CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …

Tiêu đề

Kinesiology in the liberal arts

Tác giả

Charles J.M.

Năm xuất bản

1992

Source title

Quest

Số trích dẫn

DOI

10.1080/00336297.1992.10484045

Liên kết

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-33748350386&doi=10.1080%2f00336297.1992.10484045&partnerID=40&md5=73e28243181ad39ec3eaba32e8ceedac

Tóm tắt

Until recently, physical education and the liberal arts have taken divergent courses. The resurgence of the field as a cross-disciplinary study of human movement may revitalize the position of kinesiology in the liberal arts college. This paper assesses the nature of the liberal arts in higher education and suggests ways a kinesiology curriculum may be honed to the specifications of that model. The question of curricular centrality is a vital issue, particularly in times of recessionary budgets. Until a program of study reflects the knowledge objectives and imparts the skills dear to its parent institution, it will remain endangered. As the American Academy of Physical Education and others succeed in pushing open the window of opportunity, we may be greeted by a fresh breeze of intellectual integrity; institutions, each espousing their unique goals, may seek common ground and mutual growth. © 1992 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Từ khóa

Tài liệu tham khảo

Resolution on kinesiology, The Academy Papers, 23, (1990); Apple M., Ideology and Curriculum, (1979); Bain L., Further reactions to Newell: Knowledge as contested terrain, Quest, 43, pp. 214-217, (1991); Berger P., Berger B., Kellner H., The Homeless Mind, (1974); Charles J., Technocentric ideology in physical education, Quest, 31, pp. 277-284, (1979); General Education Purpose Statement, (1988); Corbin C.B., Further reactions to Newell: Becoming a field is more than saying we are one, Quest, 43, pp. 224-229, (1991); Freire P., Pedagogy of the Oppressed, (1970); Gulick L.H., Physical Education: A New Profession., pp. 59-66, (1890); Harris J., Suited up and stripped down: Perspectives for sociocultural sport studies, Sociology of Sport Journal, 6, pp. 335-347, (1989); Henry F.M., Physical education: An academic discipline, Journal of Health, Physical Education & Recreation, 35, pp. 32-33, (1964); Lawson H.A., The multiversity and issues of discipline, profession, and centrality, Quest, 41, pp. 68-80, (1989); Locke L.F., Conjuring kinesiology and other political parlor tricks, Quest, 42, pp. 323-329, (1990); McKay J., Gore J.M., Kirk D., Beyond the limits of technocratic physical education, Quest, 42, pp. 52-76, (1990); Newell K.M., Kinesiology: Further commentary on the field of study, Quest, 42, pp. 335-342, (1990); Newell K.M., Kinesiology: The label for the study of physical activity in higher education, Quest, 42, pp. 269-278, (1990); Newell K.M., Physical activity, knowledge types, and degree programs, Quest, 42, pp. 243-268, (1990); Newell K.M., Physical education in higher education: Chaos out of order, Quest, 42, pp. 227-242, (1990); Park R., The second 100 years: Or, can physical education become the Renaissance field of the 21st century?, Quest, 41, pp. 1-27, (1989); Wade M.G., Further reactions to Newell: Unravelling the Larry and Darryl magical mystery tour, Quest, 43, pp. 207-213, (1991)