- 86 Downloads
Thinking Change retraces the path of the book’s voyage exploring trivialization, discourses and opinions, realities and histories, and the limits and potentials of our thinking individually and collectively. How can we get ahead? The answer partly lies in our surrendering of the traditional philosophies of education in favor of new approaches. Some of the assumptions informing our goals in education date back to times when education was an option for the few, not a necessity of the many, meeting their limits in modern age. We highlight that there, beyond the conventional ideas, lie realistic solutions deserving our attention. They hold a promise to improve our education by advancing effectively our predominant style of thought, our discourse and culture more broadly, changing with it our prospects.
- Barnes, Michael Horace. 2000. Stages of thought: The co-evolution of religious thought and science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Bauerlein, Mark. 2008. The dumbest generation: How the digital age stupefies young Americans and jeopardizes our future. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
- Berggruen, Nicolas, and Nathan Gardels. 2013. Intelligent governance for the 21st century: A middle way between west and east. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Bohm, David. 2013. On dialogue. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Brennan, Jason. 2017. Against democracy: New preface. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Cummings, Dominic. 2013. “Some thoughts on education and political priorities.” The Guardian, October 11. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/interactive/2013/oct/11/dominic-cummings-michael-gove-thoughts-education-pdf.
- Dalton, Russell J. 2017. “Political trust in North America.” In Handbook on political trust, edited by Sonja Zmerli and Tom W. G. Van der Meer. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Dörner, Dietrich. 1997. The logic of failure: Recognizing and avoiding error in complex situations. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.Google Scholar
- Egan, Kieran. 1997. The educated mind: How cognitive tools shape our understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Fullan, Michael. 2010. All systems go: The change imperative for whole system reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
- Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis F. Thompson. 1998. Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
- Helbing, Dirk. 2015. Thinking ahead—Essays on big data, digital revolution, and participatory market society. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- Hibbing, John R., and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse. 2004. Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
- Keynes, John Maynard. 2018 (1936). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Kinney, Eleanor D. 2015. The affordable care act and medicare in comparative context. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Manski, Charles F. 2013. Public policy in an uncertain world: Analysis and decisions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Mitchell, Sandra D. 2012. Unsimple truths: Science, complexity, and policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Olson, Steve, ed. 2018. The science of science communication III: Inspiring novel collaborations and building capacity: Proceedings of a colloquium, 63. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Payne, Sebastian. 2016. “How vote leave won the EU referendum.” Financial Times, June 24. https://www.ft.com/content/90c054fe-3953-11e6-9a05-82a9b15a8ee7.
- Strauss, Claudia. 2012. Making sense of public opinion: American discourses about immigration and social programs. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Warren, Mark E., and Hilary Pearse, eds. 2008. Designing deliberative democracy: The British Columbia citizens’ assembly. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Zaller, John R. 2005 (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar