WHAT SHOULD WE TEACH IN READING?

Arthur Gates was a prominent reading educator of the last century. As a writer of over 300 articles and books on the teaching of reading he had a profound effect on many aspects of classroom literacy instruction. While this short article was written 50 years ago it still clearly speaks to all teachers about what is really important in the teaching of reading. This material is taken from a new IRA book titled, Classics in Literacy Education: Historical Perspectives for Today's Teachers (2002).     

MULTIPLE-ACT CRITERIA IN THE VALIDATION OF COMMUNICATION TRAITS: WHAT DO WE GAIN AND WHAT DO WE LOSE?

Recent dissatisfaction with trait explanations of human communication has given rise to the use of multiple-act criteria in co-relational studies of trait/behavior relationships. In order to overcome the practical problems of gathering multiple-act data, researchers have relied on self-reports. It was hypothesized that the use of self-reports has led to biased estimates of the utility of the multiple-act approach. This hypothesis was generally supported and its implications examined.     

WHAT WE SHOULD STUDY, PROBLEMS WE SHOULD SOLVE: PERSPECTIVES OF TWO CONSTITUENCIES

Qualitative data from management and non-management employees were content analyzed to assess their perceptions of what organizational problems they would most like academic researchers to study. These data are then compared to the publications that have appeared in empirical journals over ten journal years (Campbell, Daft, and Hulin, 1982). Results indicate: (1) specific problem areas health care practitioners want studied: (2) strong congruence between the interests of the management and non-management subsamples; and (3) areas where academicians are not meeting the research needs of this sample.     

WHAT SHOULD WE TREAT AS AN END IN ITSELF?

One formulation of the Categorical Imperative tells us to treat humanity as an end in itself. It has become common to think that ‘humanity’ (die Menschheit) here refers to some minimal power of rationality that is necessarily possessed by any rational agent, but I argue that this common reading is misguided. Instead, ‘humanity’ refers to a good will, the will of a being who is committed to moral principles. This good will reading of ‘humanity’ is not only suggested by passages in which Kant specifically discusses humanity, but also is more consistent with the main ideas of Kant's ethics.     

ON WHAT THERE IS

Abstract: This paper programmatically outlines a case for “nominalism”. If brown and colored are so related logically that being colored is nothing over and above being brown, then whatever “exists”other than concreta is nothing over and above concreta. Possibilities of rain and “universals” like the shape, circularity (= the logical possibility of being so shaped), lack “existence” in another sense. (“There are things that don't exist” shows that ‘there are’ is used even more broadly than ‘there exist’.) The univocity of ‘exist’ is disproved by “A prime number between 6 and 10 exists” being analytic despite the invalidity of ontological arguments.     

TRANSLATING WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE CONTEXT OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR INTO A LOWER PREVALENCE OF SUCH BEHAVIOR

Although we have identified many variables that affect antisocial behavior, there is no evidence that we have learned how to reduce the incidence of such behavior or the proportion of young people who repeatedly engage in antisocial behavior. It is appropriate, therefore, for behavioral scientists to turn some of their energies to research on reducing the incidence and prevalence of antisocial behavior. Small communities may be a particularly useful social unit in which to conduct experimental research. The interventions to be tested include advocacy and community organizing to influence communities to make validated school and clinical interventions widely available and to assist them in increasing other forms of supervision of young people and social and material support of families. Key components of advocacy and community organizing are suggested, and possibilities for research are described.     

PERSONHOOD AND CREATION IN AN AGE OF ROBOTS AND AI: CAN WE SAY “YOU” TO ARTIFACTS?

This article explores the extent to which the I-You relation should be applied to domains other than the human and the divine focusing particularly on artifacts and technology. Drawing first on the work of Martin Buber, Gabriel Marcel, and Martin Heidegger, I contend that the I-You tradition has maintained I-You relations with objects are possible even when these same figures level strong critiques of the I-It relation. I extend these discussions and argue that some kind of You-speaking for artifacts is needed to combat rampant consumption and reduction of the world to pure utility. But, I equally suggest that there are limitations to applying the I-You relation to artifacts precisely when doing so keeps us from having genuine relationships with other people as outlined by psychologist Sherry Turkle. Finally, I outline how this proposal impacts the doctrine of creation. In sum, it expands our intuitions of what is included in that doctrine creation.