Family Science Review
Research Articles
James R. Huber
ABSTRACT: Do you sometimes feel like you’ve been a student forever? Have you wondered lately if you’re getting the most our of your undergraduate education? Are you concerned about how you’ll make the transition from being a student to being a professional? If you answered “yes” to any of these questions, then you may be at high-risk for “schooliosis,” a paralyzing condition which effects thousands of Family Science majors each year.
Gregory W. Brock and Jeanette D. Coufal
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this chapter is to provide family science majors with guidelines for writing and building an effective resume. First impressions count, and the case of applying for a position, your first impression is your resume. What your resume says and how it says it are both important. The resume usually is the most important factor in determining whether you get an interview. An effective resume, however, is not based on writing alone. Effective resumes are built over a long period of time. The process begins in the freshman year or even earlier.
J. Kenneth Davidson, Sr
ABSTRACT: The quest for voluntary certification has recently been described as a national pastime. In view of the proliferation of certification opportunities through professional societies as well as through technical and industrial organizations, the late twentieth century could well be remembered in the annuals of professionalization as the Age of Certification (Institute of Association Management Companies, 1986). The interest in family life education, however, is rooted in a much earlier era of cultural and social upheaval which occurred during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. At this time, many social and economic forces such as industrialization, urbanization, and mobilization resulted in significant changes in traditional family patterns. Consequently, concern for professional support of families emerged along with the development of
disciplines pertaining to the family. Professions such as home economics, sociology, psychology, health, psychiatry, and psychoanalysis were well in process by the early part of the twentieth century (Darling, 1987). But, despite the widespread interest in family life education, functional courses in marriage and family remained the exclusive purview of home economics for many years. The discipline of sociology, especially was concerned about risking its professional reputation by offering functional courses which were believed by some sociologists to avoid theoretical and/or research perspectives by taking a more applied approach to the subject matter. But, as student interest increased and as demand for credit hour production became increasingly stronger, departments of sociology began to offer functional marriage and family courses (Somerville, 1971).
Carolyn J. Love
ABSTRACT: The major focus of this article is the investigation of advancement criteria in non-academic careers for family professional. Five specific topics will be addressed: the increasing awareness of need for family scientists outside of academia, the kinds of expertise most in demand, motives of family science professionals, marketing family science, and family science career education. It’s main target audience is family science professionals who are presently employed by non-academic institutions, are desiring employment in such institutions, and/or educating others about career opportunities in this arena. Emphasis will be placed on those individuals who have already acquired one or more non-academic positions in their career field.
Nelwyn B. Moore
ABSTRACT: The focus of this paper is the affective domain–that area of learning concerned with emotional, attitudinal or psychological issues (DeVito, 1986). The three domains of human learning are differentiated as Cognitive–mental or intellectual abilities; Psychomotor–neuromuscular coordination, muscular or motor skill, and/or manipulation of materials and objects; and Affective–values, attitudes, feelings, and emotional sets (Green, 1975). While the cognitive and psychomotor domains of learning are organized by increasing complexity, the affective one is organized by increasing internalization. The goal of all learning is to integrate these domains in a process that David Mace has described as “the long, long trail from information-giving to behavioral change” (1981:599). Further clarifying the concepts, Olson and Moss (1980) suggest that teaching about family life is within the cognitive domain while teaching for family living concerns the affective domain. Specifically, this paper will address the need for affective competencies in the training of family life educators. It will identify needed personal relationship competencies, the extent of their inclusion in professional preparation, as well as suggested program strategies. Finally, it will consider assessment as a tool to effect a better match of affectively competent individuals and the field of family life education.
Robert E. Keim and Barbara Kimes Myers
ABSTRACT: This review can be helpful not only for emerging students entering the professional ranks but for the seasoned professional as well. Occasionally someone will ask the established professional for suggested resources on a given topic. Often there are a vast pools of resources presently existing which are overlooked due to the lack of knowing them or not knowing of the resources which can guide a person to them. More precisely, the purposes of the article are: (1) To provide some principle resources to the professional and (2) To introduce the professional to specific reference guides and encyclopedias to assist them in locating other resources.
Richard C. Endsley, Marilyn R. Bradbard, and Greg Lang
ABSTRACT: Previous research has documented that investigators of parent-child (p-c) relations who publish either in Child Development (CD) or Journal of Marriage and the Family (JMF) are from essentially two different research communities that function in virtual isolation from each other. The present study attempted to test the hypothesis that the differences in methods used and age groups of subjects studied can be accounted for by meta-theoretical differences that derive from child specialists’ closer links to the discipline of psychology and family specialists’ closer links to the discipline of sociology. However, the results indicated that the two groups’ conceptions of variable molarity and the sources of external causation were more notable for their similarities than their differences. Further, the groups differed on the frequency with which reciprocal interaction measures were employed, even though both have long held similar views about the importance of such assessments. Therefore, it was concluded that methodological and/or substantive traditions of their respective root discipline.
Roberta Magarrell
ABSTRACT: This paper is an attempt to begin identifying the literature that has had and is having the most influence in the family field. A random sample of members of the National Council on Family Relations was surveyed to determine which books and articles had the most influence. The responses indicated there is considerable diversity in what people view as the most influential literature in the field, and the patterns are different for different disciplines.
Robert L. Moxley and Douglas Bachtel
ABSTRACT: This article highlights the challenges associated with reviewing articles for professional journals in the social sciences. Topics explored include the importance of reviewers in the publication process, how reviewers are selected and their willingness to review. Suggestions on critiquing a paper such as (a) having its eventual publication in a journal as the goal and (b) taking a “state-of-the-art” perspective rather than a “how would I do this’ approach also presented. Finally, the importance of spelling out the reasons regarding revision or rejection and the tendency of some reviewers to reject all papers are discussed.
