Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Secondary analysis of descriptive data concerning musically gifted students, their parents, and their teachers yields distinctive attribution patterns for each group. The patterns describe this group of students as attributing much of their success to inborn ability and hard work. These accomplished students, however, describe family members and friends as discouraging their musical development. Parents, in sharp contrast, report their children as having only ordinary levels of inborn talent, and they attribute their children's musical accomplishments to encouragement provided by family and friends. Teachers in this study attribute students' musical development to innate talent, hard work, and schooling. Differences among these attribution patterns are surprising, but are consistent with research that suggests that individuals often make causal attributions that are self-serving, giving a good deal of credit to their own characteristics or influence.
Many policymakers and researchers still maintain that “modernization” of education through sustained and well-focused investment in educational innovation can improve the quality of education, significantly ameliorate social and economic problems, and lower educational costs as well. By restructuring management and teaching practices, putting more reliance on prepackaged curriculum materials, exploiting the possibilities of computers, radio, and TV, and changing teachers’ roles, it is believed that children and youth would be better prepared to meet the requirements of the modern workplace. We contend, however, that these benefits have failed to materialize. In an attempt to understand why the promise of educational innovation has not been realized, we critically examine educational innovation, its ideological and paradigmatic underpinnings, and the major stages of the innovation process. Review of a large body of research suggests that conventional theory fails to understand the nature of structural and institutional factors and processes that characterize class-based societies. A political economy of educational innovation perspective is elaborated that focuses on the centrality of power and the generation of correspondence and contradiction as key analytical concepts. It is argued that this “radical” perspective better explains the failure of innovation. Recent arguments that the central ideas behind educational innovation are still valid, but that greater emphasis must be put on the implementation process and participation of potential adopters, are also critically reviewed and found to represent no substantive shift from the “failed” model of innovation. Although shortcomings of the radical view are acknowledged and some of its theoretical weaknesses underscored, it demonstrates how the innovation process actively extends and creates a “technological” ideology that is self-legitimating, providing the illusion of change, not its substance. Yet despite the predominance of this reproductive function, we discuss how the radical paradigm also posits that educational innovation yields contradictions and resistances that have the potential for social transformation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.