Search results

The questions at the origin of this chapter are: Are children aged 5 years able to become involved in a critical thinking process, which implies a certain degree of abstraction and decentering? To what extent can an approach centered on philosophical dialogue among peers contribute to this development? The chapter describes a study of the exchanges in two groups of children aged 5 years. One group had experience with the philosophical dialogue tool, the Philosophy for Children approach, while the other group had no such experience. The analysis grid was the operationalized model of the developmental process of dialogical critical thinking, as revisited by Daniel and Gagnon, which includes four thinking modes (logical, creative, responsible, and metacognitive) and six epistemological perspectives (egocentricity, post-egocentricity, pre-relativism, relativism, post-relativism, intersubjectivity). Results of the analysis showed that 65% of the experimental group's interventions were situated in relativistic perspectives and 35% in egocentric perspectives, whereas 60% of the control group's interventions were situated in egocentric perspectives and 40% in relativistic perspectives.

This chapter explores how four culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse colleagues use self-study methodologies and online journaling to systematically examine inquiry-based teaching and learning in international contexts. Respectively from the USA, Canada, Taiwan, and China, the main research question is, “How can we develop an inquiry stance in our similarly diverse teacher candidates?” For five months, they explore the question with one another in an interactive online journal. The analysis of their written journal reflections result in four main themes: (1) naming and framing inquiry and context, (2) perspectives on translating theory to practice, (3) common practices for developing inquiry stance, and (4) policy work. The chapter concludes with a list of recommendations for fostering inquiry-based teaching and learning with culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse teacher candidates. Self-study research methodologies, Philosophy for Children, and online journaling are also suggested as professional development models for diverse globalized teacher educators.

One defining characteristic of service-learning as a pedagogical tool is its focus on reflection. Within service-learning programmes, students engage collaboratively with one another and community members, and are encouraged to reflect on the various aspects of their experience. The author argues that reflection is crucial for its contribution to service-learning, as a teaching methodology, and to service-learning’s cognitive, affective and social impact. Part of service-learning’s impact is its contribution to the development of inclusive attitudes and predispositions towards inclusiveness among school students and tertiary students, particularly pre-service teachers. The chapter recognises inclusivity as an element of quality teaching that helps students make connections with contexts outside the classroom, engage with different perspectives and ways of knowing and to accommodate all their peers and all those being offered service. The chapter recommends a particular approach to the expansion of thinking and practice that inclusivity requires, one based on the methodology of the Philosophy in Schools movement, which has its genesis in the work of John Dewey. That approach uses the mechanism of the Community of Inquiry to structure reflective activities in a way that facilitates the development of students’ critical and creative thinking and their capacity for substantive dialogue. Within the Community of Inquiry students are encouraged to engage with differing and perhaps novel perspectives as they respond to real-life service-learning experiences. Well-facilitated reflection gives students the opportunity to develop skills and dispositions conducive to deep understanding of concepts and issues that arise in discussion. It also helps to raise awareness of preconceptions and attitudes that can undermine inclusiveness in education. The chapter draws the conclusion that rigorous reflection serves as a stimulus to act to implement inclusive practices within service-learning projects on the basis of well-justified reasoning.

As noted in the introduction, this book is concerned with resistance to professional guidance that teachers may evince as they hold rigidly to an ‘inherited script’ that undermines the flexibility needed to respond to the emergent needs of learners. We propose that this resistance, and the sense of excessive entitlement that propels it, are responses to fundamentally incoherent theorizations of learning that form the basis for unworkable pedagogical models promulgated by reform-oriented teacher educators. Inherited scripts, therefore, are the only working models of pedagogy available to teachers, torn by the need to make sense of their own teaching while fending off the incomprehensible demands of their academic mentors. Our critique of learning theory is based on Thomas Kuhn's well-known perspectives on preparadigmatic science. Our thesis is that the various branches of learning theory reflect incommensurable interpretations of learning. Thus, any synthesis of perspectives – for instance, in reform pedagogies – is necessarily unstable. We support this critique through an examination of a lesson in an afterschool philosophy club illustrating lapses in reform-oriented pedagogy that trace back to incoherent theoretical framings.

This chapter will detail the methodologies and methods used in a research project aimed to develop a working democratic model of parent engagement in a coastal primary school in England. Building on John Macmurray's (1958/2012) insistence that learning to live and act in relationship with each other is vital to democracy and thus education, the project involved working with a group of parents who explored different ways of working with and relating to the school. Initially, the study involved using Community Philosophy (SAPERE, 2015) which provided a forum to discuss, problematise and develop new concepts and forms of parent engagement. As the research project continued, it was necessary to take a post-structuralist turn and develop a more dissensual approach to both parent engagement and research. This chapter explores the need for such an approach argues for a re-conceptualisation of action research as the rope makers tool, the fid, an approach that ruptures understandings and the status quo. The implications of such an approach are explored, especially the need for a destabilising approach to methodology and research ethics.