Advertisement

Education Enframed and ‘Real’

  • Steven HodgeEmail author
Chapter
  • 672 Downloads
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Education book series (BRIEFSEDUCAT)

Abstract

Heidegger’s philosophy abounds with implications for education. He addressed a number of perennial concerns of education theory, such as the nature of human being, of our intellectual traditions and of the social world. He made direct contributions to educational thought too. For instance, he worked toward a program of higher education reform that reflected his theory of the relationships between Being and the academic disciplines. This chapter spells out key implications of his philosophy for education and considers some of his contributions to educational thought. Education scholars and researchers have analysed his ideas about education and have made a number of implications clear. The chapter discusses the research of scholars such as Noddings and more recent work by Peters and Thomson. These recent contributions draw attention to the threat to education posed by the dominant paradigm of instrumental, calculative thinking which Heidegger analysed and labelled ‘enframing.’ The chapter concludes with an attempt to clarify Heidegger’s vision for a ‘real’ education to overcome the spell of instrumental thought.

Keywords

Education Modernity Technology Neoliberal Economics 

References

  1. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital. A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ehrmantraut, M. (2010). Heidegger’s philosophic pedagogy. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  3. Finegold, D., & Soskice, D. (1988). The failure of training in Britain: Analysis and prescription. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 4(3), 21–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fitzsimons, P. (2002). Enframing Education. In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Heidegger, education, and modernity. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  5. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. New York: Harper Torch books.Google Scholar
  6. Heidegger, M. (1993). The self-assertion of the German University. In R. Wolin (Ed.), The Heidegger Controversy. A Critical Reader. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Heidegger, M. (1998). Pathmarks. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heidegger, M. (2009). Letter to William J. Richardson. In G. Figal (Ed.), The Heidegger reader. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Heidegger, M. (2010). Being and Time (trans. Stambaugh, rev. Schmidt). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hodge, S. (2015), Alienating curriculum work in Australian Vocational Education and Training. Critical Studies in Education, doi:  10.1080/17508487.2015.1009842.
  11. Huebner, D. (1967). Curriculum as concern for man’s temporality. Theory into Practice, 6(4), 172–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lambier, B. (2002). Comfortably numb in the digital era: Man’s Being as standing-reserve or dwelling silently. In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Heidegger, education, and modernity. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  13. Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. (2006). Universities in national innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg & D. C. Mowery (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  15. Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in the schools. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  16. OECD. (1996). The knowledge-based economy. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  17. OECD. (2010). Recognising non-formal and informal learning: outcomes. Policies and Practices, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  18. Olssen, M., & Peters, M. A. (2005). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: from the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 20(3), 313–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peters, M. A. (Ed.). (2002). Heidegger, education, and modernity. Lahan, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
  20. Peters, M. A. (2009). Editorial: Heidegger, phenomenology, education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41(1), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Plato (1961). Plato’s dialogues. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Productivity Commission. (2012). Schools workforce. research report. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Productivity Commission.Google Scholar
  23. Productivity Commission. (2013). Childcare and early childhood learning. Issues paper. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Productivity Commission.Google Scholar
  24. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Spanos, W. (1993). The end of education: Toward posthumanism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. Stevens, M. (1999). Human capital theory and UK vocational training policy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 15(1), 16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thomson, I. D. (2005). Heidegger on ontotheology. Technology and the politics of education. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. World Bank. (2003). Lifelong learning for a global knowledge economy. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Griffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations