No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

A rather complete review of factors influencing students' choice of teaching as a career is presented by Chaltas (1957). The review revealed the important role of idealism among students planning to teach. It was also noted that students were significantly motivated by social factors related to teaching. In a previous study the writers found that certain needs of prospective women teachers varied with different teaching areas (Garrison & Scott, 1961). However, the various studies dealing with motives related to the choice of teaching as a career fail to consider the relationship of certain background factors and specific personal needs of those choosing teaching as a career. The ProblemThe hypothesis of this study states that the specific personal needs of prospective women teachers (as measured by the Edwards Personal Pre f erence Schedule) vary significantly according to selected personal characteristics of the prospective teachers. The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS) consists of 210 pairs of items, and is designed to measure the relative importance of 15 psychological needs. Relationships were explored between the needs of prospective women teachers and the following personal characteristics: (1) marital status; (2) age; (3) college class standing; (4) number of

Drawing on Engeström's theory of vertical learning, Bourdieu's theory of capital, and Bernstein's theory of pedagogic device, this chapter explains various ways that connections between writing, lifelong learning, and social mobility have been investigated in the United Kingdom and the United States across three siteshome, school, and work. While writing researchers following from sociocultural theories of learning tend to resist defined models of development or predictive analysis, research from the field does suggest certain insights on the relationship of writing and lifelong learning: vertical learning occurs along with horizontal learning within and across domains; social and cultural contexts not only influence individual learning but the conditions under which learning occurs and, thus, influence the ways that social mobility may or may not be possible; and writing is a far-reaching, flexible concept that operates with other semiotic resources that individuals have available to them. Yet our main response is that any conclusion regarding the relationship between writing, lifelong learning, and social mobility must be repeatedly reassessed. Thus, we suggest that the relationship between writing and learning and the potential for social mobility remains open to question, and one that should always be tied to an understanding of social equality.