International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education

The good teacher for the twenty-first century: a “mentoring teacher” with
heutagogical skills
Irit Levy-Feldman,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Irit Levy-Feldman, (2018) "The good teacher for the twenty-first century: a “mentoring teacher”
with heutagogical skills", International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-10-2017-0067
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-10-2017-0067
Downloaded on: 06 May 2018, At: 05:25 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 63 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 5 times since 2018*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:573577 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2046-6854.htm

The good
The good teacher for the teacher for the
twenty-first century: a “mentoring twenty-first
century
teacher” with heutagogical skills
Irit Levy-Feldman
Kibbutzim College of Education Technology and the Arts, Tel-Aviv, Israel
Received 13 October 2017
Revised 20 January 2018
17 February 2018
Abstract 9 March 2018
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose a new conception of the “good teacher” – that of the 25 March 2018
teacher-as-mentor, or, as the author refer to it, the “mentoring teacher,” who is equipped with heutagogical Accepted 25 March 2018
skills aimed at promoting self-determined learning through dialogic teaching. This conception appears to be
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

better suited than current conceptions for the twenty-first century and the postmodern era.
Design/methodology/approach – The conception is based on an interpretative textual analysis of western
educational philosophies and of the nature of postmodernity.
Findings – The mentoring teacher, presented to be the “good teacher” for the new era, is provided with skills
associated with heutagogy: a pedagogical approach that emphasizes the individual’s need to learn
autonomously and independently and that regards the capacity to do so as a basic skill for living and lifelong
learning in the changing world. Using dialogic teaching, mentoring teachers equipped with heutagogical
skills can navigate their teaching to promote the self-learning abilities of different learners and better prepare
them to navigate the challenges of the current era.
Research limitations/implications – This paper presents one perspective on looking at the changes that
have occurred in the conception of the good teacher in western society and offers one point of view of the
image of the new good teacher, hoping it might stimulate new thinking on the need to reconsider the role of
the teacher in contemporary western society.
Originality/value – Placing the focus on teachers’ skills as opposed to students’ needs, which is much more
common, invites discussion regarding the image of the good teacher and teacher education.
Keywords Heutagogy, Good teacher, Mentoring teacher, Teacher-as-mentor
Paper type Conceptual paper

Introduction
Discussion regarding the concept or the image of the “good teacher” is nothing new. Indeed,
evidence of discussion on this subject dates back as far as Aristotle and Sophocles and the
ancient texts of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Despite its longevity, however, this
discussion never ceases to be relevant, as the conception of the good teacher is not scientific
but rather ideologically (Cochran-Smith, 2004a), culturally, and contextually contingent and
changes over time (Shulman, 1986).
The changes that have occurred in the conception of the good teacher in western society
can be considered in a variety of ways. One of the most common distinctions among
educational philosophies was first proposed by John Dewey (Dworkin, 1959). During the
1930s, Dewey compared the progressive movement he had established with previous
streams in education and in this context classified the older streams, which included
educational philosophies focused on culture and on society, as “old education” and
progressive education as “new education.” This fundamental distinction also finds
expression in later divisions, for example Lamm (1973), Fenstermacher and Soltis (1986),
Harpaz (2006), and Aloni (2005).
The paper begins by considering different conceptions of the good teacher in the
traditional or “old” era and in the “modern” era. It then proceeds to its main section, which
suggests a redefinition and repositioning of the concept of the good teacher that seems
better suited for the postmodern era: the teacher-as-mentor, equipped with heutagogical International Journal of Mentoring
and Coaching in Education
skills aimed at promoting self-determined learning through dialogic teaching, which I refer © Emerald Publishing Limited
2046-6854
to as the mentoring teacher. Although the term mentor in the context of education is DOI 10.1108/IJMCE-10-2017-0067
 IJMCE typically employed to refer to the mentoring of new teachers by more experienced teachers
(Nasser-Abu Alhija et al., 2011), this paper uses it to conceptualize the teacher-student
relationship in the context of teaching, learning, and assessment. Heutagogy, which I regard
as a pedagogical approach distinctly suitable for the mentoring teacher, is a relatively new
term that was first advanced by Hase and Kenyon in 2001 to refer to “the study of
self-determined learning,” which is considered to be learning of a higher order. According to
Hase and Kenyon (2001), the heutagogical approach to learning stresses the individual’s
need to learn autonomously and independently and regards the capacity to do so as a basic
skill for living in the constantly changing contemporary world. In this context, it places an
emphasis on the teacher’s ability to engage in dialogic teaching.
In addition to constituting historical periods, the different eras, especially the old and the
modern eras, reflect different conceptual approaches to the goal of education, schools, and
the teacher, as articulated using similar terminology (traditional vs old and modern vs new)
by Dewey. The concept of a “postmodern” era, or “postmodernity,” is relatively new and
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

more vague, as noted by Featherstone (2007), who wrote that “one of the problems is that the
term is at once fashionable yet irritatingly illusive to define” (p. 1), and Hassan (1987), who
argued that “Postmodernism suffers from a certain semantic instability: that is, no clear
consensus about its meaning exists among scholars” (p. 87). Some view it as a historical
period whereas others understand it as “a desire, a mood which looks to the future to redeem
the present” (Docherty, 1993, p. 2). The division between the eras is neither clear nor sharp
and will be discussed further at a later point in the paper.
Our understanding of the concepts of the good teacher that have been prevalent during
the different eras is based partially on an interpretative textual analysis of educational
philosophies. Interpretive textual analysis is a form of textual analysis used to explore
different meanings and cultural layers of given texts and, in some cases, to suggest new
versions created by the intersection of these texts. This process, also referred to as textual
deconstruction, is a critical analysis that aims to identify and disassemble common and
sometimes axiomatic concepts (Derrida, cited in Shlasky and Arieli, 2001). Such textual
analysis can be associated with postmodernism in light of the challenge it poses to
present-day concepts.

The concept of the good teacher in the old era

According to the traditional culture-focused philosophical conception, the main goal of
education is to ground the individual in the historical partnership of the human race, the
product of which is culture. According to this conception, an educated individual is an
individual who meets the standards and possesses the values that enjoy a stable standing in
culture and have existed for many generations, proving their necessity and their importance
to man and to human society (Lamm, 1973). An educated person is a “good person” who is
intellectual and has a positive personality (Aloni, 2005; Lamm, 1973, 2000a). The content of
education consists of bodies of knowledge and skills that crystalized in the past
(Dworkin, 1959) and includes general knowledge in diverse areas of content. Schools and
teachers function to shape students in the spirit of the prevailing culture by exposing them
to the best elements of the sciences, morals, citizenship, and the arts (Aloni, 2005). Teaching
is meant to shape the personality of students in accordance with the model of the “good and
cultured person” for any given culture, and teaching methods place an emphasis on forming
the individual in the spirit of the dominant culture (Lamm, 1973).
Textbooks are the exclusive agent of culture and consist primarily of bodies of
knowledge and skills that evolved in the past. The teacher is expected to be a widely
educated intellectual who functions as a legitimate and autonomous agent of culture and
knowledge (Bitty, 2001), whose role it is to serve as an example of a good and cultured
person and to cause students to identify both with the teachers and with the cultural values
 they represent. The literature classifies this approach as a traditional approach that The good
assumes that any intellectual with a broad education and knowledge in a particular field of teacher for the
content can also teach (Zeichner, 1994). twenty-first
According to the traditional society-focused philosophical conception of education, which
emphasizes society and the individual’s role within it, the goal of education is to teach young century
students the conventional patterns of thinking and behavior in the society in which they live
(Aloni, 2005; Lamm, 1973, 2000a, b). The roots of this approach reach back to ancient Greece.
Plato assigned the work of education as a whole to the ideal society, which, he argued, “will
maintain and fulfill itself only if, through education, it assigns each individual his
place within it and proves capable of also educating its leaders” (Adar, 1976, p. 59). Aristotle
stressed that “Man is a social animal” and that “society is something that precedes
the individual” (Adar, 1976, p. 60). Education is a social system by which society fulfills its
role of teaching its young members ways of thinking and behaving that are considered by
society to be good. As a result, the role of the school in general and the teacher in particular
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

is to imbue students with the values of the society in which they live. Teachers are the
means by which an effective relationship is established between the students and the study
material and the agents by which information and skills are conveyed and rules of conduct
coerced. The teacher is required to possess extensive knowledge regarding the values of
society, its authority structure, and content that is regarded as beneficial to and important
for the individual’s functioning in society, as reflected in an organized program drawn up by
a source of authority (Zeichner, 1994). The teacher must be qualified to employ the best
methods possible to convey this content; or, in other words, the teacher is expected to
possess pedagogical skills and be able to identify and neutralize personality factors that
have the potential to interfere with the student’s learning in order to maximize the
effectiveness of the process (Lamm, 1973). Some refer to such a teacher as an “effective
teacher” (Cochran-Smith, 2004b), and others refer to the teacher as a “behaviorist” focusing
on the “how” (Bitty, 2001).

The concept of the good teacher in the modern era

According to Dewey’s (Dworkin, 1959) modern philosophical conception of education, which
focuses on the self-actualization of the individual, the aim of education is to provide students
with conditions that are conducive to personal development and self-actualization, without
relation to any external cultural or social goal (Lamm, 2000a). Although this approach is
perceived as being innovative in character, it actually has ancient roots. Socrates
(Aloni, 2005) claimed that the “truth” lies within students but that students are in need of a
teacher to inspire them to seek it out within themselves and to develop and actualize their
own personalities. According to this approach, the goal of education is to reveal and activate
the latent human potential within each individual, and the purpose of schools and teachers
is to make this possible. In doing so, they must help students actualize their individual
capabilities to enable them to live balanced and happy lives.
According to the modern conception of education, the good teacher needs to possess an
awareness of and commitment to difference among the students and must be caring and
attentive to their basic emotional and intellectual needs. To this end, the teacher needs to
understand the students, their stage of development, their previous experiences, and the
ways in which they learn, as well as the individual background, motivation, areas of
interest, and worldview of each. The good teacher must be flexible and relate to difference
among the students in order to motivate each to learn, to be involved, to understand, and to
develop (Darling-Hammond and Snyder, 2000; Giladi and Ben-Peretz, 1981; Sykes, 1999).
The teacher must engage in teaching geared toward learning that suits the identity
of the students – high-quality teaching “tailored to their needs” (Teaching and Learning
in 2020 Review Group, 2006, p. 3). The teacher must possess general pedagogical skills,
 IJMCE including the ability to manage a classroom, to plan a lesson, and to engage in evaluation
(Hawley and Valli, 1999; Sykes, 1999). The teacher must also possess expertise in the
necessary pedagogical skills for the relevant field of content, to enable the teacher to present
ideas relevant to the area of content, as well as linkages between them and other subjects in a
manner that is clear and accessible to the students (Loewenberg-Ball, 2000; Loewenberg-Ball
and Cohen, 1999). Moreover, the good teacher needs to be able to contend with and learn from
changes at different levels (the classroom, the school, and the education system as a whole)
(Cochran-Smith, 2003). Shulman (2005) refers to this ability as “pedagogies of uncertainty” and
asserts that in situations of uncertainty in the course of teaching, teachers are expected to be
able to demonstrate integrity based on responsible judgment that is well suited to the
changing realities. This, he posits, requires awareness and cognizance of change, the ability to
make judgments based on understanding and recognition of the implications of the possible
courses of action in the situations created by education, and the ability to respond with
flexibility and improvisation. In order to respond effectively to difference and change, the
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

teachers must interrogate their work by means of constant reflection on the one hand and
professional development on the other hand. The good teachers also need to undergo
professional development by investigating their vocation both independently and as part of
“learning communities” (Darling-Hammond, 2005, 2006, 2007; Darling-Hammond et al., 2002;
Hawley and Valli, 1999).
As shown, the image of the good teacher has changed over the years. However, in recent
years, as a result of decreased satisfaction with education systems, an increasing number of
voices have pointed to the need for new discourse on the concept of the good teacher
(McDiarmid and Clevenger-Bright, 2008; Teaching and Learning in 2020 Review Group,
2006; Yosifon and Shmida, 2006). Calls for change have intensified in light of the processes
associated with globalization and the information revolution that are characteristic of the
postmodern era. Against this background, the following section suggests a new conception
of the good teacher that seems better suited for the postmodern era: that of the mentoring
teacher, equipped with heutagogical skills aimed at promoting self-determined learning
using dialogic teaching.

The conception of the good teacher in the postmodern era

Postmodernity
The postmodern era is characterized by a number of pronounced trends and developments.
Some can be attributed to the technological revolution, which has facilitated worldwide
communication and created the possibility of personal, cultural, economic, and political
relationships of unprecedented scope between individuals, groups, and countries and has
had far-reaching sociological, psychological, cultural, economic, religious, and educational
impact on our lives (Barber, 1995; Bauman, 2002; Ram, 2005; Silverstone, 1999; Yosifon and
Shmida, 2006).
One of the most prominent effects of the technological revolution thus far has been
globalization. The technological revolution can be distinguished from globalization in that
the former has to do primarily with technological advancement whereas the latter
encompasses broader social, psychological, sociological, and other aspects. Many
sociologists, however, attribute the onset of globalization to technological changes
originating toward the end of the twentieth century. These changes, they maintain, sparked
a process that resulted in an unprecedented “shrinking” of the world, with effects that have
been positive, negative, and in some cases, contradictory (Barber, 1995; Bauman, 2002;
Ram, 2005; Silverstone, 1999). For example, in the world of today, information is accessible
to all who seek it. At the same time, however, western society has come to be characterized
by hyper-connectivity, which some maintain is causing people to lose their personal
connections (Silverstone, 1999). Moreover, globalization is regarded as facilitating diverse
 opportunities, but some argue that the processes involved are widening the gap between The good
rich and poor (Bauman, 2002). In this context, some regard technological development and teacher for the
globalization as engines for improving the economy, while others contend that they promote twenty-first
capitalist hyper-consumerism. Furthermore, some point to globalization as a process that
weakens “great truths”; provides welcome legitimacy for numerous local truths; raises century
public consciousness regarding multiculturalism, pluralism, and individual difference; and
encourages mass immigration and the creation of new identities (Yosifon and Shmida, 2006).
Others argue that we are currently bearing witness to a worldwide conflict between two
opposing parts of the world that are separated from one another by technology, which is
closely tied to capitalism and creates antagonism among many communities that are
concerned about their unique local character (Barber, 1995).
Researchers and philosophers view postmodernism as a reaction to, and in some cases a
rejection of, the modern era and the values associated with it. Some argue that the term has
no single definition, some understand it as a historical period, and some, as noted, view it as
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

“a mood which looks to the future to redeem the present” (Docherty, 1993, p. 2). Lyotard
(1984) points out that the position of knowledge has changed in the postmodern era.
Whereas knowledge in the modern era was justified by what he refers to as meta-narratives,
the postmodern era tends to emphasize the relativism, irrationalism, and nihilism of human
reality; appreciates multiplicity; and disapproves of meta-narratives. Some postmodern
philosophers are critical of some of the modern ideologies, renouncing the very notion of
“truth,” and suggesting a different way of viewing knowledge – one that, unlike the
modernist approach, does not distinguish between positivist knowledge and critical
reflexive or hermeneutic knowledge and does not regard knowledge as a process of
oppositional thinking controlled by experts. From the postmodernist perspective,
knowledge is a viable concept constructed by all, a set of working hypotheses rather
than an absolute and universal truth (Libman, 2013; Lyotard, 1984).
As opposed to this position, some researchers and philosophers argue that the ideas
expressed by postmodern philosophers are nothing new (see e.g. Docherty, 1993; Glasner,
2011). Bereiter and Scardamalia (2003) pointed out, “We think a fair generalization is that
they are relatively short-term interventions that do not so much develop new skills as
sharpen or repurpose old ones” (p. 2). Foucault (1984) suggested refraining from
distinguishing between the modern and the pre-modern or postmodern eras and instead
called for investigating how attitudes of modernity came to find themselves struggling with
attitudes of counter modernity. In this way, postmodernity can be viewed as a critique of or
a challenge to the present and its inability to achieve enlightenment – that is, a process by
which we are liberated from “immaturity” or a state in which we accept someone else’s
authority to lead us in areas where the use of reason is called for. Steps toward
enlightenment can be made through education (Kant, cited in Aloni, 2005).

Education in the postmodern era

These developments and changes present education systems with immense and at times
contradictory challenges. The complex reality in which we currently live underscores the
need for reconsideration of the prevalent educational paradigms currently in place,
including the concept of the good teacher.
The diverse, global, multicultural, and pluralistic world of today continues to develop and
change at a feverish pace. At the same time, as a result of massive migration from the Third
World to the First World, the west is becoming increasingly multicultural and heterogeneous.
The traditional educational philosophies, which aimed at instilling knowledge for the sake of
cultural advancement and/or socialization, do not reflect current educational needs of western
society. At the same time, modern educational philosophies, which promote the self-actualization
of the individual, are also in need of update and adaptation to better suit the realities of the
 IJMCE technological revolution, globalization, social changes, and the new position of knowledge.
The major pedagogical challenge facing the education system in the postmodern era is to stress
the skills of self-management and problem solving (particularly problems of the changing,
complex world), some of which were presented in earlier eras, and to place greater emphasis on
the cultivation of creativity, innovation, conceptualization, communication, cooperation, and
technological and critical skills. According to Edmund Gordon (2013), “Learning how to think
critically and creatively, reason logically, interpret relationally, and to access and create
knowledge will be more privileged in the 21st century” (p. 10). Particularly important is the need
to learn media and self-management within the media as an integral part of life experiences
(Silverstone, 1999). However, the postmodern era challenges education not only technologically
but also conceptually. In light of the new position of knowledge, it is also necessary to rethink
the position of education to better enable it to achieve its role of promoting individual
enlightenment. Bereiter and Scardamalia (2012) identified the following five abilities as elements
that teachers must cultivate in their students in the postmodern era: the ability to build, improve,
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

and create knowledge from information; the ability to simplify theories – meaning, to “translate”
theories into practice; the ability to understand and effectively conduct themselves in today’s
complex world and to use this complexity to their advantage; the ability to learn alone and to
persevere in independent learning; and the ability to learn and work cooperatively with others.
Again, some of the skills are not exclusively associated with the new era but appear to require
greater emphasis.

The teacher in the postmodern era

The above requirements need to be reflected in the attributes of the teacher. Ostensibly,
the complex concept of the good teacher appears to be capable of meeting this need. On a
more practical level, however, voices raised over the past few years maintain that the
conventional concept of the good teacher is largely “theoretical,” fails to stand up to the test
of contemporary reality, and is poorly suited for the postmodern era (McDiarmid and
Clevenger-Bright, 2008; Teaching and Learning in 2020 Review Group, 2006; Yosifon and
Shmida, 2006). These factors need to be considered in conjunction with claims that despite
the need to do so, teachers find it difficult to form such a complex professional identity
within the burdensome, contradiction-laden reality in which they work. Contradiction is
manifested in a variety of forms. One is the gap between strategies of broad centralization of
the education system on the one hand, and the desire to extend autonomy to schools and
teachers on the other hand. Another is the incompatibility between school structure, the
content it teaches, and its standard teaching methods, which are still based on the logic and
patterns of past activity, despite the surroundings, which have undergone major change.
In addition, indicative of this contradiction is the desire for teachers that are both
multi-disciplinary and specialists. So is recognition of the need for teaching, learning, and
evaluation that cultivate the individual and give expression to multiculturalism and
difference among students, and the simultaneous need for intensive evaluation on uniform
scales based on comprehensive standardized testing (Apeloig et al., 2010).
Taking all this into consideration, the need for a different concept of the good teacher
that is better suited for the postmodern era is clear. To meet this need, I suggest the concept
of the mentoring teacher: the teacher equipped with heutagogical skills that promote
self-determined learning through dialogic teaching.
Self-determined learning reflects a humanistic conception of human nature and
highlights the individual’s natural tendency toward development and psychological growth
(Deci and Ryan, 2000). According to Deci and Ryan’s (1985, 2000) self-determination theory
(SDT), autonomous motivations enable people to realize their authentic self, whereas
controlled motivations are experienced as sources of external or internal pressure.
Thus, SDT does not see extrinsic/intrinsic as a dichotomy but rather as a continuum of
 autonomous vs controlled motivation (Roth et al., 2007). This theory views individual The good
self-efficacy or competence, on a scale from extrinsic to intrinsic, as an important individual teacher for the
characteristic enabling motivation. According to SDT, autonomous motivation is positively twenty-first
associated with a sense of personal accomplishment, which can be achieved through
autonomy-supporting teaching in which the teacher is not the exclusive authority for century
information, knowledge, or learning, and not even necessarily for teaching or the
assessment of learning, but rather a facilitator or a learning leader. Students can also learn
from peers, in groups or alone, and can build knowledge using external resources, as
reflected in studies that associate this approach with on-line learning (Blaschke, 2012;
Hase and Kenyon, 2007).
Teachers who promote self-determined learning must provide their students with tools to
help them develop the skills necessary to extract the relevant knowledge from the boundless
sea of information at their disposal and, at the same time, understand and relate to
differences among students. They also need to imbue their students with a sense of
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

openness to the difference, multiculturalism, and pluralism that are typical of the world
today and provide them with the tools to contend with the changes of the twenty-first
century and to make use of critical intelligence to deal with problems and experience
changes in a positive manner (Giroux, 1993). As knowledge today is conceived of differently
than in the past, teachers are no longer the “holders” of knowledge and are no longer
required to “convey” their knowledge to their students, but are rather to help them acquire it
on their own, based on their own abilities. Teaching is not limited to the delivery of
knowledge and the ability to remember information but must also enable students to
develop a capacity to implement relevant information in a specific context and to organize it
according to effective strategies (Lyotard, 1984). If, as Lyotard (1984, p. 52) points out:
[…] education must not only provide for the reproduction of skills, but also for their progress, then
it follows that the transmission of knowledge should not be limited to the transmission of
information, but should include training in all of the procedures that can increase one’s ability to
connect the fields jealously guarded from one another by the traditional organization of knowledge.

To this end, and to ensure maximum facilitation of student self-determination, it is

recommended that teachers in the postmodern era be provided with heutagogical
techniques, which can be considered pedagogical skills of a higher order.
Pedagogy today refers to the art or science of educating children and is used widely as a
synonym for teaching (Kennedy and Surman, 2006). The pedagogue (teacher) assumes
responsibility for deciding what will be learned, when it will be learned, and how. Looking
back at the roots of pedagogy, none of the great teachers, from Confucius to Plato, were
quite so authoritarian (Ashton and Newman, 2006), and it seems that the real meaning has
shifted to the paradigm of teachers’ authority and control. In andragogy, which was
originally defined as the art and science of helping adult learners, there is less distinction
between the teacher and the learner. This term has recently come to refer to learner-focused
education for people of all ages but, as a paradigm, appears to treat education more as doing
in the present than preparation for the future (Ashton and Newman, 2006).
Heutagogy is a relatively new term first suggested by Hase and Kenyon (2001) to refer to
the study of self-determined learning, which is considered to be of a higher order than
pedagogical learning or andragogic learning (Blaschke, 2012; Hase and Kenyon, 2007)
because it allows the development of critique, openness, and flexibility capabilities of the
student. Heutagogy is a new pedagogical approach that stresses the individual’s need to
learn independently and regards the ability to do so as a basic skill for living in the quickly
changing world (Hase and Kenyon, 2001). The program of study proposed by this approach
is neither linear nor dictated but rather flexible, adapted to context, and determined in
conjunction with the student. It assumes that people, young and old, learn from a full range
 IJMCE of life experiences and that educators have to serve as guides in the development of
ideas rather than force-feeding the wisdom of others (Coughlan, 2004, cited in Ashton and
Newman, 2006).
Heutagogy recognizes that knowledge and skills assume different forms in the postmodern
era and do not necessarily lead to meaningful learning, and that the teacher and student,
together, must identify the knowledge, skills, and processes that are necessary for meaningful
learning. Heutagogy anticipates a future in which knowing how to learn will be an essential
educational skill (Ashton and Newman, 2006), requiring a fundamental shift away from the
idea of uniform teaching and learning in which “one size fits all” (Cochran, 2008). Nevertheless,
it emphasizes collaborative learning and is therefore suitable for the postmodern era.
In addition to leading the learning process, learners are partners in shaping the processes of
evaluation, including self-evaluation. According to this approach, the good teacher is a
moderator of learning who guides learners via a dialog that relates to their personal learning
needs and that holds practical applicability to their own lives (Hase and Kenyon, 2007).
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

The teacher must be knowledgeable in the content area to be able to steer students
toward relevant resources and incorporate curricular goals into their learning activities.
To play this role, teachers are in need of skills enabling them to conduct and sustain
empowering dialogic instruction. The teacher’s role, during this dialog, is to guide students
in finding their way in the rich yet confusing sea of information around them in an effort to
enable them to produce new knowledge and to continue developing in the course of and
throughout their lives as part of the global world community and the quickly changing
multicultural environment. In addition, teachers employing a heutagogical approach deepen
their own meaningful learning by constantly learning on their own and in conjunction with
colleagues. They do so by producing new knowledge through the conceptualization of their
own personal experience, by translating theories into practice, and by taking advantage of
the complexities of reality and the changes around them for the sake of teaching and
learning (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 2012).
In this way, dialogical teaching has a productive, enriching impact on all participants in
the process and provides teachers with the ability (through action studies and reflection, for
example) to learn independently and develop professionally, making use of their personal
teaching experience and dealing with changing teaching situations in multicultural settings.
The term mentor is derived from the Greek and refers to a person who serves as an
advisor or guide with rich experience in his or her field of expertise. As Athena, the
archetypical mentor, was the goddess of wisdom, mentoring can be defined as using one’s
own wisdom to help increase the wisdom of another. Different definitions and theories of
mentoring exist today, mostly outside the area of education; indeed, some have put the
number of definitions currently in use at more than 50 (Crisp and Cruz, 2009). One common
definition casts mentoring as a process for the informal transmission of knowledge, social
capital, and the psychosocial support perceived by the recipient as relevant to work, career,
or professional development. According to this approach, mentoring entails informal,
typically face-to-face, communication over a sustained period of time between a person who
is perceived to possess greater relevant knowledge, wisdom, or experience (the mentor) and
a person who is perceived to possess less (the protégé) (Bozeman and Feeney, 2007).
A mentor guides a person through his or her personal and/or professional development.
Mentoring is practiced in a wide range of professions including business, law, medicine, and
nursing, with common and differing techniques employed in different areas.
To conclude, in the field of education, the term mentoring mostly employs the
professional learning and development of new teachers and school principals or of other
officials in the educational system (Nasser-Abu Alhija et al., 2011; Searby and Armstrong,
2016). Therefore, I suggest the term mentoring teacher to clarify the usage of the concept
of the mentor to characterize the teacher-student relationship, as opposed to the mentoring
 of new or fellow teachers or leaders, in a variety of teaching, learning, and evaluation The good
settings, as advocated in this paper. teacher for the
There are similarities and differences between these two types of mentoring. Mentors twenty-first
working with new teachers are first and foremost teachers, and mentoring is their secondary
role. In this capacity, they help new teachers integrate into their school and provide century
them with pedagogical advice and support in developing their professional identity.
The mentoring process involves the mutual observation of instruction and regular feedback
and advisory sessions, and the relationship between the participants is expected to be of
mutual and equal partnership, although this is not always the case (Ingersoll and Smith,
2004; Nasser-Abu Alhija et al., 2011). The skills required by mentors of new teachers
include knowledge regarding teaching, the ability to teach about teaching, the interpersonal
qualities of empathy and accommodation, and a well-formed professional identity
( Jaspers et al., 2014).
The mentoring teacher is charged with guiding/mentoring the students throughout their
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

personal and professional development by providing them with the conditions, tools, and
skills required for optimal and educated independent self-management within the
constantly changing multicultural global world, both alone and as part of a group. In so
doing, the mentoring teachers must adapt themselves to different learners and recognize
that the tools with which she imbues them will serve them not only throughout their studies
but also throughout their adult lives (lifelong learning). The teacher must think about the
process rather than the content, look beyond the disciplines, and acknowledge that knowing
how to learn is a fundamental skill for the learners (Hase and Kenyon, 2003).
According to Rogers (2006), we cannot teach another person directly but rather can only
facilitate his/her learning. As we have seen, not only is the role of the mentoring teacher
different from that of the experienced teacher mentoring new teachers, but so is the manner
of mentoring, the nature of the relationship between the involved parties, and the skills
required. However, there are also a number of similarities. In her work on mentoring new
teachers, Orland-Barak (2011) maintains that teaching how to teach requires the acquisition
of three interrelated abilities – the ability to evaluate, the ability to participate, and the
ability to improvise – all of which find expression in a variety of dialectic contexts at
the junctures between frameworks of dialog and frameworks of doing. These abilities are
reflective of the wisdom behind mentoring students. For example, Orland-Barak points out
that the discourse of the mentor promotes a transition from “speaking to” the student
to “speaking with” the student, which is also a discourse that reflects the necessary
transition from teacher to mentoring teacher. The change also reflects transition from a
standards-focused conception to a conception that emphasizes personal guidance and
support and recognizes the difference between learners and the need for tailor-made,
personal mentoring (Wang, cited in Orland-Barak, 2011). In a broader and more general
sense, it also reflects a transition from positivist to constructivist learning, teaching, and
evaluating, which stresses the active nature of the process.
The training of mentoring teachers will require teacher education institutions to undergo
a change in conception and a shift from traditional to newer methods, as the former is based
on teachers’ power and views learners as primarily passive and dependent individuals in
compulsory learning environments receiving transmitted knowledge (Ashton and Newman,
2006). Newer methods, in contrast, assume learner competence and greater independence.
As we have seen, the world today presents an enormous variety of possibilities and a sea of
information that is open and accessible to all. This information is being constantly updated,
and it is reasonable to assume that within ten years’ time, if not fewer, we will find ourselves
in completely different surroundings than in the present. Therefore, even if we train the
teachers of tomorrow using the information of today, the current “present” will no longer
be relevant by the time they begin teaching. As the attempt to keep up with the pace of the
 IJMCE developments in the world by expanding our expectations of teachers has no chance of
success, I suggest that we accept this phenomenon as part of the dynamic lives we have
been living for the past decade and teach both children and teachers to manage themselves
rationally in this reality.
Although these points require further consideration, we can nonetheless rely on suitable,
already existing foundations. For example, Orland-Barak (2011) proposes foundations for a
program for educating toward teaching as a praxis that, at least in part, can be used in the
training of mentoring teachers. They include training teachers as mentors based first on the
understanding that everything is contextually relative and contingent and subject to
change, and nothing is eternal or static; second, recognition of the importance of the ability
to conduct a mutual dialog in which the social and cultural codes of the participants are
accepted as legitimate, even if they are not agreed upon; and eventually, based on an
understanding of the concept of teaching as an act of mediation and as a non-linear concept
of advancement and learning.
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

Summary and conclusion

Postmodern educational philosophy incorporates, to some extent, elements of the traditional
as well as the modern educational philosophies discussed in the first part of this paper.
Although some would say it offers nothing new, it adapts something from each approach to
suit the postmodern era. With regard to traditional social educational philosophy, it
incorporates the idea that socialization pertains not only to the student’s local home
society but also to the diverse multicultural and frequently changing global community.
With regard to traditional cultural educational philosophy, it does not advocate an
abandonment of cultural assets but rather asserts the need to internalize the fact that the
teacher is not necessarily the only source of knowledge on such subjects. In this context, it is
noteworthy that, despite concerns regarding cultural superficiality and the diminution of the
human spirit, the postmodern era appears to be promoting the democratization of cultural
assets, imbuing them with value for all; obfuscating the hierarchy of elitist power centers;
and facilitating a pluralistic and heterogeneous culture that allows for the expression of
multiculturalism, disagreement, and difference (Yosifon and Shmida, 2006). With regard to
modern educational philosophy, postmodern educational philosophy retains the goal of
self-actualization of the individual but advocates achieving this goal through autonomous,
self-determined learning that recognizes individual difference and, at the same time,
considers global diversity and the need to adapt skills for promoting self-actualization to
better suit the rapidly changing world. It also acknowledges the need to develop skills for
lifelong learning. Therefore, in the new and complex postmodern world, the role of education
in general, and teachers in particular, is to help learners actualize themselves, both on their
own and as part of the all-encompassing, multicultural, and rapidly changing global
community. To do so, teachers need to provide students with capabilities and skills of
lifelong learning including self-management, problem solving, creativity, innovation, critical
thinking, and the ability to cope with ambiguity and cooperation.
On this basis, we can conceptualize the good teachers as mentors with heutagogy skills
necessary to navigate the complex realities of the postmodern era – for the benefit of their
teaching and the education of the students – through productive dialogs with students and
with colleagues. It is interesting to point out that Hase and Kenyon (2003) themselves
associated mentoring with heutagogy:
Some of the work-based learning possibilities that are heutagogical in nature are action learning,
and coaching and mentoring and their associated techniques. These approaches emphasize
processes that provide the opportunity to access learning “moments,” tacit learning, and develop
the notion of a learning organisation. A more recent conceptualization of this notion that has been
provided a practical base is that of knowledge management (p. 5).
 The role of educators according to the pedagogical approach, which appears to have been The good
suited to the traditional era, is to deliver knowledge. The role of educators according to the teacher for the
andragogical, which is better suited to the modern era, is to instruct and support the learner twenty-first
in developing the capacity to become more self-directed learners, to help learners find
information and relate it to their own experiences, and to place the focus on problem solving century
within real-world situations.
The role of educators according to a heutagogical approach, which we posit is well suited
to the postmodern era, is similar to their role in the andragogical approach, in which
the instructor facilitates the learning process by providing guidance and resources. In the
heutagogical approach, however, the teachers fully relinquishes their ownership of the
learning path and vests it in the learners, who negotiate their learning and determine what
will be learned and how (Blaschke, 2012; Hase and Kenyon, 2001, 2007).
Because more mature learners require less mentoring and can be more self-directed in
their learning, and less mature learners require more mentoring (Blaschke, 2012), heutagogy
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

can be understood as an extension of andragogy and andragogy as an extension of

pedagogy. On this basis, teachers who possess heutagogical skills also possess skills of
andragogy and pedagogy and can utilize all of them appropriately in different situations
and with different learners. A good teacher is a teacher with the ability to mentor students to
achieve the highest level of learning – learning that will enable them to advance toward
enlightenment as they mature and continue along the never-ending path of lifelong learning.
It is therefore recommended, especially for teacher training institutes, that heutagogical
skills be cultivated in future teachers by training them to engage in dialogic work with students
on different levels and in different formats for the sake of their own self-determination and that
of their students. It is also recommended that future teachers be exposed to the complexities
and ongoing changes of global society; and that thought be invested in considering how these
changes can be taken advantage of for the sake of teaching, learning, and evaluation.
In addition, there is a need to provide future teachers with the tools required to approach
the information that is accessible in this technology-laden world in a critical and
knowledgeable manner, as well as the tools and skills required for independent work
throughout life, self-management in states of uncertainty and change, and independent
learning and work in teams. Significant emphasis should be placed on these skills and tools,
but not at the expense of the provision of disciplinary knowledge. Rather, emphasis should
be placed not only on knowledge itself, but also on the assimilation of knowledge as an
opportunity to provide tools for independent learning skills to be used by the learner for
continuing lifelong learning. As a result, there is a need to reconsider teachers’ assessment
throughout teachers’ careers, starting with pre-service teachers, novice teachers during
teacher internship, and expert/accomplished teachers. Therefore, these recommendations
have applications to teacher training curricula as well as to teacher assessment in general.
In terms of future research, empirical studies that examine the proposals in this paper
would be beneficial. Such studies, for example, could investigate the perceptions of teacher
training staff members about the proposed mentoring teacher and how they should be
trained and evaluated.

References
Adar, Z. (1976), What is Education? Clarifying the Goal of Education and the Educating Authority,
Magnes Press, Jerusalem (in Hebrew).
Aloni, N. (2005), Everything a Person Should Be: A Journey in Educational Philosophy, An Anthology,
Hakibbutz Hameuchad and the Mofet Institute Tel Aviv (in Hebrew).
Apeloig, N., Shalev-Visigier and Carmon, A. (2010), “The role of the teacher at the onset of the 21st century”,
A working paper for the Van Leer Conference on Education, Jerusalem (in Hebrew).
 IJMCE Ashton, J. and Newman, L. (2006), “An unfinished symphony: 21st century teacher education using
knowledge creating heutagogies”, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 37 No. 6,
pp. 825-840.
Barber, B. (1995), Jihad Versus McWorld: Terrorism’s Challenge to Democracy, Ballantine Books,
New York, NY.
Bauman, Z. (2002), Globalization: The Human Consequences, Columbia University Press, New York, NY.
Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M. (2003), “Learning to work creatively with knowledge”, in Corte, E.D.,
Verschaffel, L., Entwistle, N. and Merrienvoer, J.V. (Eds), Powerful Learning Environments:
Unravelling Basic Components and Dimentions, Emerald Book Publishing, pp. 55-68.
Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M. (2012), “To be an educated person in the 21st century”, To assess, to
teach, to learn: a vision for the future of assessment in education, The Gordon Commission on
the Future of Education, available at: www.gordoncommission.org/rsc/pdfs/gordon_
commission_technical_report.pdf (accessed March 22, 2015).
Bitty, Y. (2001), “Different models for teacher education and their implications for Jewish education”,
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

Da’at – Jewish and Spiritual Studies (in Hebrew), available at: www.daat.ac.il/daat/chinuch/
morim/modelim-2.htm (accessed March 22, 2015).
Blaschke, L.M. (2012), “Heutagogy and lifelong learning: a review of heutagogical practice and
self-determined learning”, The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning,
Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 56-71.
Bozeman, B. and Feeney, M.K. (2007), “Toward a useful theory of mentoring: a conceptual analysis and
critique”, Administration & Society, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 719-739.
Cochran, D.W. (2008), “Universal design for learning: reaching all students with digital media”, Creative
Educator, Fall, pp. 14-16, available at: http://creativeeducator.tech4learning.com/v05/articles/
Universal_Design_for_Learning (accessed 16 July 2016).
Cochran-Smith, M. (2003), “Teaching quality matters”, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 95-98.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004a), “Taking stock in 2004, teacher education in dangerous times”, Journal of
Teacher Education, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 3-7.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004b), “The problem of teacher education”, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 55
No. 4, pp. 295-299.
Crisp, G. and Cruz, I. (2009), “Mentoring college students: a critical review of the literature between 1990
and 2007”, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 525-545.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2005), A Good Teacher in Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified
Teachers our Children Deserve, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006), “Constructing 21st century teacher education”, Journal of Teacher
Education, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 300-315.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007), “The story of Gloria as a future vision of the new teacher”, Journal of Staff
Development, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 25-26.
Darling-Hammond, L. and Snyder, J. (2000), “Authentic assessment of teaching in context”, Teaching
and Teacher Education, Vol. 16 Nos 5-6, pp. 523-545.
Darling-Hammond, L., French, J. and Garcia-Lopez, S.P. (Eds) (2002), Learning to Teach for Social
Justice, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, M. (1985), Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior,
Plenum Press, New York, NY.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, M. (2000), “The what and why of goal pursuits: human needs and
self-determination of behavior”, Psychological Inquiry, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 227-268.
Docherty, T. (1993), Postmodernism – A Reader, Routledge, London and New York, NY.
Dworkin, M.S. (1959), “Dewey on education. Selections with introduction and notes by Martin S. Dworkin”,
Classics in Education, No. 3, Teacher College Press, New York, NY and London.
Featherstone, M. (2007), Consumer Culture and Postmodernism, Sage Publication, London.
 Fenstermacher, G.D. and Soltis, J.F. (1986), Approaches to Teaching, Teacher College Press, New York, NY. The good
Foucault, M. (1984), “What is enlightenment”, in Rabinow, P. (Ed.), The Foucault Reader, Pantheon teacher for the
Books, New York, NY, pp. 32-50. twenty-first
Giladi, M. and Ben-Peretz, M. (1981), “The ideal teacher as perceived by students in teacher education century
programs”, Iyunim Bachinuch, Vol. 30, pp. 5-14 (in Hebrew).
Giroux, H.A. (1993), “Postmodernism as border pedagogy”, in Natoli, J. and Hutcheon, L. (Eds),
A Postmodern Reader, SUNY Press, New York, NY, pp. 452-496.
Glasner, A. (2011), “Journalistic literary criticism in Israel in the postmodern era”, PhD thesis,
submitted to the Senate of Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan (in Hebrew).
Gordon, E.W. (2013), “The changing context for education and its assessment”, To assess, to teach, to
learn: a vision for the future of assessment in education, The Gordon Commission on the Future
of Education, available at: www.gordoncommission.org/rsc/pdfs/gordon_commission_
technical_report.pdf (accessed March 25, 2015).
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

Harpaz., Y. (2006), “The third model in education”, in Aloni, N. (Ed.), Multidisciplinary Thinking in
Humanistic Education: A Collection of Articles from the First National Conference on Advanced
Education at Seminar Hakibbutzim College, Vol. 2, Seminar Hakibbutzim, Tel Aviv, pp. 25-49,
(in Hebrew).
Hase, S. and Kenyon, C. (2001), “From andragogy to heutagogy”, available at: www.psy.gla.ac.uk/
~steve/pr/Heutagogy.html (accessed March 25, 2015).
Hase, S. and Kenyon, C. (2003), “Heutagogy and developing capable people and capable workplaces:
strategies for dealing with complexity”, Proceedings of The Changing Face of Work and
Learning Conference, Alberta, September 25-27, available at: http://nferciindonesia.blogspot.co.
il/2013/04/heutagogy-and-developing-capable-people.html (accessed March 3, 2017).
Hase, S. and Kenyon., C. (2007), “Heutagogy: a child of complexity theory”, Complicity: An International
Journal of Complexity and Education, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 111-118.
Hassan, I. (1987), The Postmodern Turn, Ohio State University Press, Columbus, OH.
Hawley, W.D. and Valli, L. (1999), “The essentials of effective professional development: a new
consensus”, in Darling-Hammond, L. and Sykes, G. (Eds), Teaching as the Learning Profession:
Handbook of Policy and Practice, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 127-150.
Ingersoll, M.R. and Smith, M.T. (2004), “Do teacher induction and mentoring matter?”, NASSP
(National Association of Secondary School Principals) Bulletin, Vol. 88 No. 638, pp. 24-41.
Jaspers, W.M., Meijer, P.C., Prins, F. and Wubbels, T. (2014), “Mentor teachers: their possibilities
and challenges as mentor and teacher”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 44 No. 8,
pp. 106-116.
Kennedy, A. and Surman, I. (2006), “The pedagogy of relationships”, in Fleer, M., Edwards, S., Hammer, M.,
Ridgway, A., Robbins, J. and Surman, L. (Eds), Early Childhood Learning Communities:
Sociocultural Research in Practice, Pearson Education Australia, Sydney, pp. 44-56.
Lamm, Z. (1973), Contradictory Logics in Thinking, Sifriat Hapoalim, Tel Aviv, pp. 127-149 (in Hebrew).
Lamm, Z. (2000a), In the Whirlpool of Ideologies: Education in the Twentieth Century, Magnes Press,
Jerusalem (in Hebrew).
Lamm, Z. (2000b), “Ideology and thinking in education”, in Yoram Harpaz (Ed.), Pressure and
Resistance in Education: Articles and Conversations, Poalim, Tel Aviv, pp. 127-149 (in Hebrew).
Libman, Z. (2013), “Constructivism in education”, in Libman, Z. (Ed.), To Learn, To Understand, To
Know: A Journey to the Depths of Constructivist Teaching, Hakibbutz Hameuchad and Mofet
Institute, Tel Aviv, pp. 13-52 (in Hebrew).
Loewenberg-Ball, D. (2000), “Bringing practices: intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and
learning to teach”, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 241-247.
Loewenberg-Ball, D. and Cohen, D.K. (1999), “Developing practice, developing practitioners”,
in Darling-Hammond, L. and Sykes, G. (Eds), Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of
Policy and Practice, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 3-32.
 IJMCE Lyotard, J.F. (1984), The Post Modern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, University of Minnesota Press,
Minnesota.
McDiarmid, G.W. and Clevenger-Bright, M. (2008), “Rethinking teacher capacity”, in Cochran-Smith, M.,
Feiman-Nemser, S., Mclntyre, D.J. and Demers, K.E. (Eds), Handbook of Research on Teacher
Education, 3rd ed., Routledge, New-York, NY, pp. 388-393.
Nasser-Abu Alhija, F., Fresko, B. and Reichenberg, R. (2011), “The apprenticeship process in education – an
overall view”, in Shatz-Oppenheimer, O., Maskit, D. and Zilberstrom, S. (Eds), Being a Teacher:
On the Entry Route to Teaching, Mofet Institute, Tel Aviv, pp. 55-88 (in Hebrew).
Orland-Barak, L. (2011), “Competing models of mentoring new teachers: implications and applications
for mentored learning”, in Smith, K. and Ulvik, M. (Eds), Veiledning av nye lærere: Nasjonale og
internasjonale perspektiver (Mentoring Novice Teachers: National and International
Perspectives), Universitetsforloget, Oslo, pp. 68-85 (in English and Norwegian).
Ram, U. (2005), The Globalization of Israel: McWorld in Tel-Aviv, Jihad in Jerusalem, Routledge, London
and New York, NY.
Downloaded by University of Sussex Library At 05:25 06 May 2018 (PT)

Rogers, C. (2006), “Core conditions and education”, Infed. Site provided by the YMCA George Williams
College, London, available at: http://infed.org/mobi/carl-rogers-core-conditions-and-education/
(accessed December 12, 2017).
Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y. and Kaplan, H. (2007), “Autonomous motivation for teaching:
how self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning”, Journal of Educational
Psychology, Vol. 99 No. 4, pp. 761-774.
Searby, L.J. and Armstrong, D. (2016), “Supporting the development and professional growth of middle
space educational leaders through mentoring”, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching
in Education, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 162-169.
Shlasky, S. and Arieli, M. (2001), “From the interpretive approach to postmodern attitudes in the study
of education”, in Sabar Ben-Yehoshua, N. (Ed.), Traditions and Genres in Qualitative Research.
Philosophies, Strategies and Advanced Tools, Mofet Institute, Tel-Aviv, pp. 31-76 (in Hebrew).
Shulman, L.S. (1986), “Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching”, Educational Researcher,
Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 4-14.
Shulman, L.S. (2005), “Pedagogies of uncertainty”, Liberal Education, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 18-25.
Silverstone, R. (1999), Why Study the Media? Sage, London.
Sykes, G. (1999), “Teaching as the learning profession”, in Darling-Hammond, L. and Sykes, G. (Eds),
Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of Policy and Practice, Jossey-Bass,
San Francisco, CA, pp. 151-180.
Teaching and Learning in 2020 Review Group (2006), “Vision 2020 vision: report of the Teaching and
Learning in 2020 Review Group”, Department for Education and Skills, available at: www.
educationengland.org.uk/documents/pdfs/2006-2020-vision.pdf (accessed March 18, 2015).
Yosifon, M. and Shmida, M. (2006), “Toward a new educational paradigm in the Israeli education
system in the postmodern era”, The Center for Educational Technology, Tel-Aviv (in Hebrew).
Zeichner, K.M. (1994), “Research on teachers thinking and different views of reflective practice in teacher’s
education”, in Carlgren, I., Handal, G. and Vaage, S. (Eds), Teacher’s Minds and Action: Research on
Teacher’s Thinking and Practice, The Falmer Press, London and Washington, DC, pp. 9-27.

Corresponding author
Irit Levy-Feldman can be contacted at: irit.feldman@smkb.ac.il

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com