Page 72 - Polona Kelava, Neformalno učenje? Kaj je to? Dissertationes 24, Digitalna knjižnica, Pedagoški inštitut 2013
P. 72
Neformalno učenje? Kaj je to?
possibilities of dialogue. In the third part the author deals with the (modern) theo-
ries of learning which are important for our understanding of the nature and mean
ing of non-formal learning and of the meaning of collaboration, community, praxis
and dialogue for learning. In this frame he presents three theories of learning – the
social, the situational and the »terrain« ones – as supporting the last claim. The cen-
tral subject of the fourth part is dialogic inquiry. The whole essay is pervaded by a
strong conviction of the author about the exceptional meaning of the constructivist
approach to learning and in learning, especially of the approach established by Vy-
gotsky. The main constituents of the frame of reference of the essay are represented
by the work of Vygotsky and other constructivists (Piaget, Freire). Among the pre-
sent researchers the names Doris Ash and Gordon Wells (dialogic inquiry), Mark K.
Smith and Daniel Schugurensky (situational learning) should be mentioned in par-
ticular. The conceptual analysis in the first part can largely be attributed to D. W. Li-
vingston. The fil rouge of the essay is an explanation and a justification of the theses
about the great importance of non-formal learning and of the meaning of dialogue
for learning. The main original contribution of the essay is establishing the advanta-
ges of non-formal learning (compared to the formal one) in terms of the possibility
and stimulation of dialogue.
Key words: learning, constructivist model of learning, education, non-formal lear-
ning, situational learning, dialogue, dialogic inquiry.
Prvi namen avtorja tega članka je bil napisati sicer znanstveno, a
obenem vendarle kolikor se da jasno, umljivo, tekoče in berljivo
besedilo. Upam, da mi je to vsaj do neke mere uspelo. Najtršo ovi-
ro do tega cilja predstavlja prvi razdelek, to pa že zaradi svoje narave, saj
gre za pojmovno analizo, ki je po svoji naravi, če je dobra, vsaj do neke
mere tudi dlakocepska, take stvari pa se težko tekoče berejo. Po eni stra-
ni lahko bralec ta prvi razdelek tudi preskoči. Vendar pa se mi po dru-
gi strani zdi, še posebno, ker sem poklicni filozof, da ga iz razprave ne
morem izpustiti. Namen dobre filozofije je opozarjanje na pojmovne
distinkcije, brez poznavanja katerih je naše mišljenje inferiornejše in za
marsikaj slepo.
Poleg temeljne filozofske metode pojmovne analize, ki jo gojim v
članku, velja omeniti usmerjenost, ki jo pravzaprav narekuje moje osnov-
no zadržanje solidarnega personalizma1, ki je v temeljnem nasprotju z
instrumentalizmom. To zadržanje, ki prežema vse moje razmišljanje in
je njegova temeljna podlaga, background, mojo pozornost v prvi vrsti
usmerja na dejavnike učlovečenja človeka, če uporabim govorico klasi-
1 Za podrobnejšo pojasnitev (solidarnega) personalizma in instrumentalizma cf. Žalec, B., 2010a.
possibilities of dialogue. In the third part the author deals with the (modern) theo-
ries of learning which are important for our understanding of the nature and mean
ing of non-formal learning and of the meaning of collaboration, community, praxis
and dialogue for learning. In this frame he presents three theories of learning – the
social, the situational and the »terrain« ones – as supporting the last claim. The cen-
tral subject of the fourth part is dialogic inquiry. The whole essay is pervaded by a
strong conviction of the author about the exceptional meaning of the constructivist
approach to learning and in learning, especially of the approach established by Vy-
gotsky. The main constituents of the frame of reference of the essay are represented
by the work of Vygotsky and other constructivists (Piaget, Freire). Among the pre-
sent researchers the names Doris Ash and Gordon Wells (dialogic inquiry), Mark K.
Smith and Daniel Schugurensky (situational learning) should be mentioned in par-
ticular. The conceptual analysis in the first part can largely be attributed to D. W. Li-
vingston. The fil rouge of the essay is an explanation and a justification of the theses
about the great importance of non-formal learning and of the meaning of dialogue
for learning. The main original contribution of the essay is establishing the advanta-
ges of non-formal learning (compared to the formal one) in terms of the possibility
and stimulation of dialogue.
Key words: learning, constructivist model of learning, education, non-formal lear-
ning, situational learning, dialogue, dialogic inquiry.
Prvi namen avtorja tega članka je bil napisati sicer znanstveno, a
obenem vendarle kolikor se da jasno, umljivo, tekoče in berljivo
besedilo. Upam, da mi je to vsaj do neke mere uspelo. Najtršo ovi-
ro do tega cilja predstavlja prvi razdelek, to pa že zaradi svoje narave, saj
gre za pojmovno analizo, ki je po svoji naravi, če je dobra, vsaj do neke
mere tudi dlakocepska, take stvari pa se težko tekoče berejo. Po eni stra-
ni lahko bralec ta prvi razdelek tudi preskoči. Vendar pa se mi po dru-
gi strani zdi, še posebno, ker sem poklicni filozof, da ga iz razprave ne
morem izpustiti. Namen dobre filozofije je opozarjanje na pojmovne
distinkcije, brez poznavanja katerih je naše mišljenje inferiornejše in za
marsikaj slepo.
Poleg temeljne filozofske metode pojmovne analize, ki jo gojim v
članku, velja omeniti usmerjenost, ki jo pravzaprav narekuje moje osnov-
no zadržanje solidarnega personalizma1, ki je v temeljnem nasprotju z
instrumentalizmom. To zadržanje, ki prežema vse moje razmišljanje in
je njegova temeljna podlaga, background, mojo pozornost v prvi vrsti
usmerja na dejavnike učlovečenja človeka, če uporabim govorico klasi-
1 Za podrobnejšo pojasnitev (solidarnega) personalizma in instrumentalizma cf. Žalec, B., 2010a.
