The Criticism of Eclectic Integration Discourse in Education: Khosro Baqeri’s Works at a Glance

پژوهش نامه مبانی تعلیم و تربیت

Article 2, Volume 7, Issue 2, March 2018, Pages 103-118   

Document Type: نقد مقاله

DOI: 10.22067/fedu.v7i2.66857

Author

mahdi Sajjadi^*

tarbiat modares

Abstract

The main purpose of this paper is to explain and critique the eclectic integration discourse on the one hand, as well as to critique the works of one of the thinkers of the field of Iran education system has, at least in the last two decades, been pursuing its scientific and research activities on the basis of the eclectic integration approach, under the titles such as “Realistic Constructivism”,” Constructive Realism” and the “establishing approach”, etc. To achieve the objectives of the case consideration of methods such as concept analysis, conceptual renewal, critical analysis, and then inference as appropriate methods. By elaborating the fundamental questions about the logic of the eclectic integration discourse or constructive reconstruction, and criticizing the approach of Dr. Khosrow Bagheri, this paper concludes that the eclectic discourse, on the one hand, has not been successful in explains the logical possibility of this reconstruction, and on the other hand, it suffers from ambiguities and shortcomings, particularly in terms of the logic and methodology of eclectic integration and reconstruction.

Keywords

eclectic integration; Integration; Theory; discourse; criticism

References

Bagheri, Kh (2004). Realistic Constructivism: Reconstruction of Jorge Kelly’s Personal Constructivism .Journal of Psychology and Education.34 (1) (In Persian).

Bagheri, Kh (2008) Identity of Religious science. Ministry of Culture and Islamic Thought.Tehran, Iran (In Persian).

Bagheri, Kh (2013) Constructive Realism and Instruction of Sciences. Quarterly of Curriculum Studies.7 (28).81(In Persian).

Chaudhary, Krishma (2015) Dryden’s theory of criticism in “an essay of dramatic Poesy”. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development. 2(2): 255

-Dawson, N.V and Gregoer, F (2009) Correspondence and Coherence in science: A brief historical perspective. Judgment and decision making. 4(2).

-Gold fried M.R., & Safran, J.D (1986) Future Directions in Psychotherapy integration. Hand Book of eclectic psychotherapy. New York.

-Gray, T (2007) Education and Theory: strangers in paradigms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

-Gregory (1992) Nature Lost? National Science and the Germany Theological Traditions of the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

-Hammond, K.R (2007) Beyond Rationality: the Search for Wisdom in a Troubled Time. New York. Oxford University Press.

-Hemple, C.G (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Sciences.Routledge. New York.

-Kelly.G.A (2005) The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York: Norton

Lee, M.D and Zhang, S (2012) Evaluating the coherence of Take-the-best in structured environments. Judgment and decision Making.7.360

-Lowenstein, M. (2012, June). Theoretical reflections: Why a theory of advising? Academic Advising Today, 35(2).

-Mook, D.G (1988). The selfish paradigm. Contemporary psychology. 33 (6). -New Encyclopedia Britannica (15th edition, Propædia Ed.). 2007. p. 524.

-Norcross, J.C (1986) Handbook of eclectic psychotherapy. New York

Patterson, C.H (2000) Eclecticism in Psychotherapy: is integration possible? In understanding psychotherapy. PCC Books. London.

-Polonioli, A (2015) The Use and abuses of the coherence-correspondence distinction. University of Edinburgh.UK.

-Sanderson, S.K (2006) Reforming Theoretical Work in Sociology: A Brief Reply to My Critics”.Perspectives.28 (3).11

-Useem, B (1980) Solidarity Model, Breakdown Model, and the Boston Anti-Busing Movement.Kegan Paul. New York.

-Yin, R (2003), “The Case Study Crisis: Some Answers,” Administrative Science Quarterly.26. (1). 58-65

-Zeller, Eduard (2009) Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, 13th Edition. New York.