|
Showing 1 - 3 of
3 matches in All Departments
The language of frames suggests the need to rethink self and other
in fostering ethical relationships as a foundation for peaceful
existence. Educational writers and practitioners from many parts of
the world, including New York, Denver, Minneapolis, South Africa,
Zimbabwe, Israel, and Canada offer their perspectives on peace as
an aim of curriculum. Possibilities for learning about peace
conceived in terms of Jonathan Lear's (2006) notion of "radical
hope" are illustrated in the contexts of diverse settings and
challenges: the aftermath of apartheid in South Africa,
re-imagining post-colonial history curricula in Zimbabwe, exploring
the meanings of truth and reconciliation and restorative justice in
Canada, examining the quality of pedagogic relationships in
elementary school classrooms, attending to experiences of gay and
lesbian students in schools, experiences of marginalized students,
children's experiences of civic engagement, Islamophobia in high
schools and teacher education classes, fraught relationships
between Palestinian and Jewish students in a teachers' college in
Israel, and the inclusion of First Nations culture and knowledge in
Canadian teacher education classes. As whole and in each of its
parts, Framing Peace encourages us to think about peace as an
urgent and fundamental responsibility of curriculum at all levels
of education.
The language of frames suggests the need to rethink self and other
in fostering ethical relationships as a foundation for peaceful
existence. Educational writers and practitioners from many parts of
the world, including New York, Denver, Minneapolis, South Africa,
Zimbabwe, Israel, and Canada offer their perspectives on peace as
an aim of curriculum. Possibilities for learning about peace
conceived in terms of Jonathan Lear's (2006) notion of "radical
hope" are illustrated in the contexts of diverse settings and
challenges: the aftermath of apartheid in South Africa,
re-imagining post-colonial history curricula in Zimbabwe, exploring
the meanings of truth and reconciliation and restorative justice in
Canada, examining the quality of pedagogic relationships in
elementary school classrooms, attending to experiences of gay and
lesbian students in schools, experiences of marginalized students,
children's experiences of civic engagement, Islamophobia in high
schools and teacher education classes, fraught relationships
between Palestinian and Jewish students in a teachers' college in
Israel, and the inclusion of First Nations culture and knowledge in
Canadian teacher education classes. As whole and in each of its
parts, Framing Peace encourages us to think about peace as an
urgent and fundamental responsibility of curriculum at all levels
of education.
Thinking about and Enacting Curriculum in "Frames of War", edited
by Rahat Naqvi and Hans Smits, responds to the challenges Judith
Butler posed about the precariousness of life and questions about
how we apprehend, and take up ethically, our responsibilities for
those who are considered "Other." The notion of enframing asks us
to consider what conditions our understanding of others, and how we
open up what curriculum concepts and theories mean in the contexts
of complex conditions for educational practices, such as recent
wars, which have brought to forefront critical questions of human
recognition and the precariousness of the conditions in which human
flourishing is possible. An overarching objective of this book is
the meaning of a call to ethics, and how discussion of framing and
frames is a provocation to think about our responsibilities as
curriculum scholars and practitioners. The authors take up the
limits of knowledge, and present the challenge to curriculum theory
to think in terms of not just understanding the frames through
which we apprehend the Other, but also how we might re-frame our
thinking as a radical call to responsibility. Each chapter in Smits
and Naqvi's Thinking about and Enacting Curriculum in "Frames of
War" illustrates these concepts in diverse ways, but with common
interest and concern, considering how curriculum is and ought to be
fundamentally engaged with re-thinking our frames of apprehension.
|
|