Self Managed Learning: a hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH On the Horizon Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI:10.1108/oth-08-2023-0029
Eugene Matusov
{"title":"Self Managed Learning: a hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education","authors":"Eugene Matusov","doi":"10.1108/oth-08-2023-0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose The book has generated a passionate dialogue-disagreement (mostly but not entirely) with the book. Dialogue-disagreement is based on challenges, disagreements and rebuttals between opponents, often belonging to different, even irreconcilable, paradigms. The goal of dialogue-disagreement is not so much to convince the opponent to change their mind but rather to critically examine and problematize the two involved paradigms: the authors’ and the reviewer’s. By taking the generated challenges and disagreements seriously, both irreconcilable paradigms can grow through their replies. Dialogue-disagreement gives the participants–opponents the gift of revealing their own paradigmatic blind spots, which are often invisible from within their paradigms. Dialogue-disagreement is exploratory and based on an agnostic relationship between frenemies, i.e. “friendly enemies.” Design/methodology/approach This is a critical book review essay of Self Managed Learning and the New Educational Paradigm (Cunningham, 2021). Findings The reviewer views Ian Cunningham’s Self Managed Learning educational paradigm as a hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education, while the reviewer sees his/her Self-Education paradigm as entirely Democratic (and Dialogic). Elsewhere, the reviewer discussed and critically analyzed the Progressive Education paradigm, which generally involves channeling the student’s learning activism and subjectivity toward learning outcomes desired by an educator. It uses the educator’s manipulation of the student’s subjectivity to make them study what the educator wants them to study. In contrast, the paradigm of Democratic Education assumes that the educatee is the final authority of their own education. The educatee decides whether to study, when to study, what to study, how to study, with whom to study, where to study, for what purpose to study and so on. The educatee makes these decisions by themselves or with the help of other people at the educatee’s discretion and conditions. The reviewer charges that Ian’s Self Managed Learning paradigm is a hybrid of both paradigms, with the Progressive Education paradigm taking the lead and exploiting the Democratic Education paradigm. Originality/value The book presented a unique, innovative practice worth a critical analysis. The reviewer’s dialogue-disagreement with the book reveals a particular hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education which is common to some innovative self-directed learning.","PeriodicalId":47013,"journal":{"name":"On the Horizon","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"On the Horizon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/oth-08-2023-0029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The book has generated a passionate dialogue-disagreement (mostly but not entirely) with the book. Dialogue-disagreement is based on challenges, disagreements and rebuttals between opponents, often belonging to different, even irreconcilable, paradigms. The goal of dialogue-disagreement is not so much to convince the opponent to change their mind but rather to critically examine and problematize the two involved paradigms: the authors’ and the reviewer’s. By taking the generated challenges and disagreements seriously, both irreconcilable paradigms can grow through their replies. Dialogue-disagreement gives the participants–opponents the gift of revealing their own paradigmatic blind spots, which are often invisible from within their paradigms. Dialogue-disagreement is exploratory and based on an agnostic relationship between frenemies, i.e. “friendly enemies.” Design/methodology/approach This is a critical book review essay of Self Managed Learning and the New Educational Paradigm (Cunningham, 2021). Findings The reviewer views Ian Cunningham’s Self Managed Learning educational paradigm as a hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education, while the reviewer sees his/her Self-Education paradigm as entirely Democratic (and Dialogic). Elsewhere, the reviewer discussed and critically analyzed the Progressive Education paradigm, which generally involves channeling the student’s learning activism and subjectivity toward learning outcomes desired by an educator. It uses the educator’s manipulation of the student’s subjectivity to make them study what the educator wants them to study. In contrast, the paradigm of Democratic Education assumes that the educatee is the final authority of their own education. The educatee decides whether to study, when to study, what to study, how to study, with whom to study, where to study, for what purpose to study and so on. The educatee makes these decisions by themselves or with the help of other people at the educatee’s discretion and conditions. The reviewer charges that Ian’s Self Managed Learning paradigm is a hybrid of both paradigms, with the Progressive Education paradigm taking the lead and exploiting the Democratic Education paradigm. Originality/value The book presented a unique, innovative practice worth a critical analysis. The reviewer’s dialogue-disagreement with the book reveals a particular hybrid of Progressive and Democratic Education which is common to some innovative self-directed learning.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自我管理学习:进步与民主教育的结合
这本书引发了一场充满激情的对话——与书的分歧(大部分但不是全部)。对话-分歧是基于对手之间的挑战、分歧和反驳,通常属于不同的,甚至是不可调和的范式。对话-分歧的目的并不是说服对方改变主意,而是批判性地审视和质疑两种相关的范式:作者和审稿人的范式。通过认真对待产生的挑战和分歧,这两种不可调和的范式都可以通过他们的回应得到发展。对话-分歧让参与者-对手有机会揭示自己的范式盲点,而这些盲点在他们的范式中往往是看不见的。对话分歧是探索性的,基于友敌之间的不可知论关系,即“友好的敌人”。这是一篇关于自我管理学习和新教育范式的重要书评(Cunningham, 2021)。评论者认为Ian Cunningham的自我管理学习教育范式是进步教育和民主教育的混合体,而评论者认为他/她的自我教育范式是完全民主的(和对话的)。在其他地方,评论者讨论并批判性地分析了进步教育范式,该范式通常涉及引导学生的学习主动性和主体性,以实现教育者所期望的学习成果。它利用教育者对学生主体性的操纵,使他们学习教育者想要他们学习的东西。相比之下,民主教育的范式假设受教育者是他们自己教育的最终权威。受教育者决定是否学习,何时学习,学习什么,如何学习,和谁一起学习,在哪里学习,为了什么目的学习等等。受教育者根据自己的判断和条件,自己或在他人的帮助下做出这些决定。评论者指责Ian的自我管理学习范式是两种范式的混合体,其中进步教育范式占主导地位,并利用了民主教育范式。这本书提出了一个独特的、创新的做法,值得进行批判性的分析。书评人对这本书的对话异议揭示了进步和民主教育的特殊混合,这在一些创新的自主学习中很常见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
On the Horizon
On the Horizon EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: On the Horizon provides an insight into how the changing face of technology is making it possible for educational institutions to form new relationships across geographic and cultural boundaries.
期刊最新文献
Our mission is uplift: Afrofuturism and collective work for liberation in Black homeschooling organizations High school teachers’ perceptions of technology integration in instruction Developing individual capability in organizations through the promotion of heutagogy Psychometric properties of a scale to measure social entrepreneurship competency in Mexican university students Student accommodation characteristics, perceived overall satisfaction and academic performance: evidence from six Scottish universities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1