Search

Iveta Kestere is a Professor at the Faculty of Education, Psychology and Art, University of Latvia and an expert in the history of education at the Latvian Council of Science. Her current academic interest is in the research methodology for the history of education and education under dictatorship, including history of school reality and history of teaching profession. She is the author of numerous articles devoted to the history of education and the author or co-editor of nine books, among them The Visual Image of the Teacher (2012) and History of Pedagogy and Educational Sciences in the Baltic Countries from 1940 to 1990: an Overview (2013). She was a guest researcher and lecturer at the KU Leuven, Belgium. She is included in the editorial board of academic journals in Lithuania and Italy. She is a co-convenor of 17th Network (history of education) at The European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) and the Board member of the Baltic Association of Historians of Pedagogy.

The paper is a specific revision of Dewey’s Democracy and Education so to point out the supremacy of educational dimension on the political one in Dewey’s thought and to individuate the central elements of Deweyan legacy for them who, at present, are taking into account educational questions and their referring science.

In my paper, I describe educational experiences carried out not in the name of political choices, but thanks to engaged educators or/and philanthropists. Official school politics have been dominated by conservatism and elitism, whereas educators and philanthropists tried different didactical ways, working out a different idea of a school. The core of the paper is to compare official political school-models and non-official models. At the end, two questions are raised: Why have these experiences not influenced political choices? Why have teachers, politicians and educational theorists not interacted?

The paper is a specific revision of Dewey’s Democracy and Education so to point out the supremacy of educational dimension on the political one in Dewey’s thought and to individuate the central elements of Deweyan legacy for them who, at present, are taking into account educational questions and their referring science.

From its first appearance in western culture, philosophy has been considered able to build up reality, to educate people, and to disclose truth. Plato proposed philosophers as governors in life-long pursuit of philosophical learning. Socrates was the ideal paradigm of an educating philosopher: he tried to wake up human minds so that they could be aware of themselves and of the world, criticizing tradition and prejudices in a logically consistent perspective. A critical and dialogic approach—not by mere chance defined as "Socratic"—to problems has been considered until now the most profitable method of teaching. Socrates is a pioneer in discussing the question of a philosophical (paideia), as he defined his method "maieutic." He was not an authoritarian teacher, but a sparring partner in the process of self-education. Moreover, he considered himself as the most learned and, at the same time, the wisest in Greece, just because he was conscious of his ignorance. Therefore, he understood for the first time in our cultural tradition that knowledge is an endless process rather than a product, within marked bounds.

In occasione del centenario dalla pubblicazione di “Democrazia e educazione” di John Dewey, il contributo propone una riflessione sull’attualità di un classico del pedagogista americano e ne riprende i temi salienti – la concezione della democrazia e la funzione dell’economia – in un ideale confronto con tre pensatori contemporanei: Amartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum e Jean-Paul Fitoussi.

Nel presente contributo l'autore, in un volume dedicato alla figura di Giovanni Genovesi, analizza, anche sotto forma di dialogo, il contributo che lo studioso ha apportato con studi e riflessioni sempre attente e raffinate alla pedagogia speciale in quanto modo di essere della Scienza dell'Educazione.

This contribution puts in confrontation the characteristics of Giovanni Maria Bertin’s problematicist approach, in particular the social-cultural value of ethical-social educa-tion, with the instrumentalist approach, the “intelligence method” of John Dewey (which is related to active, progressive and democratic education: substantial democracy and not only representative and formal democracy) and his militant logical philosophy. On the other hand, both G. M. Bertin and J. Dewey are concordant in retaining that an inten-tionally educational process (the action of educating) is characterized by being perma-nent, continuous and directed at a constant search for sense and meaning concerning one’s self in a constructive relationship with others and the environment (natural and so-cial) in an ethical and aesthetical way. The Deweyan approach and the Bertinian one are, therefore, delineated as unavoidable points of reference for educating in the complexity of reality, through the option of a life style marked by authentic life, or ‘ethic living’ (Gal-lerani, 2011), under different forms of commitment and achievement, going towards an individual and social empowerment. To set up the direction of the problematicism and of ‘ethic living’ means, finally, proposing solid ethics of thinking, acting and living in a con-stant ‘transaction’ (in the Deweyan meaning) that is founded on a democratic and engagé way of life in the óikos-world.

Il contributo prende in esame, al'interno della critica e della letteratura per l'infanzia, il tema della figura del lettore e dello sguardo bambino sulle narrazioni. A partire da alcuni ineludibili classici per giovani lettori sino agli autori contemporanei per l'infanzia, il contributo intende approfondire i principali percorsi critici e pedagogici sul senso del leggere e del raccontare nella letteratura per ragazze e ragazzi.