Community of Learners: Ontological and non-ontological projects

Abstract

Our analysis reveals two major types of "Community of Learners" (COL) projects: instrumental and ontological. In instrumental COL, the notion of community is separated from instruction in order to reach some preset endpoints: curricular or otherwise. We notice three main instrumental COL models: relational, instructional, and engagement. Ontological COL redefines learning as an ill-defined, distributed, social, multi-faceted, poly-goal, agency-based, and situated process that integrates all educational aspects. We will consider two ontological COL projects into: narrowly dialogic and polyphonic.

Democracy, dialogism, therapy, progressivism, anarchism, and other values in Martin Duberman’s innovative pedagogy

“…In Summerhill school, education involved this hard version of freeing the child from neuroses: "Curing a neurosis in a child is a matter of the release of emotion, and the cure will not be furthered in any way by expounding psychiatric theories to the child and telling him that he has a complex" (Neill, 1960, p. 38). In its middle-ground version, this paradigm organically integrates the existing academic curriculum at hand with therapy, like in some versions of the "community of learners" 32 pedagogical approach (Matusov, von Duyke, & Han, 2012). For example, Duberman was searching for a middle ground, What I'm aiming for is a way to bring ourselves to a topic; I don't think we should make ourselves the topic.…”

Community versus society: The normative vision of sociality in joint self-education

“…This section represents the rebuke to my previous, ten-year-old, theoretical work with my collaborators (Matusov, et al, 2012) arguing that educational sociality of joint self-education normatively fits a “community of learners.” In this article, my colleagues and I offered a typology of the existing normative projects of a “community of learners” (CoL). We came to the two major types of CoL: (1) instrumental CoL and (2) ontological CoL.…”

“…In a way, in ontological CoL, community becomes “community behind” for developing the students’ unique voices (Matusov, 2009): “The students do not only become recognized by others as legitimate by how they participate but also by how they transform the practice and its discourse. The quality and success of the students’ contributions – their replies and challenges – are judged and defined by the community itself (that often extends beyond the limits of the classroom) in evaluative dialogic replies of the involved proponents, opponents, and those who have to be convinced about the importance of the unfolding tensions (Latour, 1987; Matusov, 2009)” (Matusov, et al, 2012, p. 58).…”

“…but also on educatees, “As a reader may suspect by now, our own bias is toward ontological CoL in general and polyphonic ontological CoL more specifically. The reason for that is because we are committed to education for agency and critical dialogue focusing on transcending any known norms, values, and practices and testing ideas (Matusov, 2009; 2011; Matusov et al, 2016)” (Matusov, et al, 2012, p. 63). In listing the conditions for the polyphonic ontological CoL, the authors actually promote a legitimate possibility for an educatee’s divorce from a community: “ Legitimacy of and respect for the students’ non-participation and non-cooperation , at least at some point (otherwise, participation is always suspected to be forced, and this can be a burden for the students for their initiatives)” (Matusov, et al, 2012, p. 61).…”

“…In innovative, progressive manipulative education, which also denies self-education (Matusov, 2021a), educational sociality is normatively modeled often after a community that has shared cultural and educational values, practices, traditions, routines, lifestyles, and goals. It is expected that this community, which is shaped by the progressive teacher, would regulate all educational, organizational, and relational decisions in “a community of learners” (Brown, 1997; Brown & Campione, 1994, 1998; Matusov et al, 2012). Although the community as a model is normative sociality for progressive education, so far, it has not been examined whether it fits, what I call, joint self-education.…”