國立虎尾科技大學 |

Educational Justice : = Knowledge, Formation, and Pedagogical Responsibility.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Educational Justice :/
Reminder of title:	Knowledge, Formation, and Pedagogical Responsibility.
Author:	Nikolaidis, Alexandros Charalampos.
Description:	1 online resource (419 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-04, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International85-04A.
Subject:	Ethics. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798380595261

Educational Justice : = Knowledge, Formation, and Pedagogical Responsibility.
Nikolaidis, Alexandros Charalampos.

Educational Justice :Knowledge, Formation, and Pedagogical Responsibility. - 1 online resource (419 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-04, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Ohio State University, 2023.

Includes bibliographical references

Educational justice has traditionally been conceptualized in non-educational terms. Categories of justice with economic and political clout dominate scholarly conversations about educational justice and inform educational policymaking and practice. This leads to a narrow conceptualization of educational justice in distributive terms. The author challenges the hegemony of the dominant paradigm and advances a new paradigm for theorizing educational justice to inform educational research, policymaking, and practice. In developing this new paradigm, the dissertation first establishes the dominance of distributive justice as a guiding principle of US education policy and as a lens for theorizing educational injustice in educational research. It offers a historical analysis of federal education policy focused on the principles of justice that underpinned the policies enacted. Moreover, it presents limitations of distributive justice, thereby, establishing the need to reconsider our understanding of what constitutes an educational injustice and what policies are appropriate for disrupting such injustices. Second, the dissertation advances an account of educational injustice that centers on the obstruction of two distinctly educational tasks: knowledge acquisition and self-formation. In doing so, it reorients education policy and research toward two distinctly educational injustices: epistemic oppression and developmental coercion. It is argued that these are severe educational wrongs that also contribute to pressing social problems and injustices. The dissertation concludes by outlining implications of replacing the standard distributive paradigm with a democratic paradigm of epistemic empowerment and developmental enablement that fosters epistemic agency and disrupts the impact of harmful ideology on moral and intellectual development. It suggests that the new paradigm compels us to reconsider that nature of educational injustice and, relatedly, the locus and scope of pedagogical responsibility for its disruption. Moreover, it outlines principles and conditions that are necessary, though not necessarily sufficient, for educational justice to obtain and provides recommendations for action at the individual, collective, and policy level that align with these principles and conditions.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798380595261Subjects--Topical Terms:

555769
Ethics.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Educational justiceIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Educational Justice : = Knowledge, Formation, and Pedagogical Responsibility.
LDR:03889ntm a22004577 4500 001 1152624
005 20241209114614.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798380595261
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30788289
035 $a (MiAaPQ)OhioLINKosu1686340950791366
035 $a AAI30788289
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Nikolaidis, Alexandros Charalampos. $3 1479674
245 1 0 $a Educational Justice : $b Knowledge, Formation, and Pedagogical Responsibility.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (419 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-04, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Warnick, Bryan R.;Thompson, Winston C.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Ohio State University, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Educational justice has traditionally been conceptualized in non-educational terms. Categories of justice with economic and political clout dominate scholarly conversations about educational justice and inform educational policymaking and practice. This leads to a narrow conceptualization of educational justice in distributive terms. The author challenges the hegemony of the dominant paradigm and advances a new paradigm for theorizing educational justice to inform educational research, policymaking, and practice. In developing this new paradigm, the dissertation first establishes the dominance of distributive justice as a guiding principle of US education policy and as a lens for theorizing educational injustice in educational research. It offers a historical analysis of federal education policy focused on the principles of justice that underpinned the policies enacted. Moreover, it presents limitations of distributive justice, thereby, establishing the need to reconsider our understanding of what constitutes an educational injustice and what policies are appropriate for disrupting such injustices. Second, the dissertation advances an account of educational injustice that centers on the obstruction of two distinctly educational tasks: knowledge acquisition and self-formation. In doing so, it reorients education policy and research toward two distinctly educational injustices: epistemic oppression and developmental coercion. It is argued that these are severe educational wrongs that also contribute to pressing social problems and injustices. The dissertation concludes by outlining implications of replacing the standard distributive paradigm with a democratic paradigm of epistemic empowerment and developmental enablement that fosters epistemic agency and disrupts the impact of harmful ideology on moral and intellectual development. It suggests that the new paradigm compels us to reconsider that nature of educational injustice and, relatedly, the locus and scope of pedagogical responsibility for its disruption. Moreover, it outlines principles and conditions that are necessary, though not necessarily sufficient, for educational justice to obtain and provides recommendations for action at the individual, collective, and policy level that align with these principles and conditions.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Ethics. $3 555769
650 4 $a Epistemology. $3 671538
650 4 $a Education history. $3 1179887
650 4 $a Education policy. $3 1107727
650 4 $a Public policy. $3 1002398
650 4 $a Educational philosophy. $3 1148497
653 $a Educational justice
653 $a Distributive justice
653 $a Epistemic justice
653 $a Formative justice
653 $a Formative epistemic justice
653 $a Epistemic oppression
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0520
690 $a 0630
690 $a 0394
690 $a 0998
690 $a 0458
690 $a 0393
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a The Ohio State University. $b Educational Studies. $3 1189198
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 85-04A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30788289 $z click for full text (PQDT)