Pedagogy in practice: school pedagogy from students’ perspectives

Abstract

This paper introduces the concept of 'pedagogy in practice' (PiP), referring to the immediate interaction between students' learning experiences and school's pedagogy and distinct from the pedagogy advocated 'from above' by the school. We bring the concept of PiP into focus by analysing students' open-ended discourse about their learning experiences in 24 open group conversations, comparing two holistically different learning environments (conventional and an alternative arts and sciences (A&S) high school in Israel). The results show that A&S students described their learning experiences as ones wherein they actively steered and navigated their own learning process. Students' experience of the conventional school's pedagogy implies that the conventional school's PiP considers its students as passengers joining a ride over which they have little control. Traditionally, research has looked into students' perceived learning experiences for the purpose of better understanding their learning processes. We suggest that students' talk about their experiences is also informative for understanding their interaction with the schools' pedagogy.

Educational practice, student experience, and the purpose of education—a critique of ‘Pedagogy in Practice’

“…The focus of this paper is a recent line of research concerning 'Pedagogy in Practice' (PiP) which offers a method for studying pedagogy concretely in unfolding classroom interaction - (Hadar & Hotam, 2012;Hotam & Hadar, 2013). The intent is to offer a critique that may help improve the concept for use in further research.…”

“…Secondly, PiP (re)introduces pedagogy into research on student experience of educational practice and links it explicitly with practice. Hadar and Hotam acknowledge the contested nature of the concept of pedagogy and also state that PiP is not meant to signify all of pedagogy, however they believe that PiP is the missing link between what teachers plan and act and how students perform (Hadar & Hotam, 2012).…”

“…What is clear is that Hadar and Hotam want to differentiate between pedagogy as part of school practice in general and focus on the interactional aspects which directly involve students. The pedagogy of PiP is thus separate from pedagogy as part of educational planning and school organization (Hadar & Hotam, 2012).…”

“…Quantitative and qualitative analyses were made of group interviews with students aimed at "tap[ping] students' actual subjective experiences" (Hadar & Hotam, 2012, p. 191). The questions were about 'learning' and the characteristics of 'good learners' (Hadar & Hotam, 2012). What students were prompted to talk about was the 'overall' message they got by participating in their particular school setting and not the specific (subject-matter) content or their relationship to individual teachers.…”

“…The PiP of the A&S school was on this basis considered better than the PiP of the conventional school in that it made students hold certain beliefs about learning and (themselves as) learners. Hadar and Hotam (2012) Hadar and Hotam believe that PiP is central to educational improvement and "that any attempt to understand, evaluate, make sense and eventually improve pedagogy or curriculum in general must examine PiP in particular" (Hadar & Hotam, 2012, p. 202 -my emphasis). Yet the research on PiP so far has been conducted without direct reference to specific ways in which the results may be utilized for improving educational practice.…”