Deductive reasoning: in the eye of the beholder

This study examines ways of approaching deductive reasoning of people involved in mathematics education and/or logic. The data source includes 21 individual semi-structured interviews. The data analysis reveals two different approaches. One approach refers to deductive reasoning as a systematic step-by-step manner for solving problems, both in mathematics and in other domains. The other approach emphasizes formal logic as the essence of the deductive inference, distinguishing between mathematics and other domains in the usability of deductive reasoning. The findings are interpreted in light of theory and practice.

The eye of the beholder: metaphor in adult education research

Important workforce competencies for managers and professionals were identified separately for males and females through a sequence of interviews, content analysis, accessing expert opinion and statistical factoring procedures. Interviews of thirty‐two professionals and managers and a subsequent content analysis led to the development of a list of important skills, knowledge and attitudes which formed the basis for separate male and female competencies questionnaires. Principal components analyses were performed separately for male and female questionnaires, with samples of 310 women and 249 men. Seven important competencies were identified for each gender. Competencies for women were: maintenance of job skills; orientation to innovation and change; affective and cognitive efficacy; self determination and stability; presentation skills; interpersonal communication skills; and office politics skills. Competencies for men were: leadership ability; self‐determination; interpersonal ability; task management; job skill maintenance; office politics skills; and tolerance and open‐mindedness. Results suggest that acquiring competence in the workforce involves a combination both of learning and of overcoming constraints, and that individual experience influences important competencies.     

Seeing eye to eye: An evaluation of the use of video-conferencing to support collaboration

Student mobility and trans-national collaborative modes of learning at University level have been strongly promoted within Europe. However, such initiatives are expensive, difficult to organise and do not always attain their objectives. Recently there has been considerable interest in the extent to which computer-mediated communication between students in different countries can either supplement or substitute for actual student mobility. This paper reports an evaluation of a project in which video-conferencing was introduced in the context of an established Anglo-Spanish programme in which UK and Spanish Fashion students undertake collaborative projects in each others’ countries. Project aims included fostering and supporting second language use, providing an innovative context for collaborative art and design projects and offering an opportunity to simulate trans-national working conditions. Questionnaires, observation and interview data indicate that not all these objectives were realised, though student reaction to the technology and to the benefits it afforded for collaboration were broadly positive. The strengths and weaknesses of video-conferencing as a support to collaborative learning in this context are discussed.     

The Value of Education: A Reply to Andrew Reid

Andrew Reid's essay on the value of education in this journal distinguished the intrinsic features of education from what education is for, the latter being ultimately located in the promotion of personal well-being. At a meta-ethical level, this response accepts Reid's claim about ultimate location, but challenges his view that prudential goods are desire-independent, arguing for a desire-dependent conception based on supra-individual, but not always universal-human, preferences. It also questions his claim that the source of educational value lies in the intrinsic features of education, rejecting the suggestion that epistemological rather ethical considerations should be the starting-point.     

Not Proved: Reply to Wynn

Findings on whether young infants look longer at incorrect addition and subtraction have been inconsistent or, as in our study, negative. We hypothesize that imprecise ordinal calculating with very small numbers of objects develops in late infancy and precise calculating in early childhood.     

The Impossibility of a Core Curriculum: a Reply to Alan Harris

Two main reasons are given for the continuing educational deployment of Piaget's psychological theory. The first reason is that his theory survives psychological scrutiny. In support, it is argued that none of five criticisms directed by Peter Bryant (Oxford Review of Education, 10/3 1984) requires the rejection of Piaget's theory. It is, in particular, contended that the development of cognitive ability is accorded a relative, rather than absolute, construal; that both principles of matching and of mismatching are compatible with Piaget's theory; and that decisions about the validity of Piaget's recent equilibratory model should not be taken prematurely. The second reason is that Piaget's constructivist theory has undergone recent revision and so is of interest to those with psychological or educational commitments to constructivism.     

Dissenting Voices: a Reply to Maskell

Duke Maskell ( Journal of Philosophy of Education , 32.2) argues that ‘our idea of education is puerile’ and that we need to rethink it. Drawing on the work of Jane Austen, he essentially reasserts the classic nineteenth‐century ideal of Liberal Education. Yet in so doing, Maskell fails to acknowledge the social and political implications of this ideal. I argue that if we wish to engage in a rigorous philosophical debate on education, we cannot afford to ignore the social and political context implied by our educational concepts. Furthermore, this debate can be enriched by an understanding of alternative, dissenting positions on education, specifically, in this context, that of early Socialist and Anarchist thinkers.     

Child abuse in the eyes of the beholder: lay perceptions of child sexual and physical abuse

OBJECTIVE: The purpose was to explore the effects of victim and perpetrator gender, type of abuse, and victim-perpetrator relationship on university students' and non-students' perceptions of different kinds of child abuse. METHOD: One hundred and ninety-nine participants (including university students and non-student adults) evaluated each of 24 vignettes (within-subjects design) describing an abusive interaction between a child and an adult. The following four variables were manipulated: the victim's gender, the perpetrator's gender, the type of abuse (physical, relatively mild sexual, or relatively severe sexual), and the perpetrator's relationship to the victim (parent or babysitter). Participants rated each vignette on a number of dimensions: degree of trauma and severity, likelihood of general occurrence and reoccurrence, victim believability, and repressibility of the event. RESULTS: Significant interactions emerged on each dimension. For example, sexual abuse (whether mild or severe) was rated as being more traumatic and severe if perpetrated by a parent, but relationship type did not affect perceptions of physical abuse. In addition, significant perpetrator gender by victim gender interactions indicated that homosexual abuse was perceived as more traumatic and repressible than heterosexual abuse, but as less likely to occur; and male participants tended to be more affected by the gender of the perpetrator and abuse type than female participants. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that people have stereotypes about the circumstances and consequences of child abuse. These stereotypes are often, though not always, consistent with existing empirical findings.     

Educational Research: A Reply to Professor Pring

Professor Richard Pring's BJES Vol. 48, No. 1 editorial shares a widespread unease regarding government centralisation of state-funded research (not only on education). Unfortunately the editorial compromises with this trend by suggesting it is obvious to academic experts where research should be so concentrated. Instead, an alternative model of research is advocated to counter so far as is possible the tendency towards centralisation.