The University of Texas at Tyler’s doctoral program in human resource development is designed to develop scholars who will advance the profession and serve as leaders in higher education, government and industry.
Advanced Theoretical Foundations of HRD – Complete a review and assessment of human resource development theories and the scholarly process that is required to develop sound theory in applied disciplines.
The great promise of human needs theory, in Burton's view, was that it would provide a relatively objective basis, transcending local political and cultural differences, for understanding the sources of conflict, designing conflict resolution processes, and founding conflict analysis and resolution as an autonomous discipline. The importance of this ambitious project is now generally recognized by conflict theorists, whether they agree with Burton or not (see Fisher, 1997; Avruch, 1998; Jeong, 2000). This essay will suggest some ways in which the project has succeeded, some ways in which it has fallen short, and some possible avenues for further theory development.
Gardner concluded from his work with these two populations that strength in one area of performance did not reliably predict comparable strength in another area. With this intuitive conclusion in mind, Gardner set about studying intelligence in a systematic, multi-disciplinary, and scientific manner, drawing from psychology, biology, neurology, sociology, anthropology, and the arts and humanities. This resulted in the emergence of his Theory of Multiple Intelligences (MI Theory) as presented in Frames of Mind (1983). Since the publication of that work, Gardner and others have continued to research the theory and its implications for education in general, curriculum development, teaching, and assessment. For the purposes of this Hot Topic, the focus will be on a description of the theory, major criticisms, and the implications for assessment.
I now have a better understanding on the history of human resources development, the different theories and philosophies of HRD, and skills pertaining to analyzing an organization’s human assets and the processes related to human capital development.
In Burton acknowledged his debt to Paul Sites, whose (1973) defined eight essential needs whose satisfaction was required in order to produce "normal" (non-deviant, non-violent) individual behaviour. According to Sites, these included the primary needs for consistency of response, stimulation, security, and recognition, and derivative needs for justice, meaning, rationality, and control. Sites, in turn, recognized the importance of Abraham Maslow's conception of human development as the sequential satisfaction of basic needs, which Maslow (1954) had grouped under five headings: physiological, safety, belongingness/love, esteem, and self-actualisation. The idea that humans qua humans have needs whose satisfaction is the effective antidote to alienation is considerably older than this, of course, as Karl Marx's youthful reflections on Hegel suggest:
For Burton, the concept of basic human needs offered a possible method of grounding the field of conflict analysis and resolution (which he and a few other pioneers had essentially improvised during the 1960s) in a defensible theory of the person. Together with other peace researchers (see Lederer and Galtung, 1980; Coate and Rosati, 1988; and the writers represented in Burton, 1990b), he set out to reframe the concept in order to provide the new field with a convincing alternative to the prevailing paradigms of postwar social science: mechanistic utilitarianism, behaviourism, cultural relativism, and Hobbesian "Realism." In Burton's view, the needs most salient to an understanding of destructive social conflicts were those for identity, recognition, security, and personal development. Over time, however, he tended to emphasize the failure of existing state systems to satisfy the need for identity as the primary source of modern ethno-nationalist struggles.
Learning has always been debated in the context of when does the learning start in human development, Is learning the result of nature taking its course as was argued by rationalist like Plato and Rene Descartes.
Does this mean that there are no universal (i.e., genuinely "human") needs? Not necessarily. Biologizing (or "ontologizing") needs forecloses the inquiry that should be made into the extent to which certain needs are becoming universal as a global culture comes painfully and convulsively into existence. It also forecloses other necessary inquiries: for example, into the relationship between childhood and adult behaviour. Is the adult's quest for political identity, say, a natural extension of the child's needs to bond with and differentiate itself from its parents (see Clark, in Burton, 1990b, pp. 34-59)? Or is it a regression symptomatic of incomplete or interrupted child development? Similarly, does the alleged need for "sacred meaning" postulated by Mary Clark spring from human nature, perhaps as a further development of the child's need for "consistency of response" (see Sites in Burton, 1990b, pp. 7-33)? Or, as Freud suggests in The Future of an Illusion (1989), is it merely evidence of some individuals' failure to "grow up"?
Other criticisms include the notion that MI theory is not empirical, is incompatible with g, heritability, and environmental influences, and broadens the construct of intelligence so widely as to render it meaningless. Gardner (1995) staunchly defends the empiricism of the theory by referring to the numerous laboratory and field data that contributed to its development and the ongoing re-conceptualization of the theory based on new scientific data. Regarding the claim that Multiple Intelligences theory cannot accommodate g, Gardner argues that g has a scientific place in intelligence theory but that he is interested in understanding intellectual processes that are not explained by g. In response to the criticism that MI theory is incompatible with genetic or environmental accounts of the nature of intelligence, Gardner states that his theory is most concerned with the interaction between genetics and the environment in understanding intelligence. Finally, the notion that MI theory has expanded the definition of intelligence beyond utility produces a strong reaction from Gardner. He argues passionately that the narrow definition of intelligence as equal to scholastic performance is simply too constrictive. In his view, MI theory is about the intellectual and cognitive aspects of the human mind. Gardner is careful to point out that MI theory is not a theory of personality, morality, motivation, or any other psychological construct (1995, 1999a, 1999b).
The two most widely used standardized tests of intelligence are the Wechsler scales and the Stanford-Binet. Both instruments are psychometrically sound, but Gardner believes that these tests measure only linguistic and logical/mathematical intelligences, with a narrow focus within content in those domains. According to Gardner, the current psychometric approach for measuring intelligence is not sufficient. In his view, assessment must cast a wider net to measure human cognitive abilities more accurately. Gardner (1993) proposes several improvements for the development of intelligence measures. Before enumerating those improvements, it is important to understand how Gardner defines assessment. In his view, the purpose of assessment should be to obtain information about the skills and potentials of individuals, and provide useful feedback to the individuals and the community at large. Furthermore, Gardner (1993) draws a distinction between testing and assessment. Assessment elicits information about an individual's abilities in the context of actual performance rather than by proxy using formal instruments in a de-contextualized setting.