The impetus for this roundtable arises from the research questions raised by the Pedagogy, Education and Praxis (PEP)-network, a cross-national, cross-institutional  network. PEP comprises researchers from institutions in Europe, South America, North America and Australia, who are examining  the quality and transformation of educational praxis in different educational settings.  

An over-arching research question for the PEP Network is how is “good” educational practice/praxis understood and theorized in different national contexts? In this roundtable presentation, we will build on the over-arching research aim by asking how are educational practices experienced, embodied and enacted by diverse groups of learners in different landscapes? This research question draws from the collective interests and research projects of the presenters around issues of diversity and social justice.  

We build on theoretical framework of practice architectures and praxis, and on previous studies conducted by PEP-researchers (Wilkinson et al 2016: Kemmis et al 2014; Kemmis & Grootenboer 2008). Kemmis et al. (2014) argue that education should initiate the learner into forms of understanding through semantic spaces of realised, shared language, fostering individual and collective self-expression. We explore this claim by examining a range of different experiences of learning with diverse groups of learners. Practitioners (teachers, learners) relationship with particular practices can be analysed as typical sayings, the kinds of languages which are characteristic of that practice, typical doings, the engagement in activities of the practice and typical relatings, the relationships with other people and objects. Practice architectures are arrangements that enable or constrain the practice, shaping how sayings, doings and relatings hang together in a project and these architectures are shaped by practice traditions of that project. These practice traditions serve as a collective memory of the practice, both enabling (encouraging the practice) and constraining it (preventing it from evolving).  

We illustrate the theory by presenting four empirical projects from Finland, Sweden, Canada and Australia.  

The Finnish study focuses on the praxis-development of early career teachers who were trained to work with recently arrived Finnish as an additional language learners. The study focuses on the teachers development towards praxis-oriented educators, capable for wise and prudent action (praxis) in educating children in and for the global world.  

The Swedish study is on vocational and educational training (VET) for second language learners in upper secondary education, a path which is often recommended as a way to employment and integration. The results of the study show a dire need of developing educational praxis, based on social justice, and to regard workplace literacy as content specific language learning. 

The Canadian study looks at financial literacy education practices that value self-determination of Aboriginal people and involve the incorporation of Indigenous knowledges. Through the adoption of a praxis (moral, ethical, and caring) approach to financial literacy education, how others are impacted by financial decisions made, whose knowledge is valued, and what version of success is being promoted are explored.  

In Australia, there has been am emerging recognition of knowledges and perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and refugees in education landscapes. These knowledges are being recognised in curriculum and in pedagogical approaches. One of the cases presented here was developed from the central question of “what has been your experience of embedding Indigenous knowledges in teaching practicum?”. This research illustrates not only how Indigenous pre-service teacher embodied and enacted Indigenous knowledges to fulfil their practicum requirements of initial teacher education, but to fulfil a socio-political imperative of restoring such knowledges to the centre of Australian education systems.   

We conclude by considering some of the commonalities in the ways in which educational practices  are experienced, embodied and enacted in the different landscapes of these studies. Understanding the sayings, doings and relatings in our empirical studies help us understand the mechanisms that could support praxis of education for all.   

Blue, L., Grootenboer, P., & Brimble, M. (2014). Financial literacy education in the curriculum: Making the grade or missing the mark? International Review of Economics Education, DOI:10.1016/j.ree.2014.07.005 Henning Loeb, I. (2016) Zooming in on the partnership of a successful teaching team: examining cooperation, action and recognition. Educational Action Research, 24 (3) DOI: 10.1080/09650792.2016.1185377 Kaukko, M., & Fertig, M. (2016). Linking participatory action research, global education, and social justice: Emerging issues from practice. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning 7(3), 24-46. Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboer, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education. Singapore: Springer. Kemmis, S., & Grootenboer, P. (2008). Situating praxis in practice: Practice architectures and the cultural, social and material conditions for practice. In S. Kemmis, & T. J. Smyth (Eds.), Enabling praxis: Challenges for education, (pp. 37–62). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Sense. McLaughlin, J., & Whatman, S. (2015). Recognising change and seeking affirmation: themes for embedding Indigenous knowledges on teaching practicum. International Education Journal, 14, 113-124. Wilkinson, J. & Langat, K. (2012). Exploring educators ’ practices for African students from refugee backgrounds in an Australian regional high school. The Australasian Review of African Studies, XXXIII, (II), 158-177. Wilkinson, Bristol & Ponte (2016) Professional Development: Education for All as praxis. Routledge.