School: History, Meaning, Context, and Construct

  • Thomas Stehlik


In this chapter, we ask for whom military memoirs are written. We consider authors’ own ideas about their readerships, and the connections between these and the dedications that appear in many published memoirs. We discuss the different groups which authors consider whilst writing and editing – family members, friends (including military colleagues), military readerships, and unknown others constituting a broader civilian public. We examine the construction of the market for military memoirs from authors’ perspectives, and situate this within a wider discussion of the communicative and instructional possibilities of the memoir. We consider the military memoir, provocatively perhaps, as a life-writing form akin in many respects to the Latin American testimonio form. This in turn suggests a reading of military memoirs in terms of their intentionality of communication.


  1. ABS. (2017). Australian Bureau of Statistics, Religion in Australia. Accessed 17 May 2017.
  2. Biesta, G., & Tröhler, D. (2008). Introduction: George Herbert Mead and the development of a social conception of education. In G. H. Mead, G. Biesta, & D. Tröhler (Eds.), The philosophy of education. London: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Blake, W. (1808). Milton: A poem. Google Scholar
  4. Dahlin, B. (2006). Education, history and be(com)ing human: Two essays in philosophy and education. Karlstad: Karlstad University.Google Scholar
  5. Danner, H. (1994). Bildung: A basic term of German education. Educational Sciences, 9/1994.Google Scholar
  6. Edwards, R. D. (2006). Patrick Pearse: The triumph of failure. Dublin: Irish Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Foster, R. F. (1989). Modern Ireland 1600–1972. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  8. Gidley, J. (2016). Postformal education: A philosophy for complex futures. Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Konrad, F.-M. (2012). Wilhelm von Humboldt’s contribution to a theory of Bildung. In P. Siljander, A. Kivela, & A. Sutinen (Eds.), Theories of Bildung and growth: Connections and controversies between continental educational thinking and American pragmatism (pp. 107–124). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Merriam, S. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(89), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Neill, A. S. (1960). Summerhill: A radical approach to childrearing. Middlesex: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  12. Oltermann, P. (2016, July 1). No grades, no timetable: Berlin school turns teaching upside down. The Guardian, Accessed 22 Aug 2016.
  13. Pidd, H. (2017, March 30). Schoolchildren in northern England falling behind south. The Guardian.Google Scholar
  14. Rebanks, J. (2016). The shepherd’s life: A tale of the Lake District. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  15. Reid, A. (2017). Public education in South Australia. Adelaide: SA Department of Education and Child Development.Google Scholar
  16. Ryan, S. M. J. (2009). Report of the Commission to inquire into child abuse (Vol. 1). Dublin: CICA.Google Scholar
  17. Schratzenstaller, A. (2010). The classroom of the past. Chapter 2, In K. Mӓkitalo-Siegl, J. Zottman, F. Kaplan, & F. Fischer (Eds.), Classroom of the future: Orchestrating collaborative spaces. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Siljander, P., Kivelä, A., & Sutinen, A. (2012). Theories of Bildung and growth: Connections and controversies between continental educational thinking and American pragmatism. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. UNESCO. (2015). Education for all 2000–2015: Achievements and challenges. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Stehlik
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of South AustraliaMagillAustralia

Personalised recommendations