Unconventional ideas (e.g., philosophical, theoretical, political, etc.) are discussed which lead to the realization that new and different programmatic alternatives are needed by institutions of higher learning if they are to train competent teachers in the future. The relationships between learning disabilities, CBTE programs, and hierarchical theories of human development are explored and preliminary suggestions are offered in the hope of producing alternative conceptualizations of the learning act.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Blatt, B.Bandwagons also go to funerals. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12 (3), 288–291.
2.
Burgess, J. Personal communication, February, 1979
3.
Cruickshank, W. M.When Winter comes, can Spring … ? Reprinted in W. M. Cruickshank (Ed.), Approaches to Learning, Vol. 1, The Best of ACLD. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1980, 1–24.
4.
Das, J. P., Leong, C. K., Williams, N. H.The relationship between learning disability and simultaneous successive processing. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1978a, 11, 618–625.
5.
Das, J. P., Kirby, J. R., Jarman, R. F.Simultaneous and Successive Cognitive Processes. New York: Academic Press, Inc., 1978b.
6.
Division for Children with Learning Disabilities. Code of Ethics and Competencies for Teachers of Learning Disabled Children and Youth, 1978.
7.
Frostig, M.Five questions regarding my past and future and the past, present and future of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1978, 11, 536–539.
8.
Goodman, L., Price, M.BEH final regulations for learning disabilities: Implications for the secondary school. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1978, 1 (4), 73–79.
9.
Kirst, M. W.The rise and fall of PPBS in California. Phi Delta Kappan, 1975, 56 (8), 535–538.
10.
Kuhn, T.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd edition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1970.
11.
Leigh, J. E.Implementation of the DCLD competency standards. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1980, 3 (2), 29–34.
12.
Mercer, C. D., Forgnone, C., Wolking, W. D.Definitions of learning disabilities used in the United States. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1976, 9, 376–386.
13.
Phillips, D. C., Kelley, M. E.Hierarchical theories and development in education and psychology. Harvard Educational Review, 1975, 45, 351–375.
14.
Sandberg, J. H.K-12 Competency-based education comes to Pennsylvania. Phi Delta Kappan, 1979, 61 (2), 119–120.
15.
Senf, G. M.An information-integration theory and its application to normal reading acquisition and reading disability. In N. D. Bryant and C. E. Kass (Eds.), Leadership Training Institute in Learning Disabilities: Final Report (Vol. 2). Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona, 1972, 305–391.
16.
Senf, G. M.Implications of the final procedures for evaluating specific learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1978, 11, 124–126.
17.
Spitz, H. H.Beyond field theory and mental deficiency. In N. R. Ellis, Handbook of Mental Deficiency, Psychological Theory and Research, 2nd Ed., Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1979.
