Keywords
pedagogical seeing
change
vulnerability
moral disquiet
pedagogical community
trust
Abstract
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The article focuses on the issue of pedagogical relations discussed among researchers inspired by Max van Manen’s concept of ‘phenomenology of practice’. To what extent does restoring the importance of pedagogical relations in pedagogy matter in relation to reflections on changes in education and care, as well as socio-cultural change? Reflect on this issue from the perspective of pedagogical seeing or pedagogical community. PROBLEM AND RESEARCH METHODS: The research method used in this work is content analysis (Babbie, 2008, pp.168-169). Publications in which concepts such as ‘pedagogical seeing’, ‘pedagogical community’ and the issue of moral disquiet, closely related to the pedagogical relationship, are brought to the fore, will play a special role in the presented issue. PROCESS OF REASONING The main part of the issue developed in the article concerns suffering, fragility, otherness and the place for the pedagogical relationship in the reflection developed by researchers such as Max van Manen, and in particular Tone Saevi and her colleagues, including Andrew Foran, Tone Eikland. The beginning of building a pedagogical relationship is the awareness of one’s own ‘incompleteness,’ lack of perfection, and constant journey towards maturity. It is the ability to distinguish between what is pedagogical and what is non-pedagogical. The profound meaning of change, which can be sourced from the pedagogical relationship, will be revealed in the process of discovering the meaning of the experience of fragility or disability in the relationship between the caregiver and the care recipient. RESULTS OF SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS: Understanding otherness and suffering is a process of deepening the capacity for pedagogical seeing. Pedagogical seeing is an embodied perception of people and situations that somehow reveal not only what we see, but how we see. This is important, especially when the gaze of a teacher or carer, intentionally or not, tells the student something meaningful about how their uniqueness, otherness, or weakness is seen. A guardian of change is someone who preserves the personal experience of a person’s fragility and suffering. They reflect on the human experience of fragility and suffering, which is part of our existence, and make it a significant dimension of human maturity and the foundation for community building. CONCLUSION: this pedagogical relationship is the source of individual and social change, and above all, change in care and education. We need a pedagogical seeing, which is guarded by the ability to experience and understand moral disquiet and concern for the presence of trust in interpersonal and social relationships.
References
Babbie, E. (2008). Podstawy badań społecznych. Transl. W. Betkiewicz et al. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Foran, A., Robinson, D., Eliffsen, M., Munro, E., & Thurber, T. (2020). Phenomenology & Practice, 14(1), 39–56.
Kubinowski, D. (2011). Jakościowe badania pedagogiczne. Filozofia – metodyka – ewaluacja. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie- Skłodowskiej.
Rubacha, K. (2012). Metodologia badań nad edukacją. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza Łośgraf.
Saevi, T., & Eilifsen, M. (2008). “Heartful” or “Heartless” Teachers? Or should we look for the Good Somewhere Else? Considerations of Students’ Experience of the Pedagogical Good. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 8, 1–15.
Saevi, T. (2011). Lived relationality as the fulcrum of pedagogical-ethical practice. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30(5), 455–461.
Saevi, T., & Eikeland, T. (2012). From Where does Trust come and Why is “From Where” Significant? Phenomenology & Practice, 6(1), 89–95.
Saevi, T., & Foran, A. (2012). Seeing Pedagogically, Telling Phenomenologically: Addressing the Profound Complexity of Education. Phenomenology & Practice, 6(2), 50–64.
Saevi, T., & Torsteinson, H. (2022). What is Moral Disquiet and How Does the Experience of Moral Disquiet Appear in Professional Human Practices? Facing Responsibility in Nursing, Teaching, and Caring. Phenomenology & Practice, 17(2), 77–89.
Saevi, T., & Husevaag, H. (2009). The child seen as the same or the other? The significance of the social convention to the pedagogical relation. Paideusis, 18(2), 29–41.
Saevi, T. (2004). Seeing Disability Pedagogically The Lived Experience of Disability in the Pedagogical Encounter. Bergen University.
Silverman, D. (2008). Interpretacja danych jakościowych. Transl. M. Głowacka-Grajper, J. Ostrowska. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Van Manen, M. (1999). The Pathic of Pedagogical Practice. In: P. Kansanen (eds.), Discussion on some VIII educational issues (pp. 75–88). Helsinki: Department of Teacher Education University of Helsinki.
Van Manen, M. (2015). Pedagogical Tact. Knowing What to Do When You don’t Know What to Do, Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Marta Krupska