Search - The Annie E. Casey Foundation
A Brief History of Federal Funding for More …
According to the second objection to DJ, deontological justificationdoes not tend to ‘epistemize’ true beliefs: it does not tendto make them non-accidentally true. This claim is typically supportedby describing cases involving either a benighted, culturally isolatedsociety or subjects who are cognitively deficient. Such cases involvebeliefs that are claimed to be epistemically defective even though itwould not seem that the subjects in these cases are under anyobligation to refrain from believing as they do. What makes the beliefsin question epistemically defective is that they are formed usingunreliable and intellectually faulty methods. The reason why thesubjects, from their own point of view, are not obliged to believeotherwise is that they are either cognitively deficient or live in abenighted and isolated community. DJ says that such beliefs arejustified. If they meet the remaining necessary conditions,DJ-theorists would have to count them as knowledge. According to theobjection, however, the beliefs in question, even if true, could notpossibly qualify as knowledge, due to the epistemically defective waythey were formed. Consequently, DJ must be rejected.
Sociocultural Approaches to Learning and Development:
To round off this discussion of curriculum we do need to pay further attention to the social context in which it is created. One criticism that has been made of the praxis model (especially as it is set out by Grundy) is that it does not place a strong enough emphasis upon context. This is a criticism that can also be laid at the door of the other approaches. In this respect the work of Catherine Cornbleth (1990) is of some use. She sees curriculum as a particular type of process. Curriculum for her is what actually happens in classrooms, that is, ‘an ongoing social process comprised of the interactions of students, teachers, knowledge and milieu’ (1990: 5). In contrast, Stenhouse defines curriculum as the attempt to describe what happens in classrooms rather than what actually occurs. Cornbleth further contends that curriculum as practice cannot be understood adequately or changed substantially without attention to its setting or context. Curriculum is contextually shaped. While I may quibble about the simple equation of curriculum with process, what Cornbleth does by focusing on the interaction is to bring out the significance of context.