Positionality Based on Three Educational Theorists


Warning: Use of undefined constant no - assumed 'no' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/austra01/public_html/overnightessays.us/wp-content/plugins/content-for-money/contentformoney.php on line 162

Positionality Based on Three Educational Theorists

Introduction

The concepts of teaching and gaining education have, for a long time, been hard to explain. The way a teacher explains to students and the way they understand what is taught by the teacher has become a topic of debate with different people raising different positions. Attaining education may happen through different ways where a student learns on his or her own from the notes and guidelines provided by the teacher or by listening to the narrations made by the teacher on a concept. Education is viewed differently by many people with some people viewing it as a difficult task that require a lot of efforts and others view it as a simple way of conceptualizing concepts and ideas (Knight 2007: 54). Regardless of the position taken, it is universally agreed that education is a process of gaining skills and knowledge. However, the problem arises concerning the best method to be used in gaining these skills and knowledge. Different countries have different educational systems and one may be confused by other country’s system. Teachers use different styles in teaching according to how they perceive them (Rizvi & Lingard 2010: 48). In this case, a teacher may explain a concept to students orally without demonstrating on the blackboard and students grasp it. On the other hand, he or she may demonstrate a concept on the blackboard or use examples to make it clearer to the students. On the other hand, students do not learn at the same rate or style (Knight 2007: 54). They have different styles of learning where a student can clearly understand a concept when it is being explained by the teacher. Others have to re-read on their own in order to understand clearly. The rate of understanding also differs making some students take more time in understanding a concept than others. It is therefore the responsibility of teachers to choose the most appropriate teaching style that will ensure that all students understand what is taught (Rizvi & Lingard 2010: 48).

Pay to Unlock the Answer!



Foucault, M. (2008) The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge. New Jersey: Wiley, 1-19

Freire, P. (1993) Pedagogy of the Oppressed [online]. Webster Education [Accessed 26 Mrach 2012]. Available at: <http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/philosophy/education/freire/freire-2.html>.

Jablonski, J. (2006) Academic Writing Consulting ad WAC: Methods and Models for Guiding Cross-curricular Literacy Work. New York: Wiley, 12-78

Johns, C. (2009) Becoming a Reflective Practitioner. New Jersey: Sage, 281-309

Knight, S. (2007) Understanding Positionality: A Narrative Study in Teacher Education. Victoria: Open Press, 54-67

Manzon, M. (2011) Comparative Education: The Construction of a Field. Sudbury: Routledge, 19-56

McLaren, P. & Leornard, P. (1993) Paulo Freire : A Critical Encounter. London: Prentice Hall, 69-78

Micheletti, G. (2010) Re-Envisioning Paul Freire’s “Banking Concept of Education”. Student Pulse [online]. 2(2) pp. 1-2 [Accessed 26 March 2012]. Available at: <http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/171/re-envisioning-paulo-freires-banking-concept-of-education>.

Redmond, B. (2006) Reflection in Action: Developing Reflective Practice in Health and Social Services. Victoria: Free Press, 11-54

Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. (2010) Globalizing Education Policy. Sudbury: Dovers, 48-69

Rossatto, C. (2005) Engaging Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of Possibility: From Blind to Transformative Optimism. New York: Wiley, 78-91

Schon, D. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Profession. Manchester: Sage, 32-65