Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Review of Educational Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kagan, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Articles

Teaching as Clinical Problem Solving: A Critical Examination of the Analogy and Its Implications

Dona M. Kagan

California State University, San Bernardino

In 1974, when research on teachers’ cognitions became a major focus of inquiry, teaching, like the practice of medicine, was described as a form of clinical problem solving. The concept of clinical problem solving was invoked primarily in terms of its traditional definition: the diagnosis and treatment of dysfunction. Today, after 14 years of studying teachers’ cognitions, educational researchers are beginning to provide models of classroom teaching that reflect a very different, hierarchical kind of clinical problem solving. Empirical models of each kind of clinical problem solving (diagnosis/treatment vs. hierarchical) are described and compared, as a means of evaluating the distance researchers of teachers’ cognitions have traveled. The author suggests that the transition from the initial to the newer model represents a shift in perspective that has effectively moved teaching farther from science and closer to art. The implications of this shift are discussed in terms of how pre- and inservice teachers are evaluated and trained.

Review of Educational Research, Vol. 58, No. 4, 482-505 (1988)
DOI: 10.3102/00346543058004482


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional ChildrenHome page
L. P. Blanton
Preservice Education: Essential Knowledge for the Effective Special Education Teacher
Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, April 1, 1992; 15(2): 87 - 96.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
A. Cumming
Expertise in evaluating second language compositions
Language Testing, June 1, 1990; 7(1): 31 - 51.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHHome page
D. M. Kagan
Ways of Evaluating Teacher Cognition: Inferences Concerning the Goldilocks Principle
Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1990; 60(3): 419 - 469.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERHome page
D. M Kagan
The Heuristic Value of Regarding Classroom Instruction as an Aesthetic Medium
Educational Researcher, August 1, 1989; 18(6): 11 - 18.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Teacher EducationHome page
J. M. Clark
Reconciliation of Data on Aptitude Test Scores and University Grades of Teachers
Journal of Teacher Education, July 1, 1989; 40(4): 49 - 52.
[Abstract]



RER home page AER home page EPA home page JEB home page RRE home page