Least dangerous assumption: Difference between revisions
Removed opinion to make it less essay like [NOTEssay], added extra context at the beginning. All assertions about this pedagogic concept are now reported, in the style of an encyclopedia, and from secondary sources. the writing is entirely factual. |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
<!-- Inline citations added to your article will automatically display here. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:REFB for instructions on how to add citations. --> |
<!-- Inline citations added to your article will automatically display here. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:REFB for instructions on how to add citations. --> |
||
{{reflist}} |
{{reflist}} |
||
{{AFC submission|||ts=20191111202614|u=Iorek100|ns=118}} |
|||
Revision as of 20:26, 11 November 2019
 | This article, Least dangerous assumption, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |
Comment: This reads like journal article abstracts / excerpts. Needs context as to what this is about. See WP:NOTJOURNAL AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
The 'criterion of the least dangerous assumption' encapsulates an orientation to pedagogy and to educational policy (in particular as pertaining to inclusion). It holds that, 'in the absence of conclusive data educational decisions should be based on assumptions which, if incorrect, will have the least dangerous effect on the student'[1]. The principle is most closely associated with the areas of intellectual disability and communication disorder, although it can be applied more generally in the domain of learning and teaching[2], and beyond. In most contexts in which it is used the principle holds that one should, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, presume competence, rather than non-competence, in others.
The 'presumption of competence'[3] can be regarded as the 'least dangerous' assumption to make about a person because, the principle holds, it is less damaging to presume competence in another, and to be wrong, than it is to presume non-competence (incompetence) in another, and to be wrong[4]. Take the example of a teacher who is uncertain about the extent to which a given student understands what is said to them. The principle holds that it is less dangerous to assume that the student understands everything that is said to them, and to be wrong about that, than to assume that the student understands nothing that is said to them, and to be wrong in that direction[5]. Under the latter assumption the risk is that the teacher speaks too little to the student (or, in an extreme form of the argument, the teacher may not speak to the student al all). Under the former assumption the risk is that the teacher will speak too much to the student, which, advocates of this approach maintain, is less 'dangerous'[6].
The principle comes into play in educational policy and teaching practice under conditions of uncertainty ('in the absence of conclusive data'). Debate on the usefulness of the principle revolves around the question of what constitutes 'conclusive data'[7] when it comes to making complex educational decisions.
References
- ^ Donnellan, A. M. (1984). The Criterion of the Least Dangerous Assumption. Behavioral Disorders, 9(2), 141–150. p.142.
- ^ Emerson, A. (2016). Applying the ‘least dangerous assumption’ in regard to behaviour policies and children with special needs. Pastoral Care in Education, 34(2), 104–109.
- ^ Dotger, S. (2011). Exploring new territories: My trajectory toward becoming an inclusive science teacher educator. Reflective Practice, 12(3), 415–426. p.422.
- ^ Ballard, K. (1993). The least dangerous assumption: A response to Jordan & Powell. Disability, Handicap & Society, 8(1), 87–89.
- ^ Emerson, A., & Dearden, J. (2013). The effect of using ‘full’ language when working with a child with autism: Adopting the ‘least dangerous assumption’. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 29(2), 233–244.
- ^ Doyle, M. B., & Giangreco, M. (2013). Guiding Principles for Including High School Students with Intellectual Disabilities in General Education Classes. American Secondary Education, 42(1), 57–72.
- ^ Travers, J., & Ayres, K. M. (2015). A Critique of Presuming Competence of Learners with Autism or Other Developmental Disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 50(4), 371–387.
| This article, Least dangerous assumption, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |