Search

We conducted an ontological exploration of how teachers at special-needs schools establish social interaction with students with ASD. A total of five fieldwork studies were conducted in a “Food Production” class at a special-needs high school from December 20xx to February 20xx+1. We observed and videotaped scenes of social interaction between teacher A and teacher B and X, a third-year high school student with ASD. From the recordings, we compiled a total of 10 minutes of video clips that recorded “disturbance” situations, which we used to conduct two interviews with the target teachers. The interview data were analyzed with reference to Benner’s method of interpretive phenomenological analysis. From this it emerged that the target teachers were more concerned with generating an appropriate “frame” than with student development. In addition, it became clear that the target teachers’ expertise was applied to creating a “frame” that was a good fit with the intentions and characteristics of various subjects, such as the target teacher and the target student, and with the “objects” involved in the interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to Heidegger (1889-1976), the most primordial unity of a people is founded upon poetry. He claims Hölderlin (1770-1843) to be the greatest poet for the Germans. For the Chinese, it is Li Bai 李白 (701-762) who enjoys this status. This paper aims to show that Li’s poems signify a “harmonious response” to dao 道. They can hence be characterized as the poetry of dao. More specifically, such poetry can concretely exemplify Heidegger’s thesis that “Language is the house of Being” in Chinese. Structurally, this paper starts with a clarification of Heidegger’s Hölderlin interpretation and then, by means of comparison, will work out the essential characteristics of Li’s poetry of dao. Finally, as Heidegger sees Hölderlin’s poetry as being constitutive of “German-ness,” we argue that Li’s poetry of dao is representative of “Chinese-ness.” [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Management Philosophy is the property of Academy of Management Philosophy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)