Child development.

Olson, Willard C.

doi:10.1037/13244-000

Cited by 49 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…C. Olson and his associates have attempted to integrate their research and the research of others, with implications for learning. 1 Briefly he points out that learning is an aspect of total growth, and not just mental ability. He has developed ten growth-age measurements, one half of which are social and intellectual, and the other half primarily physical.…”

Section: Study Of Perscmality and The Professions Individual Test Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of Personality and the Professions

Powell

1954

The Sociological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Study Of Perscmality and The Professions Individual Test Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of Personality and the Professions

Powell

1954

The Sociological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Olson's recent book has already been mentioned (7). Olson's recent book has already been mentioned (7).…”

Section: Understanding Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational Psychology

Stroud

1951

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What amounts to a kind of self�consciousness in educational psychology is indicated in a number of ways. A nderson (1) has discussed the influence of psychology upon education in America within the last fifty years. The content of contemporary texts in educational psychology has been examined by Blair (2). Bruce (3) has raised a number of questions about the amount and kind of training the educational psychologist should receive in general and theoretical psychology. Freeman (4) sees a need of redefinition and reorientation; Trow (5) "charts a course." Noll, Horrocks & Anderson (6) have presented a committee report on the function of the division of educa tional psychology in the American Psychologic a J Association.Freeman (4) asks the question, should the teaching of educational psy chology be "primarily on a technological level or on a scientific-theoretical level?" Bruce (3) suggests that our efforts to be practical have sometimes resulted in superficial treatment of learning and guidance, and that many who teach educational psychology have had too great a proportion of their training at the practical level and too little in such basic areas as cultural anthropology, clinical psychology, and general psychological theory and experimentation.To the extent that Freeman's question relates to the training ofeduca tional psychologists, Bruce has supplied the answer, at least a good answer. But educational psychology must also justify itself in another respect-the teaching of students who are to become classroom teachers. Most students preparing to teach will not gain enough competency in psychology to make much use of the scientific-theoretical approach, and will not exert a great deal of influence upon educational thought anyway. Perhaps a delineation of broad, general principles of learning, child development and management, and the technology derivable, is the best approach for them.The serious student of educational psychology, educational specialists, and all persons likely to assume positions of leadership in education should have thorough grounding in the scientific and theoretical aspects of the subject. Principles, generalizations, thought, not technology, can guide us. The educational leaders should be able to distinguish between shallow, un reasoned claims that may be encountered daily in the name of psychology, on the one hand, and principles based on psychological sophistication, on the other.An educational psychologist is by history any psychologist who devotes his energies to educational problems. Anderson (1) has made a strong case for psychology as an influential factor in education. Dewey and Thorndike "cannot be matched by two others who have had equal effect on American

show abstract

“…As a result, boys would tend to express them of two Groups of Immature Children 119 selves by way of direct action rather than indirectly by way of verba lization. However, in view of Tanner's [36] findings th at boys at birth are four weeks behind girls in skeletal age, and in view of other recent reports in the literature [6,29], which stress the slower m aturational rate of boys, it is felt th at the relatively inferior language performance of boys reflects their generalized physiological im m aturity rather than cultural influences. It is the investigators' impression th at the infe rior oral language performance of the two groups assumed to be physi ologically im m ature, namely prem aturely born and male children, is but one aspect of their overall delay in neurophysiological patterning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The second group consisted of boys, who were chosen in view of the frequently expressed opinion in the medical, psycholog ical and educational literature, stressing the relatively slow m aturational rate of boys as compared to th at of girls [6,7,16,29,36]. The oral language performance of the first group -prem aturely born children -was compared to th at of a control group of children born at term .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%