Being in Practice

  • Kaustuv RoyEmail author


A minoritarian but spirited voice has existed in educational and curricular practice rooted in the insights of thinkers such as Edmund Husserl, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Alfred Schutz, and others. This diverse group has not capitulated to the modernist tunnel vision and positivistic outlook that sees education not as an act of collective liberation but as training for disciplined servitude to societal demands flavored by the discourse of freedom and progress. In different ways, these outlying voices have displayed their uneasiness with, and in some cases even outright rejection of, the modernist-technicist ideas of ‘learning’ and its measurement in education. These voices are not necessarily convergent in vision or explicitly ontological in outlook, but are collectively critical of the analytic-empiricist model of thinking that is predicated upon the observer/observed split. The educational thinkers whose works are examined in this chapter are Dwayne Huebner, Ted Aoki, and Max Van Manen.


  1. Dwayne Huebner, “Religious metaphors in the language of education.” Religious Education: The Official Journal of the Religious Education Association, 1985, 80:3, 460–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dwayne Huebner, Talk at UBC, Canada, January 19, 2013.Google Scholar
  3. J. W. von Goethe, Scientific Studies (Transl.) Douglas Miller (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005).Google Scholar
  4. J.W. von Goethe, Scientific studies (New York: Suhrkamp Publishers, 1988).Google Scholar
  5. Kaustuv Roy, “An Untimely Intuition: Adding a Bergsonian dimension to experience and education.” Educational Theory, vol. 55, no. 4, 2005a, pp. 443–459.Google Scholar
  6. Kaustuv Roy, Neighborhoods of the Plantation: War, Politics and Education (The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 2005b).Google Scholar
  7. Martin Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology (New York: Garland Science, 1954).Google Scholar
  8. Max Van Manen, Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy (New York: SUNY Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  9. Ted Aoki, “Competence in Teaching as Instrumental and Practical Action: A Critical Analysis,” In Edmund Short (Ed.), Competence: Inquiries into its Meaning and Acquisition in Educational Settings (Lanham: University Press of America, Inc., 1984).Google Scholar
  10. Ted Aoki, “Interests, knowledge and evaluation: Alternative approaches to curriculum evaluation.” Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 6 (4), 1986, pp. 27–44.Google Scholar
  11. Ted Aoki, “Layered voices in teaching: The uncannily correct and the elusively true.” In W. F. Pinar & W. Reynolds (Eds.), Understanding Curriculum as Phenomenological and Deconstructed Text (New York: Teachers College Press, 1992), pp. 17–27.Google Scholar
  12. Ted Aoki, “Toward curriculum inquiry in a new key,” Curriculum Praxis Occasional Paper No. 2. (Edmonton, Alberta: Department of Secondary Education, Faculty of Education, University of Alberta, 1980).Google Scholar
  13. Ted Aoki, “Toward Understanding Computer Application.” Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 7 (2), 1987.Google Scholar
  14. Ted Aoki, Terrance R. Carson, & Basil J. Favaro, Understanding Situational Meanings of Curriculum In-service Acts: Implementing, Consulting, Inservicing; Curriculum Praxis Monograph Series, Monograph 9 (Edmonton, Alberta: Department of Secondary Education, Faculty of Education, University of Alberta, 1983).Google Scholar
  15. Ted Aoki, “Teaching as indwelling between two curriculum worlds.” In Ted T. Aoki (Ed.), Inspiriting Curriculum and Pedagogy: Talks to Teachers (Edmonton, Alberta: Department of Secondary Education, University of Alberta, 1991).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Azim Premji UniversityBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations