西方人文主义教育管理理论的方法论启示及批判

西方人文主义教育管理理论的方法论启示与局限并存:现象直观论肯定和强调组织中个体主观价值和非理性因素的作用,但它和教育管理理论化学派一样局限于从管理学视角来探讨教育管理问题;人文科学方法论主张批判和克服自然科学范式主导下的教育管理理论的泛滥,但其借鉴具有明显的不彻底性;格林菲尔德提及的操作层面的教育管理研究手段和方法有数种,但未作出进一步的交待或示范。应加强教育管理研究方法论体系的构建并重视其推广应用,当务之急应倡导实证方法的运用。     

西方自然连贯主义教育管理伦理观及启示

西方自然连贯主义教育管理伦理观是一种以后实证主义和自然主义哲学为基础的教育管理伦理观。虽然这种伦理观主张使用自然科学的成就来理解人们的主观性,将价值等同于或还原于某种事实以确立价值判断的科学性、真理性,最终滑向了科学主义一端,但其相关理论观点对于我国当前教育管理理论与实践仍具有重要的启发与借鉴意义。     

对科学主义教育管理的批判与反思

科学主义教育管理认为唯有自然科学方法才能解决教育管理面临的问题。批判与反思科学主义教育管理的目的是要真正理解科学教育管理的含义。我国教育管理的任务是双重的:一方面是要从经验管理上升到科学管理,另一方面要注意批判科学主义的倾向。     

教育管理"学"之辨析

如以传统的狭义的自然科学观及其相应的学科观来考量教育管理学，则其还进不了“学”堂；而以现代的广义的大科学观及其相应的学科观来认识教育管理学，则它早已入“学”。因为它既是一门理论科学，又是一门经验科学；既是一门科学，又是一门学科。     

当代教育管理科学研究中的"学"之辨

以传统的实证科学、理论科学和独立科学等狭义的自然科学观及其相应的学科观来考量教育管理学，它还进不了“学”堂；而将人社会科学纳入科学序列，以现代广义的大科学观及其相应的学科观来检证教育管理学，则它不仅早已入“学”，而且渐成显“学”，其涵指也因其自身的发展及其所处时代和化背景的不同而不同。     

高等学校教学管理初探

高等学校教育管理是一门新生的学科,而且是一门需要吸收和利用社会科学与自然科学有关理论的边缘学科。高等学校教学管理是教育管理学的主要组成部分,它是高等教育、教学客观规律的反映和应用,是教学管理活动内在规律的总结,是高等学校教学活动能够正常地、有效地进行下去的保证。我国高等学校的教学管理,建国以来做了很多工作,取得了很大成绩,但也存在不少缺点和错误。为了总结高等学校教学管理的经验教训,探索教学管理的客观规律,研究现阶段     

论教育管理学与其他相关学科的关联

教育管理学与管理学和教育学之间有着直接的关系，但哲学、自然科学及其他人文社会科学等，不仅为之奠定了认识论和方法论的基础，而且也为教育管理学提供了丰厚的思想养料，教育管理学与上述学科间也有着广泛而密切的关联。     

后现代主义教育管理思想解析

后现代主义是当代西方最具影响力的思潮之一 ,其基本概念 ,比如权力、对话、知识等被运用到教育管理理论中 ,形成了后现代主义教育管理理论。后现代主义教育管理理论认为组织是人的社会创造物 ,是变化的、发展的 ;教育管理知识或理论也是变化的 ,不存在唯一正确的教育管理理论 ;教育管理的权力也是变化的 ,分权可以使权力扩大 ,下属参与管理能够提高管理效率 ;组织本身的动态性决定了管理方法和手段的多样性 ,把权力变为管理的实践需要有效的对话和沟通等等。这些基本思想对我国的教育管理理论和实践具有重要的参考价值。     

谈双因素理论在国防生思想教育管理工作中的运用

双因素理论是管理学需要理论的重要代表之一,对组织的教育管理具有重要的理论指导作用.用双因素理论分析国防生教育管理现状和问题,构建起国防生教育管理工作的激励体系,对解决当前国防生教育管理工作中存在的问题,做好国防生的教育管理工作具有重要意义.     

西方科学主义教育管理理论的观点与启示

西方科学主义教育管理理论最早出现于20世纪50年代的美国,是伴随着著名的教育管理理论运动而成长起来的一个主导性理论流派。科学主义教育管理理论的最大贡献在于提出了决策是管理的核心,它的弊端是将管理“技术化”,将教育管理的全部力量都集中在组织上。科学主义教育管理理论可以改进我国教育管理的研究方法,提高我国教育管理的效率,完善我国教育管理培训制度。     

价值论与整合论:外国教育管理学理论的新进展

20世纪70年代以来，外国教育管理学理论呈现出一种极富生命力的多元化状态。早期发展起来的居于支配地位的教育管理科学论开始受到种种不同理论观点的批判、修正和完善。其中，教育管理价值论与教育管理整合论就是在反思教育管理科学论的过程中新进出现的两种颇具影响的教育管理理论。文章从思想基础、理论要点两方面，对这两种理论进行了简明扼要的讨论。     

西方主观主义教育管理理论探析

20世纪70年代兴起的主观主义教育管理理论是人文主义思潮在教育管理研究中的反映。它对以教育管理的科学化为主旨的“理论运动”进行强烈的批判,提出了“组织的人类发明论”的观点,强调个体在组织中的重要作用,并且认为教育管理具有价值并且从属于价值的活动。在研究方法上,它反对单一的实证主义方法,主张研究方法的多元化。反映在教育管理实践中,它强调对话和沟通的重要性。     

Thematic Approach to Theoretical Speculations in the Field of Educational Administration

Abstract

The purpose of this article is a critical reflection on the field of educational administration and its varied and often conflicting epistemologies. It is argued that the field of educational administration is a community of diverse epistemologies. Although epistemological heterogeneity has been persistently vilified by both theorists and pragmatists with their own discursive agendas, it is this precise environment of critical dialogue and diversity that is conducive to new frontiers in the field. A phenomenology of recognition is thus presented as a showcase for the possibility of approaching and expanding the field topically rather than treatise-like generalizations at the macro level, which are mostly dated discussions on philosophy of science. The principal value of the article is showing alternative pathways—not limited to the discussions about theory of recognition—to new frontiers in educational administration by demonstrating the possibility of thematic theory developments in the field and defending the diversity of existing epistemologies in the field as an asset rather than a liability for further development in the field.     

Reclaiming Metaphysical Truth for Educational Research

It is not uncommon in educational research and social science in general either to eschew the word truth or to put it in scare quotes in order to signify scepticism about it. After the initial wave of relativism in the philosophy of natural science, a second wave has developed in social science with the rise of postmodernism and poststructuralism. The tendency here is to relativise truth or to bracket out questions of truth. In contradistinction, this paper revindicates the metaphysical nature of truth. Truth is a transcendental precondition of educational inquiry and is best understood as a formal, regulative norm. Realism about truth enjoins a defence of the correspondence theory, which is provided here. At the same time, however, the development of realism in the social sciences has ironically followed the postmodernists in its scepticism about truth and its rejection of the correspondence theory. This paper critically appraises such recent developments, since all research is unintelligible without realism about the social world and whether our substantive knowledge-claims correspond with it.     

Belief,Knowledge and Understanding

This article discusses how to deal with the relations between different cultural perspectives in classrooms, based on a proposal for considering understanding and knowledge as goals of science education, inspired by Dewey’s naturalistic humanism. It thus combines educational and philosophical interests. In educational terms, our concerns relate to how science teachers position themselves in multicultural classrooms. In philosophical terms, we are interested in discussing the relations between belief, understanding, and knowledge under the light of Dewey’s philosophy. We present a synthesis of Dewey’s theory of inquiry through his naturalistic humanism and discuss its implications for the concepts of belief, understanding, and knowledge, as well as for the goals of science teaching. In particular, we highlight problems arising in the context of possible conflicts between scientific and religious claims in the school environment that result from totalitarian positions. We characterize an individual’s position as totalitarian if he or she takes some way of thinking as the only one capable of expressing the truth about all that exists in the world, lacks open-mindedness to understand different interpretative perspectives, and attempts to impose her or his interpretation about the facts to others by violent means or not. From this stance, any other perspective is taken to be false a priori and, accordingly, as a putative target to be suppressed or adapted to the privileged way of thinking. We argue, instead, for a more fallibilist evaluation of our own beliefs and a more respectful appraisal of the diversity of students’ beliefs by both students and teachers.     

论鲍斯的存在分析人文科学观

该文论述了鲍斯所提出的存在分析人文科学观及其人性观基础,并且以鲍斯的视角批判了当代盛行于医学和心理学领域中的自然科学观。较为细致地介绍了鲍斯和海德格尔所提出的“前科学假设”和“此在”概念,及他们所倡之现象学方法论,以此与自然科学的传统方法论形成对比。     

湖南教育科学"十五"规划实施的特点、经验及问题

"十五"期间,湖南省实施教育科学规划取得了长足的发展,呈现出一些新特点:选题领域和视野进一步拓展;学科体系构建日趋成熟和完善;教育科研理论不断丰富;研究方法不断创新;更加注重现实问题的应用性研究;更加注重教育科研课题的价值取向等,积累和形成了具有湖南特色的教育科学规划与管理的新经验.     

The Role of Education Redefined: 18th century British and French educational thought and the rise of the Baconian conception of the study of nature

The idea that science teaching in schools should prepare the ground for society's future technical and scientific progress has played an important role in shaping modern education. This idea, however, was not always present. In this article, I examine how this idea first emerged in educational thought. Early in the 17th century, Francis Bacon asserted that the study of nature should serve to improve living conditions for all members of society. Although influential, Bacon's idea was not easily assimilated by educational thinkers who remained committed to the traditional aims of teaching about nature. Yet in the second half of the 18th century a change has occurred; educational thinkers started to embrace Baconian ideas and therefore argued that science teaching should be oriented towards generating future scientific progress. Analysing the work of 18th century French and British educational thinkers, this article links the emergence of this new view to developments in the understanding of natural philosophy and to a rising interest in it. It is argued, however, that in themselves, these developments could not adequately explain why Baconian ideas started to influence educational theory in the time in which they did. It is maintained that the incorporation of Baconian ideas into educational thought resulted from a fundamental theoretical shift in the understanding of the role of education itself.     

Can Science Test Supernatural Worldviews?

Several prominent scientists, philosophers, and scientific institutions have argued that science cannot test supernatural worldviews on the grounds that (1) science presupposes a naturalistic worldview (Naturalism) or that (2) claims involving supernatural phenomena are inherently beyond the scope of scientific investigation. The present paper argues that these assumptions are questionable and that indeed science can test supernatural claims. While scientific evidence may ultimately support a naturalistic worldview, science does not presuppose Naturalism as an a priori commitment, and supernatural claims are amenable to scientific evaluation. This conclusion challenges the rationale behind a recent judicial ruling in the United States concerning the teaching of “Intelligent Design” in public schools as an alternative to evolution and the official statements of two major scientific institutions that exert a substantial influence on science educational policies in the United States. Given that science does have implications concerning the probable truth of supernatural worldviews, claims should not be excluded a priori from science education simply because they might be characterized as supernatural, paranormal, or religious. Rather, claims should be excluded from science education when the evidence does not support them, regardless of whether they are designated as ‘natural’ or ‘supernatural’.     

Experimental inquiry and naturalistic inquiry: An evaluation

In recent years, questions have been raised about the usefulness of experimental inquiry in educational research and evaluation. An alternative paradigm, called naturalistic inquiry has been advocated by some and appears to be growing in acceptability. In this article, these two approaches are described and compared using illustrations from two science education research projects. Several strengths and limitations of each inquiry style are identified. Investigators are urged to seriously consider both paradigms in planning research and evaluation studies.