Sammanfattning Syftet med studien är att belysa det specialpedagogiska uppdraget ur ett socialkonstruktivistiskt perspektiv.  Historiskt sett har det specialpedagogiska uppdraget förändrats i takt med politik och utbildningskultur, vilket kan ha inneburit svårigheter med att befästa en yrkesgrupp.  Det kan också innebära att det finns otydligheter kring uppdraget, vilket i sin tur möjliggör olika tolkningar utifrån personlighet och kontext. I denna studie studeras det specialpedagogiska uppdraget genom samtal med några personer som innehar specialpedagogisk kompetens. Tanken är att försöka förstå det specialpedagogiska uppdraget med inspiration från Berger och Luckmanns (2010) tresidiga modell, som innebär att institutioner genomgår en rad processer för att slutligen bli socialt accepterade. Institutioner i detta sammanhang kan vara en yrkesgrupp eller en arbetsfördelning. Berger och Luckmann använder sig av termer som externalisering, objektivering och slutligen internalisering. När en internalisering har skett är också något socialt accepterat. Samtalen i studien kan beskrivas som en ostrukturerad intervju, då intervjuerna är upplagda utifrån olika kategorier. Ahlefeld Nissers (2009) kunskapande samtal har funnits med som en inspiration i intervjuerna, då vi kan mötas som likvärdiga och med ömsesidig respekt. Det specialpedagogiska uppdraget beskrivs av respondenterna som svårtolkat och i samtalen framkom olika dilemman som försvårar i exempelvis mötet med övriga pedagoger En slutsats är att det saknas en nationell tydlighet kring det specialpedagogiska uppdraget vilket kan betyda att uppdraget konstrueras genom egna erfarenheter och omgivningens behov. Utifrån respondenternas berättelse i denna studie framkommer flera olika processer som tyder på att mycket i det specialpedagogiska uppdraget inte är internaliserat det vill säga, helt accepterat av omgivningen. / Abstract The purpose of the study is to elucidate the special education assignment from a social constructivist perspective. Historically, the special education assignment has changed in line with politics and the culture of education, which may have entailed difficulties in consolidating a professional group. It can also mean that there are ambiguities about the assignment, which in turn enables different interpretations based on personality and context. In this study, the special pedagogical assignment is studied through conversations with some persons who have special pedagogical competence. The idea is to try to understand the special education assignment inspired by Berger and Luckmann's (2010) three-sided model, which means that institutions undergo a series of processes to finally become socially accepted. Institutions in this context may be a professional group or a division of labor. Berger and Luckmann use terms such as externalization, objectification and finally internalization. When an internalization has taken place, something is socially accepted as well. The interviews in the study can be described as an unstructured interview, since the interviews are arranged according to different categories. Ahlefeld Nisser's (2009) knowledgeable conversation has been an inspiration in the interviews, since we can meet as equals and with mutual respect. The special education assignment is described by the respondents as difficult to interpret, and in the conversations various dilemmas emerged that are difficult in, for example, the meeting with other educators. Based on the respondents' story in this study, several different processes emerge which indicate that much in the special education assignment is not internalized, that is, fully accepted by the environment.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This study assessed how Constructivist theory accounts for verbal dominance. Conversations of rotating dyads were tape recorded, then coded for measures of dominance. Subjects completed a trait dominance scale and a constructivist personality test. Interpersonal rankings of dominance were found to be more consistent with observed behavior than trait dominance scores. Extreme trait dominance scores were associated with a constructivist measure indicating maladjustment. Dyads identified as more resistant to change were found to use fewer verbal control strategies; male/male dyads were characterized by direct, functional interactions. Dyads that were highly comfortable with one another utilized fewer verbal control methods. Lastly, interactions in which participants reported unfamiliar self-experiencing utilized higher levels of verbal control. Implications for group processing, assessment of dominance and sex differences are discussed.

My research provides an account of evaluating my mentoring practice using an Action Research design complemented by a mixed methods approach and the Hermann Whole Brain® Model (Herrmann, 1995). I explored how I can transform my mentoring practice using the principles of Whole Brain® thinking and how I can contribute to enriching the professional development of academic staff. My research has proceeded from an innovative idea and existing practice as an asset-based approach (Du Toit, 2009). By utilising an Action Research design my research articulates the construction of my understanding of mentoring of other academic staff in their professional practice. I followed a constructivist approach as used by Piaget (1952, 1970) that is considered an appropriate epistemological underpinning of Action Research. My research design shows thinking style flexibility as an action researcher in that I have drawn on each quadrant of the Whole Brain® Theory as developed by Herrmann (1995). This enabled me to construct meaning with my peer mentees through the assessing of practice-based evidence, engagement and reflection. As my goal in mentoring is to assist in developing independent reflexive practitioners, I have chosen to use the constructs contribute to and catalyse to express my awareness that responsibility for professional development remains with the individual and that a mentor is not the only source of professional development in the context of a Private Higher Education Institution. I have found that my peer mentees have differing thinking style preferences and varying professional experiences that required of me to engage with each in distinct ways to support the development of their professional practices. I position Whole Brain® Mentoring as a practice of mentoring that utilises multiple strategies for professional learning, both formal and non-formal, to engage the thinking preferences and disinclinations of mentees to catalyse the professional development of both the mentor and mentees. Many of my peer mentees perceive themselves as mentors, both of students and, in some cases, of other academic staff (our peers) as well. There is evidence that I utilise multiple strategies to facilitate professional learning and contribute to the professional development of peer mentees and that they have contributed to mine. My research provides evidence that I have become a more reflective practitioner, able to transform my Whole Brain® Mentoring Practice. / Dissertation (MEd)--University of Pretoria, 2014. / tm2015 / Humanities Education / MEd / Unrestricted

The aim of this article is to present a learning theory (constructivist theory) that supports and explains a lot of the requested changes in entrepreneurship education. It also explains how entrepreneurs learn and serves as a basis for designing entrepreneurship programs. If we look at the ‘skills’ and competencies of entrepreneurs from a constructivist’s perspective we find most of them by observing children under the age of five or six: they are motivated to learn, they are interested in a variety of different topics, they ask excellent questions, they try many things to get insights, they are creative, they are impatient. In short, they create and govern their own learning process, which is open for any content, style, goal, experience, etc., and allows them to take every opportunity to answer the question in concern. In this sense it is similar to the entrepreneurial process where the entrepreneur tries everything and is ready to learn what is needed to be successful.

In 2015 the Swedish Foreign Minister announced that the foreign policy would be feminist. This thesis aims to advance an understanding of the process of institutionalizing feminism in the Swedish foreign policy statements and the effects this has had on Swedish foreign policy priorities. Through a combined approach of constructivist and feminist theory, it is argued that while areas related to feminism, such as women, gender, and equality, have been institutionalizing over the last two decades, the introduction of overt feminism has increased resistance. By drawing on institutionalization theory, gender mainstreaming, and hegemonic masculinity it is revealed how ‘adding women’ has been the main approach but that the use of ‘feminism’ has challenged the hegemonic masculinity embedded in foreign policy. The thesis concludes that aspects of feminism have been institutionalized, however, feminism as a structure is still at its emerging stage internationally. Moreover, it is discussed how the relationship between national and international political spheres affect the institutionalization process of norms cyclically.

Where post-GDP, a socio-ecological substitute of GDP, has become increasingly salient within international relations, its practice at an institutional economic level remains largely marginalised. At a discursive level, however, both GDP and post-GDP appear to be both supplementary and antithetical to one another. This thesis investigates this relationship between GDP and post-GDP discourse, as well as the dependency of economic institutions to exercise such a discourse. Constructivist institutionalism initially frames these economic ideas as both constitutive and antagonistic towards institutional stability. This thesis, however, draws primarily upon institutional poststructuralism, articulating GDP/post-GDP discourse, not the agent, as a mechanism that produces economic knowledge and, by association, the institutions that are shaped by it. A two-part analysis takes place, consisting of an historical genealogy of GDP/post-GDP and a discourse logics analysis between the IMF development committee and the economic departments of India and surrounding countries. The findings show that the formative discourse of GDP and post-GDP had become divorced during the 20th century and that while GDP logics often struggle to reconcile requisite development outcomes, economic institutions exercise the two as a unitary discourse; albeit one that maintains a GDP centre.