Dialogue on ‘Dialogic Education’: Has Rupert gone over to ‘the Dark Side’?

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
E. Matusov, R. Wegerif
{"title":"Dialogue on ‘Dialogic Education’: Has Rupert gone over to ‘the Dark Side’?","authors":"E. Matusov, R. Wegerif","doi":"10.5195/DPJ.2014.78","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This email dialogue that we record and report here between Eugene Matusov and Rupert Wegerif, exemplifies Internet mediated dialogic education. When Eugene emailed Rupert with his initial (mis)understanding of Rupert's position about dialogic pedagogy Rupert felt really motivated to reply. Rupert was not simply motivated to refute Eugene and assert his correctness, although Rupert is sure such elements enter into every dialogue, but also to explore and to try to resolve the issues ignited by the talk in New Zealand. Through this extended dialogue Rupert's and Eugene's positions become more nuanced and focussed. Rupert brings out his concern with the long-term and collective nature of some dialogues claiming that the – \"dialogue of humanity that education serves is bigger than the interests of particular students and particular teachers.…\" – and so he argues that it is often reasonable to induct students into the dialogue so far so that they can participate fully. On the other hand, Eugene's view of dialogue seems more focussed on personal responsibility, particular individual desires, interests and positions, individual agency and answering the final ethical \"damned questions\" without an alibi-in-being.  Rupert claims that dialogic education is education FOR dialogue and Eugene claims that dialogic education is education AS dialogue. Both believe in education THROUGH dialogue but education through dialogue is not in itself dialogic education. For Rupert dialogic education can include ‘scaffolding’ for full participation in dialogue as long as dialogue is the aim. For Eugene dialogic education has to be a genuine dialogue and this means that a curriculum goal cannot be specified in advance because learning in a dialogue is always emergent and unpredictable. Our dialogue-disagreement is a relational and discursive experiment to develop a new genre of academic critical dialogue. The dialogue itself called to us and motivated us and flowed through us. This dialogue is much bigger than us. It participates in a dialogue that humanity has been having about education for thousands of years. We hope that it also engages you and calls you to respond.","PeriodicalId":42140,"journal":{"name":"Dialogic Pedagogy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogic Pedagogy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5195/DPJ.2014.78","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

This email dialogue that we record and report here between Eugene Matusov and Rupert Wegerif, exemplifies Internet mediated dialogic education. When Eugene emailed Rupert with his initial (mis)understanding of Rupert's position about dialogic pedagogy Rupert felt really motivated to reply. Rupert was not simply motivated to refute Eugene and assert his correctness, although Rupert is sure such elements enter into every dialogue, but also to explore and to try to resolve the issues ignited by the talk in New Zealand. Through this extended dialogue Rupert's and Eugene's positions become more nuanced and focussed. Rupert brings out his concern with the long-term and collective nature of some dialogues claiming that the – "dialogue of humanity that education serves is bigger than the interests of particular students and particular teachers.…" – and so he argues that it is often reasonable to induct students into the dialogue so far so that they can participate fully. On the other hand, Eugene's view of dialogue seems more focussed on personal responsibility, particular individual desires, interests and positions, individual agency and answering the final ethical "damned questions" without an alibi-in-being.  Rupert claims that dialogic education is education FOR dialogue and Eugene claims that dialogic education is education AS dialogue. Both believe in education THROUGH dialogue but education through dialogue is not in itself dialogic education. For Rupert dialogic education can include ‘scaffolding’ for full participation in dialogue as long as dialogue is the aim. For Eugene dialogic education has to be a genuine dialogue and this means that a curriculum goal cannot be specified in advance because learning in a dialogue is always emergent and unpredictable. Our dialogue-disagreement is a relational and discursive experiment to develop a new genre of academic critical dialogue. The dialogue itself called to us and motivated us and flowed through us. This dialogue is much bigger than us. It participates in a dialogue that humanity has been having about education for thousands of years. We hope that it also engages you and calls you to respond.
关于“对话教育”的对话:鲁伯特是否已经转向了“黑暗面”?
我们在这里记录和报道的尤金·马图索夫和鲁珀特·韦格里夫之间的电子邮件对话,是互联网媒介对话教育的典范。当尤金给鲁珀特发邮件,表达了他对鲁珀特关于对话教学法立场的初步(错误)理解时,鲁珀特感到很有动力去回复。鲁珀特的动机不仅仅是反驳尤金并断言他的正确性,尽管鲁珀特确信这些元素会进入每一次对话,但也是为了探索并试图解决新西兰谈话引发的问题。通过这个扩展的对话,鲁伯特和尤金的立场变得更加微妙和集中。鲁珀特对某些对话的长期性和集体性提出了关注,认为教育服务的“人类对话”大于特定学生和特定教师的利益。……”——因此他认为,到目前为止,引导学生参与对话通常是合理的,这样他们才能充分参与。另一方面,尤金的对话观似乎更侧重于个人责任、个人特定的欲望、利益和立场、个人能动性,以及在没有存在借口的情况下回答最终的伦理“该死的问题”。鲁珀特认为对话教育是为了对话而教育,尤金认为对话教育是作为对话的教育。双方都相信对话教育,但对话教育本身并不是对话教育。对鲁珀特来说,只要对话是目的,对话教育可以包括让学生充分参与对话的“脚手架”。对尤金来说,对话教育必须是一种真正的对话,这意味着课程目标不能事先规定,因为对话中的学习总是突发的和不可预测的。我们的对话-分歧是一个关系和话语实验,以发展一种新的学术批评对话类型。对话本身呼唤着我们,激励着我们,贯穿着我们。这场对话的意义远不止于我们。它参与了人类几千年来关于教育的对话。我们希望它也吸引你,并呼吁你作出回应。
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
Dialogic Pedagogy
Dialogic Pedagogy EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
33.30%
发文量
12
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信