159 research outputs found
Sort by
Disengagement, Pedagogical Eros and (the undoing of?) Dialogic pedagogy
Get PDFDialogic pedagogy is an approach to education influenced by Bakhtin, Freire, and others. It is an approach that is critical of conventional education, which tends to be didactic and alienating to students. Student engagement is made central as dialogue takes priority over standardization and core cannons of content. Dialogic pedagogy also emphasizes the importance of communities of learners where teachers are co-learners along with students as all parties work on problems together. I seek to raise challenges to Dialogic Pedagogy and these come from scholars working on the “conduct of everyday life” and from Charles Taylor’s notion of “strong evaluations”. The conduct of everyday life involves a focus on first-person subjectivities with an eye to their constitution in social and power relations. Strong evaluations enhance this discussion by addressing how people can engage in decisions that involve weighing options about the qualitative kind of person one is. I outline how education involves a conduct of everyday life where strong evaluations are promoted. Taking such an approach to education grounds two challenges to dialogic pedagogy. One challenge is that students are reticent to engage in strong evaluations and the modern identity is one disposed to disengagement. The converse challenge is that student engagement entails pedagogical eros, which is easily converted into power and abuse by a pedagogue
"Spoilsport" in Drama in Education vs. Dialogic Pedagogy
Get PDFIn this paper I compare and contrast two educational paradigms that both attempt to overcome alienation often experienced by students in the conventional education. These two educational paradigms are embodied in different educational practices: First, Drama in Education in its widest definition, is based on the Vygotskian views that human cognitive, semantic (meaning-making), and social-emotional development happens in or through play and/or imagination, thus within the imagined worlds. Second, Critical Ontological Dialogic Pedagogy, is based in the Bakhtin inspired approach to critical dialogue among the “consciousnesses of equal rights” (Bakhtin, 1999), where education is assumed to be a practice of examination of the world, the others and the self. I reveal implicit and explicit conceptual similarities and differences between these two educational paradigms regarding their understanding the nature of learning; social values that they promote; the group dynamics, social relationships and the position of learners’ subjectivity. I aim to uncover the role and legitimacy of the learners’ disagreement with the positions of others, their dissensus with the educational events and settings, and the relationships of power within the social organization of educational communities in these two diverse educational approaches. I explore the legitimacy of dissensus in these two educational approaches regarding both the participants’ critical examination of the curriculum, and in regard to promoting the participants’ agency and its transformations. In spite of important similarities between the educational practices arranged by these two paradigms, the analysis of their differences points to the paradigmatically opposing views on human development, learning and education. Although both Drama in Education and Dialogic Pedagogy claim to deeply, fully and ontologically engage the learners in the process of education, they do it for different purposes and with diametrically opposite ways of treating the students and their relationship to the world, each other and their own developing selves
Reflections on a dialogic pedagogy inspired by the writings of Bakhtin: an account of the experience of two professors working together in the classroom
Get PDFThe practice of a dialogic pedagogy inspired by the writings of Bakhtin is increasingly popular in different parts of the world. This article is an account produced in the spirit of such pedagogy. Two professors (one from Brazil, the other from the United States), both members of an international dialogic pedagogy study group, write together to discuss the work they developed in partnership under this educational paradigm when teaching a course on “Diversity in secondary education” in the School of Education of the College of Education and Human Development of the University of Delaware, USA. After presenting brief introductory information on who they are, how they met and how they happened to work together, the two scholars present classroom interaction data followed by reflections on to what extent certain forms of classroom interaction they identified in the data promote or inhibit the practice of a truly Bakhtinian Dialogic Pedagogy. In other words, what the readers will find in this article is not a traditional empirical study, but a telling case of two educators learning from one another about what counts as dialogic in the classroom, while at the same time using the aforementioned course as an anchor for multiple discussions
I thought you’d never become one of us
Get PDFIn this paper, I describe a collaborative process in which a class of grade 6&7 students made and performed two plays, and also transformed their learning. In this process, a reconfiguring of the spaces of learning, the students and I adapted a variety of literacy and drama practices; a key change in practice was the shift away from an instrumental mode of dialogue in which the teacher occupies the superior position of knower and evaluator, towards a Bakhtinian mode in which dialogue, as heteroglossic, moves between all the participants, and becomes the main purpose of learning. In a dynamic combination of linguistic, theatrical, and relational meaning making, the students moved clear of the outcomes-based learning that had hitherto stultified their interactions and language. As a result, they developed a new creative agency, both singly and as a collective, and an authoritative discourse. They left this discourse open for me to join, and also continue afterwards, as I have done here, by presenting and interpreting their voices, and including new ones.[1][1] EDITORIAL NOTE: Charles Bisley’s article is an unusual and brave attempt to transcend the current norms of scholarly and academic genres and create a polyphonic article in which he describes a year long educational event through the voices of all of its participants – among which he counts not only his students and himself, and their audience of parents and the school authorities, but also includes educational, literary and philosophical authors who inspired him and whose thoughts guided him in his actions and reflections during and after his project in creating dramatic spaces and times with his students. His writing has elements of reflective auto-ethnography, Woolfian lyrical stream of consciousness, dialogic double-voicedness and a storytelling narrative that is intended to transport the reader into an experience of the dramatic enfolding of the events and their protagonists, actors and directors: his students and himself. Although, his work doesn’t follow what is currently assumed to be the scientific criteria regarding form, length or standard components, we find it interesting and valuable as a polyphonic approach and qualitative study
Classroom community and discourse: How argumentation emerges during a Socratic circle
Get PDFLiteracy and language development is a central aspect of educational theory and practice. One area of literacy and rowlanguage research that has had a lot of attention is dialogic teaching (Bakhtin, 1984; Freire, 1970; Murphey, Wilkinson, Soter, Hennessey, & Alexander, 2009; Reznitskaya & Gregory, 2013). However, there is limited research on how high school students use their classroom discourse to construct meaning, especially in argumentation. The purpose of this data analysis is to investigate the emergence of argumentation literacy in a Socratic circle. Socratic circles, a literacy practice consisting of two concentric circles of students focused around a piece of text, are used to provide students with the opportunity to co-construct meaning through classroom dialogue (Copeland, 2005). The emergence and construction of argumentation is analyzed by applying discourse analysis to a video of a high school classroom,. Findings from this analysis reveal that through the use of exploratory talk, three discourse patterns emerge that are in line with argumentation practices: (1) generalizations, (2) communicative struggles, and (3) co-construction of ideas. Results of the analysis are discussed to inform theory and instruction on dialogic teaching and the use of Socratic circles to develop argumentation-related forms of literacy
Applying Intersubjectivity for Professional Development
Get PDFThis is an intersubjective review of Loewen, G. V. (2012). Hermeneutic Pedagogy: Teaching and learning as dialogue and interpretation. Alcoa, TN, USA. Old Moon Academic Press. The four authors of the review used a reflective-reflexive, dialogic process to interpret and analyze Loewen’s text. Their review is presented in a dialogue format that resulted after analyzing a much longer set of narrative data.[1][1] Editorial Note: This is a very unusual review! There are four points of interest that make this review an interesting read. The first one concerns the subject of the review: the book on hermeneutics. The second point is the form of the review: it is dialogue between the authors presented in its development. The third point of interest is the personal nature of the contents: the authors masterly show how their work on the review of the book penetrates their lives thus showing the real life with its changes, happiness, sadness, struggles and tribulations. The last point of interest that makes this review worth to be read is the pioneering character of the work behind this review. Glenda Moss used this review as a tool for professional development for the colleagues in her department. In my humble opinion, this review is the result of the very courageous, pioneering and inspirational work! (Mikhail Gradovski
Radical Proposal for Educational Pluralism and The State’s Educational Neutrality Policy
Get PDFCurrently, in institutionalized education, the balance between global and local forces is skewed in favor of the global through the State (and University) monopoly on educational philosophy. We think that the local has to be prioritized over the global in the balance of these forces. In our view, this promotion should occur both in depth (through open pedagogical experimentation and democratization, defining local values, creating a global dialogue), AND in breadth (through providing opportunities for students and parents to join and financially afford it). We propose that education has to be separated from the State. In our proposal, the State should focus on providing financial access to K-12 education for all citizens through redistribution of taxes while constraining itself through pedagogical neutrality: accepting any educational philosophy for public funding. In our paper, we will consider some of many diverse concerns raised by our colleagues in response to our radical proposal of the State’s educational neutrality, organized in a question-answer format
Emerging Dialogic Structures in Education Reform: An analysis of Urban Teachers’ Online Compositions
Get PDFThis paper contextualizes contemporary urban teachers’ online dissent in public discussions of education reform in relation to past educational crisis narratives to interpret recent shifts in the structure of education reform dialogue in the United States. It does so by examining the form and content of compositions in which teachers respond to education reform. The analysis is intended to describe the digitally mediated roles teachers are asserting in a complex public debate over the future of education in the United States. The structure and content of education reform discourse has often cast teachers in static roles, which inhibits their active participation in discussions of educational policy. Using Mikhail Bakhtin’s position that language choices serve to stifle and/or reinvigorate dialogue, we examine contributions to online discussions and debate composed ostensibly by urban teachers in response to dominant discourses. The data were analyzed with respect to discursive choices and grouped subsequently as themed arguments and rhetorical moves. We argue that teachers’ strategic responses to education reform challenge stifling truisms that seek to suspend discussion of all other factors besides teacher quality. Teachers’ critical digital compositions thus re-create critical, multi-voiced conversations in place of monologues about school improvement. The online, public compositions point to the dynamic structure of reform discourse that has the potential to benefit those currently faulted for a variety of social problems. Nurturing and even exploiting the dynamic potential of educational reform discourse can create opportunities for teachers, policymakers, and educational researchers to mutually inform one another’s shared interest in educational improvement
An individual subjectivist critique of the use of corpus linguistics to inform pedagogical materials
Get PDFCorpus linguistics, or the gathering together of language into a body for analysis and development of materials, is claimed to be an assured, established method (or field) that valuably informs pedagogical materials and knowledge of language (e.g. Ädel 2010; Gardner & Nesi, 2013). The fundamental validity of corpus linguistics is rarely, if ever, critiqued. In this empirical paper we critically consider the foundations of corpus linguistics as being based on an abstract objectivist view of language. We critique this foundation through the lens of an individual subjectivist view of language. Our introduction outlines abstract objectivist and individual subjectivist views of language described by Voloshinov (1973). We then present what is claimed regarding corpus linguistics, and consider contemporary critiques of these claims . We then critique the foundations of corpus linguistics from an individual subjectivist view of language. We illustrate this critique by drawing on data from interviews and focus groups with content material lecturers and students in the subject areas of ‘Business’; ‘Nursing’; ‘Design’ and ‘Computing’. These data question the fundamental assumption about how corpus linguistics operates: that what is counted is indeed countable. The data show how ostensibly similar words are understood in very different ways with very different underpinning psychological elements. We argue that corpus linguistics thus informs pedagogical materials with a merely passive understanding of the language. This view can only gain access to the inert crust of previous language, because it removes language from its individual subjective context. This context is fundamental to giving language the conscious and psychological elements that underpin its use. We argue the language should be taught through dialogue in this subject context and not removed from it
Dialogic action in climate change discussions: An international study of high school students in China, New Zealand, Norway and the United States
Get PDFGlobal efforts to prepare young developing minds for solving current and future challenges of climate change have advocated interdisciplinary, issues-based instructional approaches in order to transform traditional models of science education as delivering conceptual facts (UNESCO, 2014). This study is an exploration of the online interactions in an international social network of high school students residing in Norway, China, New Zealand and the United States (N=141). Students participated in classroom-based and asynchronous online discussions about adapted versions of seminal scientific studies with facilitative support from seven scientists across various fields. Grounded in a language-in-use frame for investigating facilitation and demonstrations of problem-based and evidence-based reasoning (Kelly & Chen, 1999), we traced the varied questions, assertions, and evidentiary sources within student-led online discussions. We found that questions from scientific experts in the form of unconstrained, open-ended invitations for exploration were followed by students’ acknowledgement and consideration of complex and, at times, conflicting sociopolitical and economic positions about climate change issues. These findings suggest that broadening science classroom discussions to include socially relevant, unsolved issues like climate change could open potential entry points for a dialogic approach that fosters a scientific community in the classroom