Condiciones dignas de la labor docente del siglo XXI, un derecho inalienable, no una opción

Recibido 14 de abril de 2011 • Aceptado 26 de agosto de 2011 • Corregido 29 de agosto de 2011   Se desarrolla el tema de las condiciones dignas de la labor docente en el desafiante siglo XXI. El objetivo recae en realizar una contextualización de la sociedad emergente en el siglo XXI, en general; así como plantear una revisión, en América Latina, del contexto educativo y de las mismas condiciones laborales del profesional de la educación. Otro objetivo es revisar las condiciones laborales en que se encuentran los educadores en distintos sistemas educativos, incluyendo realidades de Europa y América Latina, entre otras. En las principales ideas que se abordan, se define el perfil del educador de siglo XXI en comparación con el educador de la sociedad tradicional y se desarrollan algunos indicadores de consenso en distintas realidades educativas, así como su integración en tres grandes dimensiones: cognitivas, operativas e institucionales. Sobresale, entre las principales conclusiones, la determinación de políticas públicas que respalden las condiciones laborales en las que se desempeñe el docente de manera digna, lo cual se considera fundamental para una educación inclusiva de calidad, en armonía con las exigencias de la desafiante sociedad emergente. Concluye la autora que este tema es inacabado y debe ser una constante en las agendas educativas de las distintas sociedades.

Representing the epistemic nature of teachers’ practical knowledge : The case of class teachers’ general pedagogy

The present study addressed the epistemology of teachers’ practical knowledge. Drawing from the literature, teachers’ practical knowledge is defined as all teachers’ cognitions (e.g., beliefs, values, motives, procedural knowing, and declarative knowledge) that guide their practice of teaching. The teachers’ reasoning that lies behind their practical knowledge is addressed to gain insight into its epistemic nature. I studied six class teachers’ practical knowledge; they teach in the metropolitan region of Helsinki. Relying on the assumptions of the phenomenographic inquiry, I collected and analyzed the data. I analyzed the data in two stages where the first stage involved an abductive procedure, and the second stage an inductive procedure for interpretation, and thus developed the system of categories. In the end, a quantitative analysis nested into the qualitative findings to study the patterns of the teachers’’ reasoning. The results indicated that teachers justified their practical knowledge based on morality and efficiency of action; efficiency of action was found to be presented in two different ways: authentic efficiency and naïve efficiency. The epistemic weight of morality was embedded in what I call “moral care”. The core intention of teachers in the moral care was the commitment that they felt about the “whole character” of students. From this perspective the “dignity” and the moral character of the students should not replaced for any other “instrumental price”. “Caring pedagogy” was the epistemic value of teachers’ reasoning in the authentic efficiency. The central idea in the caring pedagogy was teachers’ intentions to improve the “intellectual properties” of “all or most” of the students using “flexible” and “diverse” pedagogies. However, “regulating pedagogy” was the epistemic condition of practice in the cases corresponding to naïve efficiency. Teachers argued that an effective practical knowledge should regulate and manage the classroom activities, but the targets of the practical knowledge were mainly other “issues “or a certain percentage of the students. In these cases, the teachers’ arguments were mainly based on the notion of “what worked” regardless of reflecting on “what did not work”. Drawing from the theoretical background and the data, teachers’ practical knowledge calls for “praxial knowledge” when they used the epistemic conditions of “caring pedagogy” and “moral care”. It however calls for “practicable” epistemic status when teachers use the epistemic condition of regulating pedagogy. As such, praxial knowledge with the dimensions of caring pedagogy and moral care represents the “normative” perspective on teachers’ practical knowledge, and thus reflects a higher epistemic status in comparison to “practicable” knowledge, which represents a “descriptive” perception toward teachers’ practical knowledge and teaching.