Can the Prevailing Description of Educational Reality Be Considered Complete? On the Parks-Eichmann Paradox, Spooky Action at a Distance and a Missing Dimension in the Theory of Education

Autor/in	Biesta, Gert
Titel	Can the Prevailing Description of Educational Reality Be Considered Complete? On the Parks-Eichmann Paradox, Spooky Action at a Distance and a Missing Dimension in the Theory of Education
Quelle	In: Policy Futures in Education, 18 (2020) 8, S.1011-1025 (15 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Biesta, Gert)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1478-2103
DOI	10.1177/1478210320910312
Schlagwörter	Educational Theories; Logical Thinking; Philosophy; Success; Academic Achievement; Academic Failure + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Educational theory; Theory of education; Bildungstheorie; Philosophie; Erfolg; Schulleistung
Abstract	The question I address in this paper is to what extent the prevailing description of educational reality that can be found in contemporary research, policy and practice can be considered complete. The motivation for asking this question stems from an educational paradox to which I refer as the Parks-Eichmann paradox. This paradox has to do with the fact that what appears as educational success from one perspective is problematic when viewed differently, whereas what appears as educational failure may actually reveal something that is of crucial importance educationally. The paradox thus leads to the suggestion that the prevailing description of educational reality -- to which I will refer as the 'paradigm' of education as "cultivation" -- is insufficient or incomplete. I use the work of John Dewey to highlight key characteristics and key shortcomings of this 'paradigm' and argue that it needs to be supplemented by what I will refer to as an "existential" educational 'paradigm'. I highlight the distinction between the two paradigms through the question whether it is possible to educate 'directly' -- an option which Dewey explicitly denies. I turn to the German notions of "Bildung" and "Erziehung" in order to explore to what extent they provide us with a set of concepts for articulating the distinction between the two educational paradigms. I will show that this is not as straightforward as it may seem, as there is no agreement about the exact definitions of the terms. However, having "two" terms rather than just the word 'education' is important in order to be able to make the distinction I am after, and here the terms "Bildung" and "Erziehung" are helpful. I conclude the paper with a brief sketch of the 'existential work' of education in order to outline what the existential paradigm implies for educational practice. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01