Between Tradition and Future Challenges:
The Study of Pedagogy in Central and South-East Europe
in Maribor from 22nd to 24th October 2015
Abstracts:
Štefka BATINIĆ; Igor RADEKA:
Development and Prospects of Pedagogy in Croatia
The study of pedagogy in Croatia was established at the University
of Zagreb in 1928. Prior to the existence of the study, pedagogy had
been modelled and developed in the likeness of the pedagogy in German
speaking regions – primarily as a practical discipline within the school
system of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and also as a theoretical
discipline based on Herbart’s pedagogy. The first university lectures in
pedagogy for prospective catechism teachers were given by Ivan Koharić
(1874/75) at the Faculty of Theology, and for prospective secondary
school teachers by Franjo Marković (1876/77) at the Faculty of
Philosophy, University of Zagreb, where the Pedagogical Seminar was
initiated in 1896 and conducted by Đuro Arnold until 1923.
Theoreticians of pedagogy from the academic community, Stjepan
Matičević, Stjepan Pataki, Pavao Vuk-Pavlović and Vlado Petz, came into
prominence in the 1920s. They formulated the basic teleological
questions of pedagogy, taught at the College of Pedagogy and the
Pedagogical Seminar, and contributed to the establishment of pedagogy as
an independent discipline. By the end of World War II, 116 students
completed the study of pedagogy in Croatia.
In the context of new political and social circumstances following World
War II, the role of the Pedagogical Seminar was taken over by the
Institute of Pedagogy (1946), where the instructional and the research
function of the seminar were brought together. Stjepan Pataki, the main
pre-war representative of cultural pedagogy and the post-war founder of
socialist pedagogy in Croatia, was the Institute’s Principal until the
end of his life in 1953. The new organisational form – the Department of
Pedagogy at the University of Zagreb’s Faculty of Philosophy, and the
Institute of Pedagogy as its constituent element – has been retained to
this day.
The remaining four university degrees in pedagogy in Croatia were
founded in the 1960s and at the start of the 21st century. The first
lectures in pedagogy at the University of Zadar, founded in 1955 as a
separate Faculty of the only Croatian university of the time, the
University of Zagreb, were given by Vladimir Janković in 1958/59 –
initially at the Chair of Pedagogy, which was transformed into the
Department of Pedagogy in 1966. The study of pedagogy in Zadar started
in 1961. Since 2002, pedagogy has been taught within the Department of
Pedagogy at the newly established University of Zadar.
New universities established in Croatian regional centres of Rijeka,
Split and Osijek in the first half of the 1970s also featured the
development of pedagogy in two directions (as was the case with Zagreb
and Zadar): firstly, by continuous pedagogical education of teachers and
subject-specific teachers, and secondly by establishment of integral
pedagogy studies – in Rijeka in 1966 (industrial pedagogy course) and in
1978 (general pedagogy), in Osijek in 2003 and in Split in 2007.
All five university degrees in pedagogy were included in the reform of
study programmes in Croatia initiated in 2005/06 by introducing three
levels of higher education in accordance with the Bologna Process. At
the moment, four Croatian pedagogy programmes of study (at the
universities of Zagreb, Zadar, Rijeka and Osijek) offer all three levels
of study, up to the doctorate, while the pedagogy programme in Split
offers only two levels, the Bachelor’s degree and the Master’s degree in
pedagogy.
All undergraduate and graduate degrees in pedagogy belong to studies of
a general profile. Proper programme specialisation starts at the
postgraduate doctoral level. However, studying in accordance with the
Bologna Process enables all students, in all pedagogy programmes, to be
actively involved in the creation of a significant part of their own
study programme, and thus their own academic profile, by choosing the
optional modules. The quality of all pedagogy courses, in the new
circumstances, is subject to continuous internal and external
evaluation. All programmes are thus permanently changing. The changes
ensure that the programmes respond to recent theoretical and practical
challenges and they improve the programme quality.
Wolfgang BREZINKA:
Das Fach Pädagogik an österreichischen Universitäten und die Ausbildung
der Lehrer 1805-1918
Austria was the first state to introduce chairs for pedagogy at its
universities and philosophical colleges. What was the purpose of this
measure ? Which tasks should its professors take care of ? What did they
contribute to the advantage of he school system through teacher training
and pedagogical research ? And how did the subject pedagogy develop
until the end of the Habsburg Monarchy in 1918?
These questions are treated here concerning the differences between
primary and secondary school teachers, as well as the difference between
practical, philosophical and scientific pedagogy. The history of the
subject pedagogy at universities starts with the period of „practical
knowledge of education“ from 1805 to 1848, as demonstrated in the
textbook of Vinzenz Eduard Milde 1811 / 1813, which is indeed its
climax. The main part of this paper deals with the beginning of
„philosophical pedagogy“ from 1871 onwards. Its central figure was Otto
Willmann, the most important representative of the first generation of
nine professors who taught pedagogy at the universities of Vienna,
Lemberg, Prague and Graz between 1871 and 1918. Willmann serves as an
example of how the insecurity of the epistemological groundwork has
injured the ascent of pedagogy as a science and ist usefulness for the
training of teachers.
Pedagogy as degree program in Bulgaria - historical and contemporary
aspects
Albena CHAVDAROVA:
Pedagogy as degree program in Bulgaria - historical and contemporary
aspects
Pedagogy as a univeesity discipline and later on as a degree is
closely tied with the history of the Sofia University since opening of
the university (1888), when the "High pedagogy course" was born, till
today, when the Sofia university is giving a specialized training to
teachers for all types of educational institutions.
In the beginning there were no faculties, the subjects were instead
grouped into disciplines (directions) where future high school teachers
have been trained. Under the cap of the History and philologyl faculty
fell the "History and geography", "Slavic philology and literaure" and
"Philosophy and pedagogy" disciplines, which marks the beginning of this
integrated degree program. The first students to graduate in 1897 were
three men, which number rose to 28 in 1899, amongst whom two women. With
the University Law of 1904, the faculties, the degrees and the
departments were put in place, which not only established the degree
"Philosophy and pedagogy", but it also marks the creation of the first
pedagogical department - "Pedagogia". This remained til 1923, when the
independent degree "Pedagogia" has been created. The newly found faculty
consisted of two departments, the "Pedagogia" since 1904, renamed later
to "General pedagogy" and "Didactics and methodology of the Middle
school" (1921), which becam "Didactics and methodology".
Between 1923 and 1944 the degree program "Pedagogia" developps according
to the existing European trends in university education. As to the
organization of the teaching process, a free form of education was
introduced, where the students were allowed to freely choose what
lectures, seminar activities and exercise classes to attend and in which
semester. There wass no strict schedule with mandatory classes or fixed
semester schedule, by which they should be taught and . The lecture
schedule is created by the students themselves, who also pick the time
for taking the exams associated with them. Only the state exams are
regulated at the time.
In the period up to 1944, some of the most distinguished professors of
the Sofia university have lectured there, like Prof. Dr. Petar Noikov
(1868-1921), Prof. Dr. Dimitar Katzarov (1881-1960), Prof. Dr. Hristo
Negentzov (1881-1956), Prof. Dr. Mihail Geraskov (1874-1957), Prof. Dr.
Petko Tzonev (1875-1950), Prof. Dr. Naiden Chakarov (1907-1991) and
others. All of them graduated and defended their doctor’s degree at the
universities of Lepzig, Geneve, Zurich and Jena, while their enormous
research work, teaching socal and political activity was responsible for
the so called "golden era" of the Bulgarian university pedagogy.
After 1944 the degree program "Pedagogy" exist within different
faculties - the Historico-Philological (until 1951), the
Historico-Philosophical (untill 1972), the Philosophical (untill 1986)
and after that in its own Pedagogical faculty. In this was outlined the
preparation of specialists, both in the school environment and outside
of it, which is related to the existing socio-political realities in the
country. For this purpose 3 specializations exist, which gave a more
detailed practical and theoretical knowledge in certain fields, like
preschool pedagogy, primary school pedagogy and defectology. These
subjects continued to degree programs under the newly found (1983)
Faculty of Primary School and Preschool Pedagogy.
Graduates in the master degree "Pedagogy" between 1888 and 1984 were
2612 students, of which 1388 men and 1224 women. The average number of
graduates is around 35, a tendency which is true up to this day.The
changes that came in 1989 didn't change the status of the subject,
keeping its unchanging presence as a degree program offered by the Sofia
university, although its practical dimensions have always been
challenged, due to today's realities and the job prospects of the
students. Nevertheless Classical pedagogy still has its place as a
subject to be taught and studied, which is evidenced by the fact that
today it is offered by two other universities as well.
General didactics between traditional faculty culture and digital
teaching in academic mass education
Rotraud CORIAND:
General didactics between traditional faculty culture and digital
teaching in academic mass education
More and more young people in Germany decide to study in academia
and universities are confronted with raising numbers of students. At the
same time their personal resources remain virtually constant. Moreover
the synchronization of studies that have been significantly brought
forward by the Bologna reform is accompanied by a tendency to “big event
education”: Lectures with more than 1000 students participating are not
uncommon any more. Especially the courses in the field of educational
science that are part of the Bachelor programs of teacher education are
affected by the necessity of offering „mass teaching“ because they have
to organize introductory courses reaching across first year students of
all school types and subjects. Faced with such unfavorable staffing
conditions, universities more and more count on e-learning strategies.
The problem is, that the effort to support virtual studies normally is
motivated by administrative necessities. The professional or didactic
benefit seems to be of secondary importance.
Educational sciences are considerably marked by a pluralism of theories
and by theory debates. The function of a lecture of educational science
is to authentically and systematically explicate the professional
perspective of the lecturer. It has to give an overview over different
theories. In a second step it has to consider some of these theories
more in detail. At best, students will have the opportunity to chose
which theories the lecturer will have a closer look at. In other words:
The lecture has to offer a first professional orientation and a first
systematic structure to stimulate a self dependent and critical theory
reflection in students. That means that the lecture has to reflect the
didactic reduction and the professional scientific position of one
lecturer and it has to introduce text work as a method of analysis of
different scientific positions to enable students to form their own
professional positions on education. This standard cannot be fulfilled
by mass lectures and it remains questionable if virtual teaching
strategies that make it possible to get in contact with many students at
the same time, can offer a better solution.
This contribution wants to offer up for discussion a learning concept
which is still in trial: “Blended Didaktikum”. The former BA teacher
education mass lecture on Introduction to General Didactics is embedded
into a blended learning strategy. The objectives are to at least
partially relieve first year students of the strains of mass education
and to guide them into a self dependent and reflective study culture.
Johanna HOPFNER:
Impressions on Shaping Pedagogy by Reforming Study Courses
Although Bachelor's and Master's degree programs have in many ways failed to reach their objectives, they have contributed, and continue to contribute, significantly to the shaping of pedagogy as a scientific discipline. This can be seen especially in the content and organisation of courses as well as in the shifting emphasis of research and teaching.
Mariyana ILIEVA:
Mikhail Geraskov (1874-1957) – The Originator of University Pedagogy in
Bulgaria
This paper focuses on historical development and differentiation of
pedagogy as a university course. Mikhail Geraskov is one of the erudite
Bulgarian teachers at the Sofia University, who developed the scientific
foundations of didactics and methodology of training, and their status
as independent academic disciplines. His work contributed a lot to the
development of the Bulgarian pedagogy. The aim of the research paper is
to present his ideas about the pedagogical theory and practice. The
analysis focuses upon the gradual rejection of Herbartian concept and
the later search for creation of more closer relation between the needs
of students, life and society as a whole.
Mikhail Geraskov was born on 4 October 1874 in Bercovitza and died on 14
December 1957 in Sofia. He received basic education in his hometown and
later he graduated from the Pedagogical High School in Lom. He studied
Philosophy and Pedagogy at the University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Geraskov obtained his PhD in 1912.
In the period 1923 – 1940 he was a lecturer at Sofia University,
Department of Didactics and methodology. In this period Bulgarian
pedagogical science strengthens its positions at academic level in
conformity with European tendencies in university education. The
Bulgarian pedagogical thought experienced a deficit in its
methodological developments. During this period, only individual
articles existed in Bulgaria, many of which were devoted to the
methodology in the primary school. This is inherently Geraskov’s great
contribution to the development not only of the methodology, but also of
the didactics and pedagogy in general. His Methodology was reprinted
several times and is one of the main guidelines for schools to prepare
teaching staff.
Geraskov distinguishes pedagogy, didactics and teaching methodology. The
science that studies the process of education of children and young
people either in family, at school or in any other social situation in
general is called pedagogy. The didactics is a theory of
teaching-and-learning in the school. Teaching methodology contains
theory and technique of teaching particular subjects. He assumes that
between didactics and methodology there is a direct correlation. He
defines methodology as a special didactics.
The period was characterized by the development and influence of the
Herbartianism and the Alternative education, but Geraskov presents his
personal position depending on the Bulgarian reality and education
system. He creates the instructional model of education with the four
steps in teaching. They are: definition of the aim of the lesson;
preparation for teaching the new curriculum material; teaching new
knowledge; practice knowledge. His instructional model of education
should not be directly related to the model of Herbartianism. He takes
only a few aspects of this model. This fact reflects on the educational
practice.
His ideas were highly appreciated and influenced other researchers in
this field. He believes in basic principle which emphasize that the
school organization must be determined by the specifics of the students’
specifics. He believes for teachers’ understanding of their student’s
learning style can be the key to unlocking their full potential and
making difficult concepts seem as easy as they can be. He makes a
significant contribution to the development of teaching methodology.
Geraskov made valuable contributions to science and development of
university pedagogy. Before 1950's he was the mentor for scholars who
worked on this topic.
Tomáš KASPER, Dana KASPEROVA:
Development of Pedagogy in the Czech lands of the Austro-Hungarian
Monarchy and in Inter-war Czechoslovakia (comparison of Czech and German
pedagogical discussion)
The result of the patriotic dispute and the rivalry between Czechs and Germans in the political, academic and cultural life of the second half of the 19th century was, among other things, the division of Czech Charles-Ferdinand University into Czech and German parts in 1882. After then, at the latest, we can observe different development and scientific orientation of Czech and German pedagogy, grown at the two newly established universities in Prague. While the German pedagogy was strongly influenced by Otto Willmann, the Czech pedagogical science was searching for inspiration in the positivism (G.A. Lindner and O. Kádner). Following the foundation of Czechoslovak Republic (CSR) in 1918, Czech and German scientific pedagogy started to develop differently. Czech pedagogical discussion (primarily represented by Vaclav Příhoda), turned toward and incorporated ideas of pragmatism and behaviorism transferred by Czech teachers and university professors, who visited universities in Chicago and in New York. Czech pedagogical discussion, predominantly influenced by American philosophy, could develop freely only until Nazi occupation in 1939, when all Czech universities were closed by Nazi regime. Compared to this development, German pedagogical discussion in Inter-war Czechoslovakia developed under the influence of German pedagogical tradition (W. Toischer, E. Otto), although few approaches in German pedagogy, especially so called Descriptive education (R. Lochner, partly W. Weigel), remained positivistically and experimentally oriented. During the time of Protectorate (1939-1945), all academic discussions at the German University of Prague (Ernst Otto) were under repressive Nazi regime's control. In this article we describe the development and orientation of Czech and German pedagogical discussion in the Czech lands of the Monarchy and in Czechoslovakia in the period of 1882-1939 (1945).
Zvonimir KOMAR:
Pedagogical character of University
The purpose of this paper is to think through the relation between inner logic of pedagogy as a science and inner logic of university and see whether there is an essential relation between them that would imply pedagogical character of university (just as vice versa - university character of pedagogy). Since the idea and structure of university are not neutral categories which could be essentially grasped through technical ideas of efficacy, effectiveness and "quality" (in the purely technical sense in which the term is used today), they should be thought through in regard to their essence, just as it is important to see what's being done when they are grasped purely technically. On the line of this problem it's possible to historically see two ways of thinking about university: one aligned with Humboldt's attempt of neohumanistic grounding of university and the other, today dominant, aligned with permanent reform of university seen as a heteronomous, utilitary, social, economic and in narrower sense political institution. Paralelly, the same situation is applicable to views on pedagogy as a science. The basic problem of this paper is therefore not only the question of idea of university, but also of idea of pedagogy and possible ways in which they meet.
Blanka KUDLÁČOVÁ:
Pedagogy as Part of University Education in Slovakia - Historical and
Contemporary Perspective
Pedagogy as an independent academic discipline became a part of
university education in Slovakia a little later than in the neighbouring
countries. The Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 meant for Slovaks a
negative interference into the process of national emancipation, which
found itself in a phase of retardation, caused mainly by strong
Magyarisation. Space for a change was created only after the origination
of independent Czechoslovakia in 1918.
In the period of the first Czechoslovak Republic (1918 – 1938) Comenius
University in Bratislava was the only university in Slovakia that
provided education in the field of humanities and social sciences. It
was the Faculty of Arts which started providing lectures in pedagogy in
1923 and Seminar of Education, as the first academic institution focused
on the development of scientific pedagogy and teacher training,
originated the same year. The Seminar of Education was led from its very
beginning up to 1938 by Czech pedagogues: Otokar Chlup (1923 – 1927),
prof. Josef Hendrich (1928 – 1937) and prof. Jan Uher (1937 – 1938). The
Seminar of Education in Prague, which was founded by prof. Gustav Adolf
Lidner in 1882, was a model for operation of the Bratislava Seminar of
Education.
The second stage in the development of the Bratislava Seminar of
Education can be dated since 1938, when the first Slovak, prof. Juraj
Čečetka (1907 – 1983), became a director. Čečetka is also a founding
personality of the Slovak scientific pedagogy and the first professor in
the field of pedagogy in Slovakia. He led the Seminar of Education until
1950, when, under the Act on Higher Education (No. 58/1950 Coll.
Czechoslovak Republic), seminars were replaced by departments. After the
application of the law, at the Faculty of Arts, pedagogy was taught at
the Department of Philosophy and it was possible to study pedagogy in a
joint study programme with psychology.
In 1953 the Department of Pedagogy and Psychology was founded and
Čečetka was appointed the head. The department existed during changed
political circumstances (the rise of socialism since 1949), which was
reflected in the character of pedagogy itself. Due to cadre
interventions Čečetka had to leave the faculty in 1959 and could return
only after the liberalisation of the regime in 1969 (Prague Spring).
Tough normalisation at the beginning of the 1970s caused Čečetka`s
ultimate dismissal. An independent department of pedagogy was
established in 1959/60.
The second part of the paper will deal with fundamental changes in the
field of educational sciences in Slovakia after the change of political
regime in 1989. During socialism humanities and social sciences were
under the influence of Marxist ideology and could not develop correctly.
Pedagogy was influentially impacted by Russian school, the contact with
scientists outside other than socialist countries was practically
impossible. The aim is to outline essential changes and issues in the
fight for the character of pedagogy after 1989.
Irena LESAR:
The inclusive education study programme: Is it (or should it be) the
successor of special or general pedagogy?
Inclusion is an idea that has been employed by theoreticians,
practitioners and politicians in the field of education over the last
two decades. At the tertiary level, we can identify the trend of
creating new study programmes – so-called Inclusive Education – that
contribute to the realisation of inclusion by ensuring well-educated
teaching staff. When designing study programmes, we proceed from various
assumptions and scientific disciplines. The purpose of this paper is to
analyse study programmes from three Slovenian universities, as well as
the concept of inclusiveness, from the perspective of scientific
disciplines that are, or should be, at the forefront of
conceptualisation.
From previous findings, it can be assumed that, before and after the
Second World War, Slovenian pedagogues treated general pedagogy as a
reflexive science that is responsible for the development of theory
rather than practice. This was reflected in the concept of study, as
well as in the fact that the teaching methods of a particular subject
were initially developed in the context of teachers’ associations, and
later within teacher training and at the Pedagogical Academy.
Pedagogical solutions were based on the enlightened understanding of man
and humanity as universal features, and in this context were not derived
from the notion of diversity as an existential fact, as introduced by
postmodern thought in the 1960s (so-called critical pedagogy), which
remained relatively unrecognisable in Slovenia until the 1990s. This
kind of enlightened understanding of man attributed a special role to
psychology with its findings concerning normative development, and any
deviation from this development was understood to require special
treatment, as was strongly reflected in teaching practices. It is
therefore understandable that educational work with children who find it
more difficult to learn – or who learn and engage in social groups
differently – did not become a subject of the study of pedagogy. A
separate study programme in special pedagogy was therefore created at
the then Pedagogical Academy. This programme was based on the
psycho-medical paradigm, focusing on the development of special teaching
methods for specific groups of disabled children.
Analysis of contemporary Slovenian study programmes of Inclusive
Education shows that the design of two study programmes (at the
University of Primorska and the University of Maribor) leans
considerably towards special pedagogy, while the programme at the
University of Ljubljana clearly adopts an interdisciplinary approach.
Based on research findings to date, it can be argued that the
implementation of the concept of inclusiveness goes beyond the
pedagogical-technical level that special pedagogy was capable of
providing; it requires the implementation of ethical dimensions, or, on
a practical level, the kind of institutional culture in which, on
various levels of institutional operation, it is evident that all other
values are subordinated to inclusiveness. We therefore conclude that
dealing with diversity in school should be a primary object of general
pedagogy and not special pedagogy. However, the question remains as to
which of the recognised paradigms in pedagogy (Herbartian, humanist,
critical or progressive pedagogy) would be the most constructive
response to the challenges of fostering inclusiveness.
Mirko LUKAŠ:
Ideas of goodness and philanthropy have strengthened the autonomy of the
special science of nurturing on the Croatian territory
Linking the outgrowing of educational content, historically often observed solely as a group of rules, with ethical ideas of goodness and philanthropy that have the power to change the image of the world, this paper aims to illustrate the factors and social conditions in which processes, contributing to the science of nurturing - pedagogy - as an independent and autonomous scientific discipline on today's Croatian territory, take place. Throughout history, the systematization process of pedagogy ranged from practical and written ideas of people who were not professionally trained in the said field to presenting various ideas in educational journals, books, textbooks and regulations that have proven to be necessary prerequisites for making a general theory. Until the second half of the 19th century, a thousand-year-old institutional education, developed from natural-experiential through practical-experiential to theoretical-pedagogical, existed in Croatia. The factors such as opening of the first teachers' colleges, lasting efforts for better pedagogical education of teachers, finding appropriate sources of pedagogical knowledge, the possibility of professional development, professional journals and associations, issuing the First Croatian Education Act and compulsory elementary education in Croatia provided a strong stimulation for modernizing science, previously referred to as the science of nurturing, and brought it to the level of neighboring countries. The contents of pedagogy were first introduced to the university level in the academic year 1874/1875 when they we taught during one semester. Seminars in pedagogy were held at the Catholic Faculty of Theology by Ivan Koharić, PhD and Martin Štiglić, PhD. Pedagogy was taught as a part of the philosophy course at the Faculty of Philosophy by Franjo Marković, PhD and it has been taught at the mentioned faculty since the academic year 1876/1877. Furthermore, pedagogy as an individual scientific discipline was first taught at the aforementioned faculty in 1895 by Đuro Arnold, PhD and it has been taught as such ever since. That being said, the historical analysis of the available literature presents the connection of pedagogy and its related scientific discipline philosophy. It also provides the necessary preconditions for pedagogy to become an independent scientific discipline. The analysis covers the period from the late 17th century until 1928 when pedagogy became an independent study program. Furthermore, the paper illustrates the social conditions promoting the ideas of philanthropism in addition to the factors that transform this science nature from empirical-inductive to rational-deductive. It also provides theoretical and practical theories of the discipline. During the observed period, theoretical-scientific pedagogy aims to answer the following questions: what is an educational act, which educational aims prevail, what is the educational ideal of time, what are desirable educational resources and work methods, which principles to govern by and which factors determine powerlessness and educational failures. Practical pedagogy implied addressing physical and spiritual educational areas with the later including an intellectual, emotional and volitional sphere of a human. Studying professional and personal life which is to be regarded as an example for students and the society, the moral and ethical analysis of teachers is accentuated.
Suzana MIOVSKA SPASEVA:
The study of pedagogy in Macedonia: origins, development and
contemporary challenges
The study of pedagogy in Macedonia has almost a century long
tradition. The origins are to be found in 1920 when the Faculty of
Philosophy was established in Skopje, as a branch of the homonymous
faculty in Belgrade. The Department of pedagogy was one of the first
five departments of the newly founded faculty in Skopje, and during its
twenty-year pre-war existence it shared the same ideological role with
the others: to prepare secondary school teachers that would “develop the
national consciousness” of the “Serbian people” in “South Serbia”.
Continuation of the pedagogical studies occurred immediately after the
Second World War, when the first Macedonian higher education institution
was established in 1946: the new Faculty of Philosophy in Skopje, as the
first constituent unit of the future Macedonian university in Skopje.
Since then until 1994, when pedagogical studies in Albanian language
were established within the State University in Tetovo, the Kathedra of
Pedagogy (later renamed in Institute of Pedagogy) at the Faculty of
Philosophy has been the only higher education institution in Macedonia
that was providing 4-year university education for preparation of a
wider profile – pedagogue, expert in education, who might also work as a
class teacher and as a preschool teacher. Since the very beginning the
Institute of Pedagogy had mainly academic character and focused on both
teaching and scientific research, which is testified by the organization
of post-graduate studies (since 1980/81) and providing doctoral degree
in pedagogy (in 1958 the first doctor of pedagogical sciences was
promoted at the Faculty of Philosophy).
During the almost seven decades of development, the structure and
organization of the pedagogical studies were many times revised with the
aim to improve the study programme and to adjust it to the needs of the
society, as well as to the development of the pedagogy and the sciences
that are related to it. These revisions has brought introduction of new
academic disciplines (e.g. Methodology of Pedagogy, and Andragogy in
1962/63), implementation of double major studies (1959/60, 1967/68) or
their abandonment (1962/63, 1977/78), introduction of elective group of
disciplines and elective courses (1977/78, 1982/83), strengthening of
the students’ practical work. The latest reform changes in degree
structure, organization and duration of the pedagogical studies were
made in 2004/05 with the implementation of the European Credit Transfer
System. It has brought replacement of the traditional disciplinary
approach with the modular one, which reflected in short courses and
breaking up of learning into small portions that usually are covered
with knowledge-based testing.
Bologna reform has created significant changes regarding the second and
the third cycle of pedagogical studies. In 2009, one-year master program
(60 ECTS) took the place of the traditional, two-year magister studies;
consequently, same as in the first cycle, academic disciplines that were
studied at the magister level were transformed in one-semester courses
that were more applicable and competence and learning outcome-oriented.
On a doctoral level, three-year doctoral studies (180 ECTS) were
introduced in 2011, instead of the mentored individual work on a
doctoral thesis.
Recent changes that are based on Bologna degree reform have opened many
dilemmas about the quality of the pedagogical studies and of the
entrance and exit competences of the graduates. The difference in the
study duration (2 year vs. 1year) and in the study programmes
(disciplinary vs. modular approach) has raised the question whether
Master level (VII/A of the National Qualifications Framework) is
corresponding to the pre-Bologna undergraduate studies (VII/1) or
postgraduate studies (VII/2). Therefore, having in mind the European
trends for raising teaching qualification at a higher and research-based
level, it is of urgent need to reconsider the understanding of the first
and the second cycle degree, to clearly define the competences and the
level of qualifications and their recognition and validation in the
labour market.
András NEMÉTH:
Developmental phases of educational sciences as academic discipline in
Hungary
A number of historical anthologies and monographs have been
published recently that give priority to the social approach in the
history of science of the educational sciences – using Stichweh’s (1994,
p. 17) concept of discipline – as discipline formation and discipline
development. Stichweh’s model interprets a scientific discipline as a
complex product of the given scientific community. This product
includes, a). the scientific community (members of the scientifc field)
and its communication network, b). their set of scientific knowledge,
c). accepted paradigms of research topics and problems with relevant
research methodology and methods, d). selection and preparation of the
new scientifc generation with the elements of carreer structure.
The research to date indicates that more phases in the academic
discipline development of the educational sciences can be distinguished.
In the first phase, which followed various chronological courses in
different countries, we find the institutional formation of pedagogy, as
it was then understood, as a disciplinary field. This development
proceeded most rapidly in the last third of the nineteenth century. It
took on two overlapping forms, following the general
institutionalization of teacher education. On the one hand, broad-based
theory formation regarding educational practice took place, reaching its
peak in Herbartianism. On the other hand, university courses were
introduced and academic chairs created, often closely tied to
philosophy, that were dedicated to pedagogy and represented the academic
foundations of the discipline. The second phase, which is the focus of
the present contribution, began around 1880 and continued into the
twentieth century. In this period an educational movement arose that
centered on the empirical paradigms of research in the social sciences,
most of all in psychology. But the various lines of the movement (reform
pedagogy, experimental pedagogy, child study) did not always succeed at
becoming established at the universities; often, empirical approaches
were abandoned or made marginal. The third phase is the phase of lasting
institutionalization of the educational sciences, which in most places
began already in the first half of the twentieth century. Here the
German "Geisteswissenschaft" played a role. After the 2nd World War,
Hungary, similarly to other Eastern European countries, was included in
the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union and began the fourth phase
of development of the educational sciences in Hungary. The establishment
of the Stalinist type one-party system by 1949 was backed by the fact
that the Hungarian communist party gradually gained control over law
enforcement bodies and other public authorities. Educational science was
most highly affected among social sciences by the political power shifts
oft the Stalinism and the Kadarism.
The present contribution has two goals. First, it will be shown that in
this periods of the development of the discipline, also in Hungary a
complex relationship developed between educational reform movements and
the educational sciences. Second, peculiarities of the Hungarian
development will be analyzed in this periods. The paper is therefore
organized as follows: in section 1, it will be shown generally that
while the Hungarian history of pedagogy and the educational sciences is
a history of the reception of mainly German developments, it is also
characterized by strong adaptation. In section 2, the development of
pedagogy is described briefly within the context in which complex
connections between «new education» and academic pedagogy developed. In
section 3, the discipline formation and discipline development in the
period at the service of the building of socialism/communism. Thus, the
dictatorial school of a dictatorial state came to be realized, in which
the basis of external and internal unity was socialist/communist
ideology, socialist/communist aims and educational apparatus, a
curriculum filled with Marxism and Leninism, and obligatory materialist
atheism.
Marko PALEKČIĆ, Florian H. MÜLLER:
Autonomous learning motivation before and after the Bologna Process -
Perspectives on self-determination theory
It is still an open question whether the so called `Bologna Process´
has any impact on students learning processes and outcome. This study
investigates how self-determined and controlled learning motivation of
university students differ before and after the Bologna Process in
Croatia.
As a theoretical frame we used self-determination theory (SDT, Deci &
Ryan, 2002).
The SDT (Deci & Ryan, 2002) is based on the assumption that people are
naturally inclined to integrate their ongoing experiences. This process
will be fostered, if people are supported in their basic psychological
needs for competence, autonomy and social relatedness. Accordingly, SDT
proposes a taxonomy of four types of regulation for extrinsic motivation
which differ in the degree to which they represent autonomy. The SDT
seems to be particularly appropriate for the investigation of
self-determined respectively controlled learning processes of university
students.
We have examined the data of 1534 Croatian students (humanities) with
variance and cluster analyses.
The dependent variable is self-determined learning motivation;
independent variables are aspects of the perception of the
teaching-learning environment (including the support of basic needs and
other relevant variables for learning and instruction).
The results of the analyses show that students’ perceived
self-determination decreased after the implementation of the Bologna
process.
A further significant result is the self-determination theory is also
valid in a south-eastern cultural context and that motivationally
relevant aspects of the perceived learning environment are significant
predictors for intrinsic learning motivation and autonomous forms of
extrinsic motivation.
Simonetta POLENGHI:
Development of academic Pedagogy in Italy - A sketch from 19th century
to todays' situation
The paper will aims at providing a sketch of the deveolpment of academic
pedagogy, showing the turning points of a two centuries story. The first
chairs of Pedagogy were set up in Pavia and Padua in the Habsburgic
Kingdom of Lombardy and Venetia, but int te years of the Risorgimento
the Italian pedagogical thought in the peninsula took place out of the
universities and involved Catholic as well as Liberal and Republican
thinkers. After the Unification of Italy (1861), the chair of Pedagogy
entered in the unversity, in the Faculty of Arts, always linked with
Philosophy and in a minor academic position. Due to the political
situation, Catholic educationalists remained out of the university,
which hosted Positivistic professors. Kantism and Herbartianism were
also present. At the beginning of the XXth century the herbartian Luigi
Credaro supported elementary teachers, also as Minister of Education.
But the Neo-Idealism of Croce and Gentile strongly opposed Herbartism
and Positivism, winning the battle when Gentile became Minister of
Education and issued his School Reform (1923). Idealism long dominated
Italian education, both in the university and out of it. Progressiv
education (Attivismo, Reformpaedagogik) was carried out by Giuseppe
Lombardo Radice, but he being antifascist, his influence was hindered.
Nontheless many elementary school teachers did apply his method.
Gentile improved elementary school teacher training, but firmy linked
pedagogy to philosophy, puttung the first in a ancillar position. Apart
from Lombardo Radice, professors of pedagogy were generally philosophers
of education. The chairs of pedagogy were present in the newly founded
Faculty of Education (1935) and in the Faculty of Arts.
After Fascism's fall, the end of the war and the birth of the new
Italian democratic State, the situation changed. New chairs were opened
and Catholic professors entered in the academic world (previoulsy
represented only by Mario Casotti, ex-Idealist, appointed in 1924 in the
Catholic University, founded in 1921 as a private university and
recognized by Gentile in 1923). In the Fifties Catholic pedagogy gained
a relevant position, particularly in Milan and Padua, but also in the
South of Italy. At the same time, liberal criticism and Dewey's theory
were suppoorted by a group, directed by Ernesto Codignola, ex-Idealist
himself, and centred in Florence. The Communist Party, at the time very
strong in Italy, also had a wide audience in the university. Hence
academic pedagogy was long divided, with bitter quarrels among religion
particularly. The School reform of 1962, that set up the Scuola media
unica (Mittelschule, Middleschool, Junior School age 11-13) for all
pupils, was nonetheless supported by the academic world, both lay and
Catholic, for his democratic impact. Great was the involvement of
professors both lay and Catholic in social battles, for adult education
and literacy, for family education (expecially from a Catholic
persepctive), for the inclusion of disabled (from the Sixiteis onwards),
for school renewal and didactic changes. Dewey, Piaget, Bruner, the
curriculum theory were debated.
In the Seventies university students' number increased very much, since
the limitation to access was abolished by law in 1969. In the Eighties
the crisis of values and the fall of Communism shattered the cultural
situation. Old cultural divisions and barriers began to fade. Under the
pressure of cultural changes and of new job persepctives, the Faculty of
Education, traditionally devoted to teacher tranining, become Faculty of
Educational sciences (1993-94), offering courses to work also outside
the school, in welfare centres, in human resources jobs and so on. This
deep change gave the opportunity to emply young researchers, for new
courses were opened and new professors were needed. The Italian
university and not only the Faculty of Educational sciences enjoyed ca
15 years of boom, until the economic crisis started a reverse process,
in which we are living. The old professor of Education, a cultivated man
with a solid philosophical background, who was able to deal with history
of education ad didactics, left space to specialists. New chairs were
opened, which required specialistic research: didactics, media
education, special education, exeperimental education, hsitory of
education, children's literature, as well as general and social
education (the chair mantains united the theory and the practice). This
led to progressive specialization. In history of education, for
instance, new researchers obtained the qualification to teach
(Habilitation), who have a strong historical background whereas the old
ones had a pedagogical and philosophical education: this shift reflects
the overcoming of idealistic history of education as history of
pedagogical ideas, in favour of a history of institutions and a social
history of education. Every educational academic discipliny has its own
society and journals, aside the national society that gathers all the
researchers (Siped), and has its own review.
The role of pedagogical chairs is central in the Faculty of Educational
sciences, but Psychology, Sociology and Philosophy are very relevant
chairs too. The necessity to reduce the number of campuses and chairs
and the State spending review are the reasons why the law n. 240 in 2010
abolished the Faculties replacing them with big Departments,
transferring to departments the didicatic tasks that belonged to the
Faculties. As a results, old Department of educations fused with other
departments, hence loosing their autonomy also in research.
In spite of the great numbers of professors, Education has not yet
gained the cultural or political reputation of older disciplines like
History or Philosophy, and is under political pressure: teacher
training, in fact, is gradually loosing the importance of pedagogy and
didactics, in favour of disciplinary contents, with a situation that
reminds to XIXth century one.
Since the Fifties, many professors of Education have been involved in
political school reforms and in social educational work, in adult
education, family education, media education, so that many are pressed
between the social needs and the purely theoric reflection, plus now the
overwhelming tasks connected with the increasing evaluation processes
and related bureaucracy.
The Italian acedemic educational world has been more concentrated on
national issues than on international confrontation. Foreign researches
have been studied, Italian professors have gone abroad, but generally
the personal exchange and involvement in congresses was limited. Nowadys
the increasing push towards internationalization has been producing
different attitudes: of refusal, of moderate accomplish, of enthusiastic
adherence, depending on the age of the researchers too.
Hence Italian Pedagogy has to face cultural, political end economic
challenges. Only a solid scientific base may allow it to overcome them:
as a result, the old ideological fractures are outdated and the internal
as the international debate is more free of ideological bias and more
rooted in real scientific positions.
Edvard PROTNER:
Comparison of Development of the Study of Pedagogy in Austria and
Slovenia
The analysis of the existence and development of pedagogy as an
academic discipline in Slovenia draws on the monography by Wolfgang
Brezinka Pädagogik in Österreich, which was published between 2000 and
2014 in four parts on over 4000 pages. This work provides both an
historical overview of the subject and an analysis of its position in
the present day, which can be described as a classic of pedagogical
historiography and a benchmark for contemporary research in other
countries. The history of schooling and education in Slovenia is closely
tied to the history of the Habsburg Monarchy, the Austrian Empire and
Austro-Hungary, as the Slovenian lands were part of it until the
break-up of the monarchy in 1918. It is therefore interesting to see
whether there are any similarities between Slovenia and the other member
countries before 1918 in attitudes to the development of pedagogy. The
legislative frameworks were certainly identical and in this regard,
Slovenia (as Brezinka states for Austria) was among the first in the
world to introduce pedagogy as an obligatory subject in tertiary
education.
Even more interesting than the comparison of the position of pedagogy in
Austria and Slovenia until 1918 is the comparison of the period after
Austria shrunk into its present state form, maintaining in most cases
the same constitutional regulations; Slovenia, on the other hand, until
independence in 1991, replaced much of the existing
constitutional-political regulatory framework. What we are most
interested in here is whether we can ascribe the differences in the
existence and development of pedagogy as a university scientific
discipline to political, ideological and epistemiological reasons and
circumstances.
The comparison is structured into the classification periods defined by
Brezinka in the development of pedagogy in Austria. According to his
research, pedagogy as a university subject was firstly defined as
»practical knowledge of education«(Erziehungskunde) in the period from
1805-1848. This was followed by the period of »philosophical pedagogy«
(philosophische Pädagogik) from 1871 onwards, when departments of
pedagogy (afer their disbandment in 1848/49) were reintroduced at
Austrian universities, and to 1965 when pedagogy begins to exist as an
independent study programme. This period coincides with a
epistemiological shift, as the emprirical theoretical approach comes to
the fore in pedagogical research. For this resaon, Brezinka names this
last period, the period of the development of pedagogy, as »educational
science« (Erziehungswissenschaft).
Snježana ŠUŠNJARA:
Bosnian-Herzegovian pedagogy between the past and future: How to respond
to the today’s challenges?
Writing about BiH pedagogy presents a real challenge. High school pedagogy in BiH started to develop only after the Second World War. Namely, the opening of the first University inBosnia and Herzegovina in 1949 made this process possible. At the very beginning the chair of pedagogy was founded as a part of the Department of Philosophy. Later on, it became the Department of Pedagogy, then the Department of Pedagogy and Psychology and in 1989 it became the Department of Pedagogy. It would be interesting to research the reasons and needs which resulted with the establishment of this Department. Was the labour market the reason why this department saw the light ofday? The leading ideology of that period of time regulated education and set out the goals and instructions. When the Department of pedagogy and psychology was legally formed in 1963 at the faculty of Philosophy, at Sarajevo University, where a question came up on who the first members of the Department were, and who the first students were.What kind of leading ideas they shared with each other? What their motives were for the study of this subject? Fortunately, it is possible to find out who the first students were who decided to study at this Department in 1963. It would be a great opportunity to have interviews with them in order to find out what sort of pedagogy was offered at that time and what was the mainstreaming of that pedagogy. The founding and actions of the Chair of Pedagogy at the Faculty of Philosophy in Sarajevo was of great importance to the development of pedagogical science in BiH. Professors Nikola Filipović, Branko Rakić, Petar Mandić i Muhamed Muradbegović directly contributed in the preparation, formation and development of this Chair in 1960s. They also contributed to its transformation to the Department of pedagogy-psychology, and its separation from that Department.The Chair of Pedagogy received the first generations of students in 1963. In addition to other educational issues, the Chair of Pedagogy had a special mission and responsibility to work on the development of pedagogical science. The pedagogical research and results done by the members of the Chair of Pedagogy were of great importance in the BiH region and wider because their work made a great contribution to the improvement of acknowledgment and also in the field of educational expertise. Svrdlin claimed that the sudden development of educational institutions in BiH was conditioned by the modern accomplishment of pedagogical theory and practice. The increasing needs made a demand on the experts in pedagogy to be engaged in schools, and other organization associated with labour and social services. Therefore, a need was created even before conditions were arranged to prepare personnel in high school institutions.Almost all potential professors at the recently opened Chair of Pedagogy in Sarajevo, studied and finished their PhD’s in Belgrade. The majority of the students from BiH who studied in Belgrade had completed their education at the Teacher Training school and had worked 2-3 years as teachers. Some of them even finished a higher pedagogical school. The abovementioned professors made new efforts in the science. They studied fundamental-theoretical issues of pedagogy, promoted scientific-methodological based researches, published monographs, influenced new generations with their work, etc. Consequently, as this educational activity could not be promoted without the involvement of political factors, mistakes were inevitable. Some of them were: school network arranging, the promoting of a communal general education for all pupils, the closing of gymnasiums as elite schools, practising political preferences during the selection for managing positions, etc.
Katarina TIBAUT, Milena IVANUŠ GRMEK:
The workload of students of Faculty of Arts University of Maribor after
the Bologna reform – analysis of curriculum
This article examines the factors affecting the workload of university students after the Bologna reform has been implemented in Slovenian higher education. The theoretical part represents the evaluation of the students’ academic workload and how it was affected by the introduction of divided levels of study and the credit or ECTS points. It also discusses the causes of students’ work(over)load and provides proposals to reduce the academic pressure. These theoretical findings represent the basic foundation of the empirical research. The research uses a descriptive comparative method to compare the selected curricula of old and new (Bologna) study programs of the Faculty of Arts, University of Maribor. The empirical findings show that the post-Bologna student workload is somewhat higher than in the old study system, since the Bologna reform study requires more constant individual work and engagement. The reform also increased the number of study subjects, which has also increased the number of exams in a given exam period.
Tadej VIDMAR:
Pedagogy at the University of Ljubljana before, during, and after World
War II
When the University of Ljubljana was established in 1919, a chair
for pedagogy was created as one of the first chairs in the Faculty of
Arts (Filozofska fakulteta). Dr. Karel Ozvald, a renowned Slovenian
pedagogue, was appointed as the first professor of pedagogy, and he
immediately began to develop pedagogy as a scientific discipline in
Slovenia (in 1927, his book Cultural Pedagogy was published, upon which
the geisteswissenschaftliche or cultural pedagogy in Slovenia was
founded). He began with lectures in January 1920. In 1930, Dr. Stanko
Gogala, also one of the most prominent representatives of the
geisteswissenschaftliche or cultural pedagogy, joined Ozvald as the head
of pedagogical seminars. The chair for pedagogy continued to work so
staffed until the end of World War II, when Ozvald was superannuated.
Pedagogy, which was being developed at the university between both world
wars, was the theoretical and scientific one in Slovenia. By appointing
Ozvald as a university professor, geisteswissenschaftliche or cultural
pedagogy began to develop in the country. The university’s pedagogy did
not differ from the others in central Europe, but between wars the
Slovenians did not have enough theoretically competent experts, who
would have appropriate knowledge and motivation to apply theory to
praxis. Ozvald and Gogala also remained in regular communication about
developments in the field of education in Europe and informed the
general public of this progress through well justified articles in
professional periodicals. The list of their lectures shows that they
endeavored to enlighten students with novelties in the educational field
throughout the world, in addition to disseminating their own pedagogical
concept.
During World War II, Ljubljana was first occupied by the Italian Fascist
state, and then, in 1943, by the German National Socialist regime, under
which lectures were not held at the university.
In 1945, the university began its work anew, when the study of pedagogy
was also reestablished, but this time it was based on new and different
ideological and political fundamentals. In the first postwar period,
Slovenian pedagogy concentrated on solving current educational problems
of the Socialist system. During the first years after World War II,
there was an almost exclusive reliance on Soviet pedagogy. Though Gogala
continued his work as a professor, he oriented himself toward
educational themes and areas which were not so ideologically marked. The
new postwar pedagogical concept in Slovenia, which was also adopted by
“university” pedagogy, was in fact for a long time very adverse to the
majority of the prewar pedagogical orientations and movements. The
influence of politics and Marxist ideology had strong effects on the
development of pedagogical thinking; members of the department of
pedagogy began to strive for greater autonomy of pedagogy in the 1950s.
Unfortunately, some of the contemporary interpretations of pedagogy and
its representatives at the university before 1945 won such recognition
and influenced general perception to such a degree that even today some
renowned experts without any consideration support their theories as
generally valid.
Sofija VRCELJ, Siniša KUŠIĆ:
In search of identity of pedagogy (studies) – from the perspective of
the Bologna Process in Croatia
The paper analyzes the (re) construction of pedagogy as a science as well as the practical expressions based on theoretical positions, such as, for example, pedagogical studies. Croatian pedagogical theory and practice bore the developmental characteristics of the pedagogy of the so-called Germanic circle by the 90s in the twentieth century. This means that it had the status of practical learning about education, the status of a normative science and the status of an empirical science of education. There were also attempts of constituting pedagogy as an integral science of education, which were not insignificant. After the collapse of the communist ideology and the intensification of globalization, pedagogy began to "Americanize" in a manner that the substantially differentiated concepts such as upbringing and education, began to use the common term "education" and Educology was conceived as an umbrella science of education. Americanization is also visible in the need for a change in the standard terminology in Croatian educational tradition. Thus, the term curriculum seeks to replace the terms plans and programmes, which has caused a variety of doubts and discords, not only at the level of defining the terms, but also in the practical dimension. These and other theoretical sideways, despite the paradigm war, do not give pedagogy a relatively strong scientific identity. Although pedagogy is indispensable for practice, it must be admitted that it still has a contentious scientific status. Such status is reflected in the pedagogical studies as well as the profession, which is also looking for its position in practice.
Nataša VUJISIĆ ŽIVKOVIĆ, Vera SPASENOVIĆ:
Development of Pedagogy as a Scientific and Academic Discipline in
Serbia Perceived through the Relationship between Professional and
Scientific Field
Since its beginnings Serbian pedagogy is determined by the close
relationship between theory of education and methodology of teaching
subjects, development of a school system and the professional
preparation of teachers. Application of the scientific knowledge on
education has been a powerful agent of change in the theoretical
conceptions of all generations of Serbian pedagogues. In our research,
we followed the development of pedagogy as a scientific and academic
discipline in Serbia in the context of its interdependent relations
between professional legitimization and scientific affirmation.
Perceived in this way, Serbian pedagogy can be described in four stages:
1) pedagogy as a base for preparing teachers in the teacher training
schools, 2) academic status of pedagogy in Serbia in the 19th and early
20th century, 3) the beginnings of the research orientation in pedagogy
and 4) fully establishment of the university pedagogy configuration in
the second half of the 20th century.
It has been shown that the approach applied in this paper, not only
inform us about more complex pedagogical roles and professions - from
classical teaching to supervisor and the research profession of a
pedagogue, but also provides new insights into the fundamental
determinants of the historical development of the science of education
in Serbia. This presentation has a preliminary character, while further,
similarly conceived research on the relationship of the development of
pedagogical theory and professional preparation, should enable more
reliable generalization of the study results. So far, it may highlight
the fact that the use of pedagogical knowledge in professional practice
in Serbia had, at least, an equal influence on the constitution of the
theoretical assumptions of the science of education, as the affiliation
to some scientific orientations in pedagogy, and also it has been one of
the leading factors for the development of pedagogy as an academic
discipline
Vučina ZORIĆ:
Beginnings, functioning and developmental perspectives of the Department
of pedagogy in Montenegro
The beginnings and growth of the Department of Pedagogy in
Montenegro have not been analysed by the pedagogical experts up to this
point. Even though this Department has existed for only 11 years as a
part of the Faculty of Philosophy in Nikšić and the state University of
Montenegro, we believe that it would be useful and topical to present
and analyse the process of its establishing, its functioning and its
developmental perspectives, bearing in mind the fact that a relevant
historical distance cannot yet be made. It is worth mentioning that, at
present, it is the only study programme specializing in pedagogy in
Montenegro and it will most likely remain the only one in future as
well, primarily due to the current official estimations of the needs in
the educational system and the state of the work market.
Pedagogy, as a teaching subject, has been taught in many segments and at
various levels of education of the teachers in Montenegro for many
years. However, the first major and formally significant example of the
initiative to constitute a study programme specializing in pedagogy had
not been made until 1979. It was then that the question about a future
Department of Pedagogy (four-years duration) was brought up: the idea
was that the Department of Pre-school Education and the Department of
Teachers Education (at the time, two-years duration both), within the
Teaching Faculty, could be the foundation for and first steps towards
establishing of the Department of Pedagogy. This concept has never been
realized and the (single-major-subject) Department of Pedagogy started
in 2004/2005, in accordance with the Bologna Declaration and its unique
principle of 3+1+1 studies, in a particular social and political context
of the time. Undergraduate studies (Bachelor, 3 years) and post-graduate
specialist studies (1 year) of pedagogy have been continually realized
due to the very high interest of high-school students to enroll in this
study programme (probably because of wide eligibility), even though
there is also a significant number of unemployed graduate students with
the Honours in Pedagogy. Master and doctoral studies have been carried
out periodically, depending on the students’ interests and financial
circumstances, but also depending on the educational policies of the
University derived from the assessment of the need for specialists in
pedagogy at this level of education.
The general treatment of pedagogy as a scientific and academic
discipline is inadequate in many study programmes within the University
of Montenegro, which, among other things, points to the wide-spread
ignorance of its significance, particularly as far as the future
teachers are concerned. Nevertheless, although still young, the
Department of Pedagogy has succeeded to create its own staff of high
expertise, to intensify the regional and international cooperation, as
well as to establish the Institute of Pedagogy, organizing numerous
projects and activities that foreground it as a major agent in the
reformation of the educational system of Montenegro. There are, however,
still various dilemmas and challenges, prevalently owing to the current
processes of integrations and systematization at the University, which
can affect the status and developmental perspectives of this Department
and, more generally, the very science of pedagogy in Montenegro.