BY: ABDULLAH Educational psychology is the study of how humans learn in educational settings, the effectiveness of educational interventions, the psychology of teaching, and the social psychology of schools as organizations. Educational psychology is concerned with how students learn and develop, and often focusing on subgroups such as gifted children and those subject to the Disabled. According Muhibin Shah (2002), understanding of educational psychology is a discipline that investigates the psychology of the psychological problems that occur in the world of education. Meanwhile, according to the American Encyclopedia, Definition of educational psychology is the science that is more principled in the teaching process involved with the discovery - discovery and applying the principles - principles and ways to improve keefisien in education. Meanwhile, according to Witherington, Understanding educational psychology is the systematic study of the processes and factors related to human education. Tardif (in Shah, 1997: 13) also says that the definition of Educational Psychology is a field of study related to the application of knowledge of human behavior to educational efforts. From a few opinions about educational psychology, we conclude that the definition of Educational Psychology is the study of human behavior in the world of education that includes a systematic study of the processes and factors related to human education that aim to develop and improve keefisien in in education. Understanding the term 1 For that, first of all I need to say that the term Mental Revolution is widely used in the history of thought, management, political history and even the history of music. Good use of it happening in the West and the East, both by thinkers of Islam, Christianity, Hinduism or (Zen) Buddhism. Bung Karno has ever used the term in a speech August 17, 1956. 2 The term mental is the name for the pool of all things related to the way of life - for example: mentality of the times. In the way of life there is a way of thinking, way of looking at the problem, how to feel, trust / believe, ways of behaving and acting. But often appear notion that mental is simply the inner affairs unrelated to the nature of the bodily actions and physical traits world objects. Mental faculties such as reasoning, thinking, making judgments and taking decisions is not corporeal (not visible), but not the mental world may wake up without a bodily experience. In turn, the mental faculties was formed and produces behavioral and physical actions. Mental Flexibility, the ability to change the way of thinking, way of looking at, how to behave / act is also influenced by the desire (a mixture of emotion and motivation). 3 Thats why we use the term mentality to describe and also criticized the mentality of the age. There is a farmer mentality, the mentality of industrial, gentry mentality, mentality devices (gadgets), and so on. Gentry mentality is certainly not just an inner case of the aristocracy, but the way they understand themselves and the world, how they present themselves and trust that they believe, how to dress, speak, behave, act, how they perceive the objects, religious rituals, art, etc. . 4 Errors of understanding the meaning of mental (and some even narrow it to a moral sense) make it appear that the mental changes are just a matter of moral change has nothing to do with physical things such as structural economic issues, politics, etc.. Though moral consciousness, or conscience directs people to the right moral decision, just one fruit mental powers well educated. 5. This mistake arises from the debate concerning the relation of culture, social structures and actors. The mistake was revealed in our everyday talk: Well, its a mental problem culprit!, Or: No, the problem structure! As a result, the interaction of the two was broken. This point does not need to be parsed at length here. Suffice it called that straying bore sight as if culture dealing only with the offenders subjective realm, while the social structure dealing with the realm of objective measures. And the two are not related. It was primitive and misguided view. 6 How fallacy that corrected? The answer: the integral relationship between the mental actors and social structure unbridgeable to understand culture (culture) as caraberpikir patterns, how-feel, and act in ways that revealed the practice of daily habits (practices, habits). In the real world there is no separation between structure as a condition of the material / physical / social and culture as a mental process. Both are integrally intertwined. 7 Shades of practice as well as economic and political systems that take place every day is an expression of culture, while the way we think, feel and act (culture) deeply shaped by the habitual practice of the system and the economy as well as politics. There is no politics without economics and culture, and on the contrary there is no culture without economic and political. Separation exists only in the analytic level. In the political and economic culture has always involved and always involved in the culture and political economy. 8 In addition to the style / pattern habits, culture also has layers of meaning which contains the way people interpret themselves, values and goals, and how to evaluate it. Culture also has a physical layer / material works of human creativity, including knowledge of the underlying system. However, in daily practice the three are not sharply separated. 9 An example is how the tastes and desires are formed from the habits we acquire through the structure of the environment. Consumerism as a cultural phenomenon born of the environmental structure changes that impose a particular desire to become a social habit. For example, shopping habits as a lifestyle and not because of need, or a judge branded prestige through ownership of foreign objects. 10 mistakes to understand the implications of the symptoms mentioned in paragraph 5 and 6 above are very large. Public statements such as economic and political approaches have failed so necessary way to understand culture is an example of a mistake integral relationship structure, culture, and actors. The mistake that also gave birth to the notion as if the affairs of the mental change will shrink the problems of poverty and corruption as a moral matter - if moral change, finished problem. Its wrong that notion.
Posted on: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 06:59:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015