The video game is a deeply misunderstood medium, one that is often blamed as a root cause of violence, anti-social behaviour and the laziness of youth. In addition to those who judge video games as corrupting, there are those who note the complexity and instructive power of video games and hope to harness the technology for educational use. This thesis occupies a middle ground between these two poles. I argue that as a distinct textual form, video games are prime sites for encountering power and difference, as well as productive sites through which gamers come to know themselves. Video games are semiotic playing fields that, when theorized as such, call for pedagogical interventions focused on how we teach about the worlds we inhabit both virtual and actual. I end with an explanation of how video games can constructively be theorized as “ethical spaces” for learning about issues of social justice.

The video game is a deeply misunderstood medium, one that is often blamed as a root cause of violence, anti-social behaviour and the laziness of youth. In addition to those who judge video games as corrupting, there are those who note the complexity and instructive power of video games and hope to harness the technology for educational use. This thesis occupies a middle ground between these two poles. I argue that as a distinct textual form, video games are prime sites for encountering power and difference, as well as productive sites through which gamers come to know themselves. Video games are semiotic playing fields that, when theorized as such, call for pedagogical interventions focused on how we teach about the worlds we inhabit both virtual and actual. I end with an explanation of how video games can constructively be theorized as “ethical spaces” for learning about issues of social justice.

The field of peace education presently remains undertheorized suffusing praxis and pedagogy as foundation within the edifices of dissembling postModernity marked within the Institute of Rationality. (Re)imag(e)(in)ing critical pedagogy in a peace education-to-come, enjoins readers/writers along a putative journey through the violence of metaphysics in the fundamental question of difference bridging chiastic ethico-philososphical terrain, reconceptualizing pedagogical endeavour in ethicus obligatus to the other towards a renewing peace literacy within academe. Peace education can reconstitute the force of community on planes of difference unfolding socialis aequitus and peace, reframing the nature of our being, self and other as the appositional realm of separation/connection. The opening of peace, as concept, ethos, through critical pedagogy in/by the fashioning of discursive forms acknowledging the semio-theoretical chain constructing human social relationality proffers a solid theoretical foundation for the field of peace education, re-tracing difference across socio-ethno-politico-historical structures. Central tenets of the evolving field of peace education are reconfigured in deontological proposition through deconstruction as precursorial project in reason affording performative discourse transversing the transcendental signified, peace, in another idiom eclipsing spatio-temporal illusion, affording diachronous affirmation and revelation in a crucial luminous snapshot within the post-conflict setting of Northern Ireland concerning fundamental matters of peace and education. Peace education as constituent element of contemporary peace knowledges and principal arena for education for peace within the unconditional university is fundamentally challenged in a commitment to peace literacy to adduce and address all interwoven questions of difference, justice, peace, and education within academe. A new beginning compels another reading in presence honouring the other and Other in ethico-philosophico-pedagogy radically questioning our individual and collective rationality in relation to understandings of human social relationality and the transperformative tenets of peace education in difference through différance, cathecting presence anew while (re)configuring academe primarily concerned with difference, peace, and social justice as discursis unfolding impossibility. Consequently, the order of phallogocentricism and its sponsoring patriarchal institution that would sublimate a discourse on/of difference in substitution, as the same irrupts in the fissure another perspectivity opening through presence, presence in meaning, presence in spatiality, presence in temporality in the impossibility of the limit.

Master of Arts / Department of Modern Languages / Douglas Benson / The purpose of this report is to demonstrate mastery of content in the Spanish MA program in Second Language Acquisition at Kansas State University. After graduation from this program, I plan to pursue a career as a high school Spanish teacher. As evidence of content mastery, this report contains my philosophy of education, which emphasizes communicative competence in the Spanish classroom. I discuss best teaching practices in presenting and practicing Spanish vocabulary and grammar with students. The use of the target language and the integration of culture and the four language skills is designed to further my students’ development through the progression of the lesson plan, from warm-up, to input, to the activity sequence, to closure. This report also contains a rationale, or how my philosophy of education directly and specifically applies to my teaching, for a unit plan including daily lessons and related appendices on the subject of the Spanish Civil War, and outlines student learning outcomes for this unit, such as the ability to compare their home culture to the culture of the second language as well as the ability to relate art and literature to the events of the war. The topic of my unit plan is of particular interest to my students and me as wars and violence are a present reality in our world. The secondary focus of my unit plan involves the significant detrimental effects of the Spanish Civil War and well as its specific consequences in the lives of women and children.

La Théorie de l’agir communicationnel (1981), du théoricien allemand Jürgen Habermas, figure parmi les plus importants ouvrages de sociologie et de philosophie sociale du XXe siècle : son caractère universaliste, visant l’élaboration d’une théorie globale de la société occidentale moderne, en fait un écrit dont la réputation n’est plus à faire dans une diversité de champs académiques issus des sciences sociales. Toutefois, la théorie habermassienne n’a inspiré à ce jour qu’un nombre restreint d’études portant spécifiquement sur son articulation à l’éducation, que ce soit sur le plan de la nature de l’activité éducative ou encore d’une caractérisation théorique de l’éducation moderne institutionnalisée : ainsi, comment la théorie de l’agir communicationnel nous permet-elle de mieux comprendre les rouages de l’acte éducatif moderne et contemporain ainsi que l’évolution historique, politique et sociale des institutions scolaires européennes et nord-américaines? En tant que théorie de la société basée sur un renouvellement communicationnel du concept de rationalité, de quelle façon s’inscrit-elle dans une tradition philosophique éducative aux sources de l’école occidentale, et nous renseigne-t-elle sur les fondements de la relation pédagogique entre maîtres et élèves? En proposant une série de considérations à ce propos, cette thèse représente à la fois une étude des rapports entre la pensée philosophique et sociologique d’Habermas et l’éducation ainsi qu’une forte critique de celle-ci : en effet, la problématique centrale qui se dresse et subsiste à une articulation de la théorie habermassienne à différentes sphères éducatives demeure celle du statut de l’enfant dans un tel système rationaliste qui, malgré ses visées émancipatoires et libératrices pour l’acteur social, perpétue une négation de l’enfance propre au rationalisme de Platon à Kant. Dès lors, comment réfléchir l’éducation contemporaine à l’aune de la pensée habermassienne? Comment, finalement, penser l’éducation pour et contre Habermas? / The Theory of Communicative Action (1981), by the German theorist Jürgen Habermas, is among the most important works of sociology and social philosophy of the 20th century: its universal character, which aims to develop a comprehensive theory of the Western modern society, benefits from a well-established reputation in a variety of academic fields from social sciences (philosophy, sociology, anthropology, political science, law, history, ethics, etc.). However, to date, Habermas's theory has only inspired a limited number of studies in education in terms of the nature and aims of the educational activity or the theoretical characterization of institutionalized education in Modernity : thus, how does the theory of communicative action allow us to better understand the foundations of education’s historical, social and political development in Europe and North America? As a theory of society based on a communicative reinterpretation of the concept of rationality, how does Habermas's theory, as a prolongation of the educational and philosophical traditions at the sources of the Western modern school, can inform us about the mechanisms of the pedagogical relationship between teachers and students? In proposing a series of considerations to answer these questions, this thesis is both a study of the relationship between the philosophical and sociological thought of Habermas and a strong critic of his perspective : the central issue that remains unanswered from the philosopher is the child's status in such a rationalistic system that, despite its emancipatory and liberating ideals for the social actor, perpetuates a form of denial of childhood present in the rationalist tradition from Plato to Kant. How can we then reflect on contemporary education regarding Habermas's theory? How, finally, can we conceptualize education with and against Habermas?

The dilemma of diversity is the tension that exists when prescriptive claims are required across reasonable pluralism. Scholar and philosopher Dwight Boyd believes that the dilemma of diversity must be addressed for the continued health of multicultural societies, and suggests that the solution can be found through democratic reciprocity. Though the International Olympic Committee (IOC) markets unity and peace through its Olympic Games, does the Olympics relieve the dilemma of diversity? By critically examining the IOC’s historic and recent treatment of Aboriginals, its encouragement of divisive nationalism, and its educational programs, it is clear that the IOC does not embrace reasonable pluralism. The IOC’s public pedagogy is one that conceals its dominance through diversity. In exposing this dominance, I will argue that the IOC must embrace democratic reciprocity that allows for conversation across difference. Adopting an authentic acceptance of difference will alleviate the IOC’s propagation of Western ideology through neo-imperialism.

In Anishinaabemowin (Ojibwe language), Kipimoojikewin refers to our inheritance, or the things we carry with us. While Anishinaabemowin, Anishinaabe (Ojibwe) pedagogy and research practices are all part of our inheritance, so too is a legacy of colonial violence and historic trauma. This paper details one journey towards the language; the struggle through a colonial terrain rife with institutional and cognitive barriers, the journey to return to Anishinaabe ways of knowing, to articulating Anishinaabe pedagogy in a contemporary urban context and the work done to fulfill the vision of the Elders. There are no “best practices” only stories that exemplify an Anishinaabe axiological framework so that the causes and effects can be better understood, taken up and improved upon. Aapajitoon kema wanitoon.

The dilemma of diversity is the tension that exists when prescriptive claims are required across reasonable pluralism. Scholar and philosopher Dwight Boyd believes that the dilemma of diversity must be addressed for the continued health of multicultural societies, and suggests that the solution can be found through democratic reciprocity. Though the International Olympic Committee (IOC) markets unity and peace through its Olympic Games, does the Olympics relieve the dilemma of diversity? By critically examining the IOC’s historic and recent treatment of Aboriginals, its encouragement of divisive nationalism, and its educational programs, it is clear that the IOC does not embrace reasonable pluralism. The IOC’s public pedagogy is one that conceals its dominance through diversity. In exposing this dominance, I will argue that the IOC must embrace democratic reciprocity that allows for conversation across difference. Adopting an authentic acceptance of difference will alleviate the IOC’s propagation of Western ideology through neo-imperialism.

In Anishinaabemowin (Ojibwe language), Kipimoojikewin refers to our inheritance, or the things we carry with us. While Anishinaabemowin, Anishinaabe (Ojibwe) pedagogy and research practices are all part of our inheritance, so too is a legacy of colonial violence and historic trauma. This paper details one journey towards the language; the struggle through a colonial terrain rife with institutional and cognitive barriers, the journey to return to Anishinaabe ways of knowing, to articulating Anishinaabe pedagogy in a contemporary urban context and the work done to fulfill the vision of the Elders. There are no “best practices” only stories that exemplify an Anishinaabe axiological framework so that the causes and effects can be better understood, taken up and improved upon. Aapajitoon kema wanitoon.

This study focuses on Charles Taylor’s educational thought with a view to understanding his contributions to the discipline of Philosophy of Education. No comprehensive study of Charles Taylor’s educational thought has been attempted. There is a single dissertation and a dozen or so published periodical articles that do take Taylor’s educational views into consideration, to be sure. Yet these studies, which limit themselves to Taylor’s account of the recognition and/or non-recognition of identity in multicultural societies, are insufficient on five accounts: i) they are indifferent to the historical nature of Taylor’s scholarly work; ii) they neglect the philosophical sources of his educational thought; iii) they fail to highlight the interconnections between the key educational themes he takes up; iv) they disregard his major critics and the dialectical tensions raised by these critics; and v) they are somewhat dated in that they do not consider his more recent scholarship. My dissertation seeks to fill these scholarly gaps. My thesis is that an inner logic is implicit in Charles Taylor’s educational thought. I argue that Taylor’s views on the modern condition, (i.e. in his readings of Descartes, Kant, Herder, and Hegel), are closely interwoven with his views on modern education, and that interconnected currents in the modern history of ideas elucidated by Taylor, (i.e. scientific rationality, exclusive humanism, and the ethics of authenticity), have contributed to the rise of, and the sensitivity toward, both the theory and the practice of the politics of recognition in contemporary educational institutions. I conclude that an education for culturally diverse minds and hearts, anchored in human, historical, and epistemological recognition, and democratically open to both immanence and transcendence, is the true calling of Taylor’s educational thought.