217 The following analytical framework emerges from the above: learning philosophy: focuses on doing philosophy: focuses on learning learning concepts, positions to think for oneself while practising and theories of philosophers philosophical skills and attitude continuity: everything that is ‘planned’, discontinuity: everything that is the curriculum, organization of lessons, ‘unplanned’, disruptions, order in the classroom amazement, doubt authoritative discourse: explanation or dialogic discourse: open conversation teacher-guided dialogue focusing on a in which teacher and pupils investigate particular philosophical theory a philosophical question together The research questions arising from this were the following: First area of tension: learning philosophy - doing philosophy 1a) What are teachers’ views on learning philosophy versus doing philosophy? 1b) What are teachers’ views on the Socratic method of dialogue? 1c) What are teachers’ views on using primary texts? Second area of tension: continuity - discontinuity 2a) In what ways do teachers ensure continuity in their lessons? 2b) In what ways do teachers make use of discontinuity in their lessons? Third area of tension: authoritative - dialogic discourse 3) How does the use of authoritative and dialogic discourse in the classroom discussions during philosophy lessons relate to room to think? To provide an overview of observed ways for getting pupils to think, a fourth question, beyond the areas-of-tension structure, was added: 4) What strategies do philosophy teachers apply to get their pupils to think? The second chapter, Method, covers the objectives of the study, the type of study,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw