Teacher training and the relationship between disciplinary competence and teaching skills: a debate still open

841

Abstract

Reflect on the theme of the analysis of the formation of the teacher in order to disciplinary skills and the teaching of languages, means necessarily to analyze first the relationship between pedagogy, general didactics and disciplinary teaching in an effort to work out a new initial training and in-service the teacher for the European school and outside Europe that is in the national and international, remains controversial. I do not know the present debate in Russia, so I will consider the issue this within Europe in the light of the guidelines defined by the extensive European legislation which in recent years have been launched.

General Information

Keywords: teacher training, relationship, disciplinary competence, teaching skills.

Journal rubric: Linguodidactics and Innovations.Psychological Basis of Learning Languages and Cultures.

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/langt.2016030106

For citation: Mulè P. Teacher training and the relationship between disciplinary competence and teaching skills: a debate still open [Elektronnyi resurs]. Âzyk i tekst = Language and Text, 2016. Vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 50–62. DOI: 10.17759/langt.2016030106.

Full text

Preface

On the question of the relationship between general didactics and disciplinary teaching both in Italy and abroad, the research conducted by pedagogues appear fragmented, fragmented and without a common line to be pursued so as to produce many and varied reflections. On a more practical note: application of the many tracks of theoretical research shows that there is still a gap between general and disciplinary didactics, a circumstance which has theoretical and methodological implications, often disregarded by current practitioners. Hence the urgent need to develop a pedagogy for the teacher if he is to have all the requirements necessary to confront the challenges of the future on a strictly scientific basis; both in Italy and in Europe. If a solid educational theory valid for all teachers cannot be devised, there are nevertheless some prospects and / or trends which can guide teachers and develop their professional competence[1]. The attempt of this research is to understand how to bridge the gap between the disciplinary skills and practical teaching competence of the teachers, through a comparative analysis of Italian and European studies, to build a new educational model for teacher training in schools generally. In Italy, the recent regulatory framework, which was introduced with the reform of the secondary school, aimed to respond to a scenery in transition and change, so as to encourage institutions of education and training to change their programmes. The aim is to introduce education and training run by the teachers, who have to achieve student educational goals that entail specific learning objectives as well as the development of skills. This is especially relevant in the light of the new organizational patterns in high school, frequently focusing on technical and vocational education.

This implies, however, that there is a training program which should increasingly provide harmony and cohesion between different school types and levels that should represent a common element in the new orientation for training skills,. In this regard, the European Union has already outlined a path by defining the key competences for lifelong learning, which should constitute the common European horizon of the school, helping to understand where it is on this journey and what cultural and institutional role the teacher has. A model designer will have to consider carefully the life plans of future generations in relation to others and to the organizational dimension of knowledge and educational institutions. If the process of democratic transformation of the school is a difficult one to define and implement, it can only be a teacher with a specific pedagogical background to organize it, as the most important aspect of the educational relationship is precisely the educative dimension in relation to others. Educational research, for years, has produced significant results, but only by promoting the Deweyan idea of a teacher with pedagogical expertise can significant results be attained. This means reconsidering the teaching profession, which must have the conceptual and operational tools to make the discipline interesting, through the use of new methodologies and tools, in order to facilitate the learning process of the disciplines and the acquisition of logical-linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. In the light of this perspective, the university has the task of guiding the initial and in-service training programs for the development of educational and future social generations of the XXIst century.        

1. Reflection on epistemological links between education and general and disciplinary didactics

To scientifically analyze the relationship between education and general and disciplinary didactics necessitates a clear theoretical discussion of education in relation to general education. The aim is to 'qualify both the organizational models, both curricular models of schooling'. By disciplinary teaching we mean the learning of individual subjects taught, in respect of which pedagogy must act as a 'container' within which are all disciplinary areas[2].

The teacher must build effective links between the fundamental issues of each separate discipline and the real training needs of students through reading, interpreting, monitoring and assessing the teaching-learning process, keeping constantly in mind the necessity of referring to certain methodological models and teaching strategies. In this regard, the teacher should know the importance of constructivist teaching, be inspired by constructivist epistemology, not failing to appreciate the basic assumption that our knowledge of reality is an individual and social construct. So that «Without it a constructivist practice loses incisiveness and, in fact, is very similar to methods that have already been widely tested». The question is not merely theoretical but full of practical implications, because the value of a discipline must be conceived of as a historical construct, consisting of demonstrable teaching content and details of the instructional design, which is naturally closely connected with the activity of research itself.

The epistemological roots of the debate on the relationship between education and teaching may lead to a broader scientific debate that sees education in terms of its specific object of investigation: i.e., training at the heart of a reflection on its expropriation by other disciplines. The various forms of rationality related to the epistemological problems of education have now been framed according to the interpretations of the human sciences, now according to the empirical-experimental, now to critical hermeneutics. The issue has been analysed both in terms of the spread of the scientific method and of its application by the educational phenomenon. A problematic condition of education is therefore clear that, on the one hand, refers to the conception of Bertin and Banfi[3] of the educational experience as a place of many contradictions[4].  On the other hand, it illustrates the phenomenon of dispossession of education by philosophy, biology, politics, psychology, and science[5]. Some authors, indeed, have reflected on this assumption of expropriation, saying that many areas of research have investigated the educational sector with their specific methodological procedures, causing a reduction of education, its theoretical impoverishment and, sometimes, a real cognitive twist. Other authors, however, reflecting on the phenomenon of expropriation, have shown that education itself has derived criteria and principles of identification from other disciplines, thus expressing a clear identity crisis[6]. The debate began after World War II, thanks to the perspective of philosopher John Dewey, on education conceived as scientific education[7], in which it is clear that educational processes guide and regulate the same science that applies to human problems. The scientific foundation of education is realized through the relationship with other 'special sources', as education, for Dewey, is conceived of as a broader science, presenting problems that can be analyzed and interpreted only through a plurality of disciplines. Thus, the spread of the paradigm of science education will result in an educational perspective epistemologically founded more as a philosophical, theoretical and unified science, than as a 'plural'science. Thus, the underlying assumption of Dewey’s thought focuses on the concept of theory conceived of as an active element that stands out as a conscious process of enrichment, of sense and meaning, especially since action without theory is blind, without meaning, banal but also destructive. Theory must therefore set / preset the ultimate ends of action, otherwise it will not be a significant theory.

In this regard, in Italy, in the late '70s, there began to develop the relationship between education and school thanks to the dissemination of the results of research in experimental psychology that had already begun in the United States, following the ideas of Dewey. A central concern for cognitive teaching is manifest, that has enabled educators to explore issues of school organization, technology, education and innovation in education, thereby initiating a ministerial and governmental brand of education, as evidenced in the pedagogical literature often closely tied to the vicissitudes of reform of the Italian school. Scientific research and school education of the 80s thus illustrates close attention to the issue of education and testimonies to the influence of cognition in its various cultural forms. It outlines specifically that pedagogy has been expropriated from psychology, establishing itself as teaching. Similarly, the teacher becomes the instrument for the technical transmission of content, data and knowledge, the one who must define the overall scheduling of his professionalism, who can often not find the right balance between his disciplinary skills and specific teaching competencies[8]. An interest in a education then appears, that places the accent on learning and education rather than on social issues such as found in John Dewey’s works on education. In this regard, there are numerous educational psychology research papers on the learning and building of language skills and concepts. The theory of education acts as a filter between learning and teaching and, through procedures of general and special educational research, will lead to the development of theories of a curriculum and a taxonomy of educational objectives of learning. In practice, the focus is on the school curriculum, which is the particular form of presentation of content and the specification of the mental processes that the subject must implement by interacting with these. The task of teaching procedures is to determine the allocation of teaching aids and reflections that should make possible the implementation of the curricula[9]. Forms of educational experimentation from an empirical and experimental perspective[10], have been developed, originating from distinguished scholars such as Jean Piaget, Jerome Bruner and Lev Vygotsky[11], which have generated reflections on education that highlight a close relationship between psychology and education, where education becomes an essential element of investigation[12]. The cultural background that characterized the activity of these psychologists was the study of learning in the specific situation of the classroom, and experience related to learning. On the relationship of educational psychology, Piaget assumes that learning problems are a field of study that psychology shares with biological science. It follows that «[...] the intervention of a logic of learning has nothing inassimilable to the spirit of biology, when this logic is conceived in terms of the overall coordination of actions and, therefore, is self-regulating and self-correcting, [...] or as is commonly said, natural logic»[13]. Therefore, raising the child means adaptation to the adult social environment, that is «transforming the psychobiological constitution of the individual in the light of all the collective realities to which the common conscience attributes some value»[14]. Consequently, the concept of learning loses its intellectual character and reveals its biological roots, which are defined as conditions of life for the individual in relation to a changing environment. Recent research has led to results that allow both to education and biology to go beyond descriptive knowledge that studies phenomena from the outside, towards a knowledge that tends to analyze them in their internal structure, thus giving rise to a more interpretive epistemology. It follows that even the knowledge of each child derived from his genetic code, is the acquisition of knowledge relating to specific experiences. In this perspective, the link between psychology, education and biology has been carefully analyzed by so-called biological education, with a bioeducational prospective[15], expanding the field interested in the neuroscientific educational perspective (neuroeducation)[16]. In this sense, the neurosciences and bio-technologies have opened and continue to open new possibilities for mental development, health care and the promotion of human life. From the epistemological perspective of Piaget it is clear, then, that psychological studies move more sharply in a cognitive direction, and offer significant contributions in terms of identifying the cognitive structures of the mind and their development, based on a scientific interest that has nothing in common with education. Piaget therefore focuses his research on the relationship between individual and environment, between a child and the objects of his physical and social space. Learning takes place with absorption and assimilation: the acquisition of data and signals from the outside world into innate structures of the subject and with their arrangement: the modification and adaptation of those same structures and enrichment of pre-existing schemes. For Piaget, the evolution of this progressive construction of learning by assimilation- accommodation- adaptation operates through phases that are termed 'stages'. According to his perspective, development would affect individual learning, since the child cannot learn concepts, rules and strategies if he has not developed the necessary skills and characteristics of a specific developmental stage. From the academic point of view, this implies that the teacher should propose appropriate tasks at the level of development of thought. In contrast to the Piagetian theory is the theory of education formulated by Bruner, who argues that the cultural context acts on child development in the first months of life: a youngster builds models of reality that shape his perceptions. These models depend largely on the cultural context in which an individual lives. Growth involves internalizing ways of acting, seeing, and symbolizing. These three modes affect a child's learning; learning is based mainly on discovery and invention, and intellectual development thus takes place through three stages: the active, one of direct action where experience is represented on the motoric plane; the iconic, which is largely sensory-perceptual organization; the symbolic, dominated by language, which is considered the privileged instrument of thought and a symbolic medium par excellence to express concepts and categorizations. These three phases are not rigidly linked to chronological age, but are simultaneously present in different moments of an individual’s life, and their typical modes remain active and available for the whole course of life, helping to determine cognitive style. From this perspective it can be seen, therefore, that an individual during learning not only acquires, processes and enhances incoming data, but subjects it to a constant checking on the basis of his mode of thought. The learner is not so passive as had been supposed until shortly before the development of Bruner ‘s theory, but rather plays an active and influential role in the development of experience. From a strictly educational perspective, it has been shown that levels of knowledge of the child can be improved as long as both the processes through which knowledge is acquired, and the way in which the child processes the experience, are considered.

The perspective of the Russian Vygotsky, meanwhile, aims at recovering the socio-cultural dimension, affirming the importance of historical and social variables in determining the evolution of thought processes and hence involves a new relationship between man and environment in studies of knowledge. Learning is not just a result made possible by the achievement of developmental milestones, but becomes a function, a necessary condition to promote, develop and activate the development potential of the child. Education and training are important elements in determining the course of development. The scholar distinguishes two levels of competence in the subject: one related to the possibility of spontaneous learning and the other determined by outside help. For Vygotsky, the difference between the level of tasks performed with the help of adults and those that can be accomplished with independent activity defines the area of development potential (Zone of Proximal Development). This area of development can only be activated by a teacher who, along with the stimulation of a socio-cultural environment must anticipate the stadial maturation achieved by a subject.

The overall structure of the theories of these three authors can also be found in Italian educational culture. It led to a significant influence of cognition in the field of educational research, but also greatly affected the law in the area of school and policy for schools. There is a complex ‘crossroads’ that involves the Piagetian theory of stages of development and genetic learning, the educational theory of Bruner and Vygotsky’s psychological theories of language. The spread of cognitive education in Italy illustates these three fundamental interpretations. Cognitive learning is, therefore, the expression of this hybrid form of psychological conception that aims, however, at a conception of education that simplifies the content of the discipline, adapting it to the stages of learning.

In this direction lies the problem of taxonomies, with authors such as Bloom, Guilford, Gagne, who contribute to the patrimony of Italian educational culture in the decade ranging from 1980 to 1990[17]. One of the most significant avenues of research in cognitivism, in fact, passes through the study of learning as a rationalization of the process of learning itself, looking for 'error free' instructional paths. A theory of education, like every scientific theory, tends to the explanation of phenomena and to prediction of effects; it gives rise to action and is a technology that can change educational processes. What becomes really crucial, then, is the development of teaching strategies through which the subject can achieve excellence in study; in other words, the reorganisation of teaching. These same considerations lead scholars of educational theory to reflect on the curriculum itself, concluding that it must be transparent and verifiable, or in other words, predictable and controllable. The first task will, therefore, be to define learning objectives through a kind of inventory of student behavior on a purely mental level. The search for the definition or classification of behavior in the cognitive field, but also to shift the affective and psychomotoric focus from teaching to learning, in order to constitute a transparent educational method, able to support, guide and strengthen the learning process.

2. Role and skills of the teacher in Italy and in Europe: notes on the relationship between general and disciplinary didactics

After almost forty years, there is a need to deepen the epistemological debate on educational processes, in order to solve the problematic issues that arise in the relationship between training and education, as well as the possible relationship between education and school. Although theoretically, within the contemporary educational debate, the reaffirmation of the critical-hermeneutic model of emancipation emerges, which interprets the meaning of education from a purely didactic point of view. However, as part of changes in school policy and institutional regulation, this primarily concerns the affirmation of educational models within the school system.

It is known, in this debate, that the affirmation of cognitive learning has greatly influenced school regulations. Consider, for example, the influence of cognition and the concept of interdisciplinarity in the various educational programs since 1979. The most important aspect, however, is the transformation of the figure of the teacher, on whom tasks have been imposed that have significantly changed his professional repertoire. The teacher, since the 1980s, has been driven by the educational ministry and school policy to play the role of technical transmission of content, and is increasingly obliged to adapt it to the specific psychological needs of the student. In this sense, his professionalism is affected by the psychological dimension of teaching, and this greatly affects the relationship between teaching and content. This relationship is a fundamental aspect of the controversy in Italian and European schools that started in the last two decades of the last century. In other words, the '80s were specifically characterized by this link between education and the figure of the teacher, which affected the ministerial programs of the period, transforming the legislative dimension in the area of schools.

In terms of scientific debate in Italy in the 1990s, pedagogy had several specific objects of investigation: training was investigated by methods of contextualization in the school situation following a logic of organization, from which emerged a radical transformation of the institutional model of school towards autonomy[18], with the DPR of March 8, 1999, n. 275, which regulates the autonomy of educational institutions, in accordance with art. 21 of 15 March 1997, n. 59. In the 80s, the teacher worked in a school context that required a synergistic collaboration between discipline and faculty. Think of law n. 517/77, for example, by which the program of disciplinary logic which required individual attention in the teacher, was replaced by the logic of programming tools, techniques, educational and teaching methods, which were suitable for the pursuit of educational goals of a logical and mental order.

In summary, in school practice the focus is on a curriculum that is a particular form of presentation of content and the specification of the mental processes that the subject must implement interacting with this. The task of teaching procedures is to determine the allocation of teaching aids and reflemethods that should make possible the implementation of the curricula. In the Italian regulatory framework, introduced with the reform of school autonomy, governed by Presidential Decree No. 275/1999, art. 4, educational autonomy is defined, which states that it is a faculty of the schools, while respecting the freedom of teaching and freedom of educational choice of families, to give substance to the national targets by realizing functional training, by recognizing the right of pupils to learning, by valuing diversity, promoting potential and taking all initiatives useful to the achievement of educational success of students, in compliance with certain institutional parameters which the general objectives of the education system (National Guidelines), educational demand of families and the needs of the territory. In this scenario, in terms of the relationship between general education and disciplinary teaching, it is necessary for a teacher to be able to move in a social and educational context that requires very specific skills, appropriate to determine the educational success of pupils / students by planning of personalized training pathways. To accomplish this, it is necessary for the teacher, as well as being an expert in their subject area, to have knowledge of the science of education according to a pedagogical, psychological, educational and legal perspective. He should be an expert in careful processes of trainin, a biopsychic cultural educandus, but also a connoisseur of the routes to be offered to pupils to enable them to translate their potentials into real personal knowledge, skills and competencies. In Italy, in the context of the system of secondary schools with new organization of high schools, and technical and vocational education, the teacher must respond, in general, to a scenario today in transition and change. The institutions of education and training need to change their educational activity, introducing training run by teachers who have to achieve student educational goals, which can be seen as specific learning objectives but also as skills to be developed.

This entails, however, that there should be a training program which should increasingly provide harmony and cohesion between different school types and levels that should be a common element in the new orientation of training skills. In this regard, the European Union has already outlined, in the Recommendations of the Council of Europe of 18 December 2006 and 23 April 2008, the path to follow, defining the key competences for lifelong learning, which should form the common European horizon of the school. Hence the need for a focus on initial and in-service teacher training, that aims to develop and enhance professionalism, which must be understood not as a duty but as a right to personal and professional growth. In this regard, a number of questions emerge that refer specifically to the relationship between general education and teaching discipline and, in general, to technical and professional skills, which is: but does the teacher today possess the conceptual and operational tools to deal with this scenario? Does he still possess the motivation of learning, namely the desire to continuously learn and understand new things? Has he been adequately trained at the university? And has pedagogy, in theory and practice outlined new codes and new knowledge along with new teaching methods, which are not abstract models, but are able to analyze and deconstruct language, thoughts and behavior codes with a view to differences to be exploited, to educational and social inclusion in schools?

In my opinion, addressing the issue of the teacher for a new European and planetary school necessitates answering these questions. However, Italian institutions of education and training still, in some cases, leverage the model of Bloom that focuses on cognitive achievement, demonstrating that they are not ready to move the educational work of the school and teachers towards profiles of goals and skills, as advanced by the European Union. The emergence of some key problems is inevitable, mainly due to the lack of relationship between subject content and teaching methods, that would favour the learning process and teach students how to learn.

Analyzing the key problems, we find:

1. The need to think, to organize and manage a class, interpreted as a context for learning how to learn, in which the teacher is able to teach students how to learn deep knowledge and basic procedures for managing their own life paths successfully. The Directives on new high schools states that «the routes should provide students with the cultural and methodological tools for a deeper understanding of reality, so that they put themselves, with a rational attitude, creative and critical approaches in the face of situations and phenomena and problems, and acquire knowledge, skills and competencies consistent with their skills and personal choices, appropriate to further studies of a higher order, and to their insertion in the social life and the world of work».

2. Lack of knowledge by students is very often generated by a lack of methods and techniques that should be known and used by the teacher to manage and organize their teaching actions, which should be characterized by the capacity of developing curriculum and pupil assessment, and the ability to grasp the links between thought and action, and between social context and action. The Directives on new high schools state that: «The selection of strategies and appropriate methodologies is necessary, the validity of which is testified to not by the application of any procedure, but by how they contribute to educational success». This requires that we invest in the transformation of teaching actions together with content, in order to build an educational environment in which to develop processes that help students to learn how to learn. Teaching, as we read in the National Guidelines, should consider the nature of meta-cognitive skills, learning how to learn. Relational knowledge requiring teamwork, or aptitude, creativity and autonomy, are not excluded from the process, but are a direct result, the achievement of which depends on the quality of the process implemented in the classroom.

3. Motivation arises from routine actions, for which it is essential to remember that the teacher is himself in the school system, and in the class as an active player who should facilitate the construction of knowledge of the tools. This is clearly urgent, yet in many education and training systems, teachers still need to learn how to safely and carefully use methods and tools for the active management of class and skills training, to overcome their fears and reluctance to change established habits.

4. The lack of interpersonal relationship and education should be overcome if the emphasis is on improving relationship skills, linked both to the relationship between teacher and student and between colleagues.

5. Lack of collaboration between colleagues. Many teachers are reluctant to work together, tend to work in isolation, because they fear the judgment of others and in doing so they do not communicate their experiences or their good educational practices. Hence the need for a pedagogy of teacher education that is based on the management organization of initial and in-service teacher training in relation to the epistemological, ontological and methodological concepts. Next, the study of the discipline related to its specialization and the conceptual processes of teaching; its practices, that are based on the development of a professional culture of teacher-oriented change, aware of what he does and why he does it, attentive to context and open to working through critical and reflective participation. Teachers should be encouraged to reflect on their daily operations, analyze and evaluate them, in order to learn from comparison with colleagues, as claimed in the model of self-reflective teaching advanced by Schön[19]; they should adopt methodologies and strategies that focus on the learning processes of pupils in education through innovation and research. They need to be aware of the interaction between contextual elements of the school and the beliefs of teachers, since the development of the subject is achieved through the combination of those elements.

Ultimately, we must reflect first of all on the changing attitudes of teachers, who often prefer not to be exposed to situations of uncertainty and even less to comparison with colleagues, and end up repeating behaviors and actions that they routinely perform in school. All this reflects on the processes of personal and social development of the students and their learning processes and on their view of the discipline itself, that is not understood as a 'peculiar way of looking at the world'[20], but as a subject that is conceived of as a set of knowledge, of data, of digits, of formulas to acquire mnemonically with nothing remaining for life beyond the classroom. Teachers, therefore, have the task of guiding students to a progressive learning of concepts. This implies that teachers have analyzed and selected textbooks, supports for students to study; they have a clear plan of progressive concepts, what to introduce at the appropriate time and with an organic pattern. They have awareness of a 'vertical curriculum', and clear criteria: concreteness, that the progression of concepts from communication situations will render easy and precise; they know how to reuse concepts and tools that have been learned, enhanced with further learning, applied to more complex communicative situations. They understand systematization of concepts, or the ability to frame theoretical concepts[21], and will be able to realize the inductive deductive approach to facilitate the learning process. Here we see a new kind of teacher, protagonist of a teaching that is innovative and high-quality for students, that will adequately prepare them for their future entrance into the life of society.



[1] In this regard, as early as the 90s some volumes are problems related to the lack of connection between disciplinary skills and the methodological and didactic. Think  to:J. Delors, Nell’educazione un tesoro, Armando Roma 1997 (1996);  E. Morin,  La testa ben fatta. Riforma dell’insegnamento e riforma del pensiero, Raffaello Cortina Editore, Milano 2000 (1999); Ph. Perrenoud, Dieci nuove competenze per insegnare. Invito al viaggio, Anicia, Roma 2002 (1999); Ph. Perrenoud , Costruire competenze a partire dalla scuola, Anicia, Roma 2003 (2000); H. Gardner, Cinque chiavi per il futuro, (Five Minds for The Future, Harvard Business School Press, Boston 2006), Feltrinelli, Milano 2007.

[2] For further details see: F. Frabboni, Manuale di didattica generale, Laterza ; E. Nigris, Didattica generale, Hoepli, Milano; P. Calidoni, Ambienti di apprendimento , Guerini Scientifica 2004; M. Castoldi, Didattica generale, Libreria Universitaria 2010; A. Calvani, Principi dell’istruzione e strategie per insegnare. Criteri per una didattica efficace, 2011.

[3] Italian pedagogists of the latter part of the 20th century.

[4] G. M. BERTIN, L’idea pedagogica e il principio di ragione in A. Banfi, Marzorati, Milano 1978 (nuova edizione Anicia, Roma 2008); A. BANFI, La ricerca della realtà, Sansoni, Firenze 1959; ID., Pedagogia e filosofia dell’educazione, in ID., Opere, vol.VI, Istituto Antonio Banfi, Reggio Emilia 1986; M. BALDACCI, Il problematicismo. Dalla filosofia dell’educazione alla pedagogia come scienza, Milella, Lecce 2003.

[5] G. SPADAFORA, La pedagogia tra filosofia, scienza e politica nel Novecento e oltre, in F. Cambi et ali., Pedagogia Generale. Identità, modelli, problemi, La Nuova Italia, Firenze 2001.

[6] I G. SPADAFORA, L’identità negativa della pedagogia, Unicopli, Milano 1992. Cfr. E. COLICCHI, Educazione, libertà, ragione, Ist. Editoriali e Poligrafici, Pisa 2000; ID., a cura di, Per una pedagogia critica, Dimensioni teoriche e prospettive pratiche, Carocci, Roma 2009.

[7] J. Dewey, Le fonti di una scienza dell’educazione, (The Sources of a Science of Education, 1929), La Nuova Italia, Firenze 1971)

[8] P. Mulè, Formazione, scuola emergenze educative. Teorie e prospettive della problematicità formativa, Anicia, Roma 2001, p. 41; F. Cambi, E. Colicchi, M. Muzi, G. Spadafora, Pedagogia generale. Identità, modelli, problemi,  La Nuova Italia, Firenze 2001; R. Massa, M. Muzi, A Piromallo Gambardella, Saperi, didattiche, formazione, Unicopli, Milano 1991.

[9] Cfr. R. Gagnè, Le condizioni dell’apprendimento, a cura di R. Maragliano, Armando, Roma 197315 (1970), p.15.

[10] For further details see: C. METELLI DI LALLO, Analisi del discorso pedagogico, Marsilio, Padova 1966; E. BECCHI, Problemi di sperimentalismo educativo, Armando, Roma 1969; M. DEBESSE, G. MIALARET, a cura di, Trattato delle scienze pedagogiche, Armando, Roma 1969-1975, in sei volumi; A. CLAUSSE, Avviamento alle scienze dell’educazione, la Nuova Italia, Firenze 1972.

[11] Cfr. J. PIAGET, Psicologia e sviluppo mentale del bambino, Mondadori, Milano 1994 (1967); J. BRUNER, Verso una teoria dell’istruzione, Armando, Roma 1967 (1966); ID., La mente a più dimensioni, Laterza, Roma-Bari 19974 (1986); L. VYGOTSKIJ, Pensiero e linguaggio, Giunti Barbera, Firenze 1976 (1934).

[12] On the contamination of pedagogy with other knowledge, see Piaget, when he asserts that "pedagogy, when it tries to apply the data of psychology and sociology, finds itself in the presence of problems in which it is a tangle of ends and means. It receives only modest aid from the mother science, since these disciplines are quite advanced, and must constitute by itself its own body of knowledge (a pedagogical psychology that is not a simple developmental psychology applied deductively, an experimental teaching etc..» (J. PIAGET, Psicologia e pedagogia, cit., p. 12); J. S. BRUNER, Verso una teoria dell’istruzione, Armando, Roma 1967 (ed. or. Toward a Theory of Instruction, The Belknap, Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge- Massachusetts 1966).

[13] J. PIAGET, Le scienze dell’uomo (prefazione di Mauro Ceruti), Editori Laterza, Roma-Bari 1997, p. 170.

[14] J. PIAGET, Psicologia e pedagogia, cit., p. 129.

[15] Cfr. E. FRAUENFELDER, La prospettiva educativa tra biologia e cultura, Liguori, Napoli 1983; E. FRAUENFELDER, F. SANTOIANNI, a cura di, Le scienze bioeducative; Prospettive di ricerca, Liguori, Napoli 2002. A. PORCHEDDU, a cura di, Gli incontri mancati, Unicopli, Milano, 1990; N. FILOGRASSO, L’educazione della mente. Didattica dei processi cognitivi, Franco Angeli, Milano 2002.

[16] Neuropedagogy "[...] is a discipline concerned with the understanding of the relationship between neurobiological and cognitive processes involved in the complex process that we call the education and training of Man. A neuropedagogical vision will enable us both to rethink education / training (and therefore pedagogical anthropology itself) and to re-establish educational activity " (I. LAI, Riflessioni sul rapporto tra pedagogia e neuroscienze, in «Orientamenti pedagogici», vol. 57, n. 4 (340), luglio-agosto 2010, Erickson Trento 2010, p. 652.

[17] Cfr. R. Gagnè, Le condizioni dell’apprendimento, cit.;B.S. Bloom, Caratteristiche umane e apprendimento scolastico, Armando, Roma 1980 (1976);ID., Tassonomia degli obiettivi educativi I: Area cognitiva, Giunti e Lisciani, Teramo 1983 e ID., Tassonomia degli obiettivi educativi II: Area affettiva, Giunti e Lisciani, Teramo 1984;  J. P. Guilford, The Nature of Human Intelligence, New York 1967;

[18] On this topic cfr. G. BERTAGNA, a cura di, Quale dirigente scolastico per quale scuola?, La Scuola, Brescia 2010; ID., Autonomia. Storia, bilancio e rilancio di un’idea, La Scuola, Brescia 2002.

[19] D. Schön, The Reflexive Practitioner, Basic Books, New York 1983 (trad. it. Il professionista riflessivo: per una nuova epistemologia della pratica professionale, Dedalo, Bari 1993).

[20] Cfr. H. Gardner, Cinque Chiavi per il futuro, cit., pp.36-37.

[21] On this topic see. A. Colombo, Leggere. Capire e non capire, Zanichelli, Bologna 2002; ID.,  cura di, Il curricolo e l’educazione linguistica, Franco Angeli, Milano 2008; G. Lo Duca, Lingua italiana ed educazione linguistica. Tra storia, ricerca e didattica, Carocci, Roma 2003; L. Lumbelli, La comprensione come problema. Il punto di vista cognitivo, Editori Laterza, Bari 2009; U. Margiotta, Autonomia scolastica e curricolo formativo, Anicia, Roma 2013;M. Pellerey, Competenze, conoscenze, abilità, atteggiamenti, Tecnodid, Napoli 2010; R. Rigo, Didattica delle abilità linguistiche. Percorsi di Progettazione e di formazione, Armando, Roma 2005; F. Tessaro, Metodologia e didattica dell’insegnamento secondario, Armando Roma 2002; P. Ellerani, Metodi e tecniche attive per l’insegnamento. Creare contesti per imparare ad apprendere, Anicia, Roma 2012.

References

  1. Bloom B.S., Caratteristiche umane e apprendimento scolastico, Armando, Roma 1980 (1976).
  2. Bloom B.S., Tassonomia degli obiettivi educativi I: Area cognitiva, Giunti e Lisciani, Teramo 1983.
  3. Bloom B.S., Tassonomia degli obiettivi educativi II: Area affettiva, Giunti e Lisciani, Teramo 1984 Guilford J. P., The Nature of Human Intelligence, New York 1967.
  4. Bruner J., La mente a più dimensioni, Laterza, Roma-Bari 19974 (1986).
  5. BRUNER J., Verso una teoria dell’istruzione, Armando, Roma 1967 (1966).
  6. Castoldi M., Didattica generale, Libreria Universitaria 2010.
  7. CLAUSSE A., Avviamento alle scienze dell’educazione, la Nuova Italia, Firenze 1972
  8. Delors J., Nell’educazione un tesoro, Armando Roma 1997 (1996).
  9. Dewey J., Le fonti di una scienza dell’educazione, (The Sources of a Science of Education, 1929), La Nuova Italia, Firenze 1971.
  10. Ellerani P., Metodi e tecniche attive per l’insegnamento. Creare contesti per imparare ad apprendere, Anicia, Roma 2012.
  11. FILOGRASSO N., L’educazione della mente. Didattica dei processi cognitivi, Franco Angeli, Milano 2002.
  12. Frabboni F., Manuale di didattica generale, Laterza, Roma-Bari 2007.
  13. Gagnè R., Le condizioni dell’apprendimento, a cura di R. Maragliano, Armando, Roma 197315 (1970).
  14. Gardner H., Cinque chiavi per il futuro, (Five Minds for The Future, Harvard Business School Press, Boston 2006), Feltrinelli, Milano 2007.
  15. Massa R., Muzi M., Piromallo Gambardella A., Saperi, didattiche, formazione, Unicopli, Milano 1991.
  16. Morin E., La testa ben fatta. Riforma dell’insegnamento e riforma del pensiero, Raffaello Cortina Editore, Milano 2000 (1999).
  17. Mulè P. Cristina De la Rosa Cubo C., a cura di, Pedagogia, didattica e cultura umanistica. L’insegnante per una nuova scuola europea, Anicia, Roma 2015.
  18. Mulè P., Formazione, scuola emergenze educative. Teorie e prospettive della problematicità formativa, Anicia, Roma 2001.
  19. Pellerey M., Competenze, conoscenze, abilità, atteggiamenti, Tecnodid, Napoli 2010
  20. Perrenoud Ph., Costruire competenze a partire dalla scuola, Anicia, Roma 2003 (2000).
  21. Perrenoud Ph., Dieci nuove competenze per insegnare. Invito al viaggio, Anicia, Roma 2002 (1999).
  22. PIAGET J., Psicologia e sviluppo mentale del bambino, Mondadori, Milano 1994 (1967).
  23. Rigo R., Didattica delle abilità linguistiche. Percorsi di Progettazione e di formazione, Armando, Roma 2005.
  24. Schön D., The Reflexive Practitioner, Basic Books, New York 1983 (trad. it. Il professionista riflessivo: per una nuova epistemologia della pratica professionale, Dedalo, Bari 1993).
  25. SPADAFORA G., L’identità negativa della pedagogia, Unicopli, Milano 1992.
  26. SPADAFORA G., La pedagogia tra filosofia, scienza e politica nel Novecento e oltre, in F. Cambi et ali., Pedagogia Generale. Identità, modelli, problemi, La Nuova Italia, Firenze 2001.
  27. Tessaro F., Metodologia e didattica dell’insegnamento secondario, Armando Roma 2002.
  28. VYGOTSKIJ L., Pensiero e linguaggio, Giunti Barbera, Firenze 1976 (1934).

Information About the Authors

Paolina Mulè, Doctor of Education, Catania, Italy, e-mail: paolina28@hotmail.com

Metrics

Views

Total: 4100
Previous month: 9
Current month: 3

Downloads

Total: 841
Previous month: 1
Current month: 5