Search

This article troubles themes of equity, inclusion and belonging for early childhood teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand. The authors argue that relationships between teachers matter and, in pursuit of transformative teaching praxis, can be considered as a site for restorative justice, leading to increased solidarity and collective action. While much debate has focused on the counter-colonial, bicultural and transformative potential of the early childhood curriculum "Te Whariki," research has also focused on the complexities of requiring a largely monocultural (Pakeha/of European descent) and underprepared workforce to meet its complex aspirations in the context of a neo-liberal policy landscape. An under-recognised aspect of this challenge is how the same contexts give rise to inequitable and divisive relationships between teachers, diminishing opportunities for transformative justice for children and families. This article brings these two matters into dialogue: first, it is a critical examination of teachers' narratives about their work and the complex and overlapping discourses that influence them and, second, it considers the transformative potential of inter-teacher groups as sites for restorative justice between teachers, leading to critical engagement with issues of inequity and collective advocacy.

This collective writing project considers the central issue of how we account for, understand, and talk about, the professional work of care in early childhood education. As an international collective, we stake out some of the messiness, the specificities and complexities of care in early childhood education. Each scholar explores the issue of foregrounding care in the professional work of early childhood educators and reflects on the complexities of care in early childhood education and care. While these musing are collected together in this paper, they are each a standalone provocation to grapple with diverse issues of care in relation to etymology, policy, risk, relationships, power, and racism. As a collective, we explore ways of engaging in the messiness of care and education with a spirit of vulnerability and the courage of risk taking to unpack care in early childhood education.

Public education is not just a way to organise and fund education. It is also the expression of a particular ideal about education and of a particular way to conceive of the relationship between education and society. The ideal of public education sees education as an important dimension of the common good and as an important institution in securing the common good. The common good is never what individuals or particular groups want or desire, but always reaches beyond such particular desires towards that which societies as a whole should consider as desirable. This does, of course, put the common good in tension with the desires of individuals and groups. Neo-liberal modes of governance have, over the past decades, put this particular educational set up under pressure and have, according to some, eroded the very idea of the common good. This set of contributions reflects on this state of affairs, partly through an exploration of the idea of publicness itself -- how it can be rearticulated and regained -- and partly through reflections on the current state of education in the 'north' and the 'south.'

This collective paper on radicalization and violent extremism part of the 'Philosophy of education in a new key' initiative by "Educational Philosophy and Theory" brings together some of the leading contemporary scholars writing on the most pressing epistemological, ethical, political and educational issues facing post-9/11 scholarship on radicalization and violent extremism. Its overall aim is to move beyond the 'conventional wisdom' associated with this area of scholarly research best represented by its many slogans, metaphors and other thought-terminating clichés. By providing conceptual lenses on issues previously compartmentalized primarily [or even exclusively] in security and intelligence studies or at the fringes of scholarly interest, radicalization and violent extremism turn out to be much more complex than 'radicalization studies' has been eager to acknowledge.

Within the rough ground that is the field of education there is a complex web of ethical obligations: to prepare our students for their future work; to be ethical as educators in our conduct and teaching; to the ethical principles embedded in the contexts in which we work; and given the Southern context of this work, the ethical obligations we have to this land and its First Peoples. We put out a call to colleagues whose work has been concerned with the pedagogies of professional ethics, the ethical burdens of institutional injustice, and the application of ethical theory to education's applied fields. In the responses we received it can be seen that ethical concerns in education are broad ranging, covering terrain varying from the preparation of preservice teachers, ethics in higher education, early childhood and care, educational leadership, relational and communicative ethics. Perhaps it could also be argued that this paper demonstrates Gibbon's observation that 'Assumptions about the particularity of this time as new and ripe with opportunity to make a difference through philosophy of education are not new and there's much to learn from the persistence of wanting to imagine that they are' (in Peters et al., 2020, p. 17). However, while the field of ethics is perennially concerned with human relations and pedagogical interventions to improve these, the responses collected here show that educational ethics is far from static. Educational ethics is a field that continues to develop in response to changing contexts.

This collective article discusses the philosophy of modern higher education in Iran, which in this case, optimistically, its history dates back to the founding of "Dar al-fonun" (1851)--if we consider "Dar al-fonun" as a university. Otherwise, its origin can be traced back to the University of Tehran (established in 1934). Central to this article is the emphasis on the lack of philosophy of higher education in Iran. Therefore, most of the criticisms in front of us are related to the internal inconsistency in the Iranian higher education system due to the lack of a national-indigenized-official philosophy of higher education in Iran. Furthermore, The Islamic Revolution of 1979 brought about fundamental changes in higher education. Accordingly, several controversial issues including the rapid growth of higher education, the Islamization of universities, cultural narratives in higher education, the increase in students, especially women and the low-income class of the country were also explored. Therefore, in this collection, the political, economic, social, cultural, moral, technological and historical dimensions of Iranian higher education were examined.

What is the future of Philosophy of education? Or as many of scholars and thinkers in this final 'future-focused' collective piece from the philosophy of education in a new key Series put it, what are the futures--plural and multiple--of the intersections of 'philosophy' and 'education?' What is 'Philosophy'; and what is 'Education', and what role may 'enquiry' play? Is the future of education and philosophy embracing--or at least taking seriously--and thinking with Indigenous ethicoontoepistemologies? And, perhaps most importantly, what is that 'Future'? These debates have been located in the work of diverse scholars: from the West, from Global South, from indigenous thinkers. In this collective piece, we purposefully juxtapose (and do not categorise under forced headings) diverse takes on the future of these intersections. We have given up the urge to organise, place together, separate with subheadings or connect the paragraphs that follow. Instead, we let these philosophers of education and thinkers who use philosophical texts and ideas to sit together in one long read as potentially 'strange and unusual bedfellows'. This text urges us to understand how these scholars and thinkers perceive our educational philosophical futures, and how the work and thinking they have done on thinking about what the future of that new key in philosophy of education may look like is embedded in a much deeper and richer literature, and personal experience.

There was not one, singular childhood in socialist Czechoslovakia, but many and diverse, plural, childhoods. Spanning over 40 years (1948-1989), the Czechoslovak communist governance produced diverse conceptualisations of childhoods that remain often invisible, unexplored, and the current analyses are at best sketchy and refer mostly to pedagogical nuances of strong ideological pedagogical struggles. One way to explore such an abundance of historical data in a short journal article is to utilise a somewhat personal narrative of a child. This dialogic approach allows the strong presence of the voice of a child, re-told from an adult's perspective, and it methodologically justifies an approach to thinking and theorising of socialist childhoods through Vaclav Havel's (1985; 1989; 1990) theoretical thinking that has been utilised in philosophy of education previously (see Tesar, 2015e). There are also other examples of complex and thorough analyses of socialist childhoods in other countries (see for example Aydarova et al, 2016), and theoretical thinking about the socialist child as a foreigner to its own land, can be done through Kristeva's lens (Arndt, 2015).

This article introduces the Collaborative Online Learning Across Borders (COLAB) teaching and research program. It outlines the development of the cross-national collaboration, and examines the learning in four teacher education programs in New Zealand and the United States of America. COLAB aims to support teacher candidates, in the US and abroad, to begin their teaching career with insights into the complexities of working with people from diverse social and cultural contexts. This article presents a research study that examined the online intercultural interactions and understandings among undergraduate and graduate preservice (and some inservice) teachers (n = 110) across four universities during a 4-week unit. It details the online teaching techniques involved in COLAB and highlights the development of intercultural understandings through an online learning experience among the preservice teachers. The preservice teachers' insights and sensitivities to the other, ethnocentrism, and the online learning space are theorized through a framework of cultural otherness and interculturality, which emphasizes the unique potential for cross-cultural experiences in this online format.

Video ethics in educational research involving children is a recent topic that has arisen since the increase in the use of visual mediums in research (such as photovoice and video) especially with the development of new and ubiquitous internet technologies and social media. This paper emerged as an expressed concerned by a group of scholars associated with the new Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy (Brill) that was established in 2016. The paper is the result of a collective writing process over a period of a few months that discusses visual studies in education and visual ethics in relation to qualitative research in education, and as it applies to children. The article also uses the newly established convention of open review, publishing the results with the paper.

This is a collective writing project that is part of the larger design of Infantologies, Infanticides and Infantilizations; a quartet that explores the philosophy of infants from thematic perspectives, that puts infants at the centre of our reflections, and that encourages a different academic style of thinking.

This paper explores relationships between environment and education after the Covid-19 pandemic through the lens of philosophy of education in a new key developed by Michael Peters and the Philosophy of Education Society of Australasia (PESA). The paper is collectively written by 15 authors who responded to the question: Who remembers Greta Thunberg? Their answers are classified into four main themes and corresponding sections. The first section, 'As we bake the earth, let's try and bake it from scratch', gathers wider philosophical considerations about the intersection between environment, education, and the pandemic. The second section, 'Bump in the road or a catalyst for structural change?', looks more closely into issues pertaining to education. The third section, 'If you choose to fail us, we will never forgive you', focuses to Greta Thunberg's messages and their responses. The last section, 'Towards a new (educational) normal', explores future scenarios and develops recommendations for critical emancipatory action. The concluding part brings these insights together, showing that resulting synergy between the answers offers much more then the sum of articles' parts. With its ethos of collectivity, interconnectedness, and solidarity, philosophy of education in a new key is a crucial tool for development of post-pandemic (philosophy of) education.

This article is a collective writing experiment undertaken by philosophers of education affiliated with the PESGB (Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain). When asked to reflect on questions concerning the Philosophy of Education in a New Key in May 2020, it was unsurprising that the effects of the coronavirus pandemic on society and on education were foremost in our minds. We wanted to consider important philosophical and educational questions raised by the pandemic, while acknowledging that, first and foremost, it is a human tragedy. With nearly a million deaths reported worldwide to date, and with everyone effected in one way or another by COVID-19, there is a degree of discomfort, and a responsibility to be sensitive, in reflecting and writing about it academically. Members of this 'COVID Collective' come from various countries, with perspectives from Great Britain and Ireland well represented, and we see academic practice as a globally connected enterprise, especially since the digital revolution in academic publishing. The concerns raised in this article relate to but move beyond COVID-19, reflecting the impact of neoliberalism [and other political developments] on geopolitics with educational concerns as central to our focus.

In the year of 2020, the project of the collective writing on the theme 'Philosophy of education in a new key' (Peters, 2020) was launched to explore possibilities of thinking philosophy of education through collective efforts and intelligence. Its leading tone 'Harmonic Cadence' (Peters, 2020) means that the new field for philosophy of education in the times of the post-truth world (Peters et al., 2018b) is open for more participation and partaking. 'The Philosophy of Education in a New Key: East Asia', the collectively written piece by East Asian scholars, aims to answer to the call of the 'Harmonic Cadence' by introducing East Asian sagacity. The following works are included: (1) Introduction: Collective Writing with "Goblet" Words Echoing the Harmonic Cadence (Ruyu Hung); (2) Xing (Aesthetic Awakening) as a New Key to the Understanding of Learning and Education (Zhengmei Peng); (3) Educational Significance of Japanese Calendar Arts (Morimichi Kato); (4) Self-Cultivation in Japanese Traditions (Tadashi Nishihira); (5) Knowledge of Pathos about Infants (Mika Okabe); (6) Educational Philosophy: The Source and Foundation of the Rising Asia and Beyond (Xu Di); (7) A New Way of Doing Philosophy of Education in East Asia: Cross-Cultural Interpretations of the Confucian Concepts of Education (Duck-Joo Kwak); (8) Mindfulness-Based Learning: A Proposal from East Asian Perspectives of Education (Keumjoong Hwang); (9) In Search of a Reorientation in Korean Philosophy of Education (Youngkun Tschong); (10) The Mutual Learning between the East and the West (Cheng-Hsi Chien); (11) Conclusion (Ruyu Hung); (12) East Asian Sagacity and Sensibility (Michael A. Peters); and (13) On the Consonance and Dissonance of the Philosophy of Education in a New Key in East Asia (Marek Tesar).

This article presents a dialogue between Marek Tesar, Professor at the University of Auckland, and Yulida Pangastuti, a researcher and lecturer at Universitas Gadjah Mada, exploring the reconceptualisation of early childhood education in Indonesia. The conversation delves into the integration of indigenous perspectives, addressing global crises through education, promoting gender equality, and the theoretical foundations and critiques of ideas that shape contemporary early childhood education. The discussion emphasises the importance of incorporating local wisdom and values into educational practices, fostering environmental stewardship and resilience, and challenging traditional gender roles to create more inclusive and equitable learning environments. Theoretical insights from postcolonial and feminist theories demonstrate their critical role in deconstructing colonial legacies and patriarchal structures within education. The article aims to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on creating educational frameworks that respect and utilise diversity, promote social justice, and empower all children. Drawing on diverse theoretical perspectives and practical strategies, this dialogue offers a comprehensive approach to rethinking early childhood education in ways honouring cultural relevance, sustainability, and equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The early learning action plan 2019-2029, "He Taonga te Tamaiti"/"Every Child a Taonga", ushers in a new era of thinking about the governance of early childhood education (ECE). The policy language has changed, with a shift from "early childhood education" to the "early learning system". This article starts from the concern that if a teacher was to search through the action plan and note where the phrases "early childhood", "early childhood education", or "early childhood care and education", "early learning", "early learning services", "early learning provision", and "early learning system" occur, they would begin to paint a landscape of the way in which the language of governance has been changing in ECE. In this article we ask: What does this shift in language mean for the early childhood sector? To interrogate this question, we will explore elements of the language of the plan, and question the discourse of several key changes. We begin with a turn to the theorisation of government through language via the work of George Orwell, which align with Michel Foucault's concept of governmentality, which informs ECE theory for policy, research, and practice, and how particular ways of thinking are produced in and by the dominant discourses of ECE.

This paper is an experiment in collective writing conducted in Autumn 2019 at the Faculty of Education at Beijing Normal University. The experiment involves 12 international masters' students reading the course based on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), their professor Michael Peters, visiting professor Petar Jandric, and a mix of senior Chinese and Western scholars. To successfully complete the course, the students were required to produce a 3000-word paper of publishable quality. As part of this writing process we decided to engage in the experiment of collective writing where we aimed to produce a single paper consisting of the abstracts. This collective paper was developed in 7 steps: (1) students submitted their 250-word abstracts; (2) students were introduced into the methodology of collective writing, and 2 student-editors -- Ogunniran Moses Oladele and Benjamin Green -- volunteered to work on the paper; (3) Michael Peters wrote the introduction; (4) abstracts were expanded to 500 words and integrated into a single document; (5) Petar Jandric began to edit the paper and write a conclusion; (6) students presented their abstracts in the class, where Michael Peters and Petar Jandric provided direct feedback; (7) revised abstracts were again integrated into a single document by student editors, and proofread / copy-edited in several exchanges with the instructors; and (8) the paper was subject to the process of open review, and the reviewer's comments were included in the paper. Resulting from months of collective work, the final paper provides a wide range of views ad perspectives to the question of education as a part of the BRI initiative.

In this article we consider historical and contemporary ideologies of childhood in China and critically examine notions of 'child' and 'childhood' in Chinese children's literature. We analyse the themes and knowledge that relate to relevant historical and contemporary political events and policies, and how these contribute to the production of childhoods. We focus on three images of childhoods in China: the Confucian child, the Modern child and the Maoist child. Each of the images reflects a way of seeing, a perspective about what a child ought to be and become, and what their childhood should look like. Everyday media are reflected in the texts and stories examined and portray both 'imagined' and 'real-life' narratives of children and their childhoods. The stories, and the connected power relations, represent an important link between the politics of childhood and the pedagogy associated with these politics, including large-scale state investment in the production of desired, ideal and perfect childhoods. Through such an examination of contemporary and historical children's literature and media in China we also explore the ways in which contemporary media revitalise particular notions of child agency.