Advertisement

Teaching – Between Attention and Delivery

  • Halvor Hoveid
  • Marit Honerød Hoveid
Chapter
  • 195 Downloads
Part of the Contemporary Philosophies and Theories in Education book series (COPT, volume 12)

Abstract

This chapter thematise the act of teaching and the effects freedom and responsibility have on the acts of teaching. We argue for the necessity of teaching as acts expressing a responsible teacher-self who secures the collective value of knowledge in the subject matter. To serve the justice of an education for all through the act of teaching, we argue, every student taught must become an “I can” in relation to society and its knowledge.

We argue that teachers should experience the importance of taking responsibility for teaching, meaning that teachers must pay attention to the students’ way of understanding and learning, and they must adjust their acts towards the collectivity of students in their class. Teaching also refers to the school, an organisation, which is the level that secures justice in education. We discuss this in relation to the tendency to organise teaching as a mean for an economy. The field of economy seeks profitable ends and tends to restructure knowledge as goods available for students, as goods on a market. This stresses teachers’ self-understanding.

Literature

  1. Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Towards decolonizing the pan-Canadian science framework. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6(4), 387–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aikenhead, G. S. (2008). Objectivity – The opiate of the academic. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3, 581–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement. Ethics, politics, democracy. Boulder, CO/London: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Black, M. (1962). Models and metaphors. Studies in language and philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2016). The power of PISA – limitations and possibilities for educational research. Assment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(4), 423–426.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1247518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hoveid, H., & Hoveid, M. H. (2013). Inquiry as a Pedagogical practice – Meanings of inquiry in teaching and learning in science education for all. In M. H. Hoveid & P. Gray (Eds.), Inquiry in science education and science teacher education. Research on teaching and learning through inquiry based approaches in science (teacher ) education (pp. 27–54). Trondheim, Norway: Akademika Forlag.Google Scholar
  7. Hoveid, M. H. (2009). Læreres utdanning: et arbeid med personlig språkbruk. Pedagogisk filosofiskemedieringer om mulighetene for utvikling av praktisk fornuft gjennom arbeid med språkbruk [Teachers education – a work on personal language-use] (2009:133). Trondheim, Norway: Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet.Google Scholar
  8. Komatsu, H., & Rappleye, J. (2017). A new global policy regime founded on invalid statistics? Hanushek, Woessmann, PISA, and economic growth. Comparative Education, 53(2), 166–191.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2017.1300008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lysne, D. A., & Hoveid, H. (2013). A practical approach in technology and designin a school for all. In M. H. Hoveid & P. Gray (Eds.), Inquiry in science education and science teacher education. Trondheim, Norway: Akademika Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Oancea, A., & Pring, R. (2009). The importance of being thorough: On systematic accumulations of ‘what works’ in educational research. In D. Bridges, P. Smeyers, & R. Smith (Eds.), Evidence-based education policy, what evidence? What basis? Whose policy? (pp. 11–35). Malden, MA/Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. OECD, Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015). Universal basic skills. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  12. Ricoeur, P. (Ed.). (2000). The just. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ricoeur, P. (1967). Husserl: An analysis of his phenomenology. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ricoeur, P. (1991). From text to action. Essays in hermeneutics, II. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Ricoeur, P. (Ed.). (1994). Oneself as another. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Ricoeur, P. (2005). The course of recognition. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Ricoeur, P. (2016). Philosophical anthropology. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Slavin, R. E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15–21.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031007015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2013). What is wrong with the ‘what-went-right’ approach in educational policy? European Educational Research Journal, 11(1), 20–33.  https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2013.12.1.20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Weil, S. (2005). An anthology (S. Miles, Ed.). London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Halvor Hoveid
    • 1
  • Marit Honerød Hoveid
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Teacher EducationNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Department of Education and Lifelong LearningNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations