Finding consensus on well-being in education

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Theory and Research in Education Pub Date : 2024-06-12 DOI:10.1177/14778785241259852

Randall Curren, Ilona Boniwell, Richard M. Ryan, Lindsay Oades, Harry Brighouse, Elaine Unterhalter, Kristján Kristjánsson, D. D. de Ruyter, Colin Macleod, Ian Morris, Mathew White

{"title":"Finding consensus on well-being in education","authors":"Randall Curren, Ilona Boniwell, Richard M. Ryan, Lindsay Oades, Harry Brighouse, Elaine Unterhalter, Kristján Kristjánsson, D. D. de Ruyter, Colin Macleod, Ian Morris, Mathew White","doi":"10.1177/14778785241259852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research on well-being and concern over the well-being of students and teachers has grown dramatically in recent years. Researchers and reformers in positive psychology and education, self-determination theory, social and emotional learning, liberal-democratic political and educational philosophy, and neo-Aristotelian theories of flourishing and character education have played formative and intersecting roles in what is now an international movement to promote the lifelong flourishing of students as an alternative to a human capital and economic growth focus for education. This article defends this flourishing-focused reorientation of education policy and practice, using a value-led and evidence-informed methodology. It sorts through the conceptual disputes and clarifies the ethical considerations that should guide efforts to advance the well-being of students and teachers, assesses key claims and arguments, and brings together compatible aspects of the leading philosophical and psychological perspectives on flourishing as an aim of education. It identifies ethically and evidentially justifiable points of consensus on well-being and flourishing in education, presents a consensus model of relationships between educational environments, learning, and flourishing, and concludes with some recommendations for educational policy and practice.","PeriodicalId":46679,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Research in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14778785241259852","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: 1

Abstract

Research on well-being and concern over the well-being of students and teachers has grown dramatically in recent years. Researchers and reformers in positive psychology and education, self-determination theory, social and emotional learning, liberal-democratic political and educational philosophy, and neo-Aristotelian theories of flourishing and character education have played formative and intersecting roles in what is now an international movement to promote the lifelong flourishing of students as an alternative to a human capital and economic growth focus for education. This article defends this flourishing-focused reorientation of education policy and practice, using a value-led and evidence-informed methodology. It sorts through the conceptual disputes and clarifies the ethical considerations that should guide efforts to advance the well-being of students and teachers, assesses key claims and arguments, and brings together compatible aspects of the leading philosophical and psychological perspectives on flourishing as an aim of education. It identifies ethically and evidentially justifiable points of consensus on well-being and flourishing in education, presents a consensus model of relationships between educational environments, learning, and flourishing, and concludes with some recommendations for educational policy and practice.

查看原文本刊更多论文

就教育领域的福祉达成共识

近年来，关于幸福的研究以及对学生和教师幸福的关注急剧增加。积极心理学和教育学、自我决定理论、社会和情感学习、自由民主政治和教育哲学，以及新亚里士多德繁荣和品格教育理论的研究者和改革者，在目前的国际运动中发挥了形成和交叉的作用，以促进学生的终身繁荣，作为人力资本和经济增长教育重点的替代方案。本文采用以价值为导向、以实证为依据的方法，为教育政策和实践中这种以学生的蓬勃发展为重点的重新定位进行辩护。文章梳理了概念上的争议，阐明了在促进学生和教师福祉方面应遵循的伦理考量，评估了主要的主张和论点，并汇集了以繁荣为教育目标的主要哲学和心理学观点中相互兼容的方面。该书从伦理和证据的角度确定了关于教育中的幸福和繁荣的共识点，提出了一个关于教育环境、学习和繁荣之间关系的共识模型，并在最后对教育政策和实践提出了一些建议。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Theory and Research in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

2.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Theory and Research in Education, formerly known as The School Field, is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes theoretical, empirical and conjectural papers contributing to the development of educational theory, policy and practice.