How to Grasp Individuals and Groups in Learning and Issues of Human Formation

DOI Web Site

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 学習における個と集団のとらえ方と人間形成の課題
  • ガクシュウ ニ オケル コ ト シュウダン ノ トラエ カタ ト ニンゲン ケイセイ ノ カダイ

Search this article

Abstract

<p> When we think about learning, individuals and groups are important key concepts. Various learning methods have been developed and practiced so far based on individuals and groups as the foundation and premise. Studies have addressed the relative effectiveness of emphasis on the individual and on the group, and that of a basis of individualization and one of cooperation.</p><p> However, the study of learning so far has considered individuals and groups to be self-explanatory. If we consider education from the viewpoint of human formation, it seems that individuals and groups themselves have not been sufficiently studied so far.</p><p> It is important to clarify in principle how individuals and groups have been grasped in theories and methods of learning. The close inquiry therein allows us to obtain hints for thinking about learning that contributes to the human formation of learners.</p><p> In this paper, based on an understanding of knowledge, I consider learning as two approaches: “learning based on essentialism (essentialist learning)” and “learning based on social constructivism (social constructivist learning)”. Focusing on evaluation and methods of learning, I analyze through an epistemological framework how each approach to learning addresses individuals and groups.</p><p> This analysis clarifies the following. First of all, in both essentialist learning and social constructivist learning, when evaluations and methods about learning are carried out within given frameworks or standards, individuals and groups are regarded as unchanged and static, objects at rest. In other words, it became clear that they target individuals and groups with an abstract understanding, in the direction of “general to individual”.</p><p> In addition, this abstract understanding of individuals and groups forms the views that evaluation is possible, that methods can be applied as types, and that learning can take place as intended.</p><p> Therefore, the learner will be caused to learn in principle according to evaluation and method. At that time, learning strongly encourages passivity in the direction of “what we made to what was made” as an issue of human formation. Passivity is not necessarily something which must (or can) be excluded in human formation, but given the current situation, we need to think about learning that does not suppress activity, and learning that does not promote excessive passivity.</p><p> Finally, based on the above considerations, I argue that this learning that contributes to human formation must address individuals and the group in the direction of “individual to general”. This involves thinking of our human formation in the direction of “what is made to what makes” and taking the position that “learning cannot be induced according to the teacher’s intentions”. In other words, the practice of learning must not depend entirely on formal methods or exclude exceptions and coincidences. In addition, it must recognize the “experience” of children, including “concrete experience” as individuals, prior to the human consciousness that leads to the development of “activeness”.</p>

Journal

Related Projects

See more

Keywords

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top