)--Dalhousie University (Canada), 1994. | en_US |
| dc.language | eng | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Dalhousie University | en_US |
| dc.publisher | | en_US |
| dc.subject | Education, Special. | en_US |
| dc.subject | Education, Philosophy of. | en_US |
| dc.title | A dialogic analysis of the paradigm debate in the field of learning disabilities. | en_US |
| dc.type | text | en_US |
| dc.contributor.degree | Ph.D. | en_US |
