Towards a shift in perspective for inclusive education research – a continental approach

ABSTRACT

With a starting point in the tradition of geisteswissenschaftliche Pädagogik, this article presents a challenge to inclusive education research to engage a Continental perspective on educational research. The motivation is to entice inclusive education researchers to begin to ask educational questions of inclusion, as opposed to inclusive questions of education. Recent years has seen a call to re-think inclusive education research and this paper attempts to answer this call by turning to a Continental perspective and the emphasis on an at least relative autonomy for the theory and practice of education. The article explores the relationship between Continental and Anglo-American educational theory, and why they seem to have developed in such distinct directions. Beginning with the Anglo-American perspective, it is outlined how pedagogy and the so-called educational interest became replaced by the scientific standards dominant in other academic disciplines. This is countered by a look at the continued endeavours in the Continental spheres to formulate specifically educational criteria for educational processes. This leads to a negative aim in the form of arguing against neo-liberal policy and the politicisation of inclusive education, and a positive aim in the form of an argument for a move towards constructing a pedagogical ideal of inclusion.

KEYWORDS:

• Inclusive education
• pedagogy
• Bildung
• Hannah Arendt
• Gert Biesta
• geisteswissenschaftliche Pädagogik

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Morten Timmermann Korsgaard is an assistant professor at the University of Malmö and part of the research group Philosophical Studies of Education. He works primarily in inclusive education, educational theory, and philosophy of education.

Stig Skov Mortensen holds a master's degree in Philosophy of Education from Aarhus University and currently works as an external lecturer at Roskilde University. His research interests include educational values and axiology, educational aesthetics, and questions of purpose, meaning, and judgement.

Notes

1 Our emphasis and translation of: ‘Folkeskolen skal mindske betydningen af social baggrund i forhold til faglige resultater’.

2 Our emphasis.

3 Something which appears at the moment to be put under pressure especially perhaps in the Anglo-American tradition where a growing number of evidence-based methods and theories attempt to circumvent the normative aspect by placing at the centre notions of ‘what works’ as the markers for educational theory and practice (Biesta 2010; 2013).

4 The term ‘scientific’ does not translate directly to the German notion of ’Wissenschaft’ since the latter generally incorporates a wider definition and is not confined to the natural sciences.

5 Klafki uses both ‘Erziehungswissenschaft’ and ‘geisteswissenschaftliche Pädagogik’ and refers to his contribution as ‘Grundlinien einer wissenschaftstheoretischen Ortsbestimmung der heutigen erziehungswissenschaft zu skizzieren’.

6 Our translation: ’Den pedagogiske vitenskap forsker ikke ut fra ren teoretisk erkjennelsesinteresse, men med et praktisk formål, gitt i den konkrete livssituasjon’.

7 Our translation: ’ikke historie som kumulert viten, men som nøkkelen til forståelse av pedagogiske fenomener både i fortid og nutid’

8 There are reservations to be had when attempting to enlist Arendt in a Continental tradition, most especially her positioning of herself as a layman, who cannot speak for practitioners, stands in some contrast to Klafki’s first constitutive element, namely the close connection between theory and practice. However, her method of searching for criteria and features inherent to education, and her creation of a relative autonomy by shielding education from political and worldly influences, place her firmly within a Continental framework.

9 The discussion of whether Arendt’s conservatism is in fact a new form of conservatism or even an educational form of conservatism is ongoing and unresolved, so to speak. For more on this discussion see: Gordon (1999), as well as Korsgaard (2014, 2017).

10 To unfold such an educational definition of inclusion would entail more work than this article has scope for, but some work has been done in the work of Masschelein and Simons referenced in the following, and in (Korsgaard 2016, 2017).

11 Here Masschelein and Simons draw heavily on the work of French philosopher Jacques Ranciere as well.