In this text the author poses a question about the direction of the evolution of early childhood education, considering its specificity in the context of the academic nature of pedagogy itself and its historical development, and especially the modern trend for interdisciplinarity. The author associates sources of diversity of this sub-discipline with a focus on the child, emphasizing, on the one hand, the setting of the sub-discipline in the tradition, especially pedological and, on the other hand, a growing and critical phenomenological perspective of research in this area. In conclusion he emphasizes that a reorientation of the multi paradigmatic research conducted in early childhood pedagogy, its openness to differences, but also the use of the methodology of the humanities and social studies recognized by the international community of scholars, make this sub-discipline of learning begin to regain the appellation of an integral discipline.
Odróżniając “nadzieję” od “oczekiwań”, staramy się wypracować naszą drogę ku modelowi edukacji, która byłaby nie tylko zestawem procedur pozwalających uczniom uzyskać fakty i dane do zaimplementowania w zdolnościach technicznych i praktycznych, ale która jednocześnie umożliwiałaby im krytyczną refl eksję nad jakością życia w ponowoczesnych warunkach zorientowanej rynkowo globalizacji. Taka edukacja, którą nazywamy „sytuacjonistyczną”, nie ma na celu nauczenia ucznia jak dostosować się do wymagać świata, ale (zgodnie z ujęciem Guy Deborda i jego fi lozofi i i praktyki sytuacjonistycznej) jak praktykować wolność w celu zmieniania świata, by uczynić go bardziej otwartym na rozwój ludzkiej indywidualności. To implikuje przebudzenie na wszelkie komplikacje współczesnego świata, ale także wytycza ścieżkę do kultury nadziei, która zgodnie z ujęciem Ernsta Blocha, jest najbardziej ludzkim z wszystkich mentalnych doznań oraz pozwala usytuować się wobec najdalszych horyzontów przyszłości – czyli najbardziej przejmujących kwestii w obecnej sytuacji – tworząc szansę na rozwój kultury gościnności.
This introduction to the volume outlines the conception of the pedagogical city. The author stresses flows, or continuous exchange between citizens as specific to city life. Such flows concern also thinking, which contributes to the creation of a community that one may identify, afer Aristotle, as koinopolis – an educational community of shared thinking, ‘a great teacher’. Against the background of the condition of the global city, the conception of pedagogical city contributes to the theory of social pedagogy, and to the conception of pedagogy of place in particular (including urban community education). One may speak, in this context, of koinpolitanism – a trait of thinking capable of inspiring the flow of changes taking place in the cities of today. The papers collected in this volume contribute to the development of this idea.
An autobiographical lecture at the Faculty of Social Sciences of The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, presents the genesis and evolution of my research projects in their tight connection with the ontology of development and educational achievements in science and school practice. It is an introspective and socio-historical insight into the emergence of ideas, the scope of my personal involvement in radical changes in pedagogy as science and practice from kindergarten to university professor. My works have been appreciated, among other things, by rewarding the third honorary doctorate honoris causa.
The ideas of pluralism, their various theoretical developments and ideological concretizations, as well as their promotion and the attempts at implementing them in social practice, constitute a current signum temporis. Pedagogical reflection seems to be particularly sensitive to the issue of pluralism, to its understanding and practising, to multidimensional references of pluralism to the world of values. This especially concerns the values and conflicts of values which are close to various forms of educational activity. What is considered – more or less critically – in pedagogical reflection are different aspects and consequences of the idea of pluralism concerning the currently existing ideas. Simultaneously, the multitude of the ideas of pluralism is taken into account – the ideas which refer to the broadly treated sphere of pedagogical activities and institutions. Pedagogical reflection also considers the threats which co-occur with pluralism or are aimed against it and which are carried by pluralism itself, e.g. in the sphere of education. An expert in the contemporary pedagogical thought and practice, Bogusław Śliwerski, asks: “Will we manage to save the world of pedagogical thought, the pedagogy open to difference, to pluralism (not to be mistaken for another illness which is relativism)?”. By confronting pluralistic perspectives of pedagogy with current ideological and social challenges, he makes this question one of the leading issues in pedagogical and metapedagogical studies. What seems to be heard in this question as well is the appeal to save the world of pedagogical thought as an open world characterized by pluralism, doing this through honest reasoning conducted from different standpoints and perspectives. The assumption of this question comprises the axiologically consolidated belief that it is worth “to save the world of pedagogical thought, the pedagogy open to pluralism”. This is also an inspiration to undertake the (presented in this text) thought concerning the pluralistic perspectives of pedagogy and various faces of pluralisms in the critical recognition of metapedagogical reflection in the case of the Polish pedagogical thought after 1989.
In the early 21st century, the concepts and theories which constitute the theoretical and methodological foundation of the traditional 20th century resocialization pedagogy (divided into three basic groups characterized by different theoretical and methodological approaches) got largely outdated. Therefore, contemporary resocialization pedagogy searches for new inspirations. What can become one of the new theoretical- methodological concepts is creative resocialization. The presented study concerns the assumptions of both the traditional resocialization pedagogy and its new varieties, with special focus on traditional and current theoretical and methodological contexts.
The goal of this paper is to discuss changes implemented in Danish early childhood education influenced by neoliberal ideology, and views concerning the new requirements for teachers (pedagogues) at private and self-owned kindergartens. The paper describes the historical tradition of Danish kindergartens based on children’s free play and democracy, allowing children to develop social skills and cognition through exploration and discovery, and giving practitioners a great deal of autonomy. The new trend in Danish early childhood education is towards detailed planning of work and accountability-based-assessment, which contradicts the traditional philosophy. It pushes teachers to create programs that develop children’s readiness for school and to implement teaching methods based on educational standards mandated by the government. The results of this research project, based on interviews conducted with teachers and educational experts, demonstrates the educators’ criticism of this new approach and their attempts to save democracy as a central value in education
The article outlines the conceptual assumptions of pedagogy underlying university education, re-defined with regard to the dynamic conditions underlying contemporary culture. The authors concentrate on constitutive educational forms that define the nature of semiosis in education, as well as their exposure and transformation. In connection with this, there is a focus on the concept of “symbolic politics”, which aims to liberalize the practice of pedagogy, freeing it from the dictatorship of a transmission form of education, as well as creating conditions for strengthening discursive relationships and a reflexive discursive attitude. As a result of the implementation of this form of symbolic politics, those involved in education do not promote the prevailing discourse but become agents capable of discursive reflection in action as well as participants in processes of discursive design and creation.