Conference Agenda

In times of increasing globalization of education, its politicization and its instrumentalization for social and economic goals are eye-catching. One of the signs is a remarkable upcoming of mechanistic wording in the area of education like input-output, cost and productivity, management, accountability. The conceptual frameworks and methodological approaches that are applicable in global research, access and democracy in education favorize the competitive, economic creature (homo economicus), characterized by perfect access to information and by the infinite ability to make rational decisions, maximizing utility in terms of monetary as well as non-monetary gains. However, pedagogical practice, students and teachers give us many other images of the human. So do the different subjects at school. It is more than obvious that learning, pedagogy, bildung cannot be reduced to mechanics.

In this symposium we will ask the question what is specific to pedagogy. We will look back to what we make out as specifically pedagogical terminologies in different languages and traditions. In seeking to return education to its human roots, we will take a stance in the Faure report (1972), as well as in the foremost Continental-European educational subdiscipline of pedagogical anthropology: According to the Faure report, education should enhance the full expression of being human. From the pedagogical anthropology point of view, all education begins with an implicit image or ideal of the human. Beside the homo economicus there are uncountable homo-epitheta. Most of them were coined in the mid 18th century in imitation of homo sapiens. The homo aestheticus refers to Alexander Baumgarten’s (1750) theory of ‘sensible knowledge’ and Immanuel Kant’s (1790) ‘judgment of taste’; Homo loquens is a serious suggestion by Johann G. von Herder, taking the human species as defined by the use of language. We will follow up the hypothesis that by making these images or ideals explicit as approaches to education, learning and content, a first step is taken towards an understanding education as a fundamentally humanizing process.

A historical stance will be taken in the approaches of the brothers Humboldt to bildung and curricula, for which especially Wilhelm von Humboldt stands for. In 1804, his brother Alexander on his way back to Europa from Latin America and Mexico visited Thomas Jefferson, the 3rd North-American president from 1801 to 1809 and one of the most influential political theorists of the United States, the main author of the ‘Declaration of Independence’. This meeting led to a letter correspondence (cp. Jefferson 1817, online). While Jefferson in his well-known dictum “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” sums up his nation-idea that is based on individual freedom (calling slavery an “abominable crime,” however, without insisting to abolish it), Wilhelm von Humboldt (1792, online) sees freedom as the “grand and indispensable condition” for individual development, as well as the flourishing of State affairs. In a US-American context, the pursuit of happiness is mainly about rights and citizenship rooting in the fundamental idea that “all men are created equal and independent” (Boyd 1950). Von Humboldt connects liberty and freedom foremost to academic freedom. In this paper, it will be explained how Thomas Jefferson and Wilhelm von Humboldt laid the ground for later discourses on curriculum and bildung.

Boyd, J. P. (ed.) (1950): The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Vol. 1: 1760-1776. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Humboldt, Wilhelm. The Sphere and Duties of Government (1792, 1854). John Chapman, 1792. https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/coulthard-the-sphere-and-duties-of-government-1792-1854. [retrieved, January 11, 2024]

Discussions in German-speaking countries regarding school content, when to teach it, and how to teach it make use of the term ‘Lehrplan’, while English-speaking countries use the term ‘curriculum’ to address these matters. It is essential to note that Lehrplan carries specific meanings that are similar to but not synonymous with English terms curriculum, curriculum guideline, course instruction, or course study. Lehrplan refers to a theory of Bildung, and defines “[…] that which matters in teaching and instruction” (Künzli 2009, 134), and should, therefore, be understood as the “[…] specifications set by educational authorities concerning both lesson content and learning objectives” (ibid.). Curriculum, a fundamental concept in Anglo-American educational research that recognizes ideas about what is being taught or should be taught are neither self-evident or settled matters. Therefore, “[…] everything about curriculum, including its definition, is contested” (Walker, 2003, p. 11). As Horlacher (2018, p. 2) argues, “Lehrplan and curriculum are not merely two concepts indicating comparable subjects but imply also a whole belief system about schooling”. This paper seeks to explore the possibility of conducting comparative research in light of the close connection between language and concepts by focusing the Theory of Lehrplan by Georg Kerschensteiner (1854-1932) and his theory of Bildung, and Decker Walker’s (1942-) perspective on curriculum. For Walker (2003), curriculum is the organization of educational content and purposes, and curriculum theories “employ reason and evidence, but in the service of passion. Curriculum theories can be analytical as well as partisan. […] Curriculum theories make ideals explicit, clarify them, work out their consequences for curriculum practice, compare them to other ideals, and justify or criticize them” (p.60).

Horlacher, R., & De Vincenti, A. (2014). From rationalist autonomy to scientific empiricism: A history of curriculum in Switzerland. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), International handbook of curriculum research (pp. 476–492). New York, NY: Routledge. Horlacher, R. (2018). The same but different: the German Lehrplan and curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2017.1307458 Kerschensteiner, G. (1899): Betrachtungen zur Theorie des Lehrplanes: mit eingehenden methodischen Bemerkungen und Erläuterungen zu dem beigefügten neuen Lehrplane der Weltkunde (Geographie, Geschichte, Naturkunde) für die siebenklassigen Volksschulen Münchens. Rohrbach: C. Gerber. Künzli, R. (2009). Curriculum und Lehrmittel. In: Andresen, S.; Casale, R.; Gabriel, T.; Horlacher, R.; Larcher Klee, S. & J. Oelkers (Eds.): Handwörterbuch Erziehungswissenschaft. Weinheim: Beltz, pp. 134-148. Walker, D. F. (2003). Fundamentals of curriculum: Passion and professionalism. Erlbaum Associates.

Culturally responsive education, including culturally relevant or culturally responsive instruction described in multicultural education literature, is not only about utilizing students’ culture as a vehicle for learning, but also about teaching them how to develop a broader sociopolitical consciousness that enables them to critique the cultural norms, values, mores, and institutions that produce and maintain social inequities (Ladson-Billings 1994, p. 162). Contemporary U.S. scholars (e.g., Gay, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 1994) who have proposed various approaches to culturally responsive or culturally relevant education often draw upon the writings of William Edward Burghardt Du Bois. William Edward Burghardt Du Bois (1868-1963), an US-American sociologist, historian, and civil rights activist, called for an education that prepares humankind to think more broadly, to eradicate social, economic, and political inequities (e.g., Du Bois, 1903/2008). This paper takes an historical perspective on DuBois’ (1903/2008) early work, including particularly Souls of Black Folks, in relation to his educational journey and studies in Germany. DuBois wrote about his educational journey in Germany in 1892, and the ways in which he felt he was treated as a human being (Du Bois, 1894/1954). The paper considers Du Bois’ (1903/2008) indirect references to Bildung and implications for the contemporary pedagogical approaches culturally responsive and culturally relevant education.

Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903/2008). The souls of black folk. Oxford University Press. Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. teachers college press. Hegel, G. W. F. (1807/2018). Hegel: The phenomenology of spirit. Oxford University Press. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). Dream Keepers: Successful Teachers of African American Children. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass. W. E. B. Dubois: Remembrance of His Berlin Years (1892–94), published in: German History Intersections, [November 29, 2023].

In bodily terms, pedagogical relationships and professionality, first of all, follow the signature of care. In this paper, educational care will be explained by relating to John Dewey, thus, through a historical approach. The US-American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer is a foothold in the common roots of the European continental and Anglo-American educational discourse (Kraus & Ylimaki in print), integrating continental philosophy with pragmatism, as well as with an enthusiasm for the actual challenges of a society. Dewey ([1916] 1966) models the ‘stimulation of the child’s powers’ in terms of a circuit of inquiry, i.e., as a directed transformation of an indeterminate situation into successful human action: “I believe that the only true education comes through the stimulation of the child’s powers by the demands of the social situations in which [s]he finds [her]himself” (ibid., 54). The pedagogue mediates between a child and his/her impulses of cultural self-reflection, facilitating learning experiences and social self-reflection. The circuit of inquiry involves care in terms of the ‘important role of the bond’ between pedagogue and student (Dewey 1897, 3). With the focus on experience, self-activity and inquiry, Dewey’s idea of the ‘growth’ of a child or young person indicates the impact of bodily dispositions and activities, physical well-being, and environment on the learning of an individual. In this paper, the referential frame of Dewey’s concept of care will be identified in more details and connections will be drawn on an actual Continental debate on educational care (Dietrich et al. 2020).

Dewey, J. (1897). My Pedagogic Creed (No. 25). Place: EL Kellogg & Company. Dewey, J. ([1908] 1960): Theory of the Moral Life, New York: Irvington. Dewey, J. ([1916] 1966). Democracy and Education (ed. by J. A. Boydston). The Middle Works of John Dewey, vol.9, 1899-1924. Place: Publisher. Dewey, J. ([1922] 1976). Human Nature and Conduct. In: The Middle Works, 1899-1924, vol.14 (ed. by J.A. Boydston), Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Dietrich, C., Uhlendorf, N.; Beilder, F.; Sanders, O. (eds.) (2020): Anthropologien der Sorge im Pädagogischen. Weinheim Basel: Beltz. Kraus, Anja & Rose Ylimaki (in print): A Historical Introduction to Continental Pedagogics from a Northern American Perspective. In: Educational Philosophy and Theory.