Group Essay——Week 5

Group work

Nietzche’s work composes the idea of the integrated role between religion and values and how it affects society. Nietzche encompasses the idea theta religion is life denying and as humans we are trying to make life meaningful to us, Nihlism derived from the latin term meaning nothing complies of the idea that man is metaphorically speaking is his own god this being said it is evident when comparing to the work of George Batille’s theory on humanity which asks us ‘what makes us different to animals, what makes the human and animal so distinct ? Batille like Nietzche, believes in the concept that ‘we’ as humans have no real value on earth, like animals we live we breath we die and in retrospect are the same as animals with the only difference being as humans we are never happy, we will constantly desire in order to make our lives more fulfilling. In this case humans distract themselves with materialistic values as Batile suggests to distract us of our meaningless lives e. Idealism, religion  is a dead desperate means of viewing the world ‘We have in fact only two certainties in this world – that we are not everything and we will die”

Ones life history is the interaction of habitus “a subjective reality” with the environment which Bourdieu comprehends  as an “objective reality” John Keenan uses ‘life histories’ as a method to examine how teachers working at higher level while in FE environments make sense of their role “teachers life experiences and background affects what they believe and consequently, how they teach”(Smith,2001) ones habitus not only exists subjectively, but influenced by the environment. Therefore, we can find ways of understanding how teachers construct themselves from examining the environment of their life in order to find the inner purpose to external constraints through the method of life history. To find the points from the context of their life which means the answer will be more authentic and informative as they are not subjected to ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers. Cotterill,Jackson and Letherby both state that the history process  starts of from what we think we know. “ It pulls us quickly into the unknown, of feeling and memory for example, as well as our difference”. (Pamela Cotterill, Sue Jackson, Gayle Letherby 2007: 77) There are three main motivations for this research. The first regards the ‘small amount of literature on teacher educators in the post-compulsory sector based in universities and further education colleges’ (Boyd, Harris and Murray 2011:14). Second reason is due to the relatively recent ‘explosion’ and government policy focus on the sector. There have been national developments such as new professional standards and alignment of these to the raising of the educational participation age in England with some important injection of government funding into FE-based teacher education schemes. And the third reason is the researchers’ hope to appropriate with Goodson’s inspiring research methodology in a purpose to give authentic ‘voice’ to HE in FE teacher educators. It is a practice of cooperation between FE and HE lecturers by FE and HE education lecturers. John also talk about how he inspect the method further in the next section followed by a consideration of the social, economic and political environment of education today.

It can be clearly seen however that life history is based on the pats, it encompasses personal memory of the individual but with this said the drawbacks of this method should be considered there are many concealments with this form of research such as the participants who are being interview with the life histories method have the ability to change their own reality not giving an accurate account in this sense this method can be questioned as date may not be valid.

Both speakers proposed the dictatorship in the author’s own narrative of their history. According to Barthes(1964), the “reality” may not come naturally, as it could be suggested that the reproduction and reinforcement of the cultural meaning, and that those mediums are known as portraying the reality are in fact constructing it. The two authors acknowledged and enabled Barthes’ idea of the altered and transmitted message, therefore suggesting a natural and original authorship in narratives. Hawkins shown the presentation of history with documentary, symbols and writings, it suggests the schematic process when interpreting history, that it may be altered by and appeals to our intellect based on the conventionally systematic connotation and denotation in meanings. While Keenan proposed the methodology to allow authors to have the entire dictatorship in their life history, where it shall not be processed and interpreted, and allows us to have a full access of the first-hand content.

 

Bibliography

Carol K. (2010) The Women Who Reconstructed American Jewish Education, Ingall UPNE

Pamela C, Sue J, Gayle L (2007) Challenges and Negotiations for Women in Higher Education, Springer Science & Business Media

Smith, L. C. (2001) Life history as a key factor in understanding teacher collaboration and classroom practice. key factor in understanding teacher collaboration and classroom practice. 112.

Barthes, R (1964) The Rhetoric of the Image.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s