Maximilian P. E. Groszmann’s alternative approach to the classification of “atypical” children in the early twentieth-century United States

Maximilian P. E. Groszmann’s alternative approach to the classification of “atypical” children in the early twentieth-century United States
复制标题

Maximilian P. E. Groszmann 对 20 世纪初美国“非典型”儿童分类的替代方法

DOI:
10.1080/00309230.2021.2013905
复制
发表时间:
2022
影响因子:
0.5
通讯作者:
Yoshii Ryo
Yoshii Ryo
中科院分区:
教育学4区
文献类型:
--
作者:
北畑彩子・吉井涼・松井 雄一;上山瑠津子・山田真世・森美智代・山西正記・吉井涼;吉井涼・北畑彩子・松井雄一;Yoshii Ryo

文献摘要

相似文献

对有资格接受特殊教育的学生的识别、诊断和分类引起了长期的争议。本文探讨马克西米利安·P.E.格罗兹曼的测量实践,旨在促进二十世纪初美国的教学。 1900 年,格罗兹曼为“非典型”儿童建立了一所私立寄宿学校,并开发了自己的测量这些儿童能力的方法,这是比奈量表的替代方法。 “非典型”儿童被定义为那些偏离平均人类类型但具有“正常”儿童潜力的儿童。因此,他们是被分为正常和异常之间的孩子。格罗兹曼的方法基于他的信念,即“非典型”儿童的发展与其社会环境密切相关。格罗兹曼对“非典型”儿童发展的整体看法促使他尝试以更广泛的视角来看待他们的困难、反应和经历。对于测量儿童的内容、地点以及原因等问题,格罗斯曼的回答与智力测试倡导者的不同。简而言之,他的方法旨在帮助孩子适应社会环境,而不是给他们贴上“非典型”或无社交能力的标签和分类。
The identification, diagnosis, and categorisation of students who qualified for special education have created long-standing controversy. This article explores Maximilian P.E. Groszmann’s measurement practices, which were intended to facilitate instruction in the early twentieth-century United States. In 1900, Groszmann established a private residential school for “atypical” children and developed his own method of measuring these children’s capabilities, an alternative to the Binet scale. “Atypical” children were defined as those who deviated from the average human type but had the potential of a “normal” child. Thus, they were children who were classified between normal and abnormal. Groszmann’s methods were based on his conviction that “atypical” children’s development was closely and intricately related to their social environment. His holistic perception of “atypical” children’s development led Groszmann to try to take a wider view of their difficulties, reactions, and experiences. Groszmann’s answers to the questions of what, where, and why to measure children differed from those of advocates of intelligence testing. In short, his methods were intended to help children adapt to their social environment, not to label and sort them as “atypical” or socially incapable.