The
Problem
and
the
Solution. The fundamental underlying assumptions evident in discussions of performance and learning in human resource development must be more clearly explicated. When the diverse ontological perspectives are more carefully considered, it is clear that both views may be embraced as humanistic endeavors
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barrie, J., & Pace, R.W. (1998). Learning for organizational effectiveness: Philosophy of education and human resource developmentHuman Resource Development Quarterly, 9, 39-54.
2.
Bierema, L. (1997). Development of the individual leads to a more productive workplace.
3.
In R. Rowden (Ed.), Workplace learning: Debating five critical questions of theory and practice. (pp 21-28). San FranciscoJossey-Bass
4.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressedNew York: Herder & Herder.
5.
Holton, E.F. III (2000). Theoretical assumptions underlying the performance paradigm of human resource developmentManuscript submitted for publication.
6.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learningSan Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
Peterson, S.L., & Provo, J. (1999) A case study of academic program integration in the United States: Andragogical, philosophical, theoretical and practical perspectivesManuscript submitted for publication.
8.
Ruona, W.E A. (1999). An investigation into core beliefs underlying the profession of human resource developmentSt. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, HRD Research Center.
9.
Swanson, R.A. (1995). Human resource development: Performance is the key In E. F. Holton, III (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1995 Academy of Human Resource Development Annual Conference Baton Rouge: Academy of Human Resource Development .
10.
Watkms, K.E., & Marsick, V.J. (1995). The case for learning In E. F. Holton, III (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1995 Academy of Human Resource Development Annual Conference. Baton Rouge: Academy of Human Resource Development.
