Arik Segev

Phillip Cam recently published a study on the separation between the teaching and learning of classic school curriculum on the one hand and morality on the other. He suggests an approach to integrate them. The goal of this article was to suggest a complementary alternative approach, to Cam’s. Based on a MacIntyrean paradigm, I argue that seeing the CSC as ‘practices’ would also enable that integration. This approach differs from the one proposed by Cam, since it preserves the structure of the CSC. Nevertheless, I will demonstrate how this approach leads to a number of changes in the formation, teaching and learning of school curriculum. As background, I will briefly describe R.S. Peters’ attempt to find an internal justification for the teaching and learning of school curriculum and point to some weaknesses it contains. My proposal can be understood as deriving from the same principle, of another famous educational initiative, Mortimer Adler’s ‘Great Book Project’. Toward the end of the article, I will demonstrate why Adler’s project differs from mine, and why it does not meet the goal of integrating learning school curriculum with moral education.

In his book “World-Centred Education,” Biesta discusses two themes fundamental for the emergence of subjectivity as a desirable existential humane state of being and for an education that aims to achieve it. The first theme is about freedom and the importance of distancing education and teaching from any act of objectifying students. The second theme concerns the world, its limitations on freedom, and its central role in educational events, which aim to help students fulfill their subjectivity. However, when he analyzes three historical cases to conceptualize and demonstrate his ideas regarding subjectivity and education as subjectification, Biesta seems to focus more on the role of the first theme than the second. This imbalance does not give the world the proper place Biesta’s theory itself inspires to provide, as first and foremost expressed in the book’s title. This article proposes an alternative reading of the book’s theory regarding subjectivity, freedom, the world, and their interrelationships. The suggested reading gives the world a more central role in the emergence of events of subjectivity without harming freedom and thus changes how we can analyze the three cases and how to understand and generate education and teaching aiming at subjectification.