At a time of pedagogical exhaustion, this article wants to imagine ways to redeem education, to spare education from its unaccomplished promises, reinvent and renew its vows, and make it somehow work towards possible futures. But how can this be done when there is no longer the old inherited faith in a direction of history with an end, no ‘telos’ nor faith that educational institutions will inevitably move societies forwards? Is there any ‘after’ if the arrow of history points in (...) no direction? What can we collectively expect from education if we have no assurance that schooling can lead to anything better than what we are now, or that caring for truth will make people freer? In place of the modernist idea of progress, the alternative narrative that is being offered to school systems and teachers is what I will describe as the ‘innovation paradigm’. Within this framework what we are, what we have, and what is in place are presented as declining, inadequate, and unsatisfactory. This narrative has become so powerful that from a ‘pedagogical popular culture’ perspective it has turned into the mainstream way of thinking about our educational institutions, practices, and hopes. Would it not, however, be more pedagogically productive to speak of ‘variation’ instead of ‘innovation’? Might this be the potential path for redeeming education after progress? [Editorial note: this paper forms part of the suite of papers entitled ‘Education After Progress’.]. (shrink)

While civic education may not always be explicitly included in school curriculums, it can still be imparted through various non-teaching practices and in different places. In this article, we will delve into three potential educational spaces -memorials, museums, and libraries- that are commonly found in Western democracies. We will explore the significance and scope of each of these spaces and discuss their respective ethical, political, and aesthetic responsibilities. Additionally, we will examine how they possess agency and can influence the educational (...) process, recognizing that even non-human entities, such as nature itself, can play an important role in shaping our understanding of civic education. (shrink)

Waiting has traditionally been defined as the interval of time between the anticipation of an event and its occurrence. From an educational perspective, we usually believe that it is not the wait that is important, but the attitude of the individual who is waiting. It is for this reason that, while we can barely find any educational research that addresses waiting, there is a prolific production relating to hope; that is, relating to one of the possible attitudes that someone may (...) have while waiting. This paper, contrary to this trend, aims to highlight, on the one hand, the educational importance that waiting has in itself and, on the other hand, the need to take it into account before addressing any attitude that an individual may show in relation to it. To do this, we will first distinguish between two different ways of waiting, one in which the individual is aware of the objective of the wait and another in which they are not aware of any objective. Secondly, we will analyze each of them separately and point out to what extent our world today is trying to force us to reduce our experience to just one of them. Finally, we will conclude that there is an educational need to experience both if we want to educate open minds capable of dealing with hope-inspiring attitudes in different ways. (shrink)

The introduction of corporate mode into universities with the widespread of neoliberalism has posed threats to intellectuals’ academic creativity and political sensitivity. To respond to the threats, I argue that it is high time we talk about educating hope. Moreover, I contend that Richard Rorty and Gilles Deleuze’s theories on hope can be of great help in understanding the complexity and exquisiteness of hope—non-representational and non-metaphysical, dependent on contingent encounters, transformative and political.