Studies in Philosophy and Education

, Volume 27, Issue 2–3, pp 125–136 | Cite as

Teachers’ Identity, Self and the Process of Learning



In this paper we try, by drawing on some insights from practical knowledge, to bridge a gap between common conceptions of teaching on the one hand, and of learning on the other. In Western traditions of educational thought and discourse, practical knowledge—i.e. the dynamics of thinking, speaking, acting, and personal writing—is frequently separated from disciplinary knowledge: i.e. the knowledge of academic disciplines. But this separation often fails to recognize an inherent dialectic in teaching and learning. Through fresh explorations of human capacities to act and think, to speak and write, we try to illuminate different aspects of a teacher’s identity, including the teacher’s individuality and the teacher as an agent of an educational institution. The teacher has to present and represent knowledge in education, both as an agent of an institution and as a person. By examining the disclosure and transformation of the self in light of understandings of identity as sameness (i.e. that which doesn’t change with time), or as selfhood (i.e. that which is confronted by successive challenges), we hope to draw some productive conclusions about the teacher’s self-understanding as the source for personal learning in education. We aim to explore the importance of transformation of the teachers’ self for the quality of learning relationships between the teacher and the always Other student.


Teachers identity Teaching Learning Self-identification Practical knowledge 


  1. Arendt, H. (1989). The human condition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Benviste, E. (1971). Problems in general linguistics. Florida: University of Miami press.Google Scholar
  3. Frankfurt, H. G. (1988). The importance of what we care about. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Hoveid, M. H., &. Hoveid, H. (2004). On the possibilities of educating active and reflective teachers. European Educational Research Journal, 3(1), 49–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hoveid, M. H., & Hoveid, H. (2007). Research in, on or with practice? In P. Ponte & B. Smit (Eds.), The quality of practitioner research. Reflections on the position of the researcher and the researched. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Kemp, P. (2006). Mimesis in educational hermeneutics. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(2), 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ricoeur, P. (1967). Husserl an analysis of his phenomenology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ricoeur, P. (1982). Hermeneutics and the human sciences: Essays on language, action and interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ricoeur, P. (1991). From text to action. Essays in hermeneutics, II. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ricoeur, P. (1994). Oneself as another. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Education and Liberal artsFinnmark University CollegeAltaNorway
  2. 2.Program for Teacher EducationThe Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations