Page 218 - Štremfel, Urška, ed., 2016. Student (Under)achievement: Perspectives, Approaches, Challenges. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut. Digital Library, Documenta 11.
P. 218
-argumentation principles; teachers in lower secondary education opt
for these methods more frequently than do those at the upper secon-
dary level);
− the participatory school culture (the higher the extent to which
students are enabled active participation, the more often teachers opt
for including rhetoric-argumentation principles into their lessons);
− interpersonal relationships (command of rhetoric-argumentation
principles has a positive impact on the competencies of communica-
tion and the classroom climate, especially in relation to resolving con-
flicts, interpersonal cooperation and a higher self-concept);
− the perception of a higher competence of rhetoric and argumen-
tation (teachers see students as more competent in terms of rhetoric
and argumentation mainly in relation to how frequently methods of
active learning are used and participation in lessons is enabled).
Conclusion
218 Slovenian teachers have rather different perceptions (and probably also differ-
ent levels of command) of the concepts, notions and principles of rhetoric and
argumentation. In addition to the specific situation which was, in relation to
the general (including everyday) attitude to rhetoric and argumentation pre-
sented in the first part of this paper, this is also a result of the fact that during
the course of their education and training, teachers have not been made famil-
iar with them in a suitable manner. However, it is interesting to note that they
have no difficulties recognising the presence and value of rhetoric and argu-
mentation, especially in the context of interpersonal relationships, providing
that the concepts, notions and principles of rhetoric and argumentation are
presented to them as concrete language tools, strategies or processes. Rhet-
oric and argumentation are without doubt firmly anchored in one’s daily life
and are important in co-constructing a means of entering into relationships
with others (and oneself ). However, even if one’s use of rhetoric and argumen-
tation is restricted (although not quite suitably) to the personal sphere only,
it is still true that effective persuasion and presentation of arguments with-
in ‘relationships’ cannot be learnt all that easily, but only on the basis of thor-
ough familiarity with what rhetoric and argumentation are in the first place,
and an understanding of their role within public discourse. Accordingly, re-
ducing rhetoric and argumentation to the level of secondary (and more or less
implicitly present) elements of pedagogical discourse does not seem a suita-
ble perspective. In the context of the subject matters within humanities and
social sciences, these are two important content elements that are impossible
to separate from some subject matters prescribed by the curricula. Moreover,
student (under)achievement: perspectives, approaches, challenges
for these methods more frequently than do those at the upper secon-
dary level);
− the participatory school culture (the higher the extent to which
students are enabled active participation, the more often teachers opt
for including rhetoric-argumentation principles into their lessons);
− interpersonal relationships (command of rhetoric-argumentation
principles has a positive impact on the competencies of communica-
tion and the classroom climate, especially in relation to resolving con-
flicts, interpersonal cooperation and a higher self-concept);
− the perception of a higher competence of rhetoric and argumen-
tation (teachers see students as more competent in terms of rhetoric
and argumentation mainly in relation to how frequently methods of
active learning are used and participation in lessons is enabled).
Conclusion
218 Slovenian teachers have rather different perceptions (and probably also differ-
ent levels of command) of the concepts, notions and principles of rhetoric and
argumentation. In addition to the specific situation which was, in relation to
the general (including everyday) attitude to rhetoric and argumentation pre-
sented in the first part of this paper, this is also a result of the fact that during
the course of their education and training, teachers have not been made famil-
iar with them in a suitable manner. However, it is interesting to note that they
have no difficulties recognising the presence and value of rhetoric and argu-
mentation, especially in the context of interpersonal relationships, providing
that the concepts, notions and principles of rhetoric and argumentation are
presented to them as concrete language tools, strategies or processes. Rhet-
oric and argumentation are without doubt firmly anchored in one’s daily life
and are important in co-constructing a means of entering into relationships
with others (and oneself ). However, even if one’s use of rhetoric and argumen-
tation is restricted (although not quite suitably) to the personal sphere only,
it is still true that effective persuasion and presentation of arguments with-
in ‘relationships’ cannot be learnt all that easily, but only on the basis of thor-
ough familiarity with what rhetoric and argumentation are in the first place,
and an understanding of their role within public discourse. Accordingly, re-
ducing rhetoric and argumentation to the level of secondary (and more or less
implicitly present) elements of pedagogical discourse does not seem a suita-
ble perspective. In the context of the subject matters within humanities and
social sciences, these are two important content elements that are impossible
to separate from some subject matters prescribed by the curricula. Moreover,
student (under)achievement: perspectives, approaches, challenges
