International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210
International Journal of Progressive Education
International Association of Educators

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2015, Vol. 11(1) 28-40

The limits of dialogue among teachers from different national contexts

Jenna Min Shim

pp. 28 - 40   |  Manu. Number: ijpe.2015.023

Published online: February 15, 2015  |   Number of Views: 36  |  Number of Download: 315

Save PDF

Abstract

In this study, the author investigates the dynamics of dialogue among teachers in different national contexts based on their responses to different cultural practices. Employing Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological theory of practice and his concept of habitus, the author shows that, as the teachers’ responses are not entirely context-specific, they are not autonomous either. In the final section, the author discusses the importance of attending to limits and barriers of dialogue across differences. Moreover, she further posits that recognizing the difficulties involved in productive dialogue is essential for achieving the transformative educational goals that promote a less dominating and less hierarchical approach. The assumptions implicit in this work are that the scholars and practitioners from diverse backgrounds bring unique perspectives to teaching and learning; and, therefore, productive dialogues among teachers from various backgrounds can open up a generative space that enables the active co-construction of new perspectives.

Keywords: Dialogue, intercultural communication, habitus, transformative educational goals

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Shim, J.M. (2015). The limits of dialogue among teachers from different national contexts . International Journal of Progressive Education, 11(1), 28-40.

Harvard
Shim, J. (2015). The limits of dialogue among teachers from different national contexts . International Journal of Progressive Education, 11(1), pp. 28-40.

Chicago 16th edition
Shim, Jenna Min (2015). "The limits of dialogue among teachers from different national contexts ". International Journal of Progressive Education 11 (1):28-40.

References
  1. Al-Johar, D. (2005). Muslim marriages in America: Reflecting new identities. The Muslim world, 95(4), 557-574. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1990a). The logic of practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1990b). In other words: Essays toward a reflexive sociology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Madrid, Spain: Cambridge University Press. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, IL: The [Google Scholar]
  6. University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  7. Burbules, N. C. (2000). The limits of dialogue as a critical pedagogy. In P. P. Trifonas (Ed.), Revolutionary pedagogies: Cultural politics, instituting education, and the discourse of theory (pp. 251-273). New York, NY: Routledgefalmer. [Google Scholar]
  8. Burbules, N. C., & Rice, S. (1991). Dialogue across differences: Continuing the conversation. Harvard Educational Review, 61(4), 393-416. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cicourel, A. V. (1993). Aspects of structural and processual theories of knowledge. In C. Calhoun, E. LiPuma, & M. Postone (Eds.), In Bourdieu:Critical perspectives (pp. 89–115). Cambridge, MA: Polity Press. [Google Scholar]
  10. Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  11. Cohen, S. B., Roach, J. (Producers), & Charles, L. (Director). (2006). Borat, S. B., Roach, J. (Producers), & Charles, L. (Director). (2006). In C. isco [film]. United States: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation and Dune Entertainment. [Google Scholar]
  12. Danbury, B., Maksimovich, D., Reimer, A., Schulman, C., Yari, B., & Haggis, P. (2005). Crash [film]. United States: Lions Gate Films. [Google Scholar]
  13. Eidse, A. (2003). Pancho and Gary. In F. Symons & R. Sekar (Eds.), Mother Margaret and the rhinoceros cafF (pp. 90-97). Victoria, Canada: Kaleidoscope Books. [Google Scholar]
  14. Foley, D., Levinson, B., & Hurtig, J. (2000-2001). Anthropology goes Inside: The New Educational Ethnography of Ethnicity and Gender. Review of Research in Education, 25, 37-98. [Google Scholar]
  15. Foss, M. (2003). Circumcision through words. In F. Symons & R. Sekar (Eds.), Mother Margaret and the rhinoceros cafw (pp. 63-73). Victoria, Canada: Kaleidoscope Books. [Google Scholar]
  16. hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to Transgress. New York, NY: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  17. Jones, A. (2001). Cross-cultural pedagogy and the passion for ignorance. Feminism & Psychology, 11(3), 279-292. [Google Scholar]
  18. Jones, A., & Jenkins, K. (2004). Pedagogical events: Re-reading shared moments in educational history. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 25(1), 143-159. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kaiser, T. (2003). Mother Margaret & the rhinoceros caf-reIn F. Symons & R. Sekar (Eds.), Mother Margaret and the rhinoceros cafh (pp. 11-27). Victoria, Canada: Kaleidoscope Books. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kennedy, C. (2003). Welcome to Mill Street. In F. Symons & R. Sekar (Eds.), Mother Margaret and the rhinoceros cafr (pp. 98-106). Victoria, Canada: Kaleidoscope Books. [Google Scholar]
  21. Larson, J. H., & Holman, T. B. (1994). Predictors of marital quality and stability. Family Relations, 43, 228-237. [Google Scholar]
  22. Lee, S. (1998). Do the right thing [film]. United States: Universal Studios. [Google Scholar]
  23. McCracken, R. (2003). Crazy. In F. Symons & R. Sekar (Eds.), Mother Margaret and the rhinoceros cafo (pp. 45-54). Victoria, Canada: Kaleidoscope Books. [Google Scholar]
  24. Mills, C. (2008). Opportunity and resignation within marginalized students: towards a theorization of the reproductive and transformative habitus. Critical Studies in Education, 49(2), 99-111. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mills, C., & Gale, T. (2007). Researching social inequalities in education: Toward a Bourdieuian methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20(4), 433-447. [Google Scholar]
  26. Myers, J. E., & Madathil, J., & Tingle, L. R. (2005). Marriage satisfaction and wellness in India and the United States: A preliminary comparison of arranged marriages and marriages of choice. Journal of Counseling & Development, 83, 183-190. [Google Scholar]
  27. Romanow, J. (2003). Incident on 33. In F. Symons & R. Sekar (Eds.), Mother Margaret and the rhinoceros caf3 (pp. 28-44). Victoria, Canada: Kaleidoscope Books. [Google Scholar]
  28. Shim, J. M. (2012). Pierre Bourdieu and intercultural education: It is not just about lack of knowledge about Others.  Intercultural Education, 23(3), 209-220. [Google Scholar]
  29. Shor, I., & Freire, P. (1987). What is the “dialogical method” of teaching? Journal of Education, 169(3), 11-31. [Google Scholar]
  30. Schultz, K. (2010). After the blackbird whistle: Listening to silence in classrooms. Teachers College Record, 112(11), 2833-2849. [Google Scholar]
  31. Symons, F., & Sekar, R. (Eds.). (2003). Mother Margaret and the rhinoceros café. Canada: Kaleidoscope Anthology. [Google Scholar]
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 11 Issue 1

February 2015

All Articles

International Journal of Progressive Education

International Association of Educators.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License.
Privacy policy     |     Terms of Use     |     Use of Cookies
Creative Commons Lisansı
© 2012 - 2024 - THDSoft e-Journal Management System.