This article highlights the educational and the aesthetic significance of the subject matter (i.e., “the third thing”) in the relationship between teacher and pupil. This, through a reading of two texts, one written by the 19th century educationist and German philosopher Johann Friedrich Herbart, and one written by the contemporary philosopher and political theorist Jacques Rancière. By emphasizing the third thing between pupil and teacher, the article intends to reimagine both the educative and aesthetic values of those timeless things around us, such as objects of art and education, which give life a meaning beyond our limited socio-cultural desires, interests, concepts, and identities. Teaching, from this “fusion of the horizon” between Herbart and Rancière, is an activity created by the heterogeneity already integral to the “essence” of the subject matter. As such, the article also offers a fusion of the horizon between aesthetics and Didaktik.
This present article takes an interest in the fairly new phenomena of social and emotional training programs in youth education. Prior research has shown that values and norms produced in these types of programs are supporting ethical systems that teachers may not always be aware of. This motivates the development of methods for analyzing these activities from an ethical point of view. An analysis model has been developed and piloted in the analyses of two different classroom activities. The model is based on theories of communicative ethics and an ethics of dialogicity, drawing upon the work of Jürgen Habermas, Iris Marion Young and Emmanuel Levinas. The analyses show that norms concerning whose perspective is prioritized and what ethical values are constituted in the classroom vary depending on how the program is organized and how the teacher chooses to use the program. The article also argues that the analytical model suggested might serve as a contribution to both teachers’ own professional, ethical awareness, and to critical studies on what takes place within social and emotional training activities in education.
The aim of this article is to analyze the moral dimensions of teachers’ experiences of working with unaccompanied refugee students in language introduction in Swedish upper secondary school. Theoretically, the analysis uses Bauman’s postmodern ethics, focusing on the tension between the social and the moral space in teachers’ encounters with unaccompanied students. The empirical material is derived from interviews with three teachers, and a reflexive interview approach was used. The outcome of the analysis shows that balancing professional and moral responsibilities is a challenge, and also that while teachers strive to see their students as Other in a moral sense, the demands of the profession might get in the way. This aporia of proximity – the insoluble conflict between the social and the moral space – is faced by the teacher as a moral subject, adding complex moral dimensions to teachers’ work with unaccompanied students.
This article explores how our understanding of ambivalence would shift if we saw it as an inherent and essential part of the ordinary work of education. Following Bauman's sociology of the stranger and Derrida's deconstructions of hospitality, the article unfolds in three parts. In the first part we discuss the preconditions of modern education which since the Enlightenment has been guided by the postulate that there is and ought to be a rational order in the social world. In the second part we consider the intolerance of strangers the modern will-to-order has caused. Since the stranger appears as a liminal category that falls between the boundaries of already established social categories, she can only be viewed as an antithesis of a well-ordered society. In the third part we ask how educational spaces hospitable to strangers can be opened up, and argue that we would do better not to construe living with ambivalence as a problem, but as a quest for humanity and justice
Attentiveness is a crucial aspect in the practice of teaching. As teaching always is teaching about something, ideas, values, events, or objects, it both draws and forms the attention of the students. When contemplating on and looking into the term "attention", it is apparent that it is not at all, a clear and well-defined concept. Acknowledging the relational aspects of teaching and its role in the formation of attention, the article seeks to turn away from psychologically, behaviorally, and cognitively based (or biased) perspectives that frame attention as either an individual capacity of the student or an expected student behavior in the classroom (Rytzler 2017). It also seeks to contribute to discussions of philosophy of education, where questions about uniqueness, otherness and subjectivity are seen as aspects of attention (c.f., Ingold 2001, Todd 2003, Lewis 2012, Rytzler 2019). In the article is suggested that a phenomenological account of attention adds nuances to an educational understanding of attention, as it comes to life (or not) in the lived practice of teaching. The main purpose is to show how teaching as attention formation, is a relational activity that builds on thing-centered and formative activities that take place in a domain that is both ethical and political but, first and foremost, educational.
Through writings of Simone Weil and Michel Foucault, the article explores the notion of education as the formation of the attending and attentive subjects. Both writers have in different ways acknowledged the important relation between attention and the self. While Weil develops a spiritual form of attention, an attention which can be trained in any form of serious studying, aiming at dissolving the illusion of the self, Foucault understands attention as an important aspect in the Greek notion of the care of the self, which was developed outside of and due to the limitations of pedagogy aiming at a self-attentive self-formation. Both non-egotistic notions of attention address ethical and educational dimensions of human subjectivity. Foucault’s notion is anti-institutional and Weil’s notion is non-formative. As such, both perspectives inform educational thinking and practice by highlighting attention as a crucial aspect of both the active and the contemplative subject.