The phrase ‘teaching and learning’ has essentially replaced the word ‘teaching’ in educational discourse. The linguistic shift occurred as part of a wider movement in the 1980s and 1990s to give greater attention to learning in the educational process, and the phrase served a sloganistic function. With the learning paradigm now largely uncontroversial, the phrase—like other ex-slogans—may now be carrying implications more tied to its literal meaning. This paper suggests that the constant reference to learning in the context of teaching (...) carries the implication that teaching is always accompanied by learning. After applying Gilbert Ryle’s distinction between task and achievement verbs, the paper argues that under certain interpretations, the idea that teaching implies learning is deeply problematic. The paper proposes that we instead use ‘teaching and studying’: to communicate the deep connections between the activities carried out by teachers and students, without supporting the unhelpful idea that the activity of teaching must always lead to the achievement of learning. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The politics of lifelong learning and learnification have triggered educational philosophy’s justified indignation and blanket critiques of learning. The market logic of learning has, meanwhile, seized the city and caused a further educational-philosophical reactive response, which I critique in the form that it has taken inter alia in many prominent recent educational-philosophical works. After explaining what I mean by ‘reactive response’ I focus on the educational-philosophical reaction to the shift toward lifelong learning. Then I move to how this shift (...) has been translated into a discourse of city learning and how some educational theory responds to this discourse. My critique concludes with suggestions for an ethic of stereoscopically tackling facets of learning. (shrink)