No description available.

京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(経済学) / 甲第24307号 / 経博第659号 / 新制||経||302(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院経済学研究科経済学専攻 / (主査)准教授 WANG Tao, 教授 澤邉 紀生, 教授 山内 裕, 准教授 Thinley Tharchen / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Economics / Kyoto University / DGAM

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The events of the Bunkerville standoff and the Malheur wildlife refuge occupation were both important confrontations with the government by the western land rights movement. Participants in and responders to the events engage in distinct moral judgments and rationales. Utilizing cultural schema analysis and moral foundations theory (MFT), I explored the differences in rationales and judgments made by participants and responders in their explicit, public moral discourses of both events. My analysis indicates that responders and participants defined and utilized the same moral foundations, but in distinct ways. Participants were more diverse in their invocation of moral foundations while responders centralized on judgments/rationales centered on harm/care and authority/subversion. I argue that the insights of content differences in construction/usage of moral foundations are a key contribution to the literature and usage of MFT. I further argue that future research on moral judgments utilizing MFT should endeavor to specify the moral and rational content of how moral foundations are employed, rather than simply documenting their distributions.

A person’s microcultures—including various traits, values, experiences, and beliefs—influence identities and help individuals make sense of the world. The intersection of an individual’s microcultures (how microcultures interact and influence each other), such as disability, race, language, gender identity, sexuality, and religion, plays a key role in educating students with disabilities.

Evidence-based interventions address a specific context, and because of this narrowed specificity, there may not be sufficient research to determine whether it will work in a specific context or with a specific population of students. This is a limitation of the empirically supported interventions in the field of special education. Compared to other fields (e.g., health care), research in the field of special education is still emerging. Some areas are researched far more than others. As an example, this issue is focused specifically on arts and education. Although many would argue this is an important topic that should be addressed in schools and a content area students with disabilities should have access to, there is limited research in this area. On the other hand, other academic interventions to support students with disabilities, such as reading strategies, are well researched [...]

Evidence-based interventions address a specific context, and because of this narrowed specificity, there may not be sufficient research to determine whether it will work in a specific context or with a specific population of students. This is a limitation of the empirically supported interventions in the field of special education. Compared to other fields (e.g., health care), research in the field of special education is still emerging. Some areas are researched far more than others. As an example, this issue is focused specifically on arts and education. Although many would argue this is an important topic that should be addressed in schools and a content area students with disabilities should have access to, there is limited research in this area. On the other hand, other academic interventions to support students with disabilities, such as reading strategies, are well researched [...]