LESSON 1
INTRODUCTION TO «PEDAGOGICS» COURSE
Theme: Introduction to
Pedagogics Course
v The Concept of Pedagogics.
v Main Categories of Pedagogics.
v Pedagogical science and Pedagogical practice.
v System of Pedagogical Sciences.
v Pedagogics and
Medicine.
The Concept of Pedagogy
The word Pedagogy comes from the Greek παιδαγωγέω
(paidagōgeō); in which παῖς (país, genitive παιδός,
paidos) means "child" and άγω (ágō) means
"lead"; so it literally means "to lead the child". In
Ancient Greece, παιδαγωγός
was (usually) a slave who supervised the instruction of his master’s son (girls
were not publicly taught). This involved taking him to school (διδασκαλεῖον) or a gym (γυμναστήριον),
looking after him and carrying his equipment (e.g. music instruments).
Pedagogic Practice
Pedagogues work with all age groups, starting from the
early years up to the aged. They work in nurseries and kindergartens, schools,
children's and youth services, play settings, children's homes and youth clubs;
they work in adult services engaging with communities and disadvantaged adults,
such as ethnic minorities, substance misusers, homeless, unemployed or
imprisoned persons; and they are employed in palliative care, supporting older
people at home or in care.
It is only logical that the practical methods in all
these settings will differ, depending on the target group. Therefore within the
general discipline pedagogy we can distinguish various approaches. Some of
these are named after key thinkers like Fröbel or Montessori who have created
a very specific pedagogic concept for the context of their work, while others
are termed according to the medium they are utilising, such as play, circus,
music, or theatre pedagogy.
Despite these differences in approach, what combines
all pedagogies is the way of thinking, the philosophy, the attitude with which
these different methods are used - and this is what makes practice social
pedagogic: as Hämäläinen (2003) points out, 'social pedagogy is
not a method, nor even a set of methods. As a discipline it has its own
theoretical orientation to the world. An action is not social pedagogical
because certain methods are used therein, but because some methods are chosen
and used as a consequence of social pedagogical thought.' So social pedagogy is
not what we do, it is rather how we approach practice, with what attitude and
aims. This also means that social pedagogy is not something we do or don't do -
the question to ask ourselves is to what degree we are working in a social
pedagogical way! In that sense, social pedagogy is an ongoing journey of
learning and development, not just for the people we work with but also for
ourselves. Fortunately, as human beings our potential to develop is only
limited by our imagination.
v To conceptualize the various elements
that form part of pedagogy, we have developed the model of the Pedagogy Tree.
The Pedagogy Tree
Pedagogy Tree symbolizes
that pedagogy has organically grown out of societal conditions. It is solidly
rooted in society, with the different roots representing different strands of
particular influences on social pedagogy, such as theories from related
disciplines or influential key thinkers that have shaped the development of
social pedagogy.
The trunk forms the
core of what social pedagogy represents in theory and in practice: the holistic
approach to education in the broadest sense, the centrality of relationships,
and the use of observation and reflection as a tool for continuous development
of all (systems and people) that are included in the pedagogic process.
The branches
outline various predominant elements that form part of pedagogy, and each of
them is underpinned in its significance by theory and research. This makes it
helpful to apply theory to practice. For instance, the knowledge of
communication models makes practitioners more self-reflective about and
conscious of how they communicate.
As with every tree,
growth takes place in two opposite directions, both away from and further into
the ground. This reflects how social pedagogy interacts between society and the
individual. Social pedagogy aims to provide nurturing conditions that support
children's growth in both directions, towards independence and interdependence.
In Goethe's words 'children need two things from their parents: roots and
wings'.
Similar to this is
the growth of social pedagogy itself: through dialogue, social pedagogy takes
influence on how society is constructed, and in reverse these constructions
take influence on how social pedagogy is shaped. Because of this vital
relationship with society, social pedagogy cannot simply be transplanted. It
flourishes best when embedded into the culture and existing practice, and
therefore it takes time and constant care to grow.
Pedagogy offers many practical and accessible concepts that describe how
social pedagogy can be applied. Here we would like to introduce those that
participants have found most interesting and useful.
v To conceptualize the various elements that form part
of pedagogy, we have developed the model of the Pedagogy Tree.
v The Common Third is a Danish
model that describes the use of activities in order to develop positive relationships
with children.
v The Learning Zone Model was
developed by Senninger to illustrate in what situations learning takes place.
v The Zone of Proximal
Development, a concept developed by Vygotsky, depicts the social aspects of
learning and offers an explanation why learning together with others helps us
develop further.
The Diamond Model
The Diamond Model
symbolizes one of the most fundamental underpinning principles of pedagogy -
that there is a diamond within all of us. As human beings we are all precious
and have a rich variety of knowledge, skills and abilities. Not all diamonds
are polished and sparkly, but all have the potential to be. Similarly, every
person has the potential to shine out - and social pedagogy is about supporting
them in this. Therefore, pedagogy has four core aims that are closely linked:
well-being and happiness, holistic learning, relationship, and empowerment.
Well-being
and happiness:
The overarching aim
of all social pedagogic practice is to provide well-being and happiness, not on
a short-term needs-focused basis, but sustainably, through a rights-based
approach. While the terms 'well-being' and 'happiness' are sometimes seen as
one and the same, in our understanding they are notionally different: happiness
describes a present state whereas well-being describes as a long-lasting sense
of physical, mental, emotional and social well-being. In combination we can get
a holistic view of a person's well-being and happiness. Importantly, well-being
and happiness are very individual and subjective: what makes us happy is very
different from person to person. As a result social pedagogic practice is very
context-specific and highly responsive to the individual rather than adopting a
one-size-fits-all approach.
Holistic
learning:
'Learning is the
pleasant anticipation of one's self', according to the German philosopher
Sloterdijk. In this sense, holistic learning mirrors the aim of well-being and
happiness - it must be seen as contributing to, or enhancing, our well-being.
Learning is more than what happens at school, it is a holistic process of
realizing our own potential for learning and growth, which can take place in
every situation that offers a learning opportunity. Holistic learning is a
life-long process involving 'head, heart, and hands' (Pestalozzi). Social
pedagogy is about creating learning opportunities, so that people get a sense
of their own potential and how they have developed. As we are all unique, so is
our potential for learning and our way of learning and development.
Relationship:
Central to
achieving these two aims is the pedagogic relationship. Through the supportive
relationship with the social pedagogue a person can experience that someone cares
for and about them, that they can trust somebody. This is about giving them the
social skills to be able to build strong positive relationships with others.
Therefore the pedagogic relationship must be a personal relationship between
human beings - social pedagogues make use of their personality and have to be
authentic in the relationship, which is not the same as sharing private
matters. So the pedagogic relationship is professional and personal at the same
time, thus requiring from the social pedagogue to be constantly reflective.
Empowerment:
Alongside the
relationship, empowerment is crucial in order to ensure that we get a sense of
control over our life, feel involved in decisions affecting us, and are able to
make sense of our own universe. Empowerment also means that we are able to take
on ownership and responsibility for our own learning and our own well-being and
happiness, as well as our relationship with the community. Pedagogy is
therefore about supporting people's empowerment, their independence as well as
interdependence.
Positive
Experiences:
In order to realize
these core aims, social pedagogy has to be about providing positive
experiences. The power of experiencing something positive - something that makes
us happy, something we have achieved, a new skill we have learned, the caring
support from someone else - has a double impact: it raises our self-confidence
and feeling of self-worth, so it reinforces our sense of well-being, of
learning, of being able to form a strong relationship, or of feeling empowered;
and by strengthening our positives we also improve our weak sides - negative
notions about our self-fade away...
Conclusions:
Social pedagogy
offers a conceptual framework that can help guide professional practice. As an
academic discipline, social pedagogy uses related research, theories and
concepts from other sciences such as sociology, psychology, education or
philosophy to ensure the holistic perspective. This means that in realizing
those core aims there is a lot of inspiration to be taken from what research
and concepts tell us about related areas. All four aims point at the fact that
social pedagogy is about process. Well-being and happiness, holistic learning,
relationship, empowerment - none of these is a product that, once achieved, can
be forgotten. This is why it is important to perceive them as fundamental human
rights that we all constantly need to work on if we want to ensure that
nobody's rights are violated or neglected.
The notion of Haltung in pedagogy
"Children
are not the people of tomorrow, but are people of today. They are entitled to
be taken seriously. They have a right to be treated by adults with respect, as
equals. They should be allowed to grow into whoever they were meant to be - the
unknown person inside each of them is the hope for the future." Janusz
Korczak (1879-1942)
In
the life of Janusz Korczak, Polish-Jewish doctor and pedagogue, these words
were more than an expression of his fundamental world view, his belief that
respecting a person’s dignity is central to their development - they were what
he lived his life by and what underpinned his practice in the orphanages he set
up in
They
would also have felt Korczak's dedication on one of their darkest days, in
August 1942, when the occupying Nazi forces deported the children to the
concentration camp in Treblinka. Declining offers by the German soldiers to
spare Korczak himself from the gas chambers, he went with them on their last
march. His determination to be with his orphans in the moment when they needed
him most, to give them hope in a situation of despair is a vivid reflection of
Korczak's 'Haltung' - a term crucial for understanding social pedagogy.
As
a German term, 'Haltung' roughly translates as ethos, mindset or attitude. But,
as the example of Janusz Korczak demonstrates, 'Haltung' is more about how we
guide our actions by what we believe in. Therefore it can be more or less
distinct, depending on the extent to which we actually live by our moral
convictions. This ranges from everyday decisions of whether we take our bicycle
instead of the car if we're concerned about global warming, or drink fair-trade
coffee if we believe in the importance of combating exploitative labour
conditions, to considerations more relevant to social pedagogic practice.
For
instance, if we think of children in Korczak's terms, as equal human beings, do
we then value their ideas equally to our own? Wieninger (2000) points out that
our 'Haltung' is influenced by our concept of children (or of mankind in
general), by how we think about them, what notions we hold about who they are.
As a result, 'Haltung' is very subjective and not necessarily what we might
judge as 'good': some people have a very different concept of children compared
with Korczak's. In our interactions with others, our 'Haltung' will have an
influence, because the way we think about others - and our relationship with
them - affects the way in which we engage with them. Most children, for
example, will know when we genuinely care about them or when we pretend to
care. In a sense, our 'Haltung' shines through in our relationships with
others, which in turn colours their behaviour towards us.
'Haltung'
is fundamental to social pedagogy, because it demonstrates the importance of
the professional being authentic. In our 'Haltung' the professional and the
personal are intrinsically interwoven (cf. 3Ps)
, as 'Haltung' is not something we can adopt just for a particular situation.
It explains why social pedagogy is not a method, not about what is done but how
it is done, how 'head, heart and hands' are connected through a social
pedagogical 'Haltung'. In social pedagogic terms, the 'Haltung' of the
professional should be based on an emotional connectedness to other people and
a profound respect for their human dignity.
In
this sense, a social pedagogic 'Haltung' is characterised by Carl Rogers's core
conditions: congruence, empathic understanding, and unconditional positive
regard. Mührel’s (2008) philosophical reflections on a professional
'Haltung' in social pedagogy and social care underpin this point. Drawing on
various philosophers - most notably Hans-Georg Gadamer, Emmanuel Lévinas
and Jacques Derrida - he suggests two pillars for a social pedagogical
'Haltung': comprehending and regarding.
The
notion of comprehending refers to understanding the way of life of a person and
draws on the hermeneutic ideas of Gadamer, which highlight empathy and dialogue
as leading us towards a better understanding of others. By 'regarding',
Mührel refers to accepting the otherness in people different from
ourselves who, as strangers, deserve our profound respect. He argues that we
cannot understand the other (only what we recognise of ourselves in others),
and accepting their strangeness means that we do not try to reduce them to what
we are familiar with, what we know.
Following
Mührelss logic, 'comprehending' and 'regarding' are diametrically opposed
- in a sense social pedagogical 'Haltung' moves between these two pillars like
a trapeze artist swinging between two poles. Both are important for maintaining
the trapeze's equilibrium, and whilst swinging towards one pole the trapeze
artist must already prepare to swing back towards the other pole. In a similar
way, whilst we might aim to fully understand someone else's life world, we
should also be aware that there will always remain a part in other people that
we cannot know or predict, that makes them different and demands our regard.
And in our considerations about the otherness and strangeness of an individual
we can still find something that we share with them, something that can help us
'swing' towards understanding them, something that could be our 'Common Third'.
In
this process of oscillating between understanding and regarding, dialogue
becomes fundamental to our description of professional 'Haltung'. Dialogue allows
us meet the other as our equal and to explore something together, without
knowing where that journey might ultimately lead us. As Mührel emphasises,
in dialogue we recognise the intrinsic humaneness in others. Social pedagogical
'Haltung' therefore means that we must encounter others in a congruent manner,
so that they can recognise our own personality and understand us better in
return. Through this process we can nurture a professional relationship that is
based on trust and forms the foundation for social pedagogic practice, which
Janusz Korczak brings to the point, "If you want to be a pedagogue you
have to learn to talk with children instead of to them. You have to learn to
trust their capacities and possibilities". Everything else follows on from
this.
v The Common Third is a Danish model that
describes the use of activities in order to develop positive relationships with
children.
The Common
Third
The
concept of the 'Common Third' is central to social pedagogic practice.
Essentially the Common Third is about using an activity to strengthen the bond
between social pedagogue and child and to develop new skills. This could be any
activity, be it cooking pancakes, tying shoelaces, fixing a bike, building a
kite, playing football together, going on a fishing trip together. Any of these
activities can be so much more than merely doing something - it is about
creating a commonly shared situation that becomes a symbol of the relationship
between the social pedagogue and the child, something third that brings the two
together: they are sharing an activity, and to be sharing something, to have
something in common, implies in principle to be equal, to be two (or more) individuals
on equal terms, with equal rights and dignity.
The
Common Third also means that the social pedagogue is authentic and
self-reflective, bringing in their own personality as an important resource. It
is about finding an activity in which the social pedagogue and the child are
both genuinely interested. In this sense, the Common Third suggests a
child-centred approach and full participation of the child into every step -
the child has to be involved on equal terms in all project phases, from the
beginning to the end.
What
makes the Common Third especially likeable is an understanding of holistic
education that also includes the social pedagogue themselves. An equal
relationship means that both share also a common potential of learning, on a
basis of activity and action.
v
The Learning
Zone Model was developed by Senninger to illustrate in what situations learning
takes place.
The Learning Zone Model (Senninger, 2000)
In
order to learn we have to explore: we already know our environment, our Comfort
Zone - this is where things are familiar, where we feel comfortable, where we
don't have to take any risks. The Comfort Zone is important, because it gives
us a place to return to, to reflect and make sense of things - a safe haven.
Yet,
in order to get to know the unknown we have to leave our Comfort Zone and
discover the Learning Zone, which lies just outside of our secure environment.
Only in the Learning Zone can we grow and learn, live out our curiosity and
make new discoveries, and thus slowly expand our Comfort Zone. Going into the
Learning Zone is a borderline experience - we feel we're exploring the edge of
our abilities, our limits, how far we dare to leave our Comfort Zone.
However,
beyond the Learning Zone lies the Panic Zone, wherein learning is impossible,
as it is blocked by a sense of fear. (Any learning connected with negative
emotions is memorized in a part of the human brain that we can access only in
similar emotional situations.) This is why, in the transition from Comfort Zone
to Learning Zone we need to be careful when taking risks that we don't go too
far out of our Comfort Zone - beyond the Learning Zone - into the Panic Zone,
where all our energy is used up for managing/controlling our anxiety.
Importantly,
these three zones are different for different situations and different for each
person - we all have our own unique Comfort Zone - Learning Zone - Anxiety
Zone. This means that we must never push someone into their Learning Zone, as
we cannot see where it starts or begins. All we can do is invite them into it,
value their decision, take them seriously and give them support so they won't
enter their Panic Zone.
The Zone of Proximal Development
The
Zone of Proximal Development is a model developed by the Russian psychologist
Lev Vygotsky. It states that learning is most successful in a social context,
meaning that people learn more and develop further when they are supported by
somebody who is more advanced in a certain area and functions as their mentor
(or pedagogue).
Vygotsky
defines the zone of proximal development as "the distance between the
actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the
level of potential development as determined through problem solving under
adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers". In this sense
the pedagogue could be a practitioner or another child!
According
to Schwartz (2001), the Zone of Proximal Development can be extended through
four different scenarios of supporting children in their learning:
·
Starting from the child's motivation to learn
·
Children want to learn and are interested in finding out new things -
this provides a great opportunity for pedagogues to support their learning.
·
Starting from where the pedagogue thinks the child 'is'
·
The starting point for learning is where the child is at, and the
pedagogue can assess this through observations, reflection and dialogue.
·
Mutual process of learning together, e.g. Common Third
·
Learning can also be a mutual process, in which both the pedagogue and
the child learn something new and support each other in this.
·
Necessary development, things that need to be learned
·
There are things that we all need to learn in order to lead a happy life
in dignity, be part of society and make use of our resourcefulness.
The 3 Ps - The professional, personal, and private
pedagogue
The
pedagogic role can be split into three dimensions: the professional, the
personal, and the private.
·
The professional pedagogue helps you explain and understand the child's
behav-iour through the use of law, policy, research, practice evidence and
theory. The professional pedagogue supports and protects you in having a
professional & per-sonal relationship with the child; it helps you make
sense of the child's actions and reactions, relating them to various theories
and using professional concepts to di-rect and reflect your own practice.
·
The personal pedagogue represents what you offer to the child in your
developing relationship with them. This is based on reflections: you know what
you aim to achieve through the relationship, why that will help the child/young
person do what in the relationship, and you know that it requires authenticity
and may involve some thought out self-disclosure used in the relationship with
a child.
·
The private pedagogue sets the personal boundaries of what is not shared
with those you work with and should therefore not be involved in the relation
with a child you care for or work with. The private pedagogue is who you are
with those closest to you, and the experiences you have had that may have
shaped who you are but which you do not share with a child.
The
3Ps are constantly in play during practice. Social pedagogues are aware of the
inter-play between each P and use the 3P model in supervision and on their own
to reflect upon practice, understand the impact the child/young person may be
have on them and in the search to improve practice and the relationship with
the child.
Although
the Private P is something which social pedagogues do not share with the child
or young person, it may well be impacted upon by a child or other's behaviour;
it is im-perative that practitioners are:
·
able to recognise when their reactions to a child may have something to
do with what is private to them, and
·
able and open to discussing this in professional supervision so that a
deeper under-standing of self is gained and practice is improved.
Pedagogics is a normative science with its own subject
of research. The historical development of pedagogical thought shows strong
relations with philosophical-anthropological principles and with
historical-cultural characteristics. Education today is confronted with, among
other things, postmodern developments in society ('Hauslosigkeit') and a change
in patterns of youth behavior (from a standard career to a chosen career). For
pedagogical analysis, a renewed appeal to reason is advocated. A suitable
method is the triadic-pedagogical analysis, which reflects on the parent-child
relation in connection with historical-cultural developments.
We can safely assume that everyone is aware that
children cannot be left to fend for themselves and that they cannot become
adult on their own. However, not everyone is convinced that the process of
growing up and gradually growing into society requires an on-going pedagogic
relationship based on more or less pronounced concepts of what it is to be a
civilized human being. "It can't be allowed!" people cry when they
hear that school children are carrying weapons and that they use them on a
regular basis. A father will say that his children need a "good
education" so that they can come to occupy a "good position" in
society. While a mother might say that as far as she is concerned, the most
important thing is that her children should be "honest" and that they
should learn to be prepared to help one another.
In all of these cases there is
clearly some notion of the relationship between education and the socio-cultural
environment, of the current state of society and society as it might be, of
what should be considered normal or abnormal in terms of human behavior and of
the kinds of things that education can strive towards. But not everyone is
willing to accept the practical pedagogic consequences that these notions imply
-- in other words, the need to maintain an on-going pedagogic relationship in
which educators care for the children in their charge, are aware of their
responsibility and are also ethically responsible, relating to the surrounding
culture critically and consciously and making every effort to enable children
to take part in society responsibly and effectively in their own way.
Consciously or otherwise, educators allow
themselves to be guided by all kinds of values regarding human existence on a
daily basis and these values are concretized in their dealings with the
children they are educating through the setting of various standards. If
educators do not allow themselves to be guided by values, there will be no
rules or any rules that do exist will be arbitrarily applied. Or there will be
a naive faith that with a bit of good will’s everything will work out all right
on its own. This kind of attitude means that the child is indeed left to fend
for itself and fails to learn to make choices and to be responsible for them. A
child may well be able to grow up in such a situation, but is not given enough
assistance in the process of becoming an adult. For, like Langeveld, we are
also of the opinion that while growing up the child simultaneously engages in a
process in which it determines and shapes the values that it has learned or
discovered while growing up increasingly independently (Langeveld, 1979, p.23).
In this respect, to continue to think
along the lines of Langeveld's pedagogics, we are concerned with development,
education and self-forming within a context of relatively constant personal
relationships. However, the pedagogic relationship never exists entirely independently
of the historical-cultural context. Thus in this respect we also share
Imelman's view that the educator and the child being educated are also affected
by the formative influence of the cultural environment. Ultimately, the task of
pedagogics is to act as a mediator within this process.
Concerned as it is with the
legitimization of pedagogic procedures, theoretical pedagogics has always had
to account for the reasons for education and even the necessity for education.
Pedagogics per se, that is, for while those who are purely concerned with the
therapeutic side of pedagogics -- questioning the effectiveness of certain
approaches and strategies, such as how to deal with bed-wetting, eating
disorders or social anxiety -- are covering important ground for the practice
of pedagogics, they are not obliged to account for their actions from the point
of view of cultural pedagogics, nor are they considered to have any
responsibility towards the child in question in the longer term. However, the
discipline of pedagogics per se -- in other words, the aspect of pedagogics
that cannot be reduced to psychology (or any other behavioral science) --
cannot evade the issue of legitimization.
Beekman states it in the following
lofty terms "A science of education that does not make any value judgments
is a valueless science of education." In 1826 Friedrich Schleiermacher,
one of the founders of academic pedagogics, went as far as to characterize
pedagogics as applied ethics. It is worth bearing in mind that Schleiermacher
conceived of ethics as cultural philosophy as an evolutionary process
('progress'), but all the same!
In the tradition of pedagogics as an
aspect of the humanities it is common practice to base pedagogical reasoning on
statements regarding the human being taken from philosophical anthropology.
Some of these statements have since become such established ideas in pedagogic
theory that their origin is no longer known. Here, by way of example, we look
at the anthropological ideas expounded by Scheler, Portmann and, above all, by
Gehlen, who is so widely quoted in the formulation of pedagogic theory. With
reference to Nietzsche, Gehlen describes man as "the not-yet-determined
animal". Who and what man is or must become still remains to be seen.
According to Gehlen (1940) this fact,
which is an unusual phenomenon within nature, makes man "a creature of
discipline". This notion implies a clear task for education, suggesting
that without the imposition of discipline the human being will not become a
true human being or in any event will not be given his due. Similar ideas had
already been voiced earlier, by Kant, for example, in his Vorlesung über
Pädagogik (1776): "We understand by education namely care, discipline
and instruction besides cultivation".' (Kant, 1803, p. 697: "Unter
Erziehung nämlich verstehen wir die Wartung, Disziplin, Unterweisung nebst
der Bildung")
The quotation from Gehlen referred to
above is one of a series of statements regarding the human individual that attempt
to clarify man's special status within nature and in the world. The human being
is considered to differ from the animal in that he comes into the world
incomplete and has to act in an open world in order to be able to survive, for,
unlike the animal, the human being is unable to rely on the safety of innate
instincts. A newborn infant is unable to act on its own. It needs assistance
and therefore needs to be educated. Yet even when man is fully grown the task
is still not complete, for as an adult the individual is called upon to make
something of him and must continue to act in order to be able to maintain this
position.
However, like children, adults do not
need to do this on their own. For -- to pursue Gehlen's argument -- human
beings are also characterized by the fact that together they create a culture
which functions as a second nature within which they can live a human life
especially with the aid of institutions (defined as a collection of models of
action and/or patterns of behaviour, examples of which include the state, the
legal system, the family, school, work and religion). According to this way of
thinking the human individual comes into the world unspecialized and finds
within himself, as it were, the mandate to act. Initially the child is unable
to act independently and until it can act independently it needs help.
Pedagogues adopt this anthropological finding as the rationale for educational
action. Thus we come to one of the fundamental principles of pedagogic action,
which may or may not be explicitly stated.
Gehlen's anthropology does not stand
alone. It exists within the context of a series of anthropologies, being
preceded by the work of Scheler and Plessner, among others, which also had an
effect on pedagogics, and followed by the work of Sartre, Levinas and Derrida,
among others. Research into the fundamental principles of pedagogics might seek
to examine such a series of anthropologies not only in terms of the way in
which they have been received by pedagogics but also in terms of their
(practical) utility.
To a certain extent the history of
pedagogics is a history of concepts of man in relation to education. But, one
might object, isn't all education highly individual and situational in
practice, embedded in the historical-cultural environment, which is not derived
from all kinds of general anthropological systems? And to pursue this line of
thinking still further: Isn't the theory of education excessively divorced from
the practice of education which is essentially self-governing and relatively
autonomous? The tradition of the humanities goes as far as to speak of
theoretical clarification in retrospect, thereby acknowledging the primacy of
practice. To some extent the praxis itself determines its own course
(Schleiermacher speaks of the "dignity of praxis").
Given that this is the case, the
theory of education is increasingly being assigned the task of critically
reflecting on what has already occurred and acting as an 'interlocutor' for
future practitioners. One thing is certain, when it comes to the discipline of
pedagogics the question of theory and practice can never be reduced to the
simple application of scientific conclusions in practice. Among other things,
scientific opinions are too divided for this to be possible, there being very
little consensus from one paradigm to another. As a result, the scientific
nature of pedagogics is constantly subject to discussion. The relationship
between philosophy and science has yet to crystallize.
To return to the question of the unique and
unrepeatable nature of each educational situation this is another aspect
covered by philosophical anthropology that is regularly considered in
pedagogics. The various personalistic notions in pedagogics are interesting in
this respect. In the twentieth century in particular examples of this kind of
thinking can be seen in various countries, in the work of Pascal, Kierkegaard
and in the Judeo-Christian tradition (Buber, Maritain), among others.
Personalistic thinking centers on the
human individual as a person. As a person-in-the-making the child is charged
with the task of realizing its intention in a dialectical relationship with the
other. Again this is considered to justify the existence of education, for
children need help in order to be able to do this. The process of
self-realization, which is less concerned with capitalizing on one's potential
than with finding one's specific purpose in life (which may or may not be
interpreted in a religious sense), does not really lend itself to empirical
research within the context of developmental psychology, nevertheless it has
consistently inspired the thinking regarding education. In this case the human
being is considered to be the architect of his own destiny and, as a pupil or
student, is partly responsible for his own education.
This view has been convincingly
elaborated by the Italian pedagogue Guiseppe Flores d'Arcais who is not as
well-known as he should be in the
Above all,
In addition to elaborating on the
education of the individual and the kind of assistance that promotes personal
development, triadic pedagogics also elaborates on the process involved in the
transmission and renewal of human culture. Thanks above all to Imelman, the
transmission and renewal of human culture has been extracted from the
relatively obscure and ambiguous atmosphere in the relationship between the
educator and the child and subjected to a clear analysis in the triadic model.
Something (a certain point of view) is always communicated. The point of view
(or aspect of knowledge) in question is partly reflected in the pedagogic
analysis.
In this case, rather than focusing on
a theory regarding the pedagogic relationship, we are concerned with an
analysis of the triangular relationship between the child, the educator and the
point of view being communicated. It hardly needs to be emphasized that such an
analysis is also likely to include anthropological factors. A rational and
objectifying approach to the transfer of knowledge within the context of the
teaching-learning process encourages the pupils to process knowledge critically
and helps to prevent the unquestioning absorption of knowledge. The
anthropological principle that applies in this case is that the human child
should be educated as a rational (and responsible) being.
The considerations outlined above are
some of the standard issues addressed by program-oriented theories of
education, particularly within the tradition of the humanities. Pedagogues who
lean towards conceptual analysis can therefore claim that they have already
dealt with this aspect, given that conceptual analysis is concerned with
distinguishing between meaning and nonsense, fiction and reality. In the same
way, descriptive scientists can question the empirical and practical relevance
of the entire anthropological body of thought. In this respect we are all too well
aware of the theoretical diversity that exists within the field of pedagogic
science.
So to sum up the ideas set out above:
Pedagogic reasoning is often based on
ideas developed by philosophical anthropology. Dominant anthropological
principles in pedagogics are man as the not-yet-determined animal and man as a
creature of discipline; the human being as an unspecialized being living in an
open world; the human being as a rational being. Educational theory is often
based on anthropological reflections, seen from the point of view of natural
development, cultural philosophy or personalism. An analysis of the central
question addressed by pedagogics (what needs to be taught to whom, when, how
and why?) is likely to be enhanced by an anthropologically based study of
educational reality.
In the introduction, taking our lead
from Langeveld, we wrote that the purpose of education is to promote
development and self-forming within the context of relatively constant personal
relationships. In most cases the education that occurs within the context
classic family education is conveyed within the home. In traditional pedagogics
the kind of education that takes place within the household is adopted as the
model for residential forms of education. Pestalozzi uses the terms
"Wohnstubenerziehung" (living-room education) and the
"Wohnstubengeist" (living-room atmosphere) that should ideally
prevail in professional education. Domesticity involves a certain naturalness
(Schleiermacher describes education within the home by the child's biological
parents as the "natural starting point of education") and also
includes emotional-affective factors and a coherent community in terms of
concepts and attitudes.
Today -- two centuries on -- the home
is still the main scene of action, though there have been a number of essential
changes in the intervening period. For one thing, children of a very young age
now spend one or more days a week at crčches and day care centers,
children are made to start school younger and younger, the large number of
divorces and second and third marriages mean that many children grow up in a
number of (step) families, older children leave the family earlier to live in
lodgings, or, alternatively, they continue to live at home for longer, or leave
the family home only to return again and again (the so-called boomerang kids).
In other words, the family home is increasingly characterized by huge diversity.
In addition to this, from the point
of view of transmission the 'home' represents something far more fundamental.
In this respect Buber speaks of Hauslosigkeit (homelessness in a figurative
sense) as a characteristic feature of modern culture. According to Buber, the
home -- in the sense of a shared ideology -- has gradually been demolished.
This has implications for interpersonal relationships and life within society
at large. Shared values and standards can no longer be taken for granted.
Tying in with this, many of the
French postmodernist thinkers (Lyotard and Derrida among others) claim that the
"main storylines" (the grands récits) have lost their
credibility. In saying so they are referring not only to the decline of the
Christian world view, which was widely upheld in the past, but -- more broadly
-- to all secularized forms of Judeo-Christian theology subscribed to in the
past, to the myth of human progress being achieved by means of science and
technology, and, more generally, to all of the stories that people have used to
help make the world and their own lives more understandable. In the postmodern
culture the human individual is forced to live without a home, as it were. And
"a homeless person is a disoriented person!" (Sperna Weiland, 1999,
pp. 347 and 364).
The postmodernists deny that there
are any central truths; they emphasize the pluriformity of reality
(differential philosophy) and thus confirm what Nietzsche said a century
earlier: "There is no such thing as absolute truth." On the other
hand, there are countless perspectives from which to examine reality. The same
applies to the understanding of text: there is no single meaning or no single
truth. Similarly, deconstruction teaches that there is no text, there is only
interpretation.
Postmodern principles are not confined to the philosophy
of architecture, they also characterize social reality. This is not something
that pedagogics can afford to overlook since these principles permeate the
"Volk- und Zeitgeist" (Jean Paul). Faced with these postmodern
principles we need to ask what are the pedagogic implications of these
postmodern developments? Or, in the light of the ideas set out above, how does
'Hauslosigkeit' affect "relatively constant personal relationships"
and the child's natural tendency to "determine and shape the values that
it has learned or discovered increasingly independent" (Langeveld) and the
endeavour to teach young people to think critically and to communicate an
awareness of values (Imelman)?
What is 'modern youth'?
Before
we can answer the key question addressed by this article, we first need to have
some idea of the distinguishing characteristics of modern youth. Sociologists
concerned with juveniles frequently conduct research studies on this subject.
The juvenile sociological research department in
According to Du Bois-Reymond the juvenile phase is
under pressure. This phase now involves the characteristic aspects of
individualization and pluriformity, freedom of choice and forced choices, a
negotiation culture combined with informalization, and the movement from a
standard career to an ą la carte career.
Young people now stay at school
longer. The longer period of education and increased peer pressure is changing
the relationship between young people and their parents. Parents increasingly
have to compete with the standards and way of life of their children's peers. The
traditional nuclear family of father, mother and child now exists alongside
other ways of living: communities of unmarried adults with children, divorced
parents, single parents or guardians. There has been a wholesale extension of
the youth phase with a distinction being made between post-adolescents and
young adults. Young people now have more freedom of choice but have to be able
to legitimize their choices.
Compared with a few decades ago
juveniles no longer follow a set life pattern on their way towards adulthood.
The sequence of status passages (the transition from one life situation to the
next, such as the transition from school to higher education or the transition
from living at home to living alone) is now unpredictable. There is no longer
such a thing as a standard career -- it is now more appropriate to think in
terms of ą la carte career. The aspect of choice is also evident at
secondary school. Du Bois-Reymond observes that "The compulsory national
cultural curriculum [...] is giving way in favour of more choice".
"The relationship between
parents and juveniles is now far more intimate, freer and more congenial than
was previously the case." "The present intimacy in families -- call
it domestic negotiation -- has an aspect of uncertainty [...] in the sense that
future is now an uncertain factor for all members of society, regardless of
their age." "This has to do with the labor market which is now
unpredictable."
In addition to the research on the
juvenile phase being carried out in
Though we may agree that it is
helpful and possibly even necessary to educate a child, we are still not sure
precisely what kind of education we are talking about. A broad awareness of the
need for education does not automatically imply that there is unanimity
regarding the content of the educational activity. Above we saw that to some
extent the definition of education is based on anthropological assumptions.
Conditions, methods and objectives all vary depending on the prevailing view of
the human individual, among other things. Arguing that naturalness was primary,
Rousseau defended the idea that the child must be educated to become the human
being that nature intended him to be since the child was unable to achieve this
on its own and cultural influences simply had an adverse effect.
Writing at approximately the same
time, Lessing claimed that a child could be educated given that education
simply served to accelerate and facilitate the process of becoming a human
being that was already underway. As far as Lessing was concerned, the belief in
progress that was one of the main tenets of the Enlightenment included the idea
of education. For this reason it was important to subject society to
constructive criticism (and not to turn away from society as Rousseau
advocated), for this would also accelerate the process of society becoming more
rational.
Agreeing with the principles voiced
by Rousseau and Lessing, Pestalozzi -- who was also writing in around 1800 --
was in favour of a method of education that drew on the natural development of
the child and he also devoted a great deal of effort to the creation a better
society. Accepting the biologically established incompleteness and
unspecializedness of the human child who, in addition to this, also lives in an
open world, one-and-a-half centuries later Gehlen felt it necessary to emphasize
the need for discipline (see the first paragraph of this article).
However, pedagogics is usually more
complex than this tends to suggest. For besides seeing the corruption of nature
(which he wished to restore) Pestalozzi also saw an unjust society (which he
wished to change) and in addition to this he was also an ardently religious
man. As might be expected, all of these different aspects are reflected in his
concept of education. The later interpretations of his work sometimes focus
exclusively on one aspect, giving the impression that there were several
Pestalozzis (or should we acknowledge that these interpretations are all true
in the way that postmodernism recognizes the validity of different
interpretations).
The confusion got worse still when in
1996 writers in
And it gets more complex still if we
attempt to visualize education under conditions of postmodernity. Postmodernist
theory may well help to clarify the issues faced by modern-day education, by
establishing a connection between Hauslosigkeit, the sense of disorientation
and the teaching of values. Yet it is difficult to conceive of a practice of
education deliberately based on the body of postmodernist thought. For what
does the educator have to offer the child if the educator constantly points to
the wealth of perspectives, denying the existence of absolute truth and
relativizing all explanatory associations?
The application of postmodernist
theory in educational situations presupposes that any such theory would first
be comprehensively formulated as a pedagogic approach before there could be any
practical consequences. Generally speaking, leaving aside the question as to
whether such an approach would actually be desirable, children are
uncomfortable with uncertainty or with a wealth of perspectives and the
relativization of values. For the rest, it is possible to conceive of an
educational theory that draws on insights expounded by differential philosophy,
for example. Even if it is only that on the basis of this philosophy the gender
aspect of education can be elaborated in a new way.
If the attempt to define precisely
what we mean by the term 'education' and to identify the kinds of assumptions
are at issue proves problematic within the context of a single concept of
education, it is hardly surprising that it will be even more difficult to
arrive at unequivocality and unanimity within the science of education as a
whole. History shows a kaleidoscopic picture of standard concepts of education
and in our day the science of education is still characterized by a diversity
of concepts and methods. The answer to the question "What is
education?" gives rise to a picture of diverse activities. However, when
it comes to a general description of the terrain, Kant's definition (1803)
still stands. Education encompasses the following four aspects: nurture and
protection, the teaching of rules (discipline), instruction and training.
Education is a matter of
"cheerful seriousness", but serious all the same. In order to prevent
a situation in which pedagogics lapses into unfortunate relativism ("there
is no such thing as absolute truth") or degenerates into a supermarket
model ("every customer selects something to suit his taste"), it is
necessary to establish certain a priori rights of the child being educated
(possibly based on the UN declaration regarding the rights of the child, or on
other respectable and broadly upheld principles, such as Albert Schweitzer's
maxim of "Respect for life"). As far as the science of education is
concerned, it is important to state explicitly, as far as possible, the basic
principles being subscribed to.
If it is true that young people have
never been faced with as much uncertainty as they are in our time (in the sense
of 'Hauslosigkeit', looser family ties, unrelenting dictatorship of choice,
uncertain expectations with regard to the future, a potpourri attitude towards
values and standards, etc.), it is all the more necessary to subject education
and training to the critical authority of reason. As formulated by Imelman and
Meijer in triadic pedagogics: education in which pupils are taught to ask
teachers to account for the subject matter being taught, and teachers are asked
to account for what they are teaching by means of the game of reducing
uncertainty. The idea is that pupils should be able to gain a thorough command
of the subject they are being taught, in other words, that they should reflect
on what they are learning and assume responsibility and in doing so create a
hold on life. This is a prerequisite for the child to be able to develop into a
person. And in a scientific sense a permanently critical outlook that does not
shy from criticizing sacred cows in the interest of education.
Or, as formulated by Bollnow in his
anthropological pedagogics, an education in which a permanent appeal is made to
the (development of the) inner reason of the child. Education is more necessary
than ever, an education that continues to be a true subject of conversation:
"Since we are a conversation and can listen to each other"
(Hölderlin).
Pedagogy
is also occasionally referred to as the correct use of instructive strategies (see
instructional theory). For example, Paulo Freire referred to his method of
teaching adult humans as "critical pedagogy". In correlation with
those instructive strategies the instructor's own philosophical beliefs of
instruction are harbored and governed by the pupil's background knowledge and
experience, situation, and environment, as well as learning goals set by the
student and teacher. One example would be the Socratic schools of thought
The
Latin-derived word for pedagogy: child-instruction, is in modern use in English
to refer to the whole context of instruction, learning, and the actual
operation involved therein, although both words have roughly the same original
meaning. In English the term pedagogy is used to refer to
instructive theory; trainee teachers learn their subject and also the pedagogy
appropriate for teaching that subject. The introduction of information
technology into schools has necessitated changes in pedagogy; teachers are
adopting new methods of teaching facilitated by the new technology. The late
Malcolm Knowles reasoned that the term andragogy is more pertinent when
discussing adult learning and teaching. He referred to andragogy as the art and
science of teaching adults.
THE present is the age of
intellectualism. The intellect is that faculty of soul in the exercise of which
man's inner being participates least. One speaks with some justification of the
cold intellectual nature; we need only reflect how the intellect acts upon
artistic perception or practice. It dispels or impedes. And artists dread that
their creations may be conceptually or symbolically explained by the
intelligence. In the clarity of the intellect the warmth of soul which, in the
act of creation, gave life to their works, is extinguished. The artist would like
his work to be grasped by feeling, not by the understanding. For then the
warmth with which he has experienced it is communicated to the beholder. But
this warmth is repelled by an intellectual explanation.
In social life intellectualism
separates men from one another. They can only work rightly within the community
when they are able to impart to their deeds — which always involve the weal or
woe of their fellow beings — something of their soul. One man should experience
not only another's activity but something of his soul. In a deed, however,
which springs from intellectualism, a man withholds his soul nature. He does
not let it flow over to his neighbour. It has long been said that in the
teaching and training of children intellectualism operates in a crippling way.
In saying this one has in mind, in the first place, only the child's
intelligence, not the teacher's. One would like to fashion one's methods of
training and instruction so that not only the child's cold understanding may be
aroused and developed, but warmth of heart may be engendered too.
The anthroposophical view of the
world is in full agreement with this. It accepts fully the excellent
educational maxims which have grown from this demand. But it realises clearly
that warmth can only be imparted from soul to soul. On this account it holds
that, above all, pedagogy itself must become ensouled, and thereby the
teachers' whole activity.
In recent times intellectualism has
permeated strongly into methods of instruction and training. It has achieved
this indirectly, by way of modern science. Parents let science dictate what is
good for the child's body, soul and spirit. And teachers, during their
training, receive from science the spirit of their educational methods.
But science has achieved its triumphs
precisely through intellectualism. It wants to keep its thoughts free of
anything from man's own soul life, letting them receive everything from sense
observation and experiment. Such a science could build up the excellent
knowledge of nature of our time, but it cannot found a true pedagogy.
A true pedagogy must be based upon a
knowledge that embraces man with respect to body, soul and spirit.
Intellectualism only grasps man with respect to his body, for to observation
and experiment the bodily alone is revealed. Before a true pedagogy can be
founded, a true knowledge of man is necessary. This Anthroposophy seeks to
attain.
One cannot come to a knowledge of man
by first forming an idea of his bodily nature with the help of a science
founded merely on what can be grasped by the senses, and then asking whether
this bodily nature is ensouled, and whether a spiritual element is active
within it. In dealing with a child such an attitude is harmful. For in him, far
more than in the adult, body, soul and spirit form a unity. One cannot care
first for the health of the child from the point of view of a merely natural
science, and then want to give to the healthy organism what one regards as
proper from the point of view of soul and spirit. In all that one does to the
child and with the child one benefits or injures his bodily life. In man's
earthly life soul and spirit express themselves through the body. A bodily
process is a revelation of soul and spirit.
Material science is of necessity
concerned with the body as a physical organism; it does not come to a
comprehension of the whole man. Many feel this while regarding pedagogy, but
fail to see what is needed to-day. They do not say: pedagogy cannot thrive on
material science; let us therefore found our pedagogic methods out of pedagogic
instincts and not out of material science. But half-consciously they are of
this opinion.
We may admit this in theory, but in
practice it leads to nothing, for modern humanity has lost the spontaneity of
the life of instinct. To try to-day to build up an instinctive pedagogy on
instincts which are no longer present in man in their original force, would
remain a groping in the dark. We come to see this through anthroposophical
knowledge. We learn to know that the intellectualistic trend in science owes
its existence to a necessary phase in the evolution of mankind. In recent times
man passed out of the period of instinctive life. The intellect became of
predominant significance. Man needed it in order to advance on his evolutionary
path in the right way. It leads him to that degree of consciousness which he
must attain in a certain epoch, just as the individual must acquire particular
capabilities at a particular period of his life. But the instincts are crippled
under the influence of the intellect, and one cannot try to return to the
instinctive life without working against man's evolution. We must accept the
significance of that full consciousness which has been attained through
intellectualism, and — in full consciousness — give to man what instinctive
life can no longer give him.
We need for this a knowledge of soul
and spirit which is just as much founded on reality as is material,
intellectualistic science. Anthroposophy strives for just this, yet it is this
that many people shrink from accepting. They learn to know the way modern
science tries to understand man. They feel he cannot be known in this way, but
they will not accept that it is possible to cultivate a new mode of cognition
and — in clarity of consciousness equal to that in which one penetrates the
bodily nature — attain to a knowledge of soul and spirit. So they want to
return to the instincts again in order to understand the child and train him.
But he must go forwards; and there is
no other way than to extend anthropology by acquiring Anthroposophy and sense
knowledge by acquiring spiritual knowledge. We have to learn all over again.
Men are terrified at the complete change of thought required for this. From
unconscious fear they attack Anthroposophy as fantastic, yet it only wants to
proceed in the spiritual domain as soberly and as carefully as material science
in the physical.
Let us consider the child. About the
seventh year of life he develops his second teeth. This is not merely the work
of the period of time immediately preceding. It is a process that begins with
embryonic development and only concludes with the second teeth. These forces,
which produce the second teeth at a certain stage of development, were always
active in the child's organism. They do not reveal themselves in this way in
subsequent periods of life. Further teeth formations do not occur. Yet the
forces concerned have not been lost; they continue to work; they have merely
been transformed. They have undergone a metamorphosis. (There are still other
forces in the child's organism which undergo metamorphosis in a similar way.)
If we study in this way the
development of the child's organism we discover that these forces are active
before the change of teeth. They are absorbed in the processes of nourishment
and growth. They live in undivided unity with the body, freeing themselves from
it about the seventh year. They live on as soul forces; we find them active in
the older child in feeling and thinking.
Anthroposophy shows that an etheric
organism permeates the physical organism of man. Up to the seventh year the
whole of this etheric organism is active in the physical. But now a portion of
the etheric organism becomes free from direct activity in the physical. It
acquires a certain independence, becoming thereby an independent vehicle of the
soul life, relatively free from the physical organism.
In earth life, however, soul
experience can only develop with the help of this etheric organism. Hence the
soul is quite embedded in the body before the seventh year. To be active during
this period, it must express itself through the body. The child can only come
into relationship with the outer world when this relationship takes the form of
a stimulus which runs its course within the body. This can only be the case
when the child imitates. Before the change of teeth the child is a purely
imitative being in the widest sense. His training must consist in this: that
those around him perform before him what he is to imitate.
The child's educator should experience
within himself what it is to have the whole etheric organism within the
physical. This gives him knowledge of the child. With abstract principles alone
one can do nothing. Educational practice requires an anthroposophical art of
education to work out in detail how the human being reveals himself as a child.
Just as the etheric organism is
embedded in the physical until the change of teeth, so, from the change of
teeth until puberty, there is embedded in the physical and etheric a soul
organism, called the astral organism by Anthroposophy. As a result of this the
child develops a life that no longer expends itself in imitation. But he cannot
yet govern his relation to others in accordance with fully conscious thoughts
regulated by intellectual judgment. This first becomes possible when, at
puberty, a part of the soul organism frees itself from the corresponding part
of the etheric organism. From his seventh to his fourteenth or fifteenth year
the child's life is not mainly determined by his relation to those around him
in so far as this results from his power of judgment. It is the relation which
comes through authority that is important now.
This means that, during these years,
the child must look up to someone whose authority he can accept as a matter of
course. His whole education must now be fashioned with reference to this. One
cannot build upon the child's power of intellectual judgment, but one should
perceive clearly that the child wants to accept what is put before him as true,
good and beautiful, because the teacher, whom he takes for his model, regards
it as true, good and beautiful.
Moreover the teacher must work in
such a way that he not merely puts before the child the True, the Good and the
Beautiful, but — in a sense — is these. What the teacher is passes over into
the child, not what he teaches. All that is taught should be put before the
child as a concrete ideal. Teaching itself must be a work of art, not a matter
of theory.
The case method is based on a
philosophy of professional education which associates knowledge directly with
action (Boehrer, 1995). This philosophy rejects the doctrine that students
should first learn passively, and then, having learned, should apply knowledge.
Instead, the case method is based on the principle that real education consists
of the cumulative and unending acquisition, combination and reordering of
learning experiences.
There are two fundamental principles
underpinning the case method. First, the best-learned lessons are the ones that
students teach themselves, through their own struggles. Second, many of the
most useful kinds of understanding and judgement cannot be taught but must be
learned through practical experience. When instructors assign problems or
papers in a course, they are motivated by a similar concern: by working through
the problem set on their own or writing the paper, students reach a deeper
understanding of the concepts and ideas than they would have if they only read
the text or listened passively to lectures. Case method teaching extends this
principle to make preparing for class and the class session itself an active
learning experience for students. By using complex real-world problems as the
focus, it challenges students to learn skills that will be appropriate to deal
with the practical problems that they will face as economists, civil servants
or private managers.
Teaching through the case method
allows educators to address specific pedagogical issues and to develop
higher-order skills in students. Velenchik (1995) highlights four pedagogical
issues addressed by the case method:
Motivation to learn theory. In
general, undergraduate economics courses tend to treat applications as
secondary to the exposition of theory. In our teaching we often use examples to
illustrate the application of particular theoretical concepts. However, we tend
to use the example to reinforce the theory, having taught the theory first,
rather than thinking of the theory as a set of tools for answering the question
posed by the application. The focus, therefore, is on the theory itself, and
the application is often perceived as incidental. When students do not
understand the purpose of theory, the process of learning becomes more dry and
difficult than it needs to be, and they often fail to grasp the tools they need.
In the case method, the problem that the students are challenged to solve takes
centre stage. They soon realise that they do not have the tools and they start
looking for the tools. They want to learn theory.
Application of theory. The ultimate
goal of economics education is to enable students to apply economic reasoning
to particular policy issues. The focus is generally as much on the process of
policy analysis as on the specific area of policy. One method for illustrating
the process is through examples related to lectures. However, this is
problematic. The example is often preceded by theory, so that students think of
the application as a use of the theory, rather than seeing the theory as a tool
for dealing with the issues raised by the application. Examples are commonly
selected because they are good illustrations of particular theoretical
concepts, but they do little to help students learn which theories are
appropriate for which kinds of policy problem. On the other hand, the case
method requires the student to identify the theory that best addresses the
economic problem under investigation.
Use of evidence. Empirical analysis,
guided by theoretical concepts and analytical tools, is central to many economics
modules. Students are often required to develop an ability to use quantitative
evidence. This often involves a number of tasks, including determining what
types of evidence are relevant measures of particular phenomena, evaluating the
credibility of available information, performing calculations to arrive at
appropriate and useful measures, and finding the best way to convey this
information using tables and graphs. In this respect, although the lecture and
example method usually provides students with some exposure to quantitative
information, it does not require them to do the work themselves. A prepared
classroom example does not provide training in how to select, manipulate and
present such evidence; nor does it help students learn to interpret evidence
themselves. Case studies include raw data that students have to manipulate,
represent and comment on in order to solve the problem.
Limitation of theory. One of the most
difficult aspects of applying economic analysis is understanding which parts of
a question can be answered by economic analysis, and which are best addressed
using other disciplines. In particular, students need to learn the difference
between identifying economic consequences of a policy choice and considering
these decisions in the broader social and political context in which
policy-makers and business leaders find themselves. It is difficult to use a
lecture and example to fulfil these goals, since classroom examples are often
abstracted from their context. The case method forces students to be confronted
with the broader (non-economic) consequences of economic decisions.
The case method can also be used in a
very effective way in order to move students gradually up the cognitive skills
ladder from the low skills levels of knowledge, comprehension and application
to the higher and more desirable skills of analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
This educational taxonomy was originally proposed by Bloom (1956) and, even if
not uncontested, it provides a transparent and structured approach to the
development of students’ skills. The following list describes this educational
taxonomy and then explains how the case method helps in developing each of the
skills.
Knowledge. This refers to the
student’s ability to remember previously learned information. It involves the
recall of a wide range of material but all that is required is bringing
appropriate information to mind, not necessarily understanding its meaning. The
case method is probably not the most efficient way to convey knowledge. However,
in combination with some lectures, it can be used to broaden knowledge.
Comprehension. This skill is defined
as the ability to grasp the meaning of material and it can be demonstrated by
translating material from one form to another, by interpreting material and by
extrapolating information. By basing knowledge within a real-world context, the
case method supports and facilitates the comprehension of basic knowledge.
Application. This is the ability to
use learned material in new and concrete situations. It may include the
application of rules, methods, concepts, principles, law and theories. Through
the analysis of policy decisions or business strategies, students develop an
understanding of how theory is applied in real-world contexts.
Analysis. This identifies the ability
to break down material into its component parts so that its organisational
structure may be understood. The process generally includes identification of
the parts, analysis of the relationships among the parts and recognition of the
organisational principles involved. As already mentioned, analysis is at the
centre of the case method. The case studies require students to break down
complex information, establish relationships and identify issues.
Synthesis. This skill refers to the ability
to put parts together to form a new whole. The process may involve, for
example, the production of a unique communication (presentation) or a plan of
operations (research proposal). Case studies foster this skill by requiring
students to identify relevant information, summarise fundamental concepts and
present a concise summary of main events.
Evaluation. Critical evaluation is
concerned with the ability to judge the value of material for a given purpose.
After having analysed and synthesised a particular case, students are required
to engage in an evaluation of alternative policies or strategies available to
policy-makers or business leaders. This can include an evaluation of decisions
already taken against possible alternative solutions.
The case method is a rich and
powerful approach to the development of cognitive skills in students. It is
also a flexible approach, in the sense that lecturers can use it in alternative
ways. These are discussed in the next section.
Pedagogy the science of the specially
organized, goal-oriented, and systematic molding of a human being; the science
of the content, forms, and methods of upbringing, education, and instruction.
The basic categories of pedagogy are
personality formation, upbringing, education, and instruction. Personality
formation, formerly called upbringing in its broad sense, is the process of
shaping an individual by means of goal-oriented influence (upbringing in the
true sense of the word) and of the varied and often contradictory influences of
the environment. In contemporary foreign pedagogy the first group of influences
is often called intentional upbringing, and the second functional upbringing.
In Marxist pedagogy, upbringing is a
key concept referring to the goal-oriented activities of society and family
directed toward forming a fully developed person, chiefly in institutions and
organizations specially created by society. The concept of upbringing generally
comprises intellectual, moral, labor, aesthetic, and physical upbringing as
well as the formation of a world view. However, such distinctions are largely
arbitrary, since upbringing in practice is a single, integrated process.
Education
is the process and result of assimilating a system of knowledge and of
developing skills and habits eventually ensuring a certain level of development
of a person’s cognitive needs and capacities and his ability to perform some
kind of practical activity. A distinction is made between general and
specialized education. General education provides each person with the
knowledge, skills, and habits he needs for overall development. These are the
basis for a subsequent specialized education, whose goal is preparation for
professional work. In level and scope, both general and specialized education
may be primary, secondary, or higher. Polytechnic education is an integral part
of general education.
A most important means for effecting
education and upbringing is instruction, the process of transmitting and
assimilating knowledge, skills, and habits and the modes of cognition necessary
for the realization of a continuous educational process. The process of
instruction comprises the two interconnected parts of a single whole: teaching,
the pedagogue’s transmittal of knowledge and his supervision of students’
independent work; and learning, the students’ mastery of a system of knowledge,
skills, and habits. Pedagogy is one of the sciences studying man, human
society, and the conditions of human life; thus, it takes its place alongside
such disciplines as philosophy, ethics, aesthetics, psychology, political
economy, ethics, sociology, history, anatomy, physiology, and medicine. It uses
their hypotheses and research methods, including mathematical statistics and
cybernetics, as well as the results of their empiric research.
Structure and system of pedagogic
disciplines. Within the framework of pedagogy are a number of relatively
independent divisions dealing with individual facets of teaching and
upbringing. The development of the goals, tasks, content, principles, methods,
and organization of education and instruction is the province of didactics, or
the theory of education and instruction. The theory and methodology of upbringing
concern themselves with the formation of moral qualities, political
convictions, and aesthetic tastes, as well as with the organization of pupils’
and students’ activities. The discipline of school administration studies all
organizational problems related to the management of public education and to
the network, structure, and management of educational institutions.
In order to make use of pedagogical
research and to study pedagogy thoroughly as a discipline, it is necessary to
distinguish the features of upbringing and instruction of groups having
different ages and professional orientations. Examples of these groups are
preschool children; pupils and students in general-education schools,
vocational schools, secondary specialized and higher educational institutions;
and members of the military service. Here, such arbitrary designations as
preschool, school-age, and higher-educational pedagogy are used, and under
study are the organization and the upbringing and instructional methods for a
given contingent of students. The specific pedagogic principles governing each
group are taken into account.
Related to pedagogy as such are the
teaching methods for individual disciplines. Defectology studies the
psychophysiological development of abnormal children and the principles of
their upbringing, education, and instruction. It includes such narrowly
specialized branches as the theory and methods of bringing up, educating, and
instructing deaf and hard-of-hearing children, children who are blind or have
poor vision, mentally defective children, and children with speech defects.
Also related to pedagogy is the history of pedagogy, a discipline that studies
the development of the theory and practice of upbringing, education, and
instruction during various historical periods.
Development as a science. The first
attempts to interpret upbringing in terms of the needs of society were made
during the period when slaveholding states flourished in the
During the Middle Ages, pedagogical
views in
Pedagogical views of the 14th to 16th
centuries reflected both a striving to free human thought from religious dogma
and the revival of interest in man himself and in his everyday work. These were
traits characteristic of the period of feudalism’s decline and the emergence of
capitalist social relations. Writing in diverse genres, Renaissance humanists
such as T. More, T. Campanella, Erasmus of Rotterdam, F. Rabelais, and M.
Montaigne advanced ideas of an all-around harmonious development of man’s
spiritual and physical resources. They favored a secular education based on the
assimilation of the ancient world’s cultural legacy and on the achievements of
science, which was developing rapidly.
The history of pedagogy as an
integrated theory of educating man began at the time of the first bourgeois
revolutions in
Beginning with the period of the
English Civil War of the 17th century, two basic trends in the development of
pedagogical thought may be distinguished. The feudal and clerical concept of
upbringing continued to prevail, but at the same time a new, bourgeois
interpretation of upbringing emerged, whose goal was to mold a man of action
and prepare him for his struggle for personal well-being. A clear expression of
the new ideals of upbringing is found in the works of the English Enlightenment
philosopher J. Locke, who stressed the importance of moral and physical
upbringing and originated the utilitarian approach to education and
instruction. Locke’s opposition to the theory of innate ideas was of major
importance.
In the 18th century theories of
upbringing developed chiefly within the framework of the Enlightenment. Guided
by Locke’s doctrine of the innate equality of man, such leading French thinkers
as C. A. Helvetius, D. Diderot, and J.-J. Rousseau developed the hypotehsis of
the decisive role of upbringing and environment in personality formation.
Diderot, in particular, considered one of the basic tasks of upbringing to be
the development of a person’s individuality. The French materialists
substantiated and popularized the idea of a practical education that would
eventually replace scholastic education. The greatest contribution to
18th-century pedagogical thought was made by Rousseau, who originated the
concept of a natural, free upbringing. Rousseau undertook to outline the tasks,
content, and methods of bringing up and instructing children, proceeding from
the specific features of their physical and spiritual development at different
stages of growth; he stressed the need for more active methods of instructing
children. His influence is seen in the democratic plans for reforming public
education in
Pedagogical thought in the 18th and
19th centuries was influenced by a number of theses of German classical
philosophy as expounded in the works of I. Kant, J. G. Fichte, and G. W. F.
Hegel. The Swiss democratic pedagogue J. H. Pes-talozzi played an important
role in resolving pedagogical problems. He attempted to construct a theory of
upbringing and instruction based on psychological data. His experience and
thoughts dealt with child development during instruction and upbringing and
with vocational instruction and methods of teaching reading, writing,
arithmetic, geography, and other subjects at the elementary level. His work
stimulated the development of the science of upbringing in the first half of
the 19th century. Pestalozzi was the first theoretician of the public school.
During the first half of the 19th
century the German pedagogue, psychologist, and philosopher J. F. Herbart
attempted to present pedagogy as a scientific theory based on philosophy and
psychology. In his view, philosophy laid the groundwork for the goals of
upbringing, and psychology permitted us to find the correct ways of attaining
these goals. A number of Herbart’s theses were used in the later development of
pedagogy. These included his views on the role played by interest in instruction,
on the educative nature of instruction, and on the structure of the learning
process. At the same time, however, bourgeois pedagogues assimilated the
conservative aspects of Herbart’s doctrine. These were expressed in his theory
on handling children, which amounted to suppressing the child’s personality by
means of a detailed and fully elaborated system of restrictions and punishments.
The 19th-century German democratic
pedagogue F. A. W. Diesterweg contributed significantly to pedagogy in general
and to didactics in particular. He maintained that one of the most important
factors in upbringing was the principle of cultural conformity—the taking into
account, during the process of upbringing, of all aspects of the culture,
history, and economy characteristic of a country and its people. Together with
the concept of conforming to nature in upbringing, originated by Comenius,
Rousseau, and Pestalozzi though interpreted differently by each, Diesterweg’s
principle of cultural conformity significantly enriched pedagogy.
In the late 19th century the movement
of progressive education arose. Its adherents expressed the interests of
various strata of the bourgeoisie then hostile to one another but united in
their opposition to the proletariat and its ideology. The followers of the
movement also criticized the scholastic content and dogmatic instructional
methods in schools suppressing the personality of pupils and students. The
representatives of such currents of progressive education as the new
upbringing, the labor school, the movement for art training, and the pedagogy
of the personality advocated the free development of each child’s
individuality. These educators wanted to develop new organizational forms and methods
of instruction, to reform curricula, and to place greater emphasis on
upbringing in schools. The ideas of such exponents of progressive education as
J. Dewey, G. Kerschen-steiner, L. Gurlitt, H. Scharrelmann, O. Decroly, M.
Montes-sori, and A. Ferrière dominated bourgeois pedagogy until the
mid-20th century and, to an extent, have been influential to the present time.
In Russia during the 16th and 17th
centuries, the old Christian and feudal concept of upbringing as a means of
overcoming man’s original sin and developing feelings of humility, submission,
and religiosity was challenged by expanding humanistic views of man, although
often expressed in concepts and terms of Orthodoxy, and expounded by Simeon
Polotskii, Epifanii Slavi-netskii, and the monastic scholars.
The first state system of schools was
established in
Before the 1860’s, progressive
pedagogical ideas in
The development of the emancipation
movement that began in the mid-1850’s engendered a widespread antiserfdom
movement in pedagogy. Prominent scholars, authors, and educators of the time,
including N. I. Pirogov, L. N. Tolstoy, and N. Kh. Vessel’, discussed problems
of upbringing and of the impending school reform. Of central importance were
questions of the purpose of schools, the humanization of upbringing, and
changes to be made in education and teaching methods. Indiscriminate application
of foreign pedagogical theories and educational systems was attacked, and a
movement for the establishment of a national system of upbringing emerged. All
this contributed to pedagogy’s development into an independent professional
discipline.
The establishment of pedagogy as a
science in
Ushinskii observed the difference
between unintentional molding of human personality by the society and
upbringing as a purposeful activity for the social reproduction of man. He used
the phrase “upbringing in the broad and narrow sense of the word” to define the
process. These observations led him to define the subject of pedagogy and to divide
pedagogy into a number of branches. By taking a many-sided view of man in the
light of information provided by all the sciences studying man and his life,
Ushinskii was able to found the discipline of pedagogical anthropology, which
he considered the science of educating man as he develops, or pedagogy as such.
Research into these fundamental
problems provided the basis for a substantiated theory of education and
instruction, which in turn was the basis for the best prerevolutionary
public-school textbooks and for the development of teaching methods. In the
late 19th and early 20th centuries, general problems of pedagogy and didactics
were studied by P. F. Kapterev, V. P. Ostrogor-skii, V. P. Vakhterov, N. F.
Bunakov, I. N. Ul’ianov, and P. F. Lesgaft and teaching methods by V. Ia.
Stoiunin, V. I. Vodovo-zov, and D. D. Semenov. These fields developed
extensively at this time under the influence of Ushinskii’s ideas and as a
result of his adherents’ work. Ushinskii’s pedagogical ideas also influenced
pedagogic through among other peoples of
The turning point in the
establishment and development of a truly scientific system of pedagogy was the
creation of the theory of dialectical and historical materialism by K. Marx and
F. En-gels in the mid-19th century. The founders of scientific Communism stated
that man is essentially the sum of social relations, which he “transfers” to
himself during the process of social and practical activity. They declared that
even while men influence their natural environment and social milieu, they
change their own nature. These discoveries revealed the means and factors
involved in the social molding of the personality. The works of Marx and Engels
disclosed the class character of upbringing in a class society. Their works
examined in general the content and methods of molding a fully and harmoniously
developed person; the tasks, content, and methods of polytechnic education; the
forms and methods of combining instruction with productive work; and the
correlation between family upbringing and that of society. Marx and Engels
developed the theory of Communist education for the new man. They pointed out
that this theory can be realized only after the power of the working class is
established.
The basic tenets of the Marxist
doctrine of upbringing were developed and defined concretely by V. I. Lenin,
who maintained that in a socialist society the younger generation should be inculcated
with a materialist world view, Communist convictions, and high moral qualities.
The means for achieving this goal are a broad scientific education on a
polytechnic base, the linking of instruction with productive work, and the
participation of young people in the work of building a new society. Lenin’s
doctrine of socialist culture, enlightenment, and Communist education became
the basis of modern pedagogy.
Pedagogy in the
The solution of theoretical problems
of Soviet pedagogy dealing with the relationship of pedagogy to other sciences
and with the definition of its subject, tasks, and methods has called for a
critical review of the pedagogical concepts and theories of the past. As early
as the 1920’s, the People’s Commissariat for Education of the RSFSR founded
research institutes in
In the second half of the 1920’s
pedagogical research institutes were founded in the
The establishment and development of
Soviet pedagogy is linked with the names of such well-known pedagogues as P. P.
Blonskii, A. P. Pinkevich, B. P. Esipov, M. A. Danilov, Sh. I. Ganelin, L. V.
Zankov, M. N. Skatkin, I. T. Ogorodnikov, and S. G. Shapovalenko (didactics);
V. A. Sukhomlinskii, I. F. Svadkovskii, I. A. Kairov, N. K. Goncharov, E. I.
Monoszon, and N. I. Boldyrev (theory and methods of upbringing); and N. A.
Konstantinov, E. N. Medynskii, V. Z. Smirnov, F. F. Korolev, D. O.
Lordkipanidze, I. K. Kadyrov, M. M. Mekhti-zade, A. A. Kurbanov, S. Kh.
Chavdarov, A. E. Izmailov, and S. R. Radzhabov (history of pedagogy). In the
years of Soviet power, scholarly editions have been published of the
pedagogical works of many outstanding thinkers of the past who contributed to
the founding of pedagogy, among them Comenius, Diester-weg, Locke, Pestalozzi,
Herbart, Fourier, Owen, Belinskii, Herzen, Chernyshevskii, Dobroliubov,
Pisarev, Ushinskii, and Lesgaft. In addition, such trends of the age of
imperialism as modern upbringing, the labor school, pragmatism, and
experimental pedagogy have been critically analyzed. Textbooks and teaching
aids on pedagogy and history, as well as such reference works as the
Pedagogical Encyclopedia (vols. 1–3, 1927–29), the Pedagogical Dictionary
(vols. 1–2, 1960), and the Pedagogical Encyclopedia (vols. 1–4, 1964–68), have
helped summarize and systematize the attainments of Soviet pedagogy.
The chief aim of modern research in
Marxist pedagogical science is to find the best ways to mold a fully and
harmoniously developed personality, one which is spiritually rich, highly
moral, and physically perfect. Pedagogy shows how to develop the content of
education and make it correspond to the needs of socialist economy, culture,
and science. The age of the scientific and technical revolution is marked by a
rapid growth of knowledge in all fields of science, requiring a wider scope of
scientific education. Schools must supply this even while their own means and
those of the students remain almost the same. Factors to be taken into account
include the length of the period of study and of the academic day, as well as
the students’ energy and their fatigue factor. Pedagogy develops new principles
and criteria for selecting the content of general education: it studies the
expansion of learning units, the generalization of knowledge applicable to the
needs of general education, the reinforcement of system and theory in general
education, and the consistent implementation of the polytechnic principle as a
leading criterion in the selection of material for study.
Research in the field of instruction
seeks ways to stimulate students and to develop their independence and
initiative as they acquire knowledge. Thus, research is being carried on which
aims to modernize the canonical forms of the lesson by introducing various
types of group and individual student work while retaining the teacher in the
role of leader. Other studies are being conducted that seek to perfect means
and methods of instruction in order to maximize students’ cognitive interests
and abilities and to develop their ability to organize work rationally. An
important trend in pedagogical research is the study of the political,
ideological, and moral upbringing of youth and of inculcating in them a
communist world view. Such research investigates the content and natural laws
of the process of molding communist views and convictions, as well as effective
pedagogical means to ensure the development in young people of communist
consciousness and conduct. The further progress of pedagogy as a science
depends to a great extent on defining more precisely the subject itself and its
categories and terminology, on improving research methods; and on strengthening
ties with other disciplines.
Other current topics of pedagogical
research are the history of individual pedagogical problems and their solution,
as well as the origin of various pedagogical concepts, theories, methods, and
ideas. Such an approach makes the history of pedagogy a true history of the
science of upbringing and gives historical research in the field a prognostic
significance.
In other socialist countries as well,
much attention is devoted to the study of pedagogy. A number of pedagogical
research institutes have been founded, such as the
Contemporary bourgeois pedagogy. In
the
In contemporary bourgeois pedagogy
there is no unity of approach to the basic problems of upbringing, owing to
dependence on different schools of idealist philosophy and on various religious
doctrines. This absence of unity is reflected in the very names of different
pedagogical trends: neopositivism (B. Russell, T. P. Nunn), existentialist
pedagogy (J. P. Sartre, O. F. Boll-now), Catholic or neo-Thomist pedagogy (J.
Maritain, F. X. Eggersdorfer), and evangelical pedagogy (M. Stalmann, K.
Schaller). These are not true schools of pedagogy but the views on education of
proponents of these philosophical and religious doctrines. There is also a
tendency to divide pedagogy into separate, often self-contained disciplines.
These include comparative pedagogy (Y. Bereday, W. Brickman, J. Lauwerys, F.
Hilker. L. Frese), cybernetic pedagogy (F. von Cube, H. Frank), and group
pedagogy (M. Kelber, E. Hofmann).
In contemporary bourgeois pedagogy,
the chief topic studied is didactics. In particular, researchers are trying to
elucidate the psychological mechanisms governing instruction and learning (J.
Bruner, J. Piaget, H. Roth). They are attempting to adapt education to the
needs of each student; the goal of their efforts approaches individual instruction.
To help realize these aims the audiovisual-aid method has been developed.
Programmed instruction, fashionable in the 1950’s and 1960’s, did not justify
the expectations it had raised: special research conducted in the
In many countries, and particularly in the
Pedagogical content knowledge is an accumulation of common elements;
• Knowledge of subject matter
• Knowledge of students and possible
misconceptions
• Knowledge of curricula
• Knowledge of general pedagogy.
A brief history of
Pedagogy
Although pedagogy varies across European countries,
there are similar roots that have developed into differing strands of
contemporary thinking in pedagogy. Hämäläinen (2003) explains
that "historically, social pedagogy is based on the belief that you can
decisively influence social circumstances through education" - and
importantly, education does not only refer to children but includes educating
adults, for instance in order to change their idea of children. While
philosophers of Classical antiquity like Plato and Aristotle discussed how
education could contribute to social development, social pedagogy in theory and
practice only emerged through the influence of modern thinking in Renaissance,
the Reformation and later in Enlightenment (Hämäläinen, 2003),
when children started to come into the picture of social philosophy.
In the France of the 1700s, children were seen as
mini-adults - they wore the same clothes as adults and their 'childhood' had
little similarity with contemporary attributes of childhood as a cherished
period of learning, a period of innocence and safety. Born in
His influential novel Émile, published in 1762,
described the education of the fictitious character Émile in line with
what Rousseau considered the principles of natural education, emphasising
wholeness and harmony with nature. His intention was to preserve the child's
'original perfect nature', "by means of the careful control of his
education and environment, based on an analysis of the different physical and
psychological stages through which he passed from birth to maturity"
(Stewart & McCann, 1967). With this concept of children as perfect due to
their proximity to nature, Rousseau radically changed society's notions that
being a child was something to quickly grow out of and replaced it with
something worth preserving in its unspoilt state. Whereas teaching - and
education was reserved for a small minority of children - had previously aimed
to form children into adults, Rousseau innovatively "argued that the momentum
for learning was provided by the growth of the person (nature) - and that what
the educator needed to do was to facilitate opportunities for learning,"
Doyle and Smith (1997) note.
While Rousseau did not achieve to put his educational
philosophy into practice, his groundbreaking ideas inspired many following
pedagogues, notably the Swiss Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827), who
refined Rousseau's thoughts by developing a method of holistic education, which
educates 'head, heart, and hands' in harmonious unity. Stimulating children
intellectually and arousing their curiosity of the world around them would, as
Pestalozzi stated about the 'head', form their cognitive capacity to think. The
moral education of the 'heart' constituted the basic aim to ensure a
"sense of direction, [...] of the inner dignity of our nature, and of the
pure, higher, godly being, which lies within us. This sense is not developed by
the power of our mind in thought, but is developed by the power of our heart in
love." (Pestalozzi, cited in Heafford 1967) As the third and complementary
element, the 'hands' symbolise that learning is also physical, involving the
whole body and all senses: "physical experiences give rise to mental and
spiritual ones", analyses Heafford (1967).
The three elements 'head, heart, and hands' are
inseparable from each other in Pestalozzi's method: "Nature forms the
child as an indivisible whole, as a vital organic unity with many-sided moral,
mental, and physical capacities. [...] Each of these capacities is developed
through and by means of the others", Pestalozzi argued (cited in Heafford,
1967). Based on Pestalozzi's philosophy, his German student Friedrich
Fröbel initiated the kindergarten movement, which raised international
awareness of young children's capacities for learning and inspired childcare
and pedagogy of the early years at a large scale.
Fröbel's and Pestalozzi's ideas sparked interest
across continental Europe, culminating in the New Education Movement, which
looked at ways of transferring these pedagogic concepts into various contexts:
the Italian Maria Montessori, the Austrian Rudolf Steiner and the German Kurt
Hahn all developed their own coherent educational philosophy and founded
schools based on their principles; the Pole Janusz Korczak led two orphan's
homes with great respect to children's rights and participation; and in youth
work Montessori's method was also practiced widely. Thus the New Education
Movement contributed to a continental pedagogic discourse, which gradually
established pedagogy as a way of working with children and young people.
In this discourse, children came to be conceptualised
as equal human beings - Korczak declared that "children do not become
humans, they already are" - and as resourceful, capable and active agents
- the Italian Loris Malaguzzi talked about the "rich child" stating
that "a child has a hundred languages". Furthermore, there was
increasing recognition for child participation and children's rights, for
instance in the pedagogic method of Montessori and the ideas and practice of
Korczak who was one of the leading children's rights advocates and founded in
his orphanages a Children's Republic, where children formed a Children's Court
and a Children's Parliament (see Lifton, 1988).
The New Education made two fundamental points which
demonstrate its ambition to use pedagogy for social change: "First, in all
education the personality of the child is an essential concern; second,
education must make for human betterment, that is for a New Era" (Boyd
& Rawson, 1965). In many European countries, these pedagogic concepts and
philosophies fell on fertile ground and did not only inform future education in
the classroom but also led to the provision of social pedagogic welfare
services, growing into many different pedagogic approaches.
Yet, even though the New Education Movement was very
influential in
Especially in education, there has been great openness
towards ideas of social learning, namely by the Russian Lev Vygotsky, and the
Plowden Report (Central Advisory Council, 1967) is possibly the most
outstanding example of attempts to adopt pedagogic ideas into school. But the
ensuing changes in schools towards child-centred learning were politically and
publicly seen as too radical in a culture where the Victorian notion that
"children are seen, but not heard" is still alive, which shows that
cultural acceptance for pedagogy in this sense has overall been low.
Although pedagogy was early on concerned with changing
social conditions through education - Rousseau is most famous for his Social
Contract (1762) - the term social pedagogy was first used by the German
educationalist Karl Mager in 1844. One of the first key thinkers, Paul Natorp,
"claimed that all pedagogy should be social, that is, that in the
philosophy of education the interaction of educational processes and society
must be taken into consideration (Natorp, 1889; 1907; 1920)"
(Hämäläinen, 2003: p.73). His social pedagogic theories were
influenced by Plato's doctrine of ideas, together with Immanuel Kant's
categorical imperative of treating people as subjects in their own rights
instead of treating them as means to an end, and Pestalozzi's method. In the
1920s, with influential educationalists such as Herman Nohl, German social
pedagogy was interpreted from a hermeneutical perspective, which after World
War II "became more critical, revealing a critical attitude towards
society and taking the structural factors of society that produce social
suffering into consideration" (Hämäläinen, 2003).
Consequently, contemporary social pedagogy in
Main categories of
pedagogy
The basic categories of pedagogy are personality
formation, upbringing, education, and instruction. Personality formation,
formerly called upbringing in its broad sense, is the process of shaping an
individual by means of goal-oriented influence (upbringing in the true sense of
the word) and of the varied and often contradictory influences of the
environment. In contemporary foreign pedagogy the first group of influences is
often called intentional upbringing, and the second functional upbringing.
In Marxist pedagogy, upbringing is a key concept
referring to the goal-oriented activities of society and family directed toward
forming a fully developed person, chiefly in institutions and organizations
specially created by society. The concept of upbringing generally comprises
intellectual, moral, labor, aesthetic, and physical upbringing as well as the
formation of a world view. However, such distinctions are largely arbitrary,
since upbringing in practice is a single, integrated process.
Education is the process and result of assimilating a
system of knowledge and of developing skills and habits eventually ensuring a
certain level of development of a person’s cognitive needs and capacities and
his ability to perform some kind of practical activity. A distinction is made
between general and specialized education. General education provides each
person with the knowledge, skills, and habits he needs for overall development.
These are the basis for a subsequent specialized education, whose goal is
preparation for professional work. In level and scope, both general and
specialized education may be primary, secondary, or higher. Polytechnic
education is an integral part of general education.
A most important means for effecting education and
upbringing is instruction, the process of transmitting and assimilating
knowledge, skills, and habits and the modes of cognition necessary for the
realization of a continuous educational process. The process of instruction
comprises the two interconnected parts of a single whole: teaching, the
pedagogue’s transmittal of knowledge and his supervision of students’
independent work; and learning, the students’ mastery of a system of knowledge,
skills, and habits. Pedagogy is one of the sciences studying man, human
society, and the conditions of human life; thus, it takes its place alongside
such disciplines as philosophy, ethics, aesthetics, psychology, political
economy, ethics, sociology, history, anatomy, physiology, and medicine. It uses
their hypotheses and research methods, including mathematical statistics and
cybernetics, as well as the results of their empiric research.
Structure and
system of pedagogic disciplines.
Within the framework of pedagogy are a number of
relatively independent divisions dealing with individual facets of teaching and
upbringing. The development of the goals, tasks, content, principles, methods,
and organization of education and instruction is the province of didactics, or
the theory of education and instruction. The theory and methodology of
upbringing concern themselves with the formation of moral qualities, political
convictions, and aesthetic tastes, as well as with the organization of pupils’
and students’ activities. The discipline of school administration studies all
organizational problems related to the management of public education and to
the network, structure, and management of educational institutions.
In order to make use of pedagogical research and to
study pedagogy thoroughly as a discipline, it is necessary to distinguish the
features of upbringing and instruction of groups having different ages and
professional orientations. Examples of these groups are preschool children;
pupils and students in general-education schools, vocational schools, secondary
specialized and higher educational institutions; and members of the military
service. Here, such arbitrary designations as preschool, school-age, and
higher-educational pedagogy are used, and under study are the organization and
the upbringing and instructional methods for a given contingent of students.
The specific pedagogic principles governing each group are taken into account.
Related to pedagogy as such are the teaching methods
for individual disciplines. Defectology studies the psychophysiological
development of abnormal children and the principles of their upbringing,
education, and instruction. It includes such narrowly specialized branches as
the theory and methods of bringing up, educating, and instructing deaf and
hard-of-hearing children, children who are blind or have poor vision, mentally
defective children, and children with speech defects. Also related to pedagogy
is the history of pedagogy, a discipline that studies the development of the
theory and practice of upbringing, education, and instruction during various
historical periods.
This study examines the pedagogical training process
of medical professors at a Brazilian university, the meanings attributed to it,
and the positive and negative aspects identified in it. This is a
descriptive-exploratory study, using a qualitative approach with a
questionnaire utilizing open-ended and closed questions and a semi-structured
interview. The majority of queried individuals had no formal teacher training
and learned to be teachers through a process of socialization that was in part
intuitive or by modeling those considered to be good teachers; they received
pedagogical training mainly in post-graduate courses. Positives aspects of this
training were the possibility of refresher courses in pedagogical methods and
increased knowledge in their educational area. Negative factors were a lack of
practical activities and a dichotomy between theoretical content and practical
teaching. The skills acquired through professional experience formed the basis
for teaching competence and pointed to the need for continuing education
projects at the institutional level, including these skills themselves as a
source of professional knowledge.
Clinical teaching is a complex learning situation
influenced by the learning content, the setting and the participants' actions
and interactions. Few empirical studies have been conducted in order to explore
how clinical supervision is carried out in authentic situations. In this study
we explore how clinical teaching is carried out in a clinical environment with
medical students.
Methods
Following an ethnographic approach looking for meaning
patterns, similarities and differences in how clinical teachers manage clinical
teaching; non-participant observations and informal interviews were conducted
during a four month period 2004-2005. The setting was at a teaching hospital in
Results
Seven pedagogical strategies were found to be applied,
namely: 1) Questions and answers, 2) Lecturing, 3) Piloting, 4) Prompting, 5)
Supplementing, 6) Demonstrating, and 7) Intervening.
Conclusions
This study contributes to previous research in
describing a repertoire of pedagogical strategies used in clinical education.
The findings showed that three superordinate qualitatively different ways of
teaching could be identified that fit Ramsden's model. Each of these
pedagogical strategies encompass different focus in teaching; either a focus on
the teacher's knowledge and behaviour or the student's behaviour and
understanding. We suggest that an increased awareness of the strategies in use
will increase clinical teachers' teaching skills and the consequences they will
have on the students' ability to learn. The pedagogical strategies need to be
considered and scrutinized in further research in order to verify their impact
on students' learning.
Background
During supervised clinical training, medical students
are expected to develop their professional competence and attitudes. The
present study investigates how teaching is carried out during medical students'
clinical training.
Often the literature declares that clinical medical
education adheres to a master-apprenticeship system of learning and the
fundamental condition for such teaching is that an expert is teaching a novice
[1]. Consequently, in
such a system of knowledge acquisition, the clinical teachers play a crucial
role as a teacher. According to Lauvås and Handal the
master-apprenticeship model focuses the students' ability to handle clinical praxis
in accordance with what the clinical teachers believe is correct and what
tradition allows [2]. Modelling [3] is central in the
apprenticeship model and awareness of being a role model for younger colleagues
and students in clinical practice is described among senior doctors [4,5] and deliberately
used by clinical teachers [5].
The master-apprenticeship structure and modelling
theory [3] are, however, not
sufficient to meet modern academic educational demands. All formal education
and academic teaching is aimed towards students gaining new knowledge and
skills consistent with what is intended and necessary according to the
curriculum. In medical education, as a consequence, everyday knowledge is
expected to be left behind in exchange for scientifically-based knowledge or
for knowledge based on professional experiential knowledge, useful in
professional practice. Students' knowledge acquisition is, from this
perspective, understood as a qualitative change from a previous kind of
understanding. This means there are qualitative differences in how medical or
clinical information is understood. Furthermore, such qualitatively different
kinds of student understanding of subject matter may also be found among the
students exposed to clinical teaching in a clinical situation. Consequently, we
might expect qualitative differences in how something is understood among
students. This stresses the need for clinical teachers to identify and take
advantage of the students' qualitative differences in what they learn,
understand and what they remember of what is studied [6].
Consequently, the way clinical teaching is carried out
will have consequences on students' abilities to learn and understand. Ramsden
describes three generic ways teachers can understand their role, each of which
is related to how students are expected to learn [7]. Ramsden's three
methods are: 1. teaching as telling or transmission of knowledge, 2. teaching
as organizing student activity and, 3. teaching as making understanding
possible. These three methods highlight important qualitative differences in
how clinical teachers could consider teaching and student learning [7].
The effective and excellent clinical teacher is
described as an: excellent role model; effective supervisor; and dynamic and
supportive educator [8]. Kilminster and
Jolly claimed that the essential aspects of clinical teaching are that it
should ensure patient/client safety and promote professional development, and
that clinical teaching has three main functions: educational; supportive; and
managerial or administrative [9]. Kernan acknowledged
that excellent clinical teaching is multifactorial, transcends ordinary
teaching, and is characterized by teachers inspiring, supporting, actively
involving and communicating with the student [10]. A number of studies
emphasise communicative and supportive competence with the clinical teacher [8,11-14] and its importance
for effective learning [15,16].
The literature demonstrates a vast number of
pedagogical techniques used in clinical teaching [11,17-21], but there seems to
be a lack of studies describing how such techniques are applied and used. In a
review, Heidenreich stated that the majority of the teaching methods described
were based on theoretical models and/or researcher's personal experience and
not derived from empirical studies; and that the literature, to a large extent,
is not focused on teaching performance but on the characteristics and behaviour
of the effective clinical teacher [22].
One conclusion to be drawn from the literature is that
clinical teaching must be seen as a complex learning situation influenced by
the learning content, the setting and the actions and interactions of the
participants. In order to increase the knowledge concerning clinical teaching,
the aim of the present study is to explore how it is carried out in a clinical
environment with medical students.
Methods
Design, setting and participants
Following an ethnographic approach rooted in symbolic
interactionism, the focus was on people's actions and accounts in an everyday
context and the aim was to look for meaning patterns, similarities and
differences in how clinical teaching is carried out [23]. Non-participant
observations and informal interviews were used as general data collection
methods [23]. According to the
ethnographic approach, the analysis of data involves interpretation of
meanings, functions, and consequences of human actions and instructional
practice, and how these are implicated in local, and perhaps also wider,
contexts [23]. Consequently, in
this study we used a qualitative design, with data collected from observations
from clinical teaching situations and informal interviews with clinical
teachers and medical students.
The data collection setting was a surgical ward at a
teaching hospital in
In
|
|
List of observations, observer participated and settings. |
Nine medical students (male = 2, female = 7; aged 24
to 37 years of age) were selected by the research group, and asked to
participate. The students were selected to represent diverse ages, sexes and
surgical units. Each student was observed on three different occasions where a
total of twelve clinical teachers participated (male = 11, female = 1; aged 36
to 64 years of age) (see table table22).
|
|
Teachers' age, title, clinical experience and experience as clinical
teacher. |
Data collection
The observations were carried out by two researchers
(MSN, SP). The researchers were both Registered Nurses (RN), PhD students in
Health Care Pedagogics, and had extensive experience of work in health care.
However, the presence of the researchers could affect the observations and this
had to be considered [23]. In order to
minimize the effect of the researchers they were adapted to the clinical
environment by wearing a white coat with no nameplate which gave them access to
the health care environment while at the same time showing they were not to be
seen as health care personnel dealing with patients. In this way the
researchers could participate without being a distraction or being directly
involved.
The observations were guided by the aim of the study,
during which the researchers took notes. Informal interviews were, for example,
conducted in the coffee rooms or in the corridor. These informal interviews
were mainly carried out in order to add further information to the observations
and in order to establish a foundation for a deeper understanding of what had
been observed. Observational notes and notes from informal interviews were
transcribed after each observation.
Ethical Considerations
Permission to carry out the study was given by the
head of each department. Informed consent was obtained from students and
clinical teachers in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki [24] after they were informed
of the purpose, method and publication of the study, that participation was
voluntary, and that they could withdraw from the study at any time. When this
study was planned and conducted, no approval by an ethics committee was
required for this type of study according to Swedish law. In the observations
where patients were present, the patients were informed of the purpose of the
study and that the researchers were bound by professional secrecy in their role
as health care personnel.
Analysis
Data analysis was performed in two steps. Step I: A
preliminary analysis was carried out when observational notes were taken. This
analysis resulted in intuitive hypotheses, such as, is this pedagogical
technique? Is this a way of showing the student something? These intuitive
hypotheses were tested in relation to further data collection. The analysis
process was in this way iterative and undertaken throughout the research
process, allowing for intuitive hypothesis to be tested with further data
collection [25]. In this first
analysis step the researchers discovered that clinical teachers used different
strategies in teaching students.
Step II. When all the data material was collected and
transcribed, the data text was read several times and meaning units describing
different ways of teaching detected. These meaning units were given a code
describing their content. Data text, meaning units with entailed code were read
several times and seven different pedagogical strategies could be described as
a result of this final analysis. Furthermore, the results of the analysis were
discussed in the research group (MSN, SP and EP) until agreement was reached
(see example of the analysis process, table table33).
|
Example of analysis process |
Result
The result of this study shows that the clinical
teacher uses a number of pedagogical strategies in clinical teaching, in order
to increase the likelihood of student learning. The strategies are entitled; 1)
Questions and answers, 2) Lecturing, 3) Piloting, 4) Prompting, 5)
Supplementing, 6) Demonstrating and 7) Intervening. These strategies are
described below together with selected observational notes in order to support
and clarify their meaning.
The clinical teacher frequently made use of these
strategies to help the students solve problems or complete tasks. The
strategies were used flexibly and could be changed during clinical teaching
depending on situation, context and preferences of the clinical teacher.
1. Questions and answers
This strategy is observed when clinical teachers ask
questions in order to activate the students; make them discuss and describe how
to deal with medical problems; and management specific to the patients. The
teachers' point of departure is the students' reasoning in combination with
their own preferences in the main focus of the clinical problem. The teacher
occasionally made a conclusion, summarizing the student's thoughts and
argumentations.
A patient with kidney problems is discussed.
Teacher: On the x-ray, it's hard to tell the difference
between pus and fluid. How do you figure out what it is?
The student picks up the sample test has a look and
answers.
Teacher: He has low creatinine, why?
The teacher and student further discuss what the cause
of the problem could be.
Teacher asks: What is it we want to know? What do we
want an answer to? What do you want to know about the kidney's function? What
do you look at then?
Student answers. The teacher nods and confirms. The
teacher ends the discussion by saying that we may possibly talk to the
urologist about this patient (I (clinical teacher, see table table2).2). 20 (observation,
see table table11)).
The teacher also permitted the students to ask
questions and relate these to the teachers' reasoning and actions. There were
also examples where a student's question was returned by the teacher with the
comment: The problem and
solution are now your responsibility.
Using this strategy, the teacher created a dynamic
process where the clinical teacher and students shared newly encountered
experiences with previously acquired knowledge and experience.
The strategy sometimes took the form of an examination.
For example, in one situation a teacher asked: What is a hernia? How long will the patient be on
sick leave? The
questions asked were based on what the teachers considered most important to understand.
The teacher would supplement with knowledge they considered crucial, which
could result in lecturing.
2. Lecturing
By asking questions and observing students' behaviour,
the clinical teacher could assess students' level of knowledge. In cases where
students showed a lack of knowledge, the teachers' intention changed from
questioning to lecturing about the actual area of knowledge. Lecturing could
also occur if teachers observed errors in any areas or a deficit in students'
behaviour or reasoning. Lecturing took place frequently throughout the teaching
session and examples of the strategy included: defining the meaning of medical
terms; explaining symptoms of illnesses and localisations; and surgical and
medical treatments. The clinical teacher clearly explained what areas of
medical treatment required the most attention. Lecturing not only included
medical theories and facts, but also, implicitly, medical attitudes and guiding
principles in problem solving: for example, how to act and communicate with
patients in consultation. The observational note below illustrates such a
situation.
The clinical teacher clearly and precisely describes
the procedure a doctor should go through when examining and talking to a
patient who has an interpreter present. The teacher explains what to think
about and how to conduct oneself with both the patient and the interpreter (A,
1).
3. Piloting
The meaning of this strategy is that the clinical
teacher uses guiding questions, statements or signals to ensure the student pays
attention to and focuses on specific content in order to reach an expected or
previously decided goal. By piloting, the teachers prevent students from
getting stuck in the management of a particular task. The teachers used guiding
statements, invitations or questions in order to make them continue what they
were doing. The students acted according to the teacher's directives, but the
students' understanding and reasons for their actions were not discussed and
there was no request for critical thinking or understanding from the teacher.
Easing the student's actions by piloting does not necessarily lead to the
intended perception or increase of knowledge. Students acted according to the
teacher's directives without discussing the meaning or intended goal. In such
situations there was no request for critical thinking or understanding from the
teacher. Consequently, by piloting, the teachers guide the students around the
difficulties in a clinical situation. The observational note below illustrates
piloting when discussing postoperative management. In this situation the
teacher directs the student in what to focus on, in order to get the
postoperative management completed and done.
The medical student prescribes fluids. The nurse
writes this down. The teacher nods consent.
The teacher says: We should take tests.
(Then the tests were prescribed by the teacher)
The teacher continues: What about an analgesic?
The student asks how much the patient should have (H,
19).
Piloting could also be used by the clinical teacher
when they aimed to place students in a situation where they were expected to
develop their understanding or/and experience-based knowledge. A situation
which often occurred was that the teacher pointed out that students should meet
and talk with the patients before making any judgments concerning treatments or
assessments. In this situation, the teacher seldom specified or discussed what
they wanted the student to learn or experience. Consequently, when piloting was
used it was difficult to know whether the meaning was understood by the
students.
4. Prompting
This strategy is characterized by the clinical teacher
prompting a student to prevent the student "losing face" in front of
the patient or other personnel. This approach is similar to piloting, but the
focus of using prompting is found in the process. By prompting, the teacher
supported the student in, for example, communication with a patient; whilst
using piloting, the purpose was to direct the student to the correct answer or
action. Accordingly, by prompting, the teacher supported the student in
adopting the role of doctor. This approach was observed in situations where the
students appeared to need help in their assessment, problem solving or in
communication with patients or nurses. The teacher provided advice and/or
directives by prompting. One illustration of this is described below.
The teacher is standing away from the bed. The medical
student seems unsure if the wound appears to be healing and subsequently looks
at the teacher. The teacher whispers to the student: The wound looks like it's
healing fine.
The medical student then relays this to the patient
(H, 3).
5. Supplementing
This approach is characterized by clinical teachers'
supplementing during students' communications with patients or other personnel.
The strategy is characterised by the teachers either adding some complementary
important facts, or in some cases completely taking over the student's
communication. This strategy demands teachers' sensitivity and awareness in
deciding whether students are in need of support to handle a situation,
otherwise loss of face is inevitable.
The student greets the patient. The student sits on a
stool in front of the patient who sits on the bed. The teacher stands nearby
and listens while the student talks to the patient. After a while the student
signals (by looking at the teacher) that she has nothing further to say. The
teacher then nods and brings the conversation to an end (A, 1).
In this particular case, the student signals that she
does not know how to deal with the situation entirely. The teacher notices this
and supports the student by helping her with what has to be said. In other
cases the clinical teachers assessed the students' ability to deal with the
situation and found it necessary to step in and supplement in order to continue
the consultation, sometimes together with the student.
6. Demonstrating
With this strategy the clinical teacher demonstrates
how to act, assess, communicate, and perceive a problem. This is demonstrated
when teachers deliberately illustrate how to act or what to focus on, by
displaying the correct behaviour in a clinical situation; for example when
communicating with patients, or in assessment or evaluation. The observational
note below describes such a situation.
Instead of the teacher telling the student what to ask
the patient, the teacher does it himself and palpates the patient's abdomen,
whilst the student observes (E, 14).
Demonstrating also included situations where the
clinical teacher facilitated student perception of the learning object (seeing,
hearing, listening or feeling). The purpose was to illustrate and create a
perceptual understanding of a physical phenomenon. For example by evoking or
pointing out medical phenomena or symptoms as described in the observational
note below.
At ward rounds the teacher examines a patient with a
fluid filled abdomen. The teacher says: Look here (the teacher then does a
vibrating motion with his hand on the abdomen) do you see the wave motion in
the abdomen? When it looks like this, there is a lot of fluid in the abdomen
(F, 17).
The strategy also covered the clinical teacher taking
the patient role, in order to clarify typical symptoms. Another example of
demonstrating can be found in the operating room, where students were
encouraged by the teacher to increase their awareness of the structure and
abnormalities of an organ.
7. Intervening
Significant in this strategy is the teacher taking an
authoritative role, interrupting the student and taking over the situation. In
intervening, the clinical teacher focuses on getting the assignment completed.
The observational notes below describe one situation where a teacher uses this
strategy.
At ward rounds one of the medical students, who is in
charge of the patient, asks; "may I look at the wound?", and the
patient says, "yes of course." The medical student asks both the
patient and the teacher by looking at the teacher. As a result, the teacher
responds and takes over the consultation, leaving the medical student feeling
somewhat "excluded". The medical student looks at the teacher who
subsequently assumes complete control of the consultation (B, 3).
Significant in the above situation is the student's
actions being interrupted when the clinical teacher intervenes and takes over.
The student has to stand aside and assume the role of an observer. Using this
strategy, patient management, organisational demands and limitations were
demonstrated to the student. We observed that the students could thus
experience a lack of feedback resulting in a lack of explanation and diminished
understanding of their actions and how they managed the situation. Sometimes
they felt "excluded" and their knowledge undervalued.
Discussion and Conclusion
The aim of this study was to explore how clinical
teaching was carried out in clinical education. The study was carried out in
several clinical units at the largest teaching hospital in
The findings of this study elucidate that clinical
teachers used a repertoire of different pedagogical strategies namely: Questions and answers, Lecturing,
Piloting, Prompting, Supplementing, Demonstrating and Intervening.
Comparable behaviours in clinical teaching have previously been described in
the literature [8,22] For example
questioning [21,22] or dynamic teaching
provides explanation, answers questions, giving directions and directing
learning [8]. Even the supportive
role as a supervisor that gave opportunities for the student to be involved in
patient care have been described [8]. Almost all
literature focuses on characteristics and behaviours of an effective clinical
teacher and not on teaching methods [22]. Few empirical
studies have been conducted in order to explore how clinical supervision is carried
out in authentic situations. Therefore, this study adds to previous studies by
giving empirical evidence of a teaching repertoire used by supervisors in
clinical supervision. This result shows that clinical teaching is complex and
diversified. In this study we have shown that clinical teaching consists of a
spectrum of several teaching alternatives, and is not previously described in
this way in the research literature. In accordance with the research
literature, the descriptions of the pedagogical strategies also give evidence
for clinical teachers' threefold function and role concerning: education;
management; and support [9]. In this conclusion
we focus on the educational aspect of the pedagogical strategies.
In accordance to Ramsden the pedagogical strategies,
can be divided into different superordinate ways of understanding teaching and
learning. The strategies bring into the open three underpinning ways of
understanding how to teach namely: teaching as telling or transmission;
teaching as organizing students' activity; and teaching as making understanding
possible [7]. Each of these
teaching perspectives has consequences on the teachers' focus in clinical
teaching. Figure Figure1,1, illustrates the relation between pedagogical
strategies, underpinning teaching perspective and the teachers' focus. The
illustration should be seen as a continuum, where the pedagogical strategies
placed to the left comprise a primary focus on teachers' own knowledge and
acting; while the strategies described at the right end of this continuum
comprise a focus on students' activity and understanding. These perspectives and focuses will be further discussed
below.
|
|
The relationship between pedagogical strategies used by clinical
teachers and the superordinate teaching perspective previously suggested by
Ramsden (2003). |
The descriptions of the strategies Lecturing, Demonstrating and
Intervening are in
accordance with the teaching perspectives viewing teaching as Telling or transmission of
knowledge [7]. This perspective is
the most traditional and common perspective of teaching in higher education,
where teaching is seen as a transmission of authoritatative content or the demonstrations
of procedures [7]. The teacher is
required to be an expert in the subject matter and could be seen as the store
of undistorted information. The focus in teaching is on the teachers' personal
knowledge and how it can be transmitted efficiently [7]. In applying the
strategies, Lecturing and Demonstration the teacher focus was directed
toward own acting and knowledge i.e how the subject matter could best be
expressed. The students' understanding of the transmitted content was rarely
discussed. This teaching perspective could also be linked to situations where
it was not possible to allow the students to complete their actions, and the
teacher had to Intervene.
By Intervening the teacher demonstrated for
example the way to act, or the organisational limitations. This could be seen
as a transmission of knowledge about a clinical situation or organisational
demands. However, by using this strategy, the action planned by the students
was often interrupted. Consequently, this strategy could also impair the
students' learning process which could result in a deterioration of the
relationship between teacher and student.
By Piloting, Prompting and Supplementing the teacher supported the
student in taking the role of an active doctor handling the clinical situation
and guided the students on how to react. Consequently, these approaches were in
accordance with a teaching perspective seeing Teaching
as organizing students' activity [7]. In applying this
teaching perspective, the focus is moved from the teacher toward the student's
activity and the central role for the teacher is to help the student to be
active. It is also assumed that by supporting the student in experiencing their
acting, learning will take place [7]. For instance, even
when the students make errors and experience the consequences of their actions,
learning will occur. Learning by experience means that education, like life, is
a process of continuously reconstructing experience. The starting point of the
activity should be the learner's need for knowledge and the teacher's role is
not to control the learning situation, but rather to act as a resource person
guiding the situation [26]. It is also assumed
that learning how to reflect on what we do and to apply our own knowledge to
new situations follows naturally [7]. Improving teaching
from this point of view is about extending lecturers' repertoire of techniques
[7] i.e. to use the most
appropriate strategy/techniques to support the student in acting.
The findings suggest that the clinical teachers'
method of support is of great importance and it was essential that the teacher
showed sensitivity and stepped in only in a supportive manner, even though their
presence and intervention increased several students' confidence (should any
potentially harmful mistakes be made with the patient). How important the
teacher-pupil relationship is in clinical education is well established [8,12,15,27] not only where
examples of effective relationships have proven to enhance learning, but also
where examples of poor relationships have compromised a students learning [16].
Another characteristic in these findings was that
students' understanding of the clinical situations and actions were rarely
discussed or explored by the teachers and, notable during observations was that
the individual students seemed to not always understand the consequences and
motive of directions and actions. Discussions concerning learning objectives
were rarely introduced or called attention to by the teacher. Neither was the
content selected to adjust and facilitate understanding by the students. Consequently,
the students were mostly left alone to figure out how the knowledge
transmitted, demonstrated or experienced could be understood and made useful in
other clinical situations. Questions
and answers though,
could be seen as a strategy that was aimed at making
understanding possible [7]. By using this
strategy, the focus turned to the students' own understanding of the clinical
situation. According to Ramsden teaching should be comprehended as a process of
working cooperatively with learners to help them change their understanding. In
order to support the students' understanding, the teacher has to focus on how
the students apprehend and discern phenomena related to the subject, rather
than focusing on what they know about them or how they can manipulate them [7]. Consequently, with a
teaching perspective viewing teaching as making understanding possible, the
attention is directed toward the learning content, how it should be taught and
how it is understood by the student. The teacher should focus on the essential
issues that could represent critical barriers to student learning and give such
issues special attention. Such teaching also involves discovering students'
misunderstandings, intervening to change them and creating a context of
learning that encourages students to engage with the subject matter [7]. For example, in
supporting the students' use of theoretical knowledge in understanding the
clinical situation, or to be able to discern and apprehend the most important
information to learn from a clinical situation that might be useful in other
situations. Although Questions
and answers could be
seen as a strategy facilitating and stimulating such a process with the
student, we observed that this strategy was not applied in the same way by
teachers. Some teachers provided more time for reflection and discussion,
whilst others seemed to use this strategy more in order to assess students'
knowledge content and level. This latter approach has previously been documented
in the literature [8].
The strategies described in this study constituted the
learning situation for the student. However, few statements indicated a
deliberate use of the pedagogical strategies in order to facilitate learning by
the clinical teacher. This is in accordance with other research describing
clinical teachers' lack of arguments concerning how learning will best take
place in clinical teaching [28]. Therefore, it is
more likely that the strategies were learned traditionally and not deliberately
used by the teacher.
Pedagogical Implications of this study
This study may have pedagogical implications for
clinical teaching in two different ways. Firstly, a greater knowledge of these
pedagogical strategies, as well as meeting students and understanding their
situational needs might assist clinical teachers in carrying out more effective
teaching. Secondly, each of the described pedagogical strategies could be
further explored to study how they could contribute to education and the
enhancement of student learning.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing
interests.
Authors' contributions
MSN, SP and EP have contributed to the design of the
study. MSN and SP carried out the observations. MSN, SP and EP made the first
preliminary analysis of data. MSN wrote the first draft of the paper. C-GW, EP
and MSN contributed to the interpretation of the results and the final version
of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Authors' information
MSN is a doctoral student in Health Care Pedagogics.
SP has recently defended her thesis for a PhD exam in
Health Care Pedagogics.
EP is Professor of Health Care Pedagogics with several
years of experience of studies relating to clinical teaching and use of
qualitative research methods, for example ethnographic methods.
C-GW is Professor of Education at University College
of Kristianstad. He has a long experience of research on learning and teaching
in Higher Education and from the application of qualitative research methods.
Pre-publication history
The pre-publication history for this paper can be
accessed here:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/10/9/prepub
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all the participants
for giving their time to take part in this study. We thank Bo Samuelsson, MD,
PhD, Professor, for constructive advice and implementation of this project. The
study was partly funded by the Västra Götaland Region in
References
1.
Woolliscroft JO. In: International handbook of
research in medical education. Norman GR, Newble DI, van der
Vleuten C, editor.
2.
Lauvås P, Handal G. Handledning och praktisk
yrkesteori. (Eng title: Supervising and practical occupational theory)
3.
Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and
action: a social cognitive theory.
4.
Skyvell Nilsson M, Knutsson A, Samuelsson B,
Lönnroth P, Pilhammar Andersson E. Läkares erfarenhetsbaserade
kunskap. Delrapport 1, Erfarenhetens professionella uttryck. (Eng title:
Expression of professional experience) Göteborg: Institutionen
för vårdvetenskap och hälsa, Sahlgrenska akademin vid
Göteborgs universitet; 2006.
5.
Weissmann PF, Branch WT, Gracey CF, Haidet P, Frankel
RM. Role modeling humanistic behavior: learning bedside manner from the
experts. Academic Medicine. 2006;81:661–667. doi: 10.1097/01.ACM.0000232423.81299.fe. [PubMed] [Cross
Ref]
6.
Wenestam C-G. In: Discussions on some educational
issues VII, Research Report 175. P K, editor. Department of
Teacher Education, Helsinki University; 1997. Den inlärningspsykologiska
grunden för didaktik. (Eng title: The foundation of learning psychology in
Didaktik) pp. 85–124.
7.
Ramsden P. Learning to teach in higher
education.
8.
Irby DM. Teaching and learning in ambulatory care
settings: a thematic review of the literature.Academic Medicine. 1995;70:898–931. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199510000-00014. [PubMed][Cross
Ref]
9.
Kilminster SM, Jolly BC. Effective supervision in
clinical practice settings: a literature review.Medical Education. 2000;34:827–840. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00758.x. [PubMed][Cross
Ref]
10.
Kernan WN, Hershman W, Alper EJ, Lee MY, Viscoli CM,
Perry JR, O'Connor PG. Disagreement between students and preceptors regarding
the value of teaching behaviors for ambulatory care settings. Teaching and Learning in
Medicine. 2008;20:143–150. doi: 10.1080/10401330801991667.[PubMed] [Cross Ref]
11.
Kern DE, Branch WT Jr, Jackson JL, Brady DW, Feldman MD,
Levinson W, Lipkin M Jr. Teaching the psychosocial aspects of care in the
clinical setting: practical recommendations. Academic Medicine. 2005;80:8–20. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200501000-00006. [PubMed] [Cross
Ref]
12.
Seabrook MA. Clinical students' initial reports of the
educational climate in a single medical school.Medical Education. 2004;38:659–669. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01823.x. [PubMed][Cross
Ref]
13.
Wahlqvist M, Skott A, Bjorkelund C, Dahlgren G, Lonka
K, Mattsson B. Impact of medical students' descriptive evaluations on long-term
course development. BMC Medical Education. 2006;6:24. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-6-24. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
14.
Williams KN, Ramani S, Fraser B, Orlander JD.
Improving bedside teaching: findings from a focus group study of learners. Academic Medicine. 2008;83:257–264. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181637f3e. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
15.
Sutkin G, Wagner E, Harris I, Schiffer R. What makes a
good clinical teacher in medicine? A review of the literature. Academic Medicine. 2008;83:452–466. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31816bee61. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
16.
Tiberius GR, Sinai J, Flak AE. In: International handbook of
research in medical education. Norman GR, Newble DI, Vleuten
CPMvd, editor. Vol. 2.
17.
Boehler ML,
18.
Cote L, Leclere H. How clinical teachers perceive the
doctor-patient relationship and themselves as role models. Academic Medicine. 2000;75:1117–1124. [PubMed]
19.
Gracey CF, Haidet P, Branch WT, Weissmann P, Kern DE,
Mitchell G, Frankel R, Inui T. Precepting humanism: strategies for fostering
the human dimensions of care in ambulatory settings. Academic Medicine. 2005;80:21–28. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200501000-00007.[PubMed] [Cross
Ref]
20.
Ridder JM van de, Stokking KM, McGaghie WC, ten Cate
OT. What is feedback in clinical education? Medical Education. 2008;42:189–197. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03078.x.[PubMed] [Cross
Ref]
21.
Wear D, Kokinova M, Keck-McNulty C, Aultman J.
Pimping: perspectives of 4th year medical students. Teaching and Learning in
Medicine. 2005;17:184–191. doi: 10.1207/s15328015tlm1702_14. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
22.
Heidenreich C, Lye P, Simpson D, Lourich M. The search
for effective and efficient ambulatory teaching methods through the literature. Pediatrics. 2000;105:231–237.
23.
Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Ethnography: principles in
practice. 3. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon;
24.
MFR. Riktlinjer för etisk värdering av medicinsk humanforskning:
forskningsetisk policy och organisation i Sverige (Eng title:The Swedish
Research Council's guidelines for the ethical evaluation of medical research on
humans)
25.
Glaser BG, Strauss
26.
Gutek GL. Philosophical and ideological
perspectives on education. 2.
27.
Dornan T, Boshuizen H, King N, Scherpbier A.
Experience-based learning: a model linking the processes and outcomes of
medical students' workplace learning. Medical Education.2007;41:84–91. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02652.x.
28.
Seabrook MA. Medical teachers' concerns about the
clinical teaching context. Medical Education.2003;37:213–222. doi:
10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01437.x.
Pedagogy is also occasionally referred to as the
correct use of instructive strategies. For example, Paulo
Freire referred to his method of teaching adult humans as "critical
pedagogy". In correlation with those
instructive strategies the instructor's own philosophical beliefs of instruction
are harbored and governed by the pupil's background knowledge and experience,
situation, and environment, as well as learning goals set by the student and teacher. One example would be the Socratic schools of thought.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
A. Principal:
Mcleod PJ, Steinert Y, Meagher T, Mcleod A. The ABCs of pedagogy for
clinical teachers. Med Educ 2003; 37:638-44.
Mclean M. Reawarding teaching excellence. Can we measure teaching
"excellence"? Who should be the judge? Med Teach 2001; 23:6-11.
Pinto JBT, Pepe AM. Nursing education: contradictions and challenges of
pedagogical practice. Rev Latino-am Enfermagem 2007; 15(1):120-6
B. Additional:
Adams,
Paul E.; Krockover, Gerald H.. Beginning Science Teacher Cognition and Its
Origins in the Preservice Secondary Science Teacher Program. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching; v34 n6 p633-53 Aug 1997. 1997
Clermont,
Christian P.; And Others. Comparative Study of the Pedagogical Content
Knowledge of Experienced and Novice Chemical Demonstrators. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching; v31 n4 p419-41 Apr 1994. 1994
Daehler,
Kirsten R.; Shinohara, Mayumi. A Complete Circuit Is a Complete Circle:
Exploring the Potential of Case Materials and Methods To Develop Teachers'
Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Science. . 2001
de
Berg, Kevin C.; Greive, Cedric E.. Understanding the Siphon: An Example of the
Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge Using Textbooks and the Writings
of Early Scientists. . 1999
de Jong,
Onno. The Teacher Trainer as Researcher: Exploring the Initial Pedagogical
Content Concerns of Prospective Science Teachers. European Journal of Teacher
Education; v23 n2 p127-37 2000. 2000
Doster,
Elizabeth C.; Jackson, David F.; Smith, Darwin W.. Modeling Pedagogical Content
Knowledge in Physical Science for Prospective Middle School Teachers: Problems
and Possibilities. Teacher Education Quarterly; v24 n4 p51-65 Fall 1997. 1997
Frederik,
Ineke; Van Der Valk, Ton; Leite, Laurinda; Thoren, Ingvar. Pre-Service Physics
Teachers and Conceptual Difficulties on Temperature and Heat. European Journal
of Teacher Education; v22 n1 p61-74 1999. 1999
Halim,
Lilia; Meerah, Subahan Mohd.. Science Trainee Teachers' Pedagogical Content
Knowledge and Its Influence on Physics Teaching. Research in Science and
Technological Education; v20 n2 p215-25 Nov 2002. 2002
Lederman,
Norman G.; Gess-Newsome, Julie. Do Subject Matter Knowledge, and Pedagogical
Content Knowledge Constitute the Ideal Gas Law of Science Teaching? Journal of
Science Teacher Education; v3 n1 p16-20 Win 1992. 1992
Loughran,
John; Milroy, Philippa; Berry, Amanda; Gunstone, Richard; Mulhall, Pamela.
Documenting Science Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge through PaP-eRs. .
2001
Pardhan,
Harcharan; Wheeler, Alan E.. Enhancing Science Teachers' Learning through
Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Science Education International; v9 n4 p21-25
Dec 1998. 1998
Pardhan,
Harcharan; Wheeler, Alan. Taking "STOCK" of Pedagogical Content
Knowledge in Science Education. School Science Review; v82 n299 p81-86 Dec
2000. 2000
van
Driel, Jan H.; Verloop, Nico; de Vos, Wobbe. Developing Science
Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching; v35 n6 p673-95 Aug 1998. 1998
Veal, William R.; van Driel, Jan; Hulshof, Hans. PCK:
How Teachers Transform Subject Matter Knowledge. International Journal of
Leadership in Education; v4 n3 p285-91 Jul-Sep 2001. 2001
B. Sites:
http://www.21stcenturyschools.com/Bibliography.htm#21stCentury
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedagogy