TEACHING PHILOSOPHY AND ENACTIVISM

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24193/subbphil.2021.2s.14

Keywords:

enactivism, phenomenology, philosophy of education, classroom design.

Abstract

The paper presents a concise history of enactivism in education, especially in mathematics education. Cases described by Davis’s, Proulx and Simmt’s work showcase the idea that enactivism is a viable alternative to constructivism or to classical views both in terms of practical teaching and theoretical models related to the process of learning. The idea that the student should solve a fixed problem, discover the universally correct solution, and eventually store that correct solution to find many other universally correct solutions to other fixed problems reduces the student to a very simple mechanism aimed at informational efficiency. This problem is met by the enactivistic tradition that began with Varela and Maturana’s work, now updated to the aforementioned researchers. Contra the classical perspective, enactivism proposes the idea that the student collaboratively produces the problem, being able to see multiple solutions, and eventually becoming a performer of knowledge. The article takes these ideas developed in mathematics education and finds their use in philosophical education. The article especially focuses on the student’s problem of being unable to link a new philosophical text discussed in class with their intuition. The last part of the article offers a lesson design example. The philosophical design focuses on making the students explore their own thinking regarding the topic about to be discussed by using a philosophy text before introducing the text.

References

Aristotle. 2004. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated and edited by Roger Crisp. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press;

Bacon, Francis. 2000. The New Organon. Edited by Lisa Jardine and Micheal Silverthorne. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press;

Begg, Andy. 2013. Interpreting enactivism for learning and teaching. Education Sciences and Society. 4.1 (2013): 81-96.

Brown, Laurinda, & Coles, Alf. Developing expertise: How enactivism re-frames mathematics teacher development. ZDM, 43:6-7 (2011), 861-873.

Davis, Brent. 1995. Why teach mathematics? Mathematics education and enactivist theory. For the Learning of Mathematics. 15.2 (1995): 2-9;

de Carvalho, Leonardo Lana & Kogler, João Eduardo. The enactive computational basis of cognition and the explanatory cognitive basis for computing. Cognitive Systems Research. Volume 67 (2021): 96-103;

Li, Qing, Clark, Bruce & Winchester, Ian. "Instructional design and technology grounded in enactivism: A paradigm shift?." British Journal of Educational Technology Volume 41.3 (2010): 403-419;

Maiese, Michelle. Transformative learning, enactivism, and affectivity. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 36.2 (2017), 197-216;

Maturana, Humberto. Varela, Francisco. 1987. The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. New Science Library/Shambhala Publications;

Proulx, Jerome. Simmt, Elaine. Enactivism in mathematics education: moving toward a re-conceptualization of learning and knowledge. Education Sciences and Society. 4.1 (2013): 59-79.

van der Schyff, Dylan. Music as a manifestation of life: exploring enactivism and the ‘eastern perspective’ for music education. Frontiers in Psychology. 6 (2015);

Simionescu-Panait, Andrei. Are Constructivism and Enactivism two opposite philosophies on learning mathematics? Revista Pesquisa Qualitativa 8.18 (2020): 419-430;

Simmt, Elaine. 2000. Mathematics knowing in action: A fully embodied interpretation. Proceedings of the 2000 Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education. 153-159;

Villalobos, Mario. Dewhurst, Joe. Enactive autonomy in computational systems. Synthese. 195.5 (2018): 1891-1908.

Downloads

Published

2021-10-30

How to Cite

SIMIONESCU-PANAIT, A. (2021). TEACHING PHILOSOPHY AND ENACTIVISM. Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Philosophia, 66(2 Supplement), 191–196. https://doi.org/10.24193/subbphil.2021.2s.14