Advertisement

Situated Generalization with Prototypes in Dialogical Teaching

  • Morten NissenEmail author
  • Line Lerche Mørck
Chapter
Part of the Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences book series (THHSS)

Abstract

This chapter outlines situated generalization through the creation of a prototypical model of dialogical teaching practiced at a PhD course about identity formation, self-representation, and self-exposure. A prototype is a singular practice (with its objects, premises, subject-positions, conditions, and structures) modelled as relevant to a kind of practice. The idea of the prototype as situated generalization is philosophically rooted in an epistemology of practice, as read mostly through German-Scandinavian Critical Psychology and Jean Lave’s social practice theory. We propose dialogical teaching by recounting how that was performed, articulated, and reflected at the PhD course by students, teachers, and co-researchers as different from traditional university teaching. This is unfolded in several aspects: (a) teaching is resituated as relevant to sociocultural change in which all participants are equally involved; (b) texts are deconstructed as relevant to that process of change; (c) participants—including Frigga Haug and Emily Martin who provided important inspiration—are multi-positioned as we meet on neutral ground and in movement; (d) together, we make artifacts (including this text) with which we represent and recognize ourselves as individuals and as collective; (e) this implies co-creating ethics of care, overcoming the separation and externality of ethics from practice.

Keywords

Dialogical teaching Situated generalization Prototype Identity formation Self-representation Self-exposure Positioning Social practice theory Critical psychology Collective memory work Reflecting team 

References

  1. Andersen, T. (1991). The reflecting team: Dialogues and dialogues about the dialogues. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1988). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  3. Balibar, É. (2016). Citizen subject: Foundations for philosophical anthropology. London: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernstein, R. J. (1971). Praxis and action: Contemporary philosophies of human activity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bloch, E. (1995). The principle of hope. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bourriaud, N., Pleasance, S., Woods, F., & Copeland, M. (2002). Relational aesthetics. Dijon: Les presses du reel.Google Scholar
  8. Christie, N. (1971). Hvis skolen ikke fantes. [If there were no such thing as school]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  9. Davies, B. (1990). Agency as a form of discursive practice: A classroom scene observed. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 11(3), 341–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davies, B. and S. Gannon (2006). Doing collective biography: Investigating the production of subjectivity, Berkshire, UK: McGraw-Hill EducationGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawydow, V. V. (1973). Arten der Verallgemeinerung im Unterricht. Berlin: Volk & Wissen.Google Scholar
  12. Dreier, O. (2008). Psychotherapy in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ellis, C. (2004). The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography. Walnut Creek: Rowman Altamira.Google Scholar
  14. Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  15. Gilligan, C. (2011). Joining the resistance: Psychology, politics, girls and women. Cambridge: Polity Press Harvard Graduate School of Education.Google Scholar
  16. Harding, S. G. (2003). The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Haug, W. F. (1979). Umrisse zu einer Theorie des Ideologischen. In Projekt Ideologie Theorie (Ed.), Theorien über Ideologie (pp. 178–205). Hamburg: Argument.Google Scholar
  18. Haug, F. (1999). Female sexualisation: A collective work of memory. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  19. Haug, F. (2003). Lernverhältnisse. Selbstbewegungen und Selbstblockierungen. Hamburg: Argument.Google Scholar
  20. Haug, F. (2004). Patientin im neoliberalen Krankenhaus. In S. Graumann & K. Grüber (Eds.), Patient–Bürger–Kunde. Soziale und ethische Aspekte des Gesundheitswesens (pp. 9–48). Münster: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  21. Haug, F. (2012). Memory-work as a method of social science research: A detailed rendering of memory-work method. Retrieved from http://www.friggahaug.inkrit.de/documents/memorywork-researchguidei7.pdf
  22. Højrup, T. (2003). State, culture and life-modes. The foundations of life-mode analysis. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  23. Holzkamp, K. (1973). Sinnliche Erkenntnis: Historischer Ursprung und gesellschaftliche Funktion der Wahrnehmung. Frankfurt/M: Athenäum.Google Scholar
  24. Holzkamp, K. (1983a). Grundlegung der Psychologie. Frankfurt/M: Campus-Verlag.Google Scholar
  25. Holzkamp, K. (1983b). We don’t need no education. Forum Kritische Psychologie, 11, 113–125.Google Scholar
  26. Ilyenkov, E. V. (1977). Dialectical logic. Essays on its history and theory. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Ilyenkov, E. V. (1982). The dialectics of the abstract and the concrete in Marx’s Capital. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Jameson, F. (2009). Valences of the dialectic. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  29. Jensen, U. J. (1987). Practice and progress: A theory for the modern health care system. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  30. Jensen, U. J. (1999). Categories in activity theory: Marx’ philosophy just-in-time. In S. Chaiklin, M. Hedegaard, & U. J. Jensen (Eds.), Activity theory and social practice: Cultural-historical approaches (pp. 79–99). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kuzmanic, M. (2008). Collective memory and social identity: A social psychological exploration of the memories of the disintegration of former Yugoslavia. Psiholoska Obzorja/Horizons of Psychology, 17(2), 5–26.Google Scholar
  32. Langemeier, I., & Nissen, M. (2004). Research methods: Cultural-historical activity theory. In B. Somekh & C. Lewin (Eds.), Research methods in the social sciences. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lave, J. (2011). Apprenticeship in critical ethnographic practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Liberali, F. C. (2009). Researchers learning by intervention research: The “Acting-as-Citizens” program as a joint production between researchers and deprived communities in São Paulo. In Culture and emerging educational challenges: A dialogue with Brazil/Latin America . International Cultural-Historical Human Sciences, 30, 75–93.Google Scholar
  36. Martin, E. (2007). Bipolar expeditions: Mania and depression in American culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Martin, E. (2014). Table. Somatosphere. Retrieved from http://somatosphere.net/2014/03/table.html
  38. Marx, K. (2018 [1845]). Theses on Feuerbach. Retrieved from http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/theses/theses.htm
  39. Mol, A. (2008). The logic of care. Health and the problem of patient choice. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mørck, L. L. (2006). Grænsefællesskaber: Læring og overskridelse af marginalisering [Boundary communities. Learning and transcending marginalization]. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitets Forlag.Google Scholar
  41. Mørck, L. L. (2010). Expansive learning as production of community. NSSE Yearbook, 109(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  42. Mørck, L. L. (in press). New standards for social practice ethics? Researching gang exit with former gang members. In Critical criminology.Google Scholar
  43. Mørck, L. L., & Celosse-Andersen, C. M. (in press). Mo(ve)ment methodology—Identity formation moving beyond gang involvement. Annual Review of Critical Psychology.Google Scholar
  44. Mørck, L. L., & Nissen, M. (2005). Praksisforskning: Deltagende kritik mellem mikrofonholderi og akademisk bedreviden [Practice research: Participatory critique between holding the microphone and playing the academic know-it-all]. I: T. B. Jensen & G. Christensen, (red.), Psykologiske og pædagogiske metoder: Kvalitative og kvantitative forskningsmetoder i praksis (s. 123–154). Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitets Forlag.Google Scholar
  45. Nissen, M. (2004). Wild objectification: Social work as object. Outlines, 6(1), 73–89.Google Scholar
  46. Nissen, M. (2009a). Objectification and prototype. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 6(1), 67–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nissen, M. (2009b). Prototypes for the ethics of a democratic social engineering. In T. Teo, P. Stenner, A. Rutherford, E. Park, & C. Baerveldt (Eds.), Varieties of theoretical psychology. International philosophical and practical concerns (pp. 146–154). Concord: Captus Press.Google Scholar
  48. Nissen, M. (2012). The Subjectivity of Participation: Articulating Social Work with Youth in Copenhagen. London: Palgrave/MacmillanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nissen, M. (2015). Meeting youth in movement and on neutral ground. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 3.  https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2015.34.
  50. Nissen, M. (2016). Standards and standpoints. Why standards, and studying them, imply critique. Theory & Psychology, 26(2), 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Raffnsøe, S. (2017). What is critique? Critical turns in the age of criticism. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies, 18(1), 28–60. Retrieved from https://tidsskrift.dk/outlines/article/view/26261.Google Scholar
  52. Ranciere, J. (1991). The ignorant schoolmaster. Five lessons in intellectual emancipation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Rancière, J. (1999). Disagreement: Politics and philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  54. Rancière, J. (2013). Aisthesis: Scenes from the aesthetic regime of art. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  55. Schraube, E., & Osterkamp, U. (2013). Psychology from the standpoint of the subject: Selected writings of Klaus Holzkamp. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  56. Smith, D. E. (2005). Institutional ethnography. A sociology for people. New York: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
  57. Stengers, I. (2010). Cosmopolitics I. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  58. Stenner, P. (2018). Liminality and experience. A transdisciplinary approach to the psychosocial. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  59. Stetsenko, A. (2017). The transformative mind: Expanding Vygotsky’s approach to development and education. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stiegler, B. (2010). Taking care of youth and the generations. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Stiegler, B. (2013). What makes life worth living: On pharmacology. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  62. Stiegler, B. (2015). States of shock: Stupidity and knowledge in the 21st century. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  63. Thorgaard, K. (2010). Evidence, patient perspective and deliberative clinical decision-making. (PhD), Aarhus University.Google Scholar
  64. Wartofsky, M. W. (1979). Models, representation and the scientific understanding. Dordrecht/Boston/London: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  65. White, M. (2007). Maps of narrative practice. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  66. Žižek, S. (2004). Mapping ideology. London: Verso.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Danish School of Education, Aarhus UniversityAarhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations