[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Content and pedagogy - cleavage and non-cleavage

Dear all,

Perhaps, others, but from within the history of Russian teaching,
especially Russian colleagues, can give an answer to this:

Shulman, in the attached article, p6, writes about a cleavage btw content
and pedagogy in teaching in US history and this is long ago, in 1986.

Well, I write my master thesis on the piano teaching of a piano teacher
from former Soviet Union, and I observe that, she studied a lot piano
teaching beyond formal education, has a serious scholarship in piano
teaching and executes really a very effective teaching. She took a child
from 60/100 grade to almost 90/100 and this is valid for other children too.

Now the question and my hypothesis is:

Russia, from 19th century onwards, has inherited best parts of the Western
pedagogy (French, German) and developed its own in many disciplines so that
such a cleavage which perhaps occurred in the West after a certain point
did nto occur in Russia, thanks also to October Revolution and building of
socialism and as a result, Russians have developed a quite improved way of
teaching the content, which resulted in a developed pedagogical knowledge
content (an amalgam of pedagogy and content) in many areas. In other words,
Russia, then Soviet Union could miss, refrain from such a cleavage in
pedagogy in general.

Hence, an effective teaching in many areas, like piano teaching.

What was lying behind that?

I think uneven development and the idea of surpassing the West.

And this was not peculiar to a few disciplines, it was valid in a wide
social development range.

Anyone to support or negate my hypothesis about non cleavage of content and
pedagogy in Russian pedagogy tradition?

Please note that content is what, pedagogy is how, and pedagogical content
knowledge is a transformed version of content knowledge which is made


Attachment: shulmanpck86.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document