Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- Creators: Arizona State University
Description
This philosophical inquiry explores the work of philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari and posits applications to music education. Through the concepts of multiplicities, becoming, bodies without organs, smooth spaces, maps, and nomads, Deleuze and Guattari challenge prior and current understandings of existence. In their writings on art, education, and how might one live, they assert a world consisting of variability and motion. Drawing on Deleuze and Guattari's emphasis on time and difference, I posit the following questions: Who and when are we? Where are we? When is music? When is education? Throughout this document, their philosophical figuration of a rhizome serves as a recurring theme, highlighting the possibilities of complexity, diverse connections, and continual processes. I explore the question "When and where are we?" by combining the work of Deleuze and Guattari with that of other authors. Drawing on these ideas, I posit an ontology of humans as inseparably cognitive, embodied, emotional, social, and striving multiplicities. Investigating the question "Where are we?" using Deleuze and Guattari's writings as well as that of contemporary place philosophers and other writers reveals that humans exist at the continually changing confluence of local and global places. In order to engage with the questions "When is music?" and "When is education?" I inquire into how humans as cognitive, embodied, emotional, social, and striving multiplicities emplaced in a glocalized world experience music and education. In the final chapters, a philosophy of music education consisting of the ongoing, interconnected processes of complicating, considering, and connecting is proposed. Complicating involves continually questioning how humans' multiple inseparable qualities and places integrate during musical and educative experiences. Considering includes imagining the multiple directions in which connections might occur as well as contemplating the quality of potential connections. Connecting involves assisting students in forming variegated connections between themselves, their multiple qualities, and their glocal environments. Considering a rhizomatic philosophy of music education includes continually engaging in the integrated processes of complicating, considering, and connecting. Through such ongoing practices, music educators can promote flourishing in the lives of students and the experiences of their multiple communities.
ContributorsRicherme, Lauren Kapalka (Author) / Stauffer, Sandra (Thesis advisor) / Gould, Elizabeth (Committee member) / Schmidt, Margaret (Committee member) / Sullivan, Jill (Committee member) / Tobias, Evan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Efforts to privilege STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) disciplines, initiatives, and industries in American discourse are arguably the foremost expressions of scientific authority in contemporary educational policy. Citing a diverse body of STEM literature, I discuss the histories and rationales that sustain the promotion of STEM. In doing so, I appropriate two concepts -Michel Foucault's Regime of Truth and Hayden White's Emplotment- for the purpose of analyzing the complex interests embodied by STEM discourse. I argue that the Sputnik Narrative is the prevailing story in STEM advocacy discourse. I claim that STEM advocates typically emplot this history as a Romance. Furthermore, I classify two major bases of appeal (rationales) that appear within this literature to justify STEM projects and proposals, "competition" and "equity." Throughout my writing, I cite discursive strategies for challenging and reimagining STEM history. My goal in indicating these sites of narrative possibilities is broaden the discursive field to new, perhaps liberating possibilities.
ContributorsGeldis, Christopher (Author) / Harris, Lauren M (Thesis advisor) / Lyon, Edward (Committee member) / Greenes, Carole (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
This project offers an exploration of the constitution of English language learners (ELLs) in the state of Arizona as subjects of government through the discursive rationalities of rule that unfolded alongside the Flores v. Arizona case. The artifacts under consideration span the 22 years (1992-2014) of Flores' existence so far. These artifacts include published academic scholarship; Arizona's legislative documents and floor debate audio and video; court summaries, hearings, and decisions; and public opinion texts found in newspapers and online, all of which were produced in response to Flores. These artifacts lay bare but some of the discursive rationalities that have coagulated to form governable elements of the ELL student population--ways of knowing them, measuring them, regarding them, constituting them, and intervening upon them. Somehow, some way, students who do not speak English as their first language have become a social problem to be solved. ELLs are therein governed by rationalities of English language normalization, of enterprise, of entrepreneurship, of competition, of empowerment, and of success. In narrating rationalities of rule that appear alongside the Flores case, I locate some governmental strategies in how subjects conduct themselves and govern the conduct of others with the hope that seeing subject constitution as a work of thought and not a necessary reality will create a space for potentially unknown alternatives. Through this work, I'd like to make possible the hope of thinking data differently, rejecting superimposition of meaning onto artifact, being uncomfortable, uncertain, undefinitive, and surprised. With that, this work encourages potential paths to trod in the field of curriculum studies.
ContributorsThomas, Melinda Arlene Hollis (Author) / Carlson, David Lee (Thesis advisor) / Malewski, Erik (Committee member) / Fischman, Gustavo (Committee member) / Brass, Jory (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The need for a critical education in a democracy, its difficulties, and how to reform this field requires urgent attention. This project begins with the premise that education is necessary for a vibrant democracy. While examining differing voices that advocate for educational reform, mainly that of Critical Pedagogy, it is shown how conflicting forms are advocating similar ideals. Henry Giroux and David Horowitz, both reformers that are on opposite sides of the political spectrum appear to have similar goals. Yet, the question becomes how to solve these differences between these parties? By examining the philosophical origins of these projects and explicating differences rooted in human nature and the good, the basic differences can begin to be shown. In showing these differences it requires going back to the work of Kant. Kant shows the necessity of beginning with philosophy and examining basic assumptions in order to begin to critique and build an education that would guarantee equality.
ContributorsNolen, Matthew (Author) / Wise, Greg (Thesis advisor) / Anderson, Owen (Committee member) / Ramsey, Ramsey (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
The landscape of science education is changing. Scientific research and the academy are both becoming increasingly complex, competitive, interdisciplinary, and international. Many federal research agencies, scientific professional societies, and science educators seem to agree on the importance of strong ethics education to help young scientists navigate this increasingly craggy terrain. But, what actually should be done? When it comes to teaching ethics to future scientists, is the apparent current emphasis on basic responsible conduct of research (RCR) sufficient, or should moral theory also be taught in science ethics education? In this thesis I try engage this question by focusing on an existing, related debate on whether moral theory should be part of teaching professional ethics more generally. After delving into the respective approaches promoted by the three primary participants in this debate (C. E. Harris, Bernard Gert, and Michael Davis) I unpack their views in order to ascertain their practical application potential and relative benefits. I then take these findings and apply them to ethics education in science, paying particular attention to its purported learning objectives. In the end I conclude that the presentation of these objectives suggests that moral theory may well be required in order for these objectives of ethics education in science to be fully achieved.
ContributorsMilleson, Valerye Michelle (Author) / Robert, Jason (Thesis advisor) / Herkert, Joseph (Committee member) / Ellison, Karin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014