There are many interesting insights from this module on the ‘didactic’, ‘authentic’ and ‘transformative’ pedagogical paradigms.

In particular, I was struck by the articulate reflection on the concept of teaching, which explores its multiple dimensions as art, vocation and science.

First of all, there is an intrinsic complexity of teaching, which the Italian philosopher and educationalist Franco Cambi calls ‘hypercomplexity’. This is a philosophically irreducible dimension, because it always indicates a certain tension and antinomy between fundamental concepts of pedagogy.

Pedagogy is in fact both philosophy, theory and practice. As practice

it requires continuous adaptation to different contents, contexts and students. Moreover, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to teaching; rather, a diverse set of strategies is required to address the various needs of students.

Teaching draws on different disciplines-sociology, psychology, history-and this can lead to a lack of methodological coherence with other areas of knowledge. However, this variety is also what makes education essential for the development of any other discipline.

The idea that teaching is an art implies a creative and intuitive dimension, where the teacher uses natural instincts to engage and influence students.

On the other hand, teaching as a vocation emphasises the importance of dedication and passion in educational work. However, this vocation is often undervalued and underpaid compared to other professions, such as law or medicine. This raises questions about the valorisation of educational work in society.

The concept of ‘metadisciplinary education’ proposed in the course suggests that education not only supports other disciplines, but also serves as a foundation for their development. Learning is seen as a continuous process that accompanies each professional throughout his or her career. This approach emphasises the importance of viewing education not only as professional preparation but also as a pathway to personal and social growth.

This ties in with the reflection of Professor Michael Peters in one of the suggested videos: http://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-1-new-learning/peters-on-the-knowledge-economy&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1728757728411315&usg=AOvVaw0eljkw0fe4uf4EYw8CI1-0

Michael Peters recounts his 18-month correspondence with Jean-Francois Lyotard, whose ‘The Postmodern Condition’ he had read. Peters asks Lyotard to share a reflection on the knowledge economy.

Peters' question, from which the book “Education as postmodern condition” would later be born, was: ’What form does education take within a so called knowledge economy?’

Lyotard replied that he did not know, because he was a philosopher and did not deal with knowledge economy.

Actually, for Peters, philosophy is very useful in clarifying this discourse. The central repositioning of education as the main state of the knowledge economy, especially higher education.

This is about neo-liberalism, the storage of knowledge, but also about technology and web 2.0, and it influences the creative economy.

It is also about the idea of open knowledge.

In a context where knowledge is increasingly central to social and economic progress, education must be seen not only as a set of professional practices but as a fundamental discipline that permeates every aspect of human life. Acknowledging the metadisciplinary value of education could lead to a greater focus on its development and its integration into public policies and training programmes.