RCA-Y2-Dissertation by Syin Fanziel

LEARN FROM PEDAGOGY The desire in the late 1960s and early 1970s through “learning” as “pedagogy”

Fanzhe Sun History and theory study - HTS 2022.04.25

Learn From Pedagogy The desire in the late 1960s and early 1970s through “learning” as “pedagogy”

Fanzhe Sun History and theory study - HTS 2022.04.25

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

CONTENT

2021-22 HTS

Content

005

List of Illustrations

007

Preface

009

Abstract

013

The phenomenon of canon and anti-canon

015

2-1

The closed educational canon

015

2-2

The anti-canon in the mid-to-late twentieth century

017

The voice of rethinking “pedagogy” by “learning”

022

3-1

Anti-discipline and open school

022

3-2

Pedagogy of open learning

027

‘learning’ and the desire for liberty, democratization, and grown-up

033

Conclusion: from history to tomorrow

036

Endnotes

039

Bibliography

042

Appendix

044

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

LIST OF ILLUSTRATION

2021-22 HTS

List of illustration

Interpretative drawing: Manifesto of new pedagogy.

010

Figure 1. The Guildhall, from The Microcosm of London, 1808, by Thomas Rowlandson.

016

Figure 2. “The classroom box”, 1972, by Sim Van der Ryn.

016

Figure 3. 1969 burning of the Yale School of Art and Architecture allegedly by students.

018

Figures 4a-b. “Potteries Thinkbelt”, 1965, by Cedric Price.

018

Figures 5a-j. Cases of pedagogical experiments in the 1960s to 1970s.

020

Figures 6a-b. The Farallones Scrapbook, 1971, by a radical group of Sim Van der Ryn.

022

Figures 6c-f. The Farallones Scrapbook, 1971, various media methods.

024

Figure 7. The “Big Room”, Dilworth Elementary School, San Jose, 1965.

026

Figure 8a-b. “Envirom” and “Super-Carrel”(detail), “Farallones Designs”, 1971.

026

Figure 9a. The book “Global Tools: when education coincides with life”, 1973–1975.

028

Figure 9b-i. The book “Global Tools” defined a “counter-school of architecture”, 1973–1975.

030

Figure 10. Ivan Illich, “Deschooling Society”, 1996.

028

Figure 11a. The School of Athens, 1509–1511, by Raphael

034

Figure 11b. Philosophia et septem artes liberales, the seven liberal arts.

035

Figure 12. Exhibition of Radical Pedagogies, 2015, led by Beatriz Colomina.

036

Appendix. A collection of radical pedagogy experiments’ case bubbles.

044

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

PREFACE

2021-22 HTS

Preface

1. Sim Van der Ryn,“Architecture, Institutions, and Social Change.” Unpublished lecture manuscript, (Berkeley: Environmental Design Library), 1968, p.19

FANZHE SUN

012

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

ABSTRACT

Abstract

“Pedagogy” is a systematic approach to formulate the “teaching” among “learning”. In definition, it is often demonstrated as the method and practice of teaching, especially as a subject or theoretical concept in the academic field.1 The pedagogy used by teachers shapes their judgments, actions, and other teaching strategies by considering learning theories, as well as understandings the needs, backgrounds, and interests of individual students.2 “Learning” is the process of acquiring new understanding, knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, attitudes, and preferences. 3 It is more general and unrestricted. Some learning is immediate, induced at once by a single event, but much of it needs to accumulate from repeated experiences. 4 The phenomenon of learning extensively covers almost every moment of life, and the changes induced by learning often last a lifetime for habituation and conditioning, as a consequence of ongoing interactions between people and any possible environments, which may occur consciously or without conscious awareness, as well as be executed actively and passively. Among them, the active way that facilitates learning is teaching. or its systematic form - education. The concept of “learning” is much more incipient, extensive, and unconstrainted than “teaching”, “education” or “pedagogy”. It had been repeatedly reframed and gradually mutual to form the fixed “pedagogy” frameworks that confined the method and its space, being limited in the scope of the restrictive institution. The property of liberty involved in the definition of “learning” and other pursuits in early education was gradually exhausted in this process. However, there was a turn in a short time of the late 1960s and early 1970s. Theatrical unrest and fast outbursts of countercultures created vastly different tableaus in education, compared to its conventional formation and slow development in long

2021-22 HTS

history. During that time, the awakening of those desires and voices towards liberty, democracy, and reasonable grownup as human beings promoted the reconsideration of a new approach of pedagogies that rethought the meaning of “learning” to “pedagogy” – as a new possibility to free the fetters of pedagogy in restricted orders and locations as well as to re-propose its significance to happen everywhere. There were massive radical practices in pedagogy experiments and a series of avant-garde theories at that time, such as the anti-disciplinary school, open school, deschooling, etc. These practices and theories were regarded as a kind of challenge to normative modality and the major force in the post-war field of education, that symbolizes the voice of that generation against the past canon with indisputably essential significance in inspiring the development of concept and theory but have surprisingly been neglected in recent years. Although many current pedagogy practices have been affected by those movements and individual desires dozens of years ago, and more or less have made progress, the practical application of that radical mode of unconstraint “learning” and elimination of the classrooms developing in an ideal way of territory should be carefully considered. The formed pedagogy framework and relative regulations are indispensable in the real world, and it is important to figure out a new practical role for school with corresponding pedagogy that blends with but more than “learning”, as the suitable solution to arouse the desire and creation of tomorrow. Learning from pedagogy and its changing process, various radical experiences emphasized the importance of “learning” as a new “pedagogy” and related freer spaces even to be in a way of territory, with more active meaning for the fast shift of knowledge and society, as well as the stimulation of desires as a free, grown-up human being in the past and the future.

013

FANZHE SUN

014

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

THE CLOSED EDUCATIONAL CANON

CANON AND ANTI-CANON

The phenomenon of canon and anti-canon

The closed educational canon

“Another characteristic of mass institutional environments is their emphasis of control and surveillance.The buildings are not open. They’re not socially ventilated.They’ve got good mechanical systems, but they’re closed systems without free space, without sufficient access to the rest of the world.” 5 Higher education originated from the Guilds of medieval times, associated with teaching using philosophical analysis with critical methods (Figure 1). The Latin word “Universitas” implied “guild”.6 Professionally, the closed system of medieval guilds required steep entry fees and continuing dues to keep entry selective, being regarded as the “privileged associations” protecting their memberships. 7 They also needed to carry out quality standards through the completion of training and worked following a system of apprentices and masters. 8 For not only these reasons but also increasing political motives, they became more exclusionary over time. A similar framework is inherited by the modern universities, which have yearly tuition fees, standards for entry and exit qualifications, and the qualifications of the degree levels, shaping their measure of standardization and professionalization. The education configuration and pedagogy have been framed and rigidified in its development until now. The disciplinary structure in the large framework was first influenced by the liberal arts of ancient Greek, which formed the classical educational foundation for the European elites’ standard and schooling mode, while the curriculum norms inherited by current education were formally built in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. 9 The purpose was to produce useful and industrious citizens as workers for

2021-22 HTS

somewhere like the more traditional factory or bureaucratically hierarchical office. The hierarchical convention and need for capitalism created the repressive modes of pedagogy, and also by implication of, the repressive range and spatial order, which for this purpose was hierarchical; uniformly organized; subjecting each seat and gaze to the instructors; limiting the students’ motions; and limiting learning in one space. 10 This education space was asserted by Van der Ryn as “the classroom box”, and was depicted in a cartoon with a sad-looking child under a chair bearing the caption: “We are dominated by furniture.” (Figure 2) 11 Roszak and Rossman described a similar repressive phenomenon, with the rigid furnishings, seating arrangements, lesson plans, and hourly divisions, which were frequently thought of as “technocratic”, “bureaucratic” or “totalitarian” social forms against the ideological apparatus of pedagogy in their mind. 12 Another statement of the “organization of a serial space”, with similar parallel rows of desks and pupils viewable from their front, from “Discipline and Punish” by Michel Foucault, was referred to as the “disciplinary society”, which is “by assigning individual places it made possible the supervision of each individual and the simultaneous work of all.” 13 There is no evidence to indicate the direct correspondences between Foucault, Van der Ryn, Roszak, and Rossman in the period when they brought up these theories. Rather the connection among their viewpoints seemed to have sprung up from the more widespread discovery and dissatisfaction. An artificial apparatus of discipline for the rote study of discrete subjects had repressed and constricted the students’ creativity and innate intelligence, which was an efficient measure to produce docile subjects. This type of closed institution in controllable orders and certain buildings, serving limited people and following the rigid procedure, has dominated pedagogy for a long time, and

015

FANZHE SUN

The closed educational conventional canon: Figure 1: The Guildhall, from The Microcosm of London, 1808, by Thomas Rowlandson, demonstrating one example of the Guilds in medieval times as conventional canon. Source from https://en.wahooart. com/@@/9DHNUE-William-Henry-Pyne-Guildhall Figure 2: “The classroom box”, 1972, by Sim Van der Ryn, being depicted in a cartoon with a sad-looking child under a chair bearing the caption:“We are dominated by furniture.” Source from:Van der Ryn, et al,“Farallones Scrapbook”, 1972.

016

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

THE ANTI-CANON

today’s education still cannot get rid of this type of defective disciplinary institutionalization.

The anti-canon in the mid-to-late twentieth century

The second half of the twentieth century, typically in the late 1960s and early 1970s, suddenly began to conclude the long-lasting pedagogy problems and obliterate the canon. This period increasingly saw the rigid pedagogy with related spaces and surveillance that had arisen during the nineteenth century as repression or totalitarianism. As the defiance, multiple pedagogical experiments challenged conventions at different scales throughout a wide range of the society (Figure 5). It was a white war sweeping the whole education scope. The discipline of art and architecture was always the pioneer, as they are keen on the exploration of margins and have multiple approaches to convey the voice of them and even the whole society. Thus it is easier to analyze a general widespread revolt through the microcosm of this discipline, which can crucially shape the discourse in others. In these experimental practices, some of them aimed to create forms of institutional critique, and in doing so, the status quo was challenged and the institutions they depended on were destabilized. The 1968 landmark event of it witnessed students revolting against the Unité Pédagogique No 6 in Paris and rejecting the pedagogy of the Beaux-Arts School. 14 They accused the incapable curricula and teaching methods without addressing architecture’s relationship to contemporary social and political maladies, and demanded their insistence to reflect a new social order in the very basis of studies.15 Another one, allegedly also by

CANON AND ANTI-CANON

2021-22 HTS

students, was the 1969 burning of the Yale School of Art and Architecture in Figure 3, which represented the sudden unrest within the bastions of disciplinary authority. 16 Arose from similar concerns, students and faculty at the School of Architecture in Valparaíso, Chile, led the 1967 upheavals through pedagogical movements that broke the boundaries between learning, working, and living, and were based on a legacy of 15 years of destabilizing the traditional structures of the university. 17 Additionally, there was a broader query in the existing pedagogical institutions by the larger community. For example, Emilio Ambasz at MoMA, New York organized the 1972 symposium, “The Universitas Project”, where speculative proposals for education in a post-technological society were supported by many architects, historians, writers, artists, philosophers, scientists, and educators.18 At the same time, lots of imagination in various media to think of new possibilities of the pedagogical institution itself were aroused by this large context, such were cases of the decentralized university proposed in 1962-65 by Giancarlo De Carlo, the mobile network of academic structures in the 1965 “Potteries Thinkbelt” by Cedric Price, and open system building for the FU in Berlin in 196773.19 (Figure 4) These resources from established pedagogical institutions above were exploited by more independent pedagogical experiments to forge alternative frameworks for more situations in practical institutional platforms. One case is the nomadic summer workshops, first led by Giancarlo De Carlo in 1976 with members of Team X in the International Laboratory of Architecture and Urban Design, which were held at the roving sites with unique urban conditions, in addition to different Italian universities.20 The short-period workshop or summer school, which inherited a similar idea, has become a common manner to

017

FANZHE SUN

Some radical actions of anti-canon: Figure 3: Top left, 1969 burning of the Yale School of Art and Architecture allegedly by students. Source from: “Radical Pedagogies in Architectural Education”, https://www. architectural-review. com/today/radical-pedagogies-in-architectural-education (accessed on April 05, 2022) Figures 4a, 4b: Top right and bottom, the mobile network of academic structures in the 1965 “Potteries Thinkbelt” by Cedric Price. Source from: “the Thinkbelt: the university that never was”, https://archive. discoversociety. org/2014/07/01/thethinkbelt-the-university-that-never-was/ (accessed on April 19, 2022)

018

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

THE ANTI-CANON

CANON AND ANTI-CANON

include more people in the education and reduce the entry levels. A similar thing includes the nomadic exhibition and lecture. The popularization of the Internet now maximizes this feature of ubiquity. Meanwhile, many institutions started to establish their own pedagogical programme. For example, the Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies (IAUS) in 1967-84, had run its independent pedagogy structure by a core group of scholars and practitioners, many of whom belong to academic institutions on the East Coast of the USA. 21

cybernetics and artificial intelligence, generated alliances between architecture and an expanding world of computation, and promoted a comprehensive relationship between man and machine in the late 1960s.24 All of these cases are collected and demonstrated in the case bubbles in the Appendix.

Beyond those pedagogy experiments being based only on the institution and limited in relative disciplines’ scope, the radical aspects were further eager for the transgression of disciplinary boundaries and destabilizing the conventions relating to the society, politics, economy, technology, or cultural transformations. One interdisciplinary approach, integrating sociology, regional planning, and policymaking, was embodied by the curriculum in the College of Environmental Design at the University of Berkeley, which sought to transform architecture into a political agent.22 The microcosm of pedagogy can even support the experimental space between conceptual speculation and instrumentality in the dimension of institution, community, country, and even global. Another approach to innovation was shown in the integration with the technological dimension, which was often charged with an ideological mandate. In this perspective, one of the most famous design schools of this period, the Hochschule für Gestaltung Ulm, attempted to negotiate technological innovation and advanced the functionalist design ideology inherited from the Bauhaus by utilizing sociology, philosophy, and mathematics, with a desire for the democratization of post-war Germany.23 Another was the Architecture Machine Group of Nicholas Negroponte at MIT, which implemented radical experiments with

2021-22 HTS

This type of collective defiance by the experimental practices did affect the transformation of pedagogy at that time and the institution they depend on, which aimed to stake their claims on new territory. They tried to shift the pedagogy to coincide with more places, more people, more scales, and more possibilities, to occur in life, to reduce the entry-level, and benefit more people. From radicality to conventionality, from subversion to institutionalization, many of them were typical of avant-garde practices but traced this arc. Most of them were hard to last a long lifespan and always ended with abandonment or dissolution, assimilation into a generic mainstream education, or termination due to financial and/or political constraints.25 However, these experiments led to much of the discipline’s strength and affected the institutions that swallowed them up. They lie within the institution, waiting to be reawakened by another chance, just like a dormant virus or a monster in horror films. 26 These independent and micro revolutionary practices were interlaced together to become a general phenomenon, which lit the fire sweeping the whole education domain, to draw forth relevant theories aimed to express a strong voice of that generation.

019

FANZHE SUN

Figure 5-a. Paraboloid Fiery End,” Warkworth, New Zealand, 1971. Contributed by Byron Kinnaird and Barnaby Bennett. Figure 5-b. Kwiekulik, Game on morel’s hill (group action),1971. Figure 5-c. Public voting during the first day of the “democratization” at TU Delft. May 9 1969. Figure 5-d. ‘Miss-Wahl’ (‘MisVote’), happening by the Frauenbefreiungsbewegung FBB (women liberation movement) in Zurich 1969. Contributed by Michael Hiltbrunner. Figure 5-e. Tournaments in the Course ‘Culture of the Body’, at the Valparaíso School, 1975. Courtesy of Archivo Histórico Jose Vial, Escuela Arquitectura y Diseño, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso

020

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

THE ANTI-CANON

CANON AND ANTI-CANON

2021-22 HTS

Figure 5-f. Students participating in the course ‘Structures and Structural Design’ at the Kumasi School of Architecture, Ghana, 1965. Contributed by Łukasz Stanek, Ola Uduku. Figure 5-g. “Driftwood Village - Community”, Sea ranch, CA. Experiments in Environment Workshop.1968. Figure 5-h. “Rabut Valley city,” public happening at Bogdan Bogdonivic’s Summer School in Mali Popovic, September 1980 Figure 5-i. Oscar Hansen at AICA cngress in Wroclaw, 1975 Figure 5-j. “Poetic Act for the ‘Opening’ of the site, Open City, Ritoque, Chile, 1971.” Courtesy of Archivo Histórico Jose Vial, Escuela Arquitectura y Diseño, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaiso.

021

FANZHE SUN

Figures 6a,6b: The Farallones Scrapbook, an eccentric and square-format book, 1971, published by architects and educators of a radical group of Sim Van der Ryn. Source from:“Farallones Scrapbook”, https:// www.ideanow.online/ store/Farallones-Scrapbook-p378261201 (accessed on April 19, 2022)

022

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

ANTI-DISCIPLINE AND OPEN SCHOOL

THE VOICE OF RETHINKING “PEDAGOGY”

The voice of rethinking “pedagogy” by “learning”

“Attitudes are already changing.The proud dependence on school is gone” 27 To take aim against what they considered to oppress ideological apparatus of pedagogy and schooling space, whose situation was pointed out by Van der Ryn, Michel Foucault, etc in the 1970s, another strong weapon of research and theories, apart from those practical actions of revolt demonstrated in the last chapter, was taken up by that generation of architects, critics, and social researchers in the mid-to-late twentieth century. These theories, which emerged successively in the same period, especially in Western Europe and North America, were inspired by, or in turn inspired the wide-scope practices of upheavals, symposiums, proposals, programs, and innovations against the institutions and the limitation they created, as an alternative force to reveal the strong desire of that generation.

Anti-discipline and open school

One famous researcher, Sim Van der Ryn whose viewpoints are cited before to state the restricted situation, is a professor of architecture at the University of California in Berkeley and the leader of the Farallones Institute. His research of the 1960s majorly focused on the social and architectural reform of institutions, suggesting users should be allowed “to feel that they can participate in [the institution], change it, involve themselves with it” in one of his reports.28 He had critiqued a variety of institutions, including prisons and dormitories, by using his research grants and architecture seminars.29 Relatively, the term “anti-disciplinary” has been applied by historian Julie Stephens to the relative modalities of dramatic refusal in basic social con-

2021-22 HTS

ventions, such as the monetary exchange and private property.30 The institution of schooling space associated with pedagogy became the next object for this critique, as he wrote: “I was astonished. My Post-Occupancy Evaluation seminar had migrated from dorms to studying and observing prisons, and here I was at a neighborhood school that had less public access than San Quentin Prison.”31 The pursuit to change this situation transferred to the product lay in their visualizations of new kinds of anti-disciplinary education space, as the significant experiments of Farallones (Figure 6). Although what he criticized is fundamental education, the principles can be referenced by and applied to the whole education scope. This product, an eccentric and square-format book entitled The Farallones Scrapbook In 1971, was published by architects and educators of a radical group of Sim Van der Ryn (Figure 6) 32. The book critically questions the rigid schooling space caused by the restricted pedagogy behind it, that is the “classroom box” already explained before. This visualized result of anti-disciplinary theories mixed and presented the ideas through various media methods, including the collage-like fashion, manifestos on education, pragmatic do-it-yourself guides, architectural plans, photographs of school experiments, poetry, satirical cartoons, etc.33 They creatively disseminated their educational goal to combine the vague and anti-hierarchical teaching method linked with “open learning” through the spatial flexibility of the open-plan school, simultaneously in architectural and pedagogical ways. Such spatial strategy of open-plan schools can be dated from as early as 1957, focusing on educational flexibility and individualization.34 The meaning of “learning” with the unconstraint feature was thus brought into consideration for the pedagogical justification. Advocates of open-plan schools during

023

FANZHE SUN

Figures 6c,6d: The Farallones Scrapbook, 1971, presented the ideas through various media methods for anti-disciplinary spatial flexibility and the open-plan school with experiential learning. Source from:“Farallones Scrapbook”, https:// www.ideanow.online/ store/Farallones-Scrapbook-p378261201 (accessed on April 19, 2022)

024

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

ANTI-DISCIPLINE AND OPEN SCHOOL

THE VOICE OF RETHINKING “PEDAGOGY”

2021-22 HTS

Figures 6e,6f: The Farallones Scrapbook, 1971, presented the ideas through various media methods for anti-disciplinary spatial flexibility and the open-plan school with experiential learning. Source from:“Farallones Scrapbook”, https:// www.ideanow.online/ store/Farallones-Scrapbook-p378261201 (accessed on April 19, 2022)

025

FANZHE SUN

Figure 7: The “Big Room”, Dilworth Elementary School, San Jose, 1965, cited the concept of “Schools without Walls”. Source from: Margaret Farmer and Ruth Weinstock, California Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1965. Figure 8a: “Envirom,” (detail), as an example of personalized spaces with unexpected encounters. Source from: Sim Van der Ryn et al., Illustration credit, “Farallones Designs”, 1971. Figure 8b: “Super-Carrel” (detail), as an example of personalized spaces with unexpected encounters. Source from: Sim Van der Ryn et al., Illustration credit, “Farallones Designs”, 1971.

026

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

PEDAGOGY OF OPEN LEARNING

THE VOICE OF RETHINKING “PEDAGOGY”

the 1960s created a series of expansive, sometimes amorphous interiors, emphasizing the physical reform of education buildings majorly through the elimination of interior partitions and walls, and allowing both students and objects to freely float around.35 A primary example of such designs, the Dilworth Elementary School in San Jose, California, cited the concept of “Schools without Walls” entitled in a prominent 1965 report, in which an open space called the “big room” (Figure 7) corresponded to a flexible education curriculum to liberate students from being grouped by grades, but rather to teaching and learning according to personal abilities and skill levels in particular subjects, designated by typical color-coded chairs, “because the space permits great freedom in deploying teachers and pupils” and “lends itself readily to whatever innovations in the program or schedule the staff thinks appropriate.”36

as, between designers and clients. Students acquired the right to design and construct their own schooling space by using found materials. The collaborative creativity gave the students more thorough freedom to make the most suitable learning space for their individual needs and characteristics, folded into the learning process itself. Also, students were often rated as revolutionary participants in the wider social changes of the late 1960s, that explicitly linked to the necessary functions of such open classrooms on behalf of not only free space, but also free pedagogy, and free will.

It was neither enough to change the spatial setting into an open-plan school nor to address the individual psychological freedom simply, explicitly as a synthetic goal that was made by Dan Smith - the architect collaborator of Van der Ryn – in the essay “On the Classroom Box”.37 Only these two aspects would remain a superficial change. Rather, he thought the four detailed aspects of what he called the “behavior setting” of the school were more significant to the radical reforms, which included: the physical space, social interactions, “psychological consciousness”, and temporal divisions, such as classroom hours.38 The emphasis was to break down the institutional spatial order into smaller, specifically personalized spaces or spaces with unexpected encounters. (Figure 8) The practices, ad hoc, for this theory were a series of architectural experiments in California public schools, which were conducted by Van der Ryn and his group of the Farallones Scrapbook invited by progressive educators.39 It abolished the hierarchies between teachers and students, as well

2021-22 HTS

Pedagogy of open learning

The pedagogy for anti-discipline and anti-hierarchy can be defined more radically. In contrast to open-plan schools, “free schools”, as a more unrestricted approach to “open learning”, were more concerned with liberating the “subjective autonomy” of each student to make choices in a wider territory than to be limited only in architectural reforms on the school buildings.40 The idea of “open education”, similarly, advocated the individualization of students to study within a total loosening of disciplines structure in every aspect.41 It means the full freedom to explore subjects should be given to students, to choose their own skills, own situation, and own study places, as well as to decide their own independent pace. The learning processes and students per se were mutually unpredictable, dynamic systems. In this process, flexibility, mobility, and mutability were key features, and its framework instruction’s contents and contexts should be subject to continual correction. Multiple discourses of progressive education and psychology, ranging from the concept of “self-actualization” by 027

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

Figure 9a: The book “Global Tools: when education coincides with life”, 1973–1975. Source from:“Vv.AA. Global tools 1973–1975: when education concedes with life.”, Nero, Figure 10: Ivan Illich,“Deschooling Society”, London: Marion Boyars, 1996

028

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

PEDAGOGY OF OPEN LEARNING

Abraham Maslow to the idea of “education through the experience” of Thomas Dewey, were meant to put the further concept of “creative autonomy” of each individual student foreground.42 These terms widely followed the anarchist ethos of the counterculture communes, also as an alternative theory in the Farallones Scrapbook.43 Such “experiential learning” as the “human potential movement”, grouped under the terms, emphasized the exploration of “authentic” selves, serving “self-directed learning” and “open-ended creativity”, which is in line with the progressive education and against the passive learning of subject matter limited in the strict spatiotemporal frameworks(Figure 5). 44 These terms rethought the pedagogy conceptually to approximate the definition of “learning”, and the role of the schooling space, as the physical frame itself, was less emphasized. When some architects started to think of how to make education opener and propose eliminating the classrooms, others had already conceived of the complete abolition of it. An article in the 1968 American journal, “Progressive Architecture”, proclaimed the classroom should be disappeared, citing the new concept of lounge-like learning areas, where “the student checks out his packet of learning equipment and pursues knowledge at his own pace.”45 Additionally, the book “Global Tools”, with its subtitle of “when education coincides with life”, defined a “counter-school of architecture (or non-architecture; or again non-school)” to let education as part of everyday lives be in a way of “learning” rather than rigid pedagogy, which documents the narratives of the eponymous experience of radical design and its multidisciplinary school program “without students or teachers.”(Figure 9) 46 It was a project initiated by the so-called Italian Radicals in 1973-75, as paradigmatic of post-war Italian radical movements.47 This attempt declared a similar argument of learning through

THE VOICE OF RETHINKING “PEDAGOGY”

2021-22 HTS

practical encounters and experience as a type of “open pedagogy” without schooling frameworks and depicted a kind of dispersed and ubiquitous possibilities of the schooling system to stand on the same side with those groups supporting the disappearance of the classrooms. The related concept of the ideal and liberal “ubiquitous college” was formally put forward in 1968 by Maslow.48 In his essay “Goals and Implications of Humanistic Education”, this idea, for example, was described as “not restricted to particular buildings at particular times” where “the teachers would be any human beings who had something that they wanted to share with others.”49 Within the egalitarian ethos and democracy of experiential learning, the roles of student and teacher would likewise be much less distinct, than only abolishing the hierarchy between them in other strategies mentioned before, to treat students as “whole” human beings instead of as “pupils”. Similarly, a famous theory by Ivan Illich in 1971 – “Deschooling Society”, published as a book – criticized modern society’s institutional approach that narrowed the learning to a limited region and fairly short period of the lifespan. (Figure 10) He also posited similar self-directed education and approved the current search for “new educational funnels” of “open learning” that happens in associated scenarios in line with the institutional inverse: “… Their knowledge of facts, their understanding of life and work came to them from friendship or love, while viewing TV, or while reading, from examples of peers or the challenge of a street encounter. Or they may have learned what they know through the apprenticeship ritual for admission to a street gang or the initiation to a hospital, newspaper city room, plumber’s shop, or insurance office…” 50 Writers like Leadbeater rediscovered the theory of Ivan Illich in 2000 and 029

FANZHE SUN

030

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

PEDAGOGY OF OPEN LEARNING

Figures 9 b-i: The book “Global Tools” defined a “counter-school of architecture”, 1973– 1975. Source from: “Vv.AA. Global tools 1973–1975: when education concedes with life.”, Nero.

THE VOICE OF RETHINKING “PEDAGOGY”

2021-22 HTS

supportively argued for a partially deschooled society: “More learning should be done at home, in offices and kitchens, in the contexts where knowledge is deployed to solve problems and to add value to people’s lives”.51 As a strategy to achieve this, Illich created the decentralized collaborative system of “learning networks” “which heighten the opportunity for each one to transform each moment of his living into one of learning, sharing, and caring.” 52 As he thought the good education system should “… provide all who want to learn with access to available resources at any time in their lives; empower all who want to share what they know to find those who want to learn it from them; and, finally, furnish all who want to present an issue to the public with the opportunity to make their challenge known.”53 A broader revolutionary suggestion in it is that the institutionalization of education is considered to institutionalize society, so that, conversely, concepts for de-institutionalizing education might be assumed as an opportunity for a de-institutionalized society to create a new order. As educator Michael Rossman agreed: “Significant learning or change in human systems is always explicitly revolutionary: it involves the death of one order and the creation of another.”54 This recreative approach of “open learning” as pedagogy, be achieved in a wider spatiotemporal territory, therefore became a chance to influence the whole society and broader order.

031

FANZHE SUN

032

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

‘LEARNING’ AND THE DESIRE

‘learning’ and the desire for liberty, democratization, and grown-up

“Ideally, a liberal education produces persons who are open-minded and free from provincialism, dogma, preconception, and ideology; conscious of their opinions and judgments; reflective of their actions; and aware of their place in the social and natural worlds.” 55 “Liberal education”, in definition, is for cultivating free human beings. This concept originated from the medieval concept of the liberal arts or, more commonly, is based on the liberalism of the Age of Enlightenment.56 The “liberal arts” or named “liberal pursuits” (Latin liberalia studia), that began with a “desire for a universal understanding”, were a continuation of Ancient Greek methods of inquiry.57 The content and subjects for it were summarized as seven liberal arts. (Figure 11) Originally these subjects held with classical antiquity were thought to be essential to acquire, which also played an active role in the civic life as a free person, by participating in public debate and military service, serving on juries, and defending oneself in court. Another more common origin - the Enlightenment, which dominated Europe with global effects in the 17th and 18th centuries, contained a range of concepts that were centered on the value of human delight, the pursuit of knowledge obtained by means of reasons, the evidence of the senses, and the ideals of liberty, progress, toleration, fraternity, and so on.58 It educated people to be suspicious of the self-traditions, to think for themselves instead of conforming to higher authorities.59 The voices of the late 1960s and early 1970s above, no matter through the radical actions or pedagogical theories of open school, open learning, self-directed learning, experiential learning, and ubiquitous learning, were thought to be together with liberty and conviviality, on the ordering of education, work, and society as a whole in line with human beings per se and human needs, consid-

2021-22 HTS

ering the democracy and the right of humans to coincide with the spirit of “liberal education”. From the current perspective, this kind of liberty does not refer to neoliberal freedom or the freedom to do whatever you want. It should be a type of grown-up freedom to put the desires in the perspective of reality where people can live their lives.60 Whereas giving liberty to all the citizens is central to a democratic society all the time, which, at the same gesture, requires all the citizens to use this liberty in a grown-up way and to benefit themselves.61 Any matter of textbook taught today would be fast obsoleted, in an era of ceaseless technological and cultural change. As Carl Rogers wrote in 1967, who is also a psychologist and expert on “open learning”, that autonomous “self-motivative learning” would become increasingly essential when the knowledge itself was subject to a faster speed of modification.62 For the social observers of that generation facing urgent technological change, it was foreseen that mechanized routine and bureaucratic order, as features of the older disciplines, would become less and less interrelated to the future world, as the future belongs to those students who would grow as “self-conscious adults”63, who would inversely benefit the next generation and this society circularly. In this case, “the only man who is educated is the man who has learned to learn; the man who has realized that no knowledge is secure, that only the process of seeking knowledge gives security.”64 This emphasizes the significance of “self-directed learning” and “learning” itself, having more active meaning than passive “pedagogy”. To achieve such creative “inner-directed autonomy”, abandoning the pre-determined pedagogical agenda and allowing the students themselves to shape their own pedagogy process is way more important, to foster the adaptable, agile, and independent future citizens, the “creative citizens.”65 These

033

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

Figure 11a: The School of Athens, 1509–1511, by Raphael, showing Ancient Greek methods of inquiry. Source from: “The School of Athens”, Wikipedia, https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ The_School_of_Athens (accessed on 19 April 2022). Figure 11b: Philosophia et septem artes liberales, the seven liberal arts. Source from:“the Hortus deliciarum of Herrad of Landsberg”, 12th century.

034

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

strives of that generation in the mid-tolate twentieth century does bring the beneficial results but does not totally shake the bases of the non-grown-up mechanical systems with control and surveillance. Rote acquisition of existing prescribed knowledge, as well as the “passive learning” of those alleged useful facts, which is hard to be totally ended up in a specific period, still exist to close individual creativity and generate inverse “productive adults.”

‘LEARNING’ AND THE DESIRE

2021-22 HTS

the education process itself but also its wider knock-on effects.

On the other hand, “open space” and “open learning” have become the increasing educational slogans among the radical counterculture of the left, against the establishment of authoritarianism and social injustice.66 But these points of view were not thoroughly distinct. The creation of pedagogy should be seen as the educational route to facilitate not only the personal liberation of the students but also the education of the profession for society. To entirely reject unequal “productive citizenship” for social justice, this kind of enhanced, accelerated, and “hands-on” way of “learning” is most suitable for educating the self-conscious “knowledge workers” adapting to this rapidly shifting work environment, instead of the more traditional scriptlike production-line workers. 67 Nevertheless, the voice of that generation brought an enormous effect on the workspaces in and out of school, as well as thinking towards the creative professionals, with value laying in their ability to ceaselessly experiment with the new way of innovation and collaboration while being hard to take a thorough change on institutional and spatial conventions in education practice. The creative “learning” way of pedagogy developed in the 1960s-70s theoretically extends the process and influence of education in a wider spatiotemporal scope, facilitating them to penetrate every corner of society and to last during and after the defined school time. Benefits and those desires are taken to not only 035

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

Figure 12: Exhibition of Radical Pedagogies: Reconstructing Architectural Education at Warsaw University of Technology, 2015, led by Beatriz Colomina. Source from:“Radical pedagogies: reconstructing architectural education warsaw under construction 7”, https:// artmuseum.pl/en/wystawy/radykalne-nauczanie (accessed on 19 April 2022).

036

world as individuality.74 New pedagogy should make school somewhere to slow down, to discover oneself, to learn how to learn as a grown-up human being, to follow self-awareness, to make one get benefits when they learn out of school and everywhere, and to let what teach to the students meet the world in some ways, as a place for the desire to go, desire to diminish, desire to transform, and a place “…where we try, we fail, we try again … and we fail better.”75

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

CONCLUSION

Conclusion: from history to tomorrow

Learning from the pedagogies, a force of defiance formed in the late 1960s and early 1970s stirred up the pedagogical experiences of anti-discipline against the long-lasting pedagogy tradition, which shaped a different curriculum definition, tried to consider liberal human development ideally, and extended to a wider social influence on anti-authoritarianism, democratization, and social justice. These experiments covered smaller revolutionary schooling spaces to theories linking with the larger invisible spatiotemporal territory that infiltrated the whole social network and everyday life. What is ultimately at stake in education is the liberty and justice of each human being, to make students become free bodies rather than objects poured into something or pushed to learn. These endeavors take an unthorough change on subsequent pedagogy and school buildings. Liberal principles are virtue signaled by modern education, while the standing power of a guild system means that they are still disregarded in practice, without totally escaping out of the fixed framework, standard, and hierarchy that have held on for several centuries.68 Pedagogy should be a way to shape the interactive process between human beings rather than between robots. While policies in some schools, both past and even now after that radical period, would love to force the students into robots acting to the predictable script rather than to self-motivative decisions, which fosters guild-like institutionalization and kills education.69 The restricted education itself would in turn limit the development of defiance force – the radical practice and creative research, but the innovative “spark” from the 1960s-70s never disappears, waiting to be lighted again. As a current force against the surprising overridden and slow development of that radical force, Beatriz Colomina, led her Ph.D. group to run an ongoing multi-year collaborative research project - “Radical Pedagogies”, and hold exhibitions for it everywhere.70

2021-22 HTS

(Figure 12) The group is sure of those pedagogical experiments and voices should be understood as radical practices in their own rights to continue its influence as the reawakening. The radical “learning” way of “pedagogy” should be referred to as the strategy of the future, but tomorrow is hard to totally abandon the pedagogy framework, because the ubiquitous “learning”, randomly and blindly somehow, is difficult to run as an individual practice of real-world and have to be as an attachment to the pedagogy system. New liberty cannot always escape from the framework but can keep improving it to be a new framework. Education purpose touches upon the task in front of us as the bases of human beings and the task of educator, that the desire should be aroused again in the new generation to actively live in the world with the special grown-up way, and in other human beings who want to exist in the world liberally and progressively.71 The improved framework should be in ubiquitous and lifelong effect, not in stagnation and restriction, not in competition, and not in a non-self-directed way. It also should be moved beyond this current ongoing pedagogy framework of child-centered or student-centered and curriculum-centered, trying to think of new education as world-centered to continue the desire and benefits from that radical period.72 “Learning” extends the education outside of school and the “learning” way of pedagogy in the 1960s-70s tried to decrease the function of school space. But the spaces of the schools can have their own peculiarities. “…Tomorrow indeed needs the school as a special place that is not the same as the society, that is out of place…”73 In Greek words, “scholar” means “free time amongst other things”, which precisely refers to the time that is given to the next generation by society to practice and figure out what it means to learn and live in the 037

FANZHE SUN

038

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

ENDNOTES

Endnotes

1 “Definition of pedagogy”, Merriam-webster.com, (accessed on 04 April 2022). 2 Lee Shulman, “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform”, Harvard Educational Review, (1987, 15 (2): 4–14). Retrieved 12 June 2017. 3 Richard Gross, “Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour 6E”, Hachette UK, ISBN 978-1-4441-6436-7. 4 G. Lakoff and M. Johnson, “Metaphors we live by”, (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2008). 5 Van der Ryn, “Architecture, Institutions, and Social Change.”, 1968, p.19. 6 G. F. Renard, “Guilds in the Middle Ages”, (G. Bell and Sons Limited., 1918) 7 ibid. 8 S. R. Epstein, “Craft guilds, apprenticeship, and technological change in preindustrial Europe”, The Journal of Economic History, (1998, 58(3): 684–713), https://doi. org/10.1017/S0022050700021124 9 Anthony Raynsford, “Educating a ‘creative class’: anti-disciplinary school architecture in the early 1970s.”, Childhood in the Past 13, (2005, no. 2 (2020): 138-152). 10 Sim Van der Ryn, et al, “Farallones Scrapbook”, (New York: Random House, 1972), p. 27. 11 ibid., p. 27. 12 Theodore Roszak, “The Making of a Counterculture”, (New York: Anchor Books, 1969). Michael Rossman, “On Learning and Social Change”, (New York: Random House, 1969). 13 Michel Foucault, “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison”, (New York:Vintage Books, 1979), p. 147. 14 Ar editors, “Radical Pedagogies in Architectural Education”, The Architectural Review, 2012, https://www.architectural-review.com/today/radical-pedagogies-in-architectural-education (accessed on April 05, 2022) para.5. 15 ibid., Para.5. 16 ibid., Para.5. 17 ibid., Para.5. 18 ibid., Para.6. 19 ibid., Para.6. 20 ibid., Para.7. 21 ibid., Para.7. 22 ibid., Para.12. 23 ibid., Para.11. 24 ibid., Para.11. 25 ibid., Para.13. 26 Ibid., Para.13. 27 Ivan Illich, “Deschooling Society”, (London: Marion Boyars, 1996), p.72-73. 28 Sim Van der Ryn, and Robert Reich, “Notes on Institution Building.” Unpublished manuscript, (Berkeley: College of Environmental Library, 1968), p.6. 29 Sim Van Der Ryn and Murray Silverstein, “Dorms at Berkeley: An Environmental Analysis”, (Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, 1967). 30 Julie Stephens, “Anti-Disciplinary Protest: Sixties Radicalism and Postmodernism”, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). 31 Sim Van der Ryn, “Design for Life”, (Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith, 2005), p.34. 32 Raynsford, “Educating a ‘creative class’,2005, Para.2. 33 David Senior, “Deschooling Society. In Century of the Child”, edited by Juliet Kinchin, and Aidan O’Connor, (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2012), pp.216-219. Caroline Maniaque-Benton, “Sim Van der Ryn et al., Farallones Scrapbook, 1971.” Chap. 80 in Whole Earth Field Guide, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2016), P.250. 34 Lillian S. Stephens, “The Teacher ‘s Guide to Open Education.”, (New York: Holt,

2021-22 HTS

039

FANZHE SUN

040

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

Rinehart & Winston, 1974). 35 Amy F. Ogata, “Building for Learning in Postwar American Elementary Schools.” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, (2008, 67 (4): 562–591.) doi: 10.1525/ jsah.2008.67.4.562 36 Margaret Farmer and Ruth Weinstock, “Schools Without Walls.”, (New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1965), p.7. 37 Raynsford, “Educating a ‘creative class’”, 2020. 38 ibid., 39 ibid., 40 ibid., 41 “The Plowden Report: Children and Their Primary Schools”, (London: Central Office of Information, 1967). 42 John Dewey, “Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education.” (New York: MacMillan, 1916). Abraham H. Maslow, “Toward a Psychology of Being.”, (Princeton: D.Van Nostrand, 1962). 43 Jamie Cohen-Cole, “The Open Mind: Cold War Politics and the Sciences of Human Nature”, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2014). 44 Jayson Seaman, Mike Brown, and John Quay, “The Evolution of Experiential Learning Theory: Tracing Lines of Research in the JIEE.”, Journal of Experiential Education, (2017,40 (4): 1–21). doi:10.1177/1053825916689268. 45 “Assault on the Schoolhouse: Overthrowing Tradition.”, Progressive Architecture, (1968.,26 (157): 496–498). 46 “Vv. AA. Global tools 1973–1975: when education concedes with life.”, Nero, https://www.neroeditions.com/product/global-tools-when-education-coincides-with-life/#:~:text=Global%20Tools%201973%E2%80%931975%20documents,Radical%20Architecture%2C%20Arte%20Povera%2C%20and (accessed on 08 April 2022). 47 Ar editors, “Radical Pedagogies in Architectural Education”, 2012, para.6. 48 Abraham H. Maslow, “Goals and Implications of Humanistic Education.”, Reprint in The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, 180–195, (New York:Viking Press, (1968) 1971), p.183. 49 ibid., p.183. 50 Illich, “Deschooling Society”, 1996, p.72 51 C. Leadbeater, “Living on Thin Air.” The new economy, (London: Penguin, 2000), p.112. 52 Illich, “Deschooling Society”, 1996, p.18 53 ibid., p.83 54 Rossman, “On Learning and Social Change.”, 1969, p.70 55 “Project on Liberal Education and the Sciences.”, The Liberal Art of Science: Agenda for Action, (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1990), ISBN 0-87168-378-, p. xi. 56 “A Liberal Arts Education”, Archived from the original on 15 December 2012, Retrieved 9 December 2012. 57 Nigel Tubbs, “Philosophy and Modern Liberal Arts Education: Freedom is to Learn.”, (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014), p. 1. ISBN 978-1-137-35891-2. OCLC 882530818. 58 Dorinda Outram, “Panorama of the Enlightenment”, (Getty Publications, 2006), p. 29, ISBN 978-0892368617 59 Martha C. Nussbaum, “Education for Profit, Education for Freedom”, Liberal Education, (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2009, 95 (3): 6–13). ISSN 0024-1822. p.10. 60 Gert Biesta, “The Beautiful Risk of Education”, lecture, 2017, https://www.you-

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

ENDNOTES

2021-22 HTS

tube.com/watch?v=QMqFcVoXnTI&t=265s 61 ibid., 62 Carl Rogers, “The Interpersonal Relationship in the Facilitation of Learning.”, Reprint in The Psychology of Open Teaching and Learning, edited by Melvin Silberman, Jerome Allender, and Jay Yanoff, (Boston: Little, Brown, (1967) 1972), p.58. 63 Raynsford, “Educating a ‘creative class’”, 2020. 64 Rogers, “The Interpersonal Relationship in the Facilitation of Learning.”,1972, p.58 65 Raynsford, “Educating a ‘creative class’”, 2020. 66 ibid. 67 ibid. 68 Bruce Macfarlane and Alison Elizabeth Jefferson, “The Closed Academy? Guild Power and Academic Social Class.”, Higher Education Quarterly 76, no. 1 (2022;2021): 36-47. 69 Biesta, “The Beautiful Risk of Education”, 2017. 70 Ar editors, “Radical Pedagogies in Architectural Education”, 2012, para.1. 71 Biesta, “The Beautiful Risk of Education,” 2017. 72 ibid. 73 ibid. 74 ibid. 75 ibid.

041

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

Ar editors, “Radical Pedagogies in Architectural Education”, The Architectural Review, 2012, https://www.architectural-review.com/ today/radical-pedagogies-in-architectural-education (accessed on April 05, 2022)

Macfarlane, Bruce, and Alison Elizabeth Jefferson., “The Closed Academy? Guild Power and Academic Social Class.”, Higher Education Quarterly 76, no. 1 (2022;2021): 36-47.

Biesta, Gert., “The Beautiful Risk of Education”, lecture, 2017, https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMqFcVoXnTI&t=265s Cohen-Cole, Jamie., “The Open Mind: Cold War Politics and the Sciences of Human Nature”, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2014.

Maslow, Abraham H., “Goals and Implications of Humanistic Education.”, Reprint in The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, 180–195, New York:Viking Press, (1968) 1971.

“Definition of pedagogy”, Merriam-webster.com, (accessed on 04 April 2022).

Maslow, Abraham H., “Toward a Psychology of Being.”, Princeton: D.Van Nostrand, 1962.

Dewey, John., “Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education.” New York: MacMillan, 1916.

Nussbaum, Martha C., “Education for Profit, Education for Freedom”, Liberal Education, Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2009, 95 (3): 6–13. ISSN 0024-1822. p.10.

Epstein, S. R., “Craft guilds, apprenticeship, and technological change in preindustrial Europe”, The Journal of Economic History, 1998, 58(3): 684–713, https://doi. org/10.1017/S0022050700021124 Farmer, Margaret, and Ruth Weinstock., “Schools Without Walls.”, New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1965. Foucault, Michel., “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison”, New York: Vintage Books, 1979. Gross, Richard., “Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour 6E”, Hachette UK, ISBN 978-1-4441-6436-7. Illich, Ivan., “Deschooling Society”, London: Marion Boyars, 1996. Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson., “Metaphors we live by”, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2008.

042

Maniaque-Benton, Caroline, “Sim Van der Ryn et al., Farallones Scrapbook, 1971.” Chap. 80 in Whole Earth Field Guide, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2016.

Leadbeater, C., “Living on Thin Air.”, The new economy, London: Penguin, 2000.

Outram, Dorinda., “Panorama of the Enlightenment”, Getty Publications, 2006, ISBN 978-0892368617 “Project on Liberal Education and the Sciences.”, The Liberal Art of Science: Agenda for Action, Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1990, ISBN 0-87168-378Raynsford, Anthony., “Educating a ‘creative class’: anti-disciplinary school architecture in the early 1970s.” Childhood in the Past 13, 2005, no. 2 (2020): 138-152. Renard, G. F., “Guilds in the Middle Ages”, G. Bell and Sons Limited., 1918. Rogers, Carl., “The Interpersonal Relationship in the Facilitation of Learning.”, Reprint in The Psychology of Open Teaching and Learning, edited by Melvin Silberman, Jerome Allender, and Jay Yanoff, Boston: Little, Brown, (1967) 1972. Rossman, Michael., “On Learning and So-

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bibliography

cial Change”, New York: Random House, 1969. Roszak, Theodore., “The Making of a Counterculture”, New York: Anchor Books, 1969. Seaman, Jayson, Mike Brown, and John Quay., “The Evolution of Experiential Learning Theory: Tracing Lines of Research in the JIEE.”, Journal of Experiential Education, 2017,40 (4): 1–21. doi:10.1177/1053825916689268. Senior, David., “Deschooling Society. In Century of the Child”, edited by Juliet Kinchin, and Aidan O’Connor, New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2012. Shulman, Lee., “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform”, Harvard Educational Review, 1987, 15 (2): 4–14. Retrieved 12 June 2017. Smith, Mark K., “Ivan Illich: deschooling, conviviality and lifelong learning.” https:// infed.org/mobi/ivan-illich-deschooling-conviviality-and-lifelong-learning/ (accessed on 5 April 2022)

2021-22 HTS

Van der Ryn, Sim, et al., “Farallones Scrapbook”, New York: Random House, 1972. Van Der Ryn, Sim, and Murray Silverstein., “Dorms at Berkeley: An Environmental Analysis”, Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, 1967. Van der Ryn, Sim, and Robert Reich., “Notes on Institution Building.” Unpublished manuscript, Berkeley: College of Environmental Library, 1968. “Vv. AA. Global tools 1973–1975: when education concedes with life.”, Nero, https://www.neroeditions.com/product/global-tools-when-education-coincides-with-life/#:~:text=Global%20 Tools%201973%E2%80%931975%20documents,Radical%20Architecture%2C%20 Arte%20Povera%2C%20and (accessed on 08 April 2022).

Stephens, Julie., “Anti-Disciplinary Protest: Sixties Radicalism and Postmodernism”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Stephens, Lillian S., “The Teacher ‘s Guide to Open Education.”, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1974. Tubbs, Nigel., “Philosophy and Modern Liberal Arts Education: Freedom is to Learn.”, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014, ISBN 978-1-137-35891-2. OCLC 882530818. Van der Ryn, Sim., “Architecture, Institutions, and Social Change.” Unpublished lecture manuscript, Berkeley: Environmental Design Library, 1968. Van der Ryn, Sim., “Design for Life”, Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith, 2005. 043

FANZHE SUN

LEARNING FROM PEDAGOGY

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

A collection of radical pedagogy experiments’ case 044

HISTORY & THEORY STUDIES

APPENDIX

2021-22 HTS

Appendix Collecting Radical pedagogies in 1960-70s

bubbles, part of which are included in body text. 045