Content area
This outline presents reflections with the intention of refining questions that seem important to us on a subject that continues to demand clarity. Conceptually, a series of issues that have promoted a rarefication of what pedagogy claims to be scientific, and the same happens with didactics and curriculum, are usually stated about pedagogy. So, starting from a series of theoretical discursive elements, we will join the conceptualization helped in a special way by the work of Colombian researchers on The disciplinary and professional field of Pedagogy in this country, and of course, with the intention of opening the discussion in Latin America.
Abstract
This outline presents reflections with the intention of refining questions that seem important to us on a subject that continues to demand clarity. Conceptually, a series of issues that have promoted a rarefication of what pedagogy claims to be scientific, and the same happens with didactics and curriculum, are usually stated about pedagogy. So, starting from a series of theoretical discursive elements, we will join the conceptualization helped in a special way by the work of Colombian researchers on The disciplinary and professional field of Pedagogy in this country, and of course, with the intention of opening the discussion in Latin America.
Keywords: philosophy;pedagogy; didactics; curriculum; 21st century.
1 Introduction
The beginning of this work is based on the epigraph proposed by Zambrano (2020), because we are certain that peoples like ours still do not have the possibility of overcoming the political setbacks that govern them. We have no doubt that this is the result of the failure that is their education, and the impossibility of the university spaces in which teachers are formed, thanks to the imaginaries about the modes of production and the cultural forms and knowledge on the subject that concerns us, and the humanities are a viability to overcome them. The lines established by the ideological apparatus of the state and science - or what is taken for granted, in the sense of Foucault (2010) - that invades the faculties where the teachers of education are configured, with policies that decide what is human. That is, recognizing the manipulation of power games (Marcuse, 2020), we want to leave as a precedent that, there is no doubt that Pedagogy is a discourse product of Modernity; in fact, the discomfort that is manifested in the author of this article in the face of traditional pedagogy -in some way conservative, and modern promises, is established from the beginning (Betancourt-Cadavid, 2012, p. 43).
However, the objective of this study is to recuperate the significance of education, infused with a philosophical dimension, as a means of contemplating human fulfillment and the realization of its destiny. As articulated by Zambrano (2020, p. 148), the discursive order of pedagogy, as a philosophy of the soul of subjects, as poetics of the subject, as an imminent rehearsal of the future of subjects, is contested between method and thought. In other words, the concept of utopia is pursued as a process of humanization. In accordance with Dilthey's (1968) assertions, the processes of configuration inherent to the concept of formation facilitate access to life, thereby enabling the human being to establish a sense of self, appropriate their history, and situate themselves within it, ultimately making it their own (Betancourt-Cadavid, 2021). In this theoretical framework, education assumes a pivotal role in the context of historical and cultural existence. It fulfills a critical function by establishing and preserving moral principles, which are the distinct set of values indispensable for fostering human connections within the social fabric.
This approach makes it clear that it is not necessary for Pedagogy, nor for didactics or the curriculum, as we will show below, to address the so-called ridicules about the criteria of educational quality and quality of life. The issues of the market economy and competitions reduce the possibilities of these issues to their own clumsiness that overlaps the intentions of domination of the subjects' consciousness. To this end, we invite the reader to pause and review with extreme care the work of Carrera Santafé and Luque Guerrero (2016) on the school according to neoliberal economics.
The invitation is precisely because it is not necessary for this work to inquire about the effects of financial capitalism in schools and its intentions to make the lives of subjects precarious (Butler, 2017). These ideas are an invitation to remember what the classics of pedagogical thought have left throughout the history of the West. Asking again about education from non-instrumental, technocratic or reductionist perspectives is therefore key to reconfiguring the educational choices that govern the way of understanding the place of the human - generic and individual - as an agent of his education and training. (Runge et al, 2018, p. 25).
Now, from a historical perspective, pedaogy has been coined the problem of teaching as an almost exclusive issue, as the central element for its configuration as a discourse1. This is an initial reason to affirm that the fundamental problem of Pedagogy must be addressed with greater articulating capacity, which implies patrimonies to give it a broad meaning thanks to the fact that if historically teaching was the central problem of pedagogy, then that reflection could not say anything about education before modernity. period of human history in which this topic is originally set as a dissertation.
Socially and culturally, if teaching is the center, then pedagogy could not reflect on what it itself considers to be other forms of non-institutionalized education, or what is called non-formal education, family education; even less could it address educational forms in culturally diverse contexts such as ancestral cultures, among others.
About the concept of Pedagogy
There is no doubt, the concept originates in the context of education in modernity; Freedom and autonomy coexist as keys to modern reason. But in our time the concepts that are proper to it, thanks to the instrumental reason to which it is subjected, are competence, success, intellect, instrumentalized knowledge. Let us return to a non-affirmative position to begin this section, that is, let us take up the words of Horkheimer in his critique of instrumental reason that,
If these very poor people did not behave and act in imitation of the upper class, the stentorian propaganda or educational claims that exhort them to cultivate their "personality" would seem to them as a sign of condescension, not to say hypocrisy, an effort to lull them into a state of deceptive contentment. (2010, p. 144).
The concept of Pedagogy brings with it the humanist reason of modern philosophy with elements of freedom, fraternity and human equality, concepts of the Age of Enlightenment. From there, pedagogues, as heirs of reason, prepared proposals that are present in the furrows of the school that extends from then to our time, and that is why it has become a discipline that deals with individuation and human behavior, contrary to power, obedience and submission. It seems to be a propitious territory for surveillance, oversight and even for turning each subjectivity into something institutionalized.
Although it may seem useless in the exercise of thinking, this work sees the possibility of the vindication of the humanist tradition that emerges genuine from careful reflection. This is how we understand it in Koselleck (2007), since reason is the daughter of criticism, and criticism is the heir of the world to which we have been subjected. But criticism is closely related to the concept of crisis when it shows that in absolute truth there is a single symptom, the same fabric of power. The crisis engendered by criticism has its origin in the Irish lodges that adopted a resistance to the power of the sovereign (Robinson, 2012). There is no doubt that criticism and resistance emerge from the Freemasons2 , in such a way that this attitude evident in modern literature is the renewal of what is aesthetically conceived as beautiful and sublime, it is the revaluation of the genuine. In fact, "With the development of the School of Freedom and Reason, revolutionaries were creating the conditions for the Pedagogy of the Revolution to take shape, which is nothing more than modern Pedagogy" (Zambrano, 2020, p. 151).
It was the Freemasons who, without fear of power, thanks to their stance against the secrets of the sovereign, began the tight task of seeing in secrecy an order of formation and resistance. The Freemasons undertook the revolution that overcame the old regime, opening up modern pedagogy. In fact, it is found in Fichte, which "... the Freemasonic Order represents a Seed of Good" (1997, p. 13).
History and definition of the concept of Pedagogy
The central theme of this work is the concept of Pedagogy, an expression of Greek origin: παισ αγειν (paisagein). This expression typical of ancient Greece refers to the pedagogue, a slave who guides and accompanies children to the places where specific content was learned. This type of servant had better conditions and was in charge of taking care of the children and young people from possible attacks and abuses while they walked the way to the places of learning,
Which in classical times were not unified in a building, but it was necessary to go in search of the workplaces of private teachers: the didáskalos "teacher of reading and writing..., the gymnastics teacher... music." This required constant accompaniment by an adult to protect the child or adolescent from the dangers of the street. Hence, his closeness to the child made him a moral guide, since he was in charge of teaching him good manners and was in charge, in general, of watching over the good course of his education. (Castello &Mársico, 2005, p. 57).
At that time, the pedagogue was the one who ensured the safety of the children, in such a way that the teacher was in charge of the transmission of the cultural heritage in a specific subject, and was not in charge of the transmission and reflection of social life, of the moral, he was not in charge of access to and reflection on life and culture in general. The intention here is to provide the origin of a concept that makes possible issues such as care, training and accompaniment, so as not to limit the pedagogical to the school context exclusively, and that makes it possible to circulate the concept in an endless number of possibilities in which access to culture in a general sense is the key (Gadamer, 2007), and not teaching in the narrow sense.
Now, the approach itself of what emerges for this work, after the searches carried out taking into account what it implies to write in the context of faculties and programs in Education Sciences. So we present Pedagogy as a field3 to be articulated in a much more open way than that of discipline. Thus, the concept is open to proximities willing to the constant production of knowledge, and opens the way to practical subfields that have to do with the different forms of educational praxis and professional and experiential knowledge4, "[...]knowledge that, knowledge how, know-how, practical knowledge, strategic knowledge, among others - that result from there" (Runge et al, 2018, p. 241). Among others: General, school and institutional, infant and preschool, special, youth and adult, social, intercultural, comparative, sports, arts and crafts, labor and economic pedagogy (Lenzen, 1996).
This notion, developed as a field, encompasses practices and discourses that have moderation and coherence, opens the way to the visibility of chains, ruptures, movements, similarities, relationships. Barbosa Moreira (1999) proposes that "Because it is a historical construction, the countryside is affected by different cultural, social and institutional demands" (p. 25). That is why as a theoretical-practical and applied disciplinary field, it is developed in areas such as leisure time, criminalistics, health and hospitals, road and mobility, environmental and ecological, play, sexual, citizen, media, museum, labor, and business. The former are given in trends, concepts, and theoretical-disciplinary orientations that some call metatheoretical, such as hermeneutical/interpretative pedagogy (of the spiritual sciences -geisteswissenschaften), empirical-experimental and critical-rational (postpositivist), transcendental or principled criticism, sociocriticism or historical-materialist pedagogy, structuralist and post-structuralist (archaeological/genealogical), constructivist, interactionist, praxeological, communicative, theoretical-systemic, interactionist, praxeological, communicative, theoretical-evolutionary, phenomenological, psychoanalytic and reflective pedagogy (Lenzen, 1996).
Finally, in this definition there are peculiar pedagogical approaches with presuppositions, beliefs that arrive as "Doctrines" that support programs of actions5. Waldorf Pedagogy, Freinet, Experiential, Reggio, libertarian or anti-authoritarian (anarchist), Montessori, Buddhist, Feminist. Thus, from all of the above, the fundamental pedagogical phenomena, also recognized as its objects of study, are training and education, socialization and individualization, teaching, instruction and learning, accompaniment, counseling, personal development, counseling and help. these are also approached with the help of some close ones such as anthropology, history, psychoanalysis, sociology, psychology and theology (Lenzen, 1996).
So, Pedagogy is defined by
[...] its distinctive feature as a disciplinary and professional field is complexity and plurality that, analytically and interpretatively speaking, must be worked on as a process of permanent reelaboration that is based on the historicity of Pedagogy, its theoretical and conceptual configurations, its antonomy -but also the mechanisms of its institutionalization-, educational practices, their contexts and transformations. in addition to the complex relationships with the social sciences, cultural studies and social movements. (Runge et al, 2018, p. 243).
On didactics and the curriculum
Didactics
Now it is a matter of addressing the issue of Didactics for education, in our context6. To this end, it is essential that the reader understands that the starting point is the clarity for the teacher of the four dimensions of teaching, that is, reflection on teaching begins with clarity about the aims of the exercise, and from there the objectives are determined, so that the means and procedures can be determined. Not having these clear principles - ends, objectives, means and procedures - has as a consequence an approach to teaching theorems as if they were only reasons that others dictate and that must be transmitted in the classroom, and that is quite far from what we conceive as training.
Therefore, Didactics must be based on situated actions, mediated for the purposes of training as results of learning processes. In this way, the object of conocimiento se abre al enseñante, y porendeit happens through him, the same in his disciple. But for this to be achieved, the teacher must have studied the subject to be worked on through what we present here as the EFE, which is the anagram to begin the reflection on teaching, which is not an exclusive exercise of formal institutions:
(1) E for Elementary or elementary, which are the categories that will be transmitted to the student, and which must be completely clear to who will transmit the content.
(2) F for Fundamental, that is, that the teacher must know about experiences that allow him to recognize things, first, and then present them to his students.
(3) And at the end another E for Exemplary which are the contents that are recognized to be taken to the teaching space, and that therefore form a new order in everyone's experience.
Expanding on the above on the forms of the elemental,
The fundamental is experiential only as an experience. For example: What has been experienced in an extreme situation; The exemplary, like the general, is experienced with the particular. The law of gravity in the fall of an apple; The typical when the general is experienced in the particular (Runge, 2008, p. 177).
With all of the above, the teacher must arrive at the clarity of "The simple final forms, in which the general (form) and the particular (end) coincide. Reading through learning to read; and simple aesthetic forms, so that the general and the particular coincide" (Runge, 2008, p. 177).
With this, we allow ourselves to present Didactics as that space in which the teacher, or anyone who deals with the matters of training, is dedicated to the organization of teaching. It encompasses decisions, conditions, presuppositions, foundations, it is the space for the teacher to determine the purposes of the process. It is this, Didactics, that establishes the relationship between teaching and learning, which highlights Methodology. The issue is that Didactics in a broad sense is the theory of formative contents, which is why it is considered a discipline on teaching, which helps in the provision of spaces for learning; in a restricted sense it is the theory of tasks, categories and formative contents. So it does not manage to cover the issues of form, path, means and pedagogical methods, questions that have to do with experience itself, and for this it makes use of Methodology, from which it asks about methods, forms and means of conscious teaching and learning.
In Klafki (1991, 1996), Didactics is the theory of formative contents, in such a way that Methodology is a complement to the former, since it makes the teacher's plan possible. That is to say that "The concept then encompasses methodology as a partial discipline, in the sense of efforts towards theorization and research on the forms of organization and realization of teaching and learning" (Klafki, 1991, p. 86). Thus, in the field of Didactics, we invite you to use methodology based on questions that enable teaching innovation in the field of training. Questions from teachers based on:
* The exemplary meaning of the content [...]
* Importance for the present of the content [...]
* Importance for the future of the content [...]
* Content structure [...]
* Affordability of the content [...] (Runge Peña, 2008, p. 179)
Curriculum
Let us begin by affirming that Franklin Bobbit (1876-1999) is considered in various academic spaces as the Father of the Curriculum, for whom the theme consists especially in the adaptation of educational institutions, in a broad and not exclusively institutionalized sense, to the destinies and requirements of the subjects, and their future inhabitation of the social world. And that is why studies on the Curriculum present it as an organizer and prescriber of teaching content, so they refer the subject exclusively to the organized curriculum, with a clear sequence that is a set of activities and ordered experiences that allow the child to develop what will be useful and practical in his or her adult life.
However, and in the order of the ideas presented around the concept of Pedagogy, and then on the subject of Didactics, nothing could be further from what it really means. Now it is important to trace the concept from Latin, which as a neutral singular noun, means career, path and when used in education processes it is understood as the course that determines all the necessary elements to guarantee training.
It is important to pay attention, because the concept is typical of the Anglo-Saxon culture7 where there is a strong influence of utilitarianism, and although pragmatism is also present there8, it could be said that in the educational environment there is currently no definitive proposal on the use of the subject; there is no clear approach that allows a safe curricular formulation. It can be said that we find multiple classifications that do not necessarily allow us to guide the processes of institutionalized training, and that the subject is sometimes deeply subject to the policies of the day and the guidelines of international organizations that rectify educational processes according to the financial market. We try to approach the concept of curriculum, but it is not our attempt to define it universally. That is why we provoke here a return to the idea of Ariadne's Thread, so that from Greek mythology we can refer to a continuity of elements, observations and arguments that lead us to the possibilities of a conductive sequence that could be the human experience of giving oneself shape in the midst of educational processes. An option for subjects to leave a superficial and sensitive world, towards the reality that demands its own history.
And with all of the above, if we may, we could end up returning to the classic of Western philosophy. In the so-called Myth or Allegory of the Cave, Plato (Rowe, 2006) presents part of what will be his theory of ideas in this story that has four stages: the deception that is the depths of the cave, with the chained looking at the shadows; the liberation that consists of one of the prisoners managing to free himself from the chains and is the one who discovers the trap and the simulation; the ascension of the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who He releases and proceeds with his exit from the cave and the darkness, a heavy and even painful experience. In the return, the subject has already had contact with reality, with the outside and now has a condition of being enlightened by the good and the truth, and is the one who must return to share knowledge.
It is not for us to present this final theme to make an explanation of the Greek thinker's proposal. But if it seems to us that reflection and work on curricular knowledge could keep in mind that human knowledge is definitively segmented into elements of the Visible or Sensible World or inside the cave, where imagination (Εικασια) and belief (Πιστισ) are the foundation of opinion (Δοξα). Therefore, it is worthwhile to give the opportunity to the historical conditions, to the possibilities of the Intelligible world of ideas or the exterior of the cave, which are proper to thought (Διανοια), to knowledge (Διαλχτιχα) or to their own reality that subjects can place in their contextually situated history as a way of understanding (Zemelman, 1998, 2005, 2012).
By way of closing, so as not to conclude and leave the discussion open: pedagogies of the 21st century
After defining the central concepts addressed in this article, we want to move on to the pedagogies of the twenty-first century proposed by Carbonell (2015), and which are only possible in our century thanks to the work that free thinkers have developed since the Enlightenment. Alternatives for Educational Innovation in which he proposes eight pedagogies of the Twentieth Century, which continue to be of great influence for pedagogy today, that is, for a capo that is not exclusive to the exercise of institutionalized teaching. However, we will focus on the new that is currently being established as other ways of approaching pedagogy, didactics and curriculum, thus allowing to broaden the educational perspective outside the school, since many of them are carried out in other contexts.
The first pedagogy taken up by the author is called non-institutional pedagogies, learning and education outside the school. In this section, the premises that other classical pedagogues mentioned, such as John Dewey, are recalled, for whom education in other instances other than school can generate more valuable and relevant learning. This extracurricular education is acquired by the child in family interactions, in the street and other scenarios that are also considered educational due to the offers of informal and non-formal education that plays a fundamental role in supplying other components of arts, leisure, crafts and other possibilities that the traditional school does not provide. through extracurricular activities that in many cases are sponsored by NGOs, companies, cultural or sports centers, among others. Along the same lines, for Rousseau, another classical pedagogue, nature and the relationship with the natural environment spontaneously and without the mediation of the adult generates thinkers from an early age, from there other pedagogies emerge in which the center of learning is found in the interaction with nature, constant explorations and teaching possibilities outside the four walls of the school. A contrary position, but one that is also constituted as an innovative pedagogy and that strengthens the vision of integrating the school with the environment, is the one that positions the city as a curriculum, as the center of thousands of learning possibilities where stories, cultures, imaginaries and spaces loaded with meaning converge.
It is important to mention the role of the mass media in the paradigm shift in the teaching and learning processes, since nowadays we all constantly learn from the media, which allows for self-taught learning that can be synchronous and asynchronous as Burke (2013) mentions. This possibility of learning from anywhere has given way with greater freedom to modalities such as homeschooling or learning at home, through which a student can go to school without having to move from their family space, teaching is taught from digitized content and educational videos. Another form of self-paced learning is the Masive Open Online Courses, whose educational modality offers free educational courses on internet platforms that allow access to non-institutionalized knowledge that users download or enroll in to deepen their knowledge on a topic of their interest. Among the advantages that stand out from MOOCs is that the learning process that is generated is connectivist, allows collaborative and autonomous work processes, horizontal relationships with knowledge through unstructured learning environments, which facilitate the diversity of opinions and connect different nodes of knowledge. Among the disadvantages of these mass access courses are the homogeneity in the contents, the difficulty of adopting them to other contexts and the diversity of the students.
A similar strategy is Common Knowledge Banks (CCBs) that build collaborative environments on the web with free software that users share with each other, establishing knowledge as a common good. For these learning exchanges, those who assume the role of learner must also teach and those who teach then become learners, therefore, learning is the result of these exchanges of knowledge, in this way, it does not generate economic retribution, but intellectual retribution. These non-institutional pedagogies and especially those that generate knowledge using connectivity through the internet leave out the percentage of the population that lives in precarious conditions and cannot access this type of content and services, gaps that the pandemic derived from Covid 19 demonstrated. Similarly, an obsolete educational system was revealed and that it is difficult to consider in other scenarios including the less advantaged, then a question arises: Can these non-institutional pedagogies replace the school? To answer this question, we return to the premises of Fernández Enguita (2012) who speaks of the wear and tear that the knowledge society produces on educational models and education professionals.
This exhaustion focuses on the history of education before schooling, where learning was done in the family and community environment, then in modernity children and young people began to learn no longer from their elders or their environment, but from other professionals destined for this task and in a new place called school. Precisely this new educational model brought with it the promise of progress and the reduction of social inequalities with a promising future, teachers to exercise the teaching profession should have initial training in the language, literature, arts and technologies of the time, among others. However, nowadays, with the acceleration of the knowledge society, the validity of the initial training that teachers bring requires training processes, which continues to generate insecurities and exhaustion, since the school is not the only place where learning is generated, rather it competes with other sources of information such as the mass media and social networks. On the other hand, inequalities in access to education are still evident because the middle and upper classes have greater economic, technological and cultural resources in relation to the lower classes to access information and knowledge resulting from information and communication technologies.
On the other hand, free, non-directive or alternative pedagogies are also configured as educational trends for the present century, the reasons why they have had the reception they currently have, refer to some circumstances related to various controversies that the so-called traditional school has received in the pedagogical scenarios. This teaching model is pointed out as authoritarian, academic, and merely interested in the intellectual development of the individual. An issue that alternative pedagogies put in the lens of an incomplete and unsatisfactory education for the subject and for society. Another reason related to the acceptance that these pedagogies have received is the coincidence with the protest movements against the prevailing politics and the bourgeois order, as well as the defense of moral and religious values, which led to the appearance of alternative pedagogies. These movements, such as the French May of 1968, aligned themselves with anti-authoritarianism and anarchism, moving away from the tenets of orthodox Marxism. In addition, progressive sections of the middle class were looking for new ways of living and education that departed from the conventional system, which gave rise to alternative schools and discourses about unschooling and homeschooling.
The emblematic case of non-directive pedagogies is that of Summerhill, which is not only a school, but a way of life in which it governs itself in an assembly manner and is based on its own rules. Where both children and adults have a voice and vote in this micro-society, which implies that teachers renounce any type of superiority. Throughout history, there have been attempts to educate outside the conventional system, but Summerhill is considered the first solid and continuous experience of the twentieth century in which respect for the freedom of the child is theorized and applied, attending to his psychic needs without interference from the adult. The goal is to allow the child to live according to his or her natural interests, replacing fear, hypocrisy, and hostility with autonomy, love, and freedom.
In this school community, the key question is not what work the student has to do and what the student has to be like, but what interest he has, what his desire is. There are only a couple of limits to freedom: those that affect the rights and freedom of others and those that affect one's own security (Carbonell, 2015). Free, non-directive and alternative pedagogies are educational approaches that emphasize the autonomy and freedom of the student, allowing him to explore and discover knowledge according to his or her individual interests and needs. These pedagogies constitute that each student is unique and has their own learning pace, so they seek to promote their integral development and enhance their intrinsic motivation. Rather than imposing a rigid curriculum, the student is given the freedom to choose their activities and projects, which encourages their responsibility and commitment to their own learning.
In these proposals, the role of the educator is transformed into that of a facilitator and guide, whose main task is to accompany and support the student in his or her learning process. The educator provides resources, establishes an environment of trust and stimulates critical reflection, thus promoting the construction of knowledge autonomously. Dialogue and active participation are valued, and the aim is to create an inclusive and respectful environment, where collaboration and the exchange of ideas among students are encouraged. These alternative pedagogies seek to form autonomous, critical and creative individuals, capable of facing the challenges of today's world with confidence and skills for lifelong learning.
Among the pedagogical trends for the twenty-first century are also pedagogies for inclusion, a concept that still continues to generate debates, tensions, ups and downs and transformations regarding the role of the teacher, the meaning of teaching, the curriculum and didactics. Therefore, it is convenient to take a look at the historical context of inclusion, its emergence and the modalities that have been implemented over time to address differences in school. Carbonell (2015) presents a list of four models that show the path from exclusion to what is now called inclusive education. We will start with the first model that focuses on the practices of abandonment and marginalization in which children with disabilities were subjected, for this historical moment physical and cognitive imperfections were a reason for abandonment. For the second model, the creation of specialized centers permeated by a welfare discourse and moved by charity is highlighted, in which special education was provided for those people excluded from society due to physical and intellectual disabilities. For the third model mentioned by the author, the emphasis is on integration, that is, that population excluded by the school that due to disability can enter it, but is served with a differentiated curriculum for those who are now named as "students with special educational needs" and for whom reinforcements and external support are implemented with a team of professions that a last, they were also taken out of the majority group to one where they lived with others with similar characteristics to them, promoting an exclusive integration.
However, this integration continues to promote inequality in a school that, in terms of Bourdieu and Passeron (1970) cited by Dubet (2010), defines it as an institution that transmits the dominant culture, trying to cover it up under inspiring principles, and that in the same way, aims to train individuals, thus multiplying social inequalities and exclusion. Finally, the school inclusion model appears from a perspective of learning together through unified and non-fragmented school institutions, in which difference is part of their daily lives, promoting cooperation among peers and the transformation of the school. It is in this model that we will emphasize as a pedagogical trend of this century, since it shows the end of the so-called special schools and allows access to those who previously could not be part of regular education. This opening of the educational system promotes the principle of equality under the postulate that everyone has the same rights, the term equality has been linked to the history of the school from a homogenizing perspective that has minimized the differences in its claim that everyone speaks, behaves in the same way and learns the same things. Those who seek to highlight their diversity become a danger to social identity. (Dussel, 2004).
Thus, the author connects the term equality directly with the equating of personal or individual identity in general stereotypes in which differences are lost, so that in school, for the sake of equality, not only clothing is standardized, but also attitude, ideals, cognitive skills, etc. Equality under these precepts would negate the diversity and difference inherent in culture. Thus, the concept of equality is related to the creation of common identities or their homogenization. It is therefore a matter of standardizing diversity in terms of generating inclusion processes. The tendency towards homogenization that the school has played and its debate between the universal and the particular has generated multiple inequalities, but it has also opened a path to think about heterogeneity as an approximation to the concept of inclusion. This heterogeneity linked to the concept of diversity highlights the need for the school to adapt to the particularities of the students and not the students to the system, arguing that not all children should be treated in the same way.
It is important to mention that the concept of inclusive education arises from the question about the ways in which those students with disabilities are excluded from the education system, but it quickly turns to the interest of all those students who in one way or another have been violated in their ways of accessing education as a right (Ainscow and Miles, 2008). From this perspective of rights, there is an opening towards access to education for all, under this discourse a series of diversities that are part of the school daily life begin to be glimpsed, cultural, religious, sexual diversities, among others, which are part of what inclusive education is. Stainback (2001) cited in Carbonell (2015) states that inclusive education offers the right to the entire student population not only to access education, but also to participate in a common curriculum, a common class where everyone is educated in values such as respect for difference, freedom and cooperation.
UNESCO (2020) proposes an idea of seeing inclusive education as a process, an issue that is in line with what was mentioned by Echeita and Ainscow (2011) who mention that this process proposes different ways to address diversity, changes that allow differences to be appreciated and valued. As it is a process, it is essential to consider time, since the effects of the transformations are evident in the long term with concrete actions aimed at the implementation of inclusive practices in educational institutions. On the other hand, the same authors mention that inclusion seeks the presence, participation and success of all students. The presence has to do with that reflection of what type of institutions the most vulnerable population attends, regular institutions or special schools. Similarly, they emphasize that participation has to do with the type of learning experiences that these children live, if they are listened to or taken into account or valued within the educational system.
Inclusive education requires a series of transformations that the school needs to make to guarantee the right to education of the entire student population, these modifications are linked to the teaching processes, where new ways are required for the elimination of barriers to access to knowledge, linked to reflection processes of teachers who are the ones who must adapt to the child and not the child to the educational system. proposing a student-centered pedagogy that seeks with the same effort to educate all children successfully, taking into account their particularities. In the face of ways of teaching, situated actions that have to do with didactics, a transformation is required in pedagogical practices and the way of developing the curriculum open to all and enriched by differences, which implies changes in school organization and forms of evaluation. The curriculum, on the other hand, is common, which means that it is not closed or the same for all students, therefore, it becomes an open and critical curriculum of the hegemonic culture that denies diversity and values a single thought without taking into account the rhythms and styles of learning. Despite all these premises, Carbonell (2015) shows the debate presented on inclusive education processes and their relationship with ICTs, stating that in the training environment mediated by virtual environments, a relationship is shown between social exclusion and digital divides due to the fact that disadvantaged populations or those with disabilities present more barriers to access this type of learning environments that are increasingly leaving positioning much more as training alternatives.
On the other hand, there is the slow and serene pedagogy that has its origins from movements that criticize the accelerated pace of life that characterizes this century, one of them is Slow Food as opposed to Fast Food founded by Carlo Petrini in 1989, which seeks to return to old food practices such as conversation at the table, Promotion of crops based on the ancestral traditions of the territories, other movements that continue the promotion of the conscious use of time are slow cities, slow sex and which we will focus on in this section, slow education or slow education. Slow education appeared as a movement in 2002, its precursor was Professor Maurice Holt, who promoted a critique of the educational model in force at the time, which presented accelerated learning rhythms with a large amount of content that children must memorize to achieve their school goals. Domenech (2009) mentions that slow education seeks to establish the rhythm that each educational moment requires, therefore, slowness is not punished or if it seeks homogeneity in the performance of school activities, on the contrary, the different learning rhythms are enhanced and respected to promote the desire to learn and fill each learning achieved with meaning. in which children are the protagonists of their own learning.
This panorama reflects the tension generated by the State through educational policies, as mentioned by Acaso (2013) there are three instruments of State control over the school, the first of them is the school day which is designed with short times to teach class, between 45 to 50 minutes, added to the above the number of subjects that must be taken to pass the school year. The acceleration of having to take many subjects in such short periods of time generates boredom, disconnection and a race at the time when the teaching and learning processes take place in school. Another instrument is the curriculum, as mentioned above, it is composed of a number of subjects, some that are considered basic or more important and others that reflect less intensity because they are classified as less important. At this point, the author raises a question by stating whether the amount of content really generates lasting knowledge or if it is only studied for the approval of an exam. Finally, he mentions assessment as an instrument that presents a variety of standardized tests that aim to measure learning and place students between figures and percentages to pass, fail and classify them at the local, national and international levels under global standards.
Slow pedagogy seeks to analyze the learning pace of each of the students, promote ecological literacy through care for the environment, school gardens and responsible consumption, promote creative thinking, look at error not as a punishment but as a learning opportunity, eliminate repetitive and mechanical behaviors from school routines, generate spaces for student participation. Doménech (2010) presents the areas in which slow pedagogy, diversity, the classroom, the curriculum, pedagogical approach, evaluation and community relations can be developed. In terms of diversity, it emphasizes respect for learning rhythms and the adequacy of school times according to the needs evidenced in the student population. Regarding the classroom, it is important to redistribute the furniture and space to promote student participation with didactic resources to work individually and in groups. In the curricular field, working with teachers is essential, since they are the ones who prioritize and select the content to be worked on, classifying basic learning from superficial learning. The pedagogical approach focuses on the student to generate flexibility in teaching and common learning experiences according to the learning rhythms of the students, also the evaluation is qualitative and takes into account the teaching-learning process with different evaluation tools adapted to the styles and rhythms of the students. As for working with the community, it is essential to work with families to address issues such as pressure, competition and the accumulation of teaching content and activities of daily life that their children develop.
The role of the family and society has led to children entering children's centers at an increasingly early age that promote accelerated learning of academic activities aimed at learning faster to read or to be bilingual, leaving aside the game and the time required to learn step by step. In the same order, the use of screens and access to technology in the early stages of childhood, as mentioned by Malagón (2003) cited in Carbonell (2015), limits their conception of the world, constructing their reality through what they see through television programs, video games and the computer. The excess of children's homework in the words of Freire (2013) does not allow them to exercise their own right to be children, in this way, childhood is submerged under the needs of consumer society, with amounts of homework to do, extracurricular activities and with planned free time similar to what happens in adult life.
By way of closing, we do not wish to conclude so as not to close the discussion, the trends of pedagogy, didactics and curriculum for education 4.0, show a continuous re-elaboration of the concept of pedagogy that takes into account the social and cultural particularities in which the processes of training, education and teaching take place, in the same way, as a disciplinary field and from the subfields that are part of it, various practices are shown that for the twenty-first century still evidence processes of domination and instrumentalization of knowledge mediated by government policies. However, there are various alternatives and struggles that position pedagogy from other places outside the school or inside it, in which student-centered learning processes prevail that promote freedom, learning rhythms and interests according to their particularities. The teaching processes seek the formation of autonomous and critical subjects, who participate in training processes that promote knowledge as a common good and accessible to all. In addition to this, the role of the teacher requires constant training, to become a learner and teacher at the same time, from processes of reflection that make him or her a facilitator and guide on the path of learning.
As for didactics, as a space in which the teacher is dedicated to the organization of teaching through situated actions, virtual learning environments with easily accessible digital content that promote synchronous and asynchronous learning are highlighted. However, these spaces for the organization of teaching are not only given virtually, but also from the physical environment, nature, the city, classroom furniture, unstructured spaces that allow the exchange of knowledge and assemblies, cooperative work and participation, are part of the methodology in education 4.0. Finally, the curriculum as a set of principles that aim to direct training, in which the curricula, pedagogical projects and learning methodologies are immersed, for the present century require flexibility, openness and adaptation to the student population, taking into account the diversity and realities of the educational context. The curricular freedom presented by the pedagogies of the twenty-first century is an example of the struggle established with the prevailing policies that have decided the curricular aspects in the different school cycles, but which make known the need to transform the closed or hegemonic curriculum into one that adjusts to the needs of its recipients.
References
Abbagnano, N. y Visalberghi, A., Historia de la pedagogía, trad. Jorge Hernández Campos, (España: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1992).
Acaso, M., rEDUvolution. Hacer la revolución en la educación (Barcelona: Paidós, 2013).
Barbosa Moreira, A. F., "Didáctica y currículo: cuestionando fronteras," Revista Propuesta Educativa 10, no. 20, (1999): 24-30.
Benner, D., La pedagogía como ciencia. Teoría reflexiva de la acción y reforma de la praxis (Barcelona: Ediciones Pomares-Corredor, S.A., 1998).
Benner, Dietrich, "Las teorías de la formación: Introducción histórico-sistemática a partir de la estructura básica de la acción y del pensamiento pedagógicos," Revista Educación, no. 292, (1990): 7-36. Madrid.
Betancourt-Cadavid, J., "Una respuesta al discurso pedagógico de la Modernidad: La pedagogía del caos," Revista En-Clave Social, Corporación Universitaria Lasallista 1, no. 1, (2012): 42-46.
Betancourt-Cadavid, J., Una lectura situada a la constitución del sujeto. Aportes a las pedagogías críticas en Latinoamérica (Medellín: Editorial Bonaventuriana, Colección Señales, 2021).
Bourdieu, P. y Wacquant, L., Una invitación a la sociología reflexiva (Argentina: Siglo XXI, 2005).
Burke, P., Common knowledges (Barcelona: CCCB, 2013).
Butler, J., Marcos de guerra: las vidas lloradas, trad. Bernardo Moreno Castillo (Ediciones Paidós, 2017).
Carbonell, J., Pedagogías del siglo XXI: Alternativas para la innovación educativa (Barcelona: Octaedro, 2015).
Carrera, P. y Luque, E., Nos quieren más tontos. La escuela según la economía neoliberal (Barcelona: Ediciones El Viejo To o 2016)
Castello, L. A. y Mársico, C., El Lenguaje como problema entre los griegos: ¿cómo decir lo real? (Buenos Aires: Altamira 2005)
Chateau, J., Los grandes pedagogos, decimonovena reimpresión, trad. Ernestina de Champourcín (Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2013).
Comenio J Didáctica Ma na (México: Porrúa Colección Se an Cuántos 1998)
Delgado, B., Historia de la infancia (Barcelona: Editoria Ariel, S.A., 1998).
Dilthey, W., Historia de la pedagogía (Buenos Aires: Losada, 1968).
Domènech, J., Elogio de la educación lenta (Barcelona: Editorial Graó, 2009).
Domènech, J., "Educación lenta," Aula de Infantil 56, (2010a): 5-6.
Dubet, F., "Crisis de la transmisión y declive de la institución," Política y Sociedad 47, no. 2, (2010): 15-25.
Dussel, I., "Inclusión y exclusión en la escuela moderna Argentina: una perspectiva postestructuralista," Cadernos de Pesquisa 34, no. 122, (2004): 305-335.
Echeita, G. E., & Ainscow, M., "La educación inclusiva como derecho.: Marco de referencia y pautas de acción para el desarrollo de una revolución pendiente," En Tejuelo: didáctica de la lengua y la literatura. Educación, no. 12, (2011): 26-46.
Fernández Enguita, M., "El incierto porvenir de una institución exhausta," Claves de Razón Práctica, no. 222, (2012): 21-33.
Fichte, J., Filosofía de la Masonería: cartas a Constant, ed. Faustino Oncina Coves (Madrid: Ediciones ISTMO S.A. 1997).
Foucault, M., La Arqueología del Saber, trad. Aurelio Garzón del Camino, 2 edición revisada (México: Siglo XXI editores, 2010).
Gadamer, H-G., Verdad y método, trad. Ana Aparicio y Rafael de Agapito, duodécima edición (Salamanca: Ediciones Sígueme, 2007).
Gadotti, M., Historia de las ideas pedagógicas (México: Siglo XXI Editores, S.A., 2003).
Horkheimer, M., Crítica de la razón instrumental, 2a ed. (Editorial Trotta, 2010).
Kant, I., Crítica de la razón práctica, trad., estudio preliminar, notas e índice analítico Dulce María Granja Castro, revisión técnica de la traducción Peter Storandt (México: Fondo de Cultura Económica Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Iztapalapa, 2005).
Klafki, W., "La importancia de las teorías clásicas de la educación para una concepción de la educación general hoy," revista Educación 36, (1987): 40-65. Tübingen, Alemania: Instituto de colaboración científica.
Klafki, W., "Sobre la relación entre didáctica y metódica," Revista Educación y Pedagogía 2, no. 5, (1991): 85-108.
Klafki, Wolfgang, Neue StudienzurBildungstheorie und Didaktik (Weinheim; Basel: Beltz, 1996).
Koselleck, R., Crítica y crisis. Un estudio sobre la patogénesis del mundo burgués, trad. Rafael de la Vega y Jorge Pérez de Tudela (Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Editorial Trotta, 2007).
Lenzen, D., Handlung Reflexion.VompädagogischenTheoriedefizitzurReflexivenErziehungswissenschaft (Weinheim und (Alemania): Beltz, 1996).
Marcuse, H., Escritos sobre educación y filosofía, trad. Leandro Sánchez Marín (Ennegativo Ediciones, 2020).
Oelkers, J y Tenorth, H., "Pädagogisches Wissen alsOrientierung und als Problem," enPädagogisches Wissen, ed. J. Oelkers y H.-Elmar Tenorth, (Weinheim; Basel: Beltz, 1993), 13-35. Platón, La República, Libro VII, trad. C. Eggers Lan (Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1992).
Robinson J., Nacidos en la sangre. Los secretos perdidos de la Francmasonería, Colección Estudios y documentos (Ediciones Obelisco, 2012).
Runge Peña, Andrés Klaus, Ensayos sobre pedagogía alemana, Colección Cátedra de Pedagogía, Volumen 1 (Universidad Pedagógica Nacional, 2008).
Runge, A., Hincapié, A. Muñoz, D. y Ospina, C., El campo disciplinar y profesional de la pedagogía en Colombia (Rionegro: Fondo Editorial Universidad Católica de Oriente, 2018).
Rowe, C., "Interpreting Plato," en A Companion to Plato, ed. Hugh H. Benson (Blackwell Publishing, 2006), 13-24.
Zambrano, L., "El orden discursivo de un concepto y de una disciplina. Pedagogía y ciencias de la educación," en Epistemología de la pedagogía, coord. A. Martínez, A. Ruiz y G. Vargas, 2 edición (Bogotá: Universidad Pedagógica Nacional, 2020).
Zemelman, H., Sujeto: existencia y potencia (Anthropos Editorial, 1998).
Zemelman, H., Voluntad de Conocer: el sujeto y su pensamiento en el paradigma crítico (Anthropos Editorial, 2005).
Zemelman, H., Pensar y poder: razonar y gramática del pensar histórico (México: Siglo xxi Editores; Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas, 2012).
1 Pedagogy as a disciplinary and professional field - an expression that will be clarified later - has to do with the so-called Science of Education (Erziehungswissenchaft) of German culture, with the Educational Science of Anglo-Saxon culture, and with the Sciences de L'education of French-speaking culture. This is important to take into account, since the separation between Education Sciences and Pedagogy has not been functional in the Colombian context, especially within the approaches to the discourse that are proper to faculties and programs in educational sciences.
2 The symbolism and rituals of Freemasonry passed through human history for centuries before this society was officially configured in 1717. After coming out of hiding, Freemasonry expanded throughout the world and attracted great figures in charge of social transformation. Such is the case of George Washington, Sam Houston, Benito Juárez, Garibaldi or Simón Bolívar. However, over the centuries, dictators such as Franco, Hitler, Mussolini or Ayatollah Khomeini have declared it illegal. Lost in the annals of time are the foundations of how the British Templars, fleeing from the arrest and torture decreed by the pope and the king of that time, formed a secret society that would come to be known as Freemasonry, an initiatory institution of formation.
3 In a structural way, the field that is proposed emerges from the concept of Knowledge proposed in the chapter on Science and Knowledge (Focucault, 2010). The Field in Bourdieu and Wacquant (2005) is assumed as a physical and delimited space where a number of social interactions take place in defined historical moments; It is a space for meetings, agreements, but also for disagreements thanks to the fact that it contains all kinds of positions established by groups and institutions.
4 The notion precedes a conceptual category that contains discursive elements around training from the context of the German pedagogical tradition, which is fundamental for the subsequent approach to the concept of didactics and curriculum that interests us.
5 Although it is not the intention of this article to read in the affirmative that recounts the categories with which the analysis of a discourse such as pedagogical discourse has traditionally been carried out (its genre, the books that try to define or describe it historically, the most representative authors), it does seem important to us to keep in mind works such as those of Abbagnano and Visalberghi (1992), Gadotti (2003), Delgado (1998) and Chateau (2013). Also a review of Klafki (1987).
6 It is important for the reader to relate to the theories of training, a fundamental structural issue within pedagogical thinking, and which can be an interesting foundation when addressing the subject of didactics (Benner, 1990).
7 The Anglo-Saxon is the courtesy accorded to the Germanic peoples who came from the south to the east of Britain (this dates from the beginning of the fifth century, and extends to the conquest by the Normans, Bretons, and French of England in 1066). These are England, the United States and Australia, especially since the second half of the twentieth century.
8 Herbert Spencer, who conceives of all-encompassing evolution as a progressive principle of the naturally physical world, Edward Lee Thorndike, predecessor of American behavioral psychology, Ralph W. Tyler, who worked on the subject of evaluation.
Copyright Institute for Local Self-Government and Public Procurement Maribor 2025