Su búsqueda

En autores o colaboradores
  • (An earlier version of this chapter appears in K. Tirri and M. Ubani [eds.] [2007], Holistic Education and Giftedness.) In developed countries, education, like medical provision, is a key focus of social welfare. Recent years have seen a tendency to compare education to medicine in the call for evidence-based policy and practice (Hargreaves 1996; Slavin 2002). The problematical aspects of this are significant and have been explored elsewhere (Parlett and Hamilton 1987; Thomas 2004). In this chapter, I suggest an area for more fruitful comparison between the two domains: a consideration of how the ethical principles informing the medical profession might shed light on the ethics of gifted education. Since the time of Hippocrates, medical practitioners have been concerned to ground their activities in a set of ethical principles that govern the doctor-patient relationship and reflect wider conceptions of a good society. These principles may be grouped into four key areas: respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-malfeasance (doing no harm) and justice. I consider here the extent to which these principles overlap with and might inform the ethics of gifted education. In particular, I seek to identify and explore key ethical issues and tensions in gifted education related to them, including respect for autonomy—consent and the right to underachieve; beneficence—what good is done by gifted education, and to whom; non-malfeasance—the character and competing claims of potential harms to gifted students and others; and justice—equal rights for giftedness as a special educational need, distributive justice, and parity of esteem. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Última actualización de la base de datos: 2/10/26, 5:50 (CEST)

Explorar

Tipo de recurso

Año de publicación