|
|
|
|
CONTRIBUTORS:
|
|
|
JOURNAL:
|
|
|
YEAR:
|
1985
|
|
PUB TYPE:
|
Journal Article
|
|
SUBJECT(S):
|
PHYSICAL-EDUCATION; GRADUATE-STUDY; UNITED-STATES; EVALUATION; FUTUROLOGY; ADMINISTRATION
|
|
DISCIPLINE:
|
No discipline assigned
|
|
HTTP:
|
|
|
LANGUAGE:
|
English
|
|
PUB ID:
|
103-366-912
(Last edited on
2002/02/27 18:44:58 US/Mountain)
|
|
SPONSOR(S):
|
|
|
ABSTRACT:
The cummulative effect of pressures such as: (1) a movement towards the human sciences, (2) the demand for vocationalism and (3) decreased funding has brought about the evaluating of existing programs and the potential reallocation of resources. This article discusses the strategy adopted by physical education graduate program administrators to meet the evaluation criteria of (1) demand, (2) excellence and (3) centrality. The approach of allying with a cognate discipline is argued to have had an opposite effect and actually exposed the weaknesses of physical education programs. An alternative strategy of defining a conceptual basis upon which graduate programs could be a consistent reflection, and to move away from a cognate discipline approach, is strongly recommended.
|
|
|
|
STATISTICS
|
|
Click on # to view
|
|
Citations
|
|
0
|
|
References
|
|
0
|
|
Comments
|
|
0
|
|
Quality
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
Interest
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
View(er)s
|
|
3/449
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Prev |
Next |
|
