Teorie e pratiche dell’inclusione / Theories and practices of inclusion

Il ruolo del Cooperative Learning nella promozione della competenza interculturale

The Role of Cooperative Learning on Fostering Intercultural Competence

Marta Milani

Assegnista di ricerca, Centro Studi Interculturali, Università degli Studi di Verona

Sommario

Una didattica inclusiva, che aspiri al contempo allo sviluppo di competenza interculturale degli studenti, non è rappresentata da un insieme di contenuti specifici, ma si caratterizza piuttosto da un orientamento metodologico e uno stile operativo da adottare nella prassi quotidiana; non si tratta, in altre parole, di dedicare uno spazio del curricolo ai temi cari all’educazione interculturale, ma di gestire tutti i curricola disciplinari con un approccio — e postura educativa — che faciliti la partecipazione di ogni alunno. Il presente articolo intende offrire un contributo alla riflessione rispetto all’enucleazione di un’idea di competenza interculturale che sia saldamente radicata nella pratica didattica. A tal fine, verrà attribuita alla natura dialogica e interattiva del Cooperative Learning la funzione di volano della stessa (della competenza interculturale).

Parole chiave

Apprendimento cooperativo, Competenza interculturale, Educazione interculturale.

Abstract

Inclusive education that also aims at the development of pupils’ intercultural competence is not represented by a set of specific contents, but conversely is characterised by a methodological orientation and an operating style that needs to be adopted on a day-to-day basis; in other words, it is not a matter of dedicating a space in the curriculum to themes that are dear to intercultural education, but dealing with all the subject curricula with an approach (and educational posture) that facilitates the participation of each pupil. This article intends to offer a contribution to reflection on the explanation of an idea of intercultural competence that is firmly rooted in classroom practice. To this end, the dialogical and interactive nature of Cooperative Learning will serve as a springboard for intercultural competence.

Keywords

Cooperative Learning, Intercultural competence, Intercultural education.

Introduction

Nowadays we are witnessing an unprecedented crisis in democracy. It is under threat everywhere in the world, and is incapable of responding adequately to the challenges posed by Neo-liberalism (Bauman, 2002; 2000; Portera e Dusi, 2016; Baldacci, 2018). This dyscrasia is ever deepening because there are so many topics such as global warming, job insecurity, the accelerating development of technology and waves of population movements that the institutions and political leaders are caught up in the need to provide immediate responses to these issues; but the answers cannot be provided in a short period of time. Democracy, however, takes time: time for elections (and managing relations), for debating and counter-powers.

Teachers and educators are therefore called upon to build a school that is up to the challenges of the present and that rests its foundations on the values of the Constitution and the inevitable political role of the word and actions (Dewey, 1964; Milani, 1967; Freire, 1974). Schools are in fact the main microsystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1986) where there are melting pots of different ethnicities and cultures; which is why they are an extraordinary social workshop where one can discover the potential and enrichment opportunities that can be gained from meeting the Other, as well as the inevitable difficulties of coexistence. In a more secluded fashion, we have to address in the classroom the same issues that incite political rhetoric in the media, but in a context that, if properly managed, can become a catalyst for intercultural competence rather than a springboard for racism. One of the main discriminating factors (in addition to the use of methods and methodologies that are based on cooperation) is time; a quality time, associated with the existence, that cannot be quantified but which, if properly tapped into, can weave together memories, knowledge and emotions. However, this only happens when you create a context where people are inclined to mutual listening, taking the utmost care to foster the art of dialogue and intercultural communication (Pinto Minerva, 2002; Castiglioni, 2005; Giaccardi, 2005; Portera, 2011); in short, when you manage to build a learning course capable of transforming every class into a small community. This can be achieved through the stimulation of mutual curiosity and when listening to opinions about a story, a theorem or a piece of music fosters critical thinking, causing uncharted semantic horizons to unfold.

In the halls of Italian schools that are still in some ways top-down, authoritarian institutions, it is therefore necessary to effectively convert individual and collective responsibility into work with the children and youngsters starting from the foundations of small school communities. The hypothesis on which we must work and commit ourselves to is that a multicultural class supports enrichment and promotes a kind of thinking that is «migrant», dialogical and not pigeon-holed according to preconceptions (Pinto Minerva, 2002; Lamberti, 2010a; Ongini, 2011; Fiorucci e Catarci, 2015). A diversity of viewpoints, in fact, helps to analyse each topic and issue with greater subtlety, depth and insight, even if achieving this is not easy. It involves preparation, dedication and a collaborative spirit that goes beyond the school walls (Milani, 2018).

Through the space allotted to dialogue and negotiation as essential elements in education, cooperative learning not only facilitates active learning strategies, but also the acquisition of intercultural competence. In other words, this method represents an extraordinary parallelism among social, emotional, relational and cognitive structures of learning and democracy, promoting ideas based on networking, horizontal communication and decentralisation of responsibilities.

 

Intercultural Competence

Intercultural competence consists of a dynamic set of knowledge, attitudes and skills, whose mastery allows you to act and react in an effective and appropriate manner[1] (Fantini e Tirmizi, 2007; Portera, 2013; Santerini, 2017). Its quid resides not so much in resources, but in their mobilisation, knowing how to act (or react) in a non-routine situation (Le Boterf, 1994; Trinchero, 2016). In other words, the knowing-how-to needs to be supported by the conditional knowledge (Damiano, 2008) which indicates how competence also involves knowing when and where one must exercise it in a relevant way. This must also include knowledge of the social roles that its activation involves, i.e. whose responsibility it is to put it into practice and with respect to which other stakeholders, within the framework of a group and/or of a more or less structured organisation, its nature and shared reference values.

Since such knowledge cannot be acquired once and for all, because external influences may compromise it and cause it to shift, one needs to appeal to ongoing training that acts on its three constituent elements, specifically:

1. Cognitive activation, i.e. it is necessary to use one’s own cognitive resources to assign meaning to the information received and to promote a deep processing of experienced content as well as a stable connection to previous knowledge (Anderson, 2009). Various forms of knowledge are essential in broadening horizons, adding reflection materials, increasing awareness of the complexity and articulation of reality and operating de-categorisations. In particular, according to Damiano (2008), there are three kinds of knowledge that an (intercultural) competence-oriented curriculum should promote: a) effective knowledge, enabling the person in question to change reality according to parameters of incisiveness and utility, with an even balance between the resources employed, and a well-defined workload and results; b) procedural knowledge, i.e. the ability to make the most of the available know-how to read the situation and act strategically; c) metacognitive knowledge, allowing one to gain awareness of one’s own thinking, to express it reflexively and to master it appropriately based on the circumstances and objectives that one gradually sets. More specifically, the cognitive component of intercultural competence refers to knowledge concerning the partners of interaction, others cultures as well as oneself. The cognitive domain covers knowledge about interaction both at individual and community levels, and also understanding how culture influences language and communication.
2. Skills and behavior: the opportunity to develop competence is not solely dependent on exposure to intellectual content, but also on active experimentation with experience of interactions; that is, the knowledge must also involve the ability to take action in certain situations. Skills and behavior refer to the ability to interpret and respect different people, to the ability to interact, acquire and process new information, skills in real-time communication, as well as use metacognitive strategies for directing one’s learning. The ability to critically evaluate perspectives, practices and products is part of skills and behavior level competence.

3. Emotional component: one cannot neglect the affective and emotional component that the competent action from an intercultural point of view is required to control and direct profitably. Emotional awareness, i.e. the ability to recognise one’s own emotional states and those of others by implementing strategies for emotional self-regulation, becomes the conditio sine qua non for greater subjective and shared well-being (Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler e Mayer, 2000; Brackett, Mayer e Warner, 2004). More specifically, an intercultural competent performance requires some basic attitudes such as (OECD, 2018): a) openness toward people from other cultural backgrounds; b) respect for cultural differences; c) global mindedness, i.e. that one is a citizen of the world with commitments and obligations toward the planet and others, irrespective of their particular cultural or national background. As for the first one, it involves sensitivity toward, curiosity about and an active willingness to engage with other people and other cultural perspectives. It requires also the willingness to suspend the own cultural values, beliefs and behaviours when interacting with others. Respect consists of positive regard and esteem for someone or something based on the judgement that they have intrinsic worth; it assumes the dignity of all human beings and their inalienable right to choose their own beliefs, opinions or practices. Global mindedness is defined as a worldview in which individuals exercise agency and voice with a critical awareness of the fact that other people might have a different vision of the world, and are open to reflecting on and changing their vision as they learn about these different perspectives.

Nevertheless, acting from a cognitive, affective and relational perspective does not necessarily lead to the development of intercultural competence if the context is not ideal to pursue this objective (Ciancio, 2014); direct meeting is only useful provided that it occurs in a situation of equal status and in a cooperative, relational framework where shared purposes are defined. The factors on which a condition of poor (or non-existent) intercultural competence depends are in fact an expression of the interaction between contextual (environmental) variables and the person. Actions aimed at environmental and personal optimisation can improve the quality of the operating levels of a person, generating growth opportunities, improving performance, eliminating or reducing the impact of internal obstacles, as well as material and/or social obstacles, that impede and/or slow down development. Therefore, following the logic of this approach, getting closer to the Other in an educational environment that is geared to collective wellbeing can positively alter the feelings of refusal and/or prejudice that had been fuelled previously; conversely, in unfavourable environmental conditions closure and hostility tend to be exacerbated.

 

Developing Intercultural Competence Through Cooperative Learning

In the previous paragraph we recalled that training and education for the development of intercultural competence can be performed effectively when one places a great deal of attention on the practical organisation of the players involved, working on the relationship in place. In this way knowledge, actions, and attitudes have a way of concretely unfolding in the ongoing search for solutions to problems that are never repeated in exactly the same form. Not only: competent knowledge is often also tacit and unconscious (Vermersh, 2005), managing to emerge in their area thanks to actual experimentation. However, group activities can be said to be effective in developing intercultural competence only if they promote cognitive, socio-emotional and relational activation in all members of the group, without any exception. The challenge comes from knowing how to combine unity with diversity, providing adequate responses to specific needs and to needs related to common learning, and also from identifying, on the one hand, the goals of informal and authentic communication and, on the other, those related to curriculum acquisition shared with one’s peers.

According to Cohen (1999), cooperative learning, building on the work and activities in which roles are not established once and for all, and in which contributions are required from each student, is particularly suitable for complying with that purpose. Cooperating for the achievement of a common goal, with the awareness of the unit primarily as a mental place of mutual and selfless help, becomes the best way to undermine prejudices and stereotypes and to ensure equality among pupils in taking part and learning. It can be defined as a «social mediation» method which, without excluding the possibility of individual work, recognises interaction among pupils as the main resource of the teaching/learning process, especially in order to tackle complex, challenging and reality-based situations and/or tasks, which require a variety of resources (attitudes, knowledges and skills; that is: competence) and higher-order cognitive processes. From an epistemological point of view, this method has its roots in the constructivist conception of learning (Vygotsky, 1978) and is based on a dynamic, procedural and interactive teaching-learning model, that is built in a strongly participatory social context, with dialogue in its broadest sense as its mainstay. By enabling students to perceive themselves as an active part of the learning process, cooperative learning turns the classroom into a powerful public space in which they are empowered to exercise their own voice (Damini, 2014; Pescarmona, 2014; Sharan, 2017). For this to happen, though, one needs to make sure that, in the activities proposed in the classroom, the five pillars of the method are organised in an intercultural perspective:

1. Positive interdependence: feeling responsible for one another, avoiding calculation and acting in a framework of respect for the Other might seem atypical postures in the current time, steeped as it is in a solipsistic culture that leads one to perceive one’s own self as detached from other people. Differently, in a cooperative classroom the students can bring their contributions in a setting which is strongly interactive. Partecipative competence is fostered by the sharing of knowledge and by recognizing other people’s contributions. Positive interdependence refers also to the capability of both literal and metaphorical translation in real-time activities and shared clarification of intentions and definition of meanings; it’s a kind of negotiation where the team members seek to clarify the reality of the organization. A collaborative classroom, when bringing in its best resources to synergic efforts, can turn into genuine intercultural competence. It involves shared goal-setting and searching for the best solutions to joint problems. The ability to establish positive interdipendence is crucial for intercultural exchange and transfert of competence. The whole interactive process is based on the ability to create an initial collaborative atmosphere, which means building contacts and identifying the purpose. As the process goes on, it will yield deeper mutual trust, which prepares the ground for stronger collaborations.
2. Face-to-face promotive interaction: one of the most singular features of the current age is the lack of coordination between physical and companion-cognitive distance that the digital environment has helped to exacerbate. Activating positive emotions, promoting tranquillity and cohesion, creating a climate of trust is key to the building and consolidation of mental schemes, motivation and commitment. The physical (and, by extension, the emotional) proximity fostered by a privileged relationship, based on loyalty and togetherness, reveals the face of the Other (Lévinas, 1979), which is what it is (i.e. it expresses our identity, it transforms over time, while always remaining recognisable to ourselves) but also what the Other thinks it is. And it requires delicacy, prudence, gentleness, patience, trust and humility so as not to impose on those around us the form that we think they could and should have so that it can be acceptable to us. In other words, facial ethics is the recognition and radical respect of otherness, so that there is no way to «confiscate» the difference of the Other to cage him/her and bring him/her back to the unit. Therefore, one needs to educate others (and be educated) towards a posture that is prone to sensitivity, to make gestures that are able to bring things to light, that can remove but also add something. Constant attention and care, fuelled by a face-to-face relationship that gives space to solidarity as well as to the positive management of inevitable conflicts (Portera e Dusi, 2005; Lamberti, 2006), may give back an image to the Other that is as close as possible to his/her Self.

3. Individual and group accountability: in the face of increasingly weak social ties and the subsequent pervasiveness of the individualistic dimension, the need for a convergence towards a unity of purpose and common goals must be relaunched. All too often, we tend to forget how interpersonal relationships, as well as being a primary factor of cognitive and relational development of pupils, allow for sharing a wide range of emotions and feelings, also providing the opportunity to immerse oneself in a large variety of social roles. The formation of small groups, where different identities have the opportunity to interact with and transform each other, triggers a virtuous process of reworking and re-signification, in the sense that the continuous exchange of ideas, values and symbols determines their continuous reformulation or significant repositioning (Pinto Minerva, 2002; Premoli, 2008; Fiorucci, Pinto Minerva e Portera, 2017). The group becomes the specific space of movement and exchange, humus that feeds the multiple roots needed by each pupil in order to evolve and progress, as well as a factor for the development of resilience. The possibility of becoming resilient depends not only on one’s genetic heritage, but also on the circumstances in which the person finds themselves, the structure of the school and the opportunity to meet and be with other people who can trigger a relationship of trust (Cyrulnik, 2003). Resilience, therefore, is not given and acquired once and for all, but is rather the effect of diachronic and synchronic interaction between the person and the context in which they are immersed. The group ties and the connectivity and collaboration areas contribute to its strengthening. All efforts should therefore be devoted to develop a network of relationships in daily teaching through group activities based on mutual help and respect and the involvement in works and projects that are centred on the assumption of individual and collective responsibility. Also for this reason, «learning to live together» (Delors, 1997), whose ultimate meaning refers to «(knowing) how to act in small, heterogeneous groups», is considered a supporting element at the heart of the DeSeCo project (Definition and Selection of Competences) with respect to the definition of key competences, i.e. those skills that contribute to the proper functioning of society (Rychen e Salganik, 2003).
4. Interpersonal and small group skills: the aim of promoting an inclusive classroom environment geared to the development of intercultural competence requires consideration of the need to educate the socio-emotional and relational dimension by implementing educational actions capable of encouraging pupils to identify the needs of others and practice mutual aid. Through cooperative learning the sterile constraint to use social skills allows for spontaneous and conscious adaptation to the forms and requirements of community life. The elements that direct the educational action are in fact the principles of (emotional and behavioural) self-regulation and self-management: pupils must jointly establish with their teacher the rules governing school life and together monitor their effective application. This educational practice is necessary so that there can be full implementation of a school-community (Sergiovanni, 2000; Tramma, 2009; Milani, 2018) in which everyone is enabled to internalise the norms of civilised life and develop their personality by mediating their personal needs with those of the group. Weil states (1990, p. 49) that the root of human beings should be sought in «their real, active and natural participation to the existence of a community»; a complex aspect that is essential to the life of every single person in the sphere of their relations, characterising it as fundamentally and irreducibly relational. One highly relevant type of interconnection with the issue is the recognition of the Other, seen as an essential and inescapable need for identity affirmation (Maslow, 1954; Portera, 1997). Recognition, then, means the possibility of being identified by the members of the communities one belongs to as a unit of a whole, through a variable that has a fundamental social impact: respect, whose roots must be sought in the inviolable principle of the dignity of the person (Frabboni e Pinto Minerva, 2013). Therefore, identification with the Other is fundamental and, in educational terms, the ability to put oneself in someone else’s shoes through strategies and activities that enhance the socio-emotional and relational area (such as role-play games or modelling) (Lamberti, 2006; 2010b) contributes towards breaking up that sense of siege for those who feel themselves the subject of persuasion and avoiding the inflexibility of positions often based on fears and insecurities acquired in familiar contexts. Empathy, then, becomes the bridgehead for full understanding, which sets itself as a dynamic opposed to rigid thinking, which isolates components rather than bringing them together in a complex and well-structured framework.

5. Group processing: we have seen that competence manifests itself as an enormous structure, characterised by a global and open nature, which finds its raison d’être in relation to the number and especially the unpredictability of situations which one must address during one’s existence. Competence is recognised by the dynamics of the individual’s previous and current, internal and external personal resources, (such as tools and materials available in the context of intervention, but also norms, symbols and values), that can be managed in stimulus situations that reflect in a creative manner the complex reality of life (Damian, 2008; Perrenoud, 2003).

It follows that, in order to assess its successful acquisition, it is essential to organise challenging situations,[2] that can stimulate (albeit in simulated but realistic contexts) the pupil’s ability to formulate original, relevant and decisive answers. These can be recorded by the teacher through a dual, synergistic and complementary procedure (Johnson, Johnson e Holubec, 1992): monitoring, which refers to a set of actions aimed at observing the pupils as they work in groups to assess their changes and improvements in terms of learning and the use of social skills. The ongoing assessment work is thus a monitoring action that is particularly useful for understanding how the work is organised, which strategies are activated to cooperate fruitfully and how group discussions are conducted and how possible relationship difficulties are addressed; conversely, the processing is the review of the group work that is performed at the conclusion of the activity and can be done by taking into consideration the comments collected by the teacher and/or by one or more external observers, as well as by stimulating a group discussion.

What is important is to emphasise the fact that the assessment should always be carried out with a view to being constructive, i.e. the assessment tests should not be used only to assess the learning, but also to improve it (Domenici, 2003; Castoldi, 2016; Milani, 2019): they should facilitate the processing of experiences (in an autopoietic perspective), clarify the objectives, direct efforts in the desired direction and facilitate transfer. The keyword is self-regulation, which refers to gaining awareness about what one knows and what one can do through the use of historical and biographical self-assessment devices (both at an individual and group level), so that students learn to improve their preparation in overcoming obstacles that gradually reveal themselves; to promote the ability to foresee the consequences of their own actions; to facilitate the planning and monitoring of one’s own strategies. The underlying assumption is that the evaluations that pupils assign to themselves before a test are a significant forecast of the evaluations that they will have in the actual test.

 

Concluding Remarks

The complexity of the current school-educational landscape forces teachers and educators to put effort into the acquisition of appropriate tools to interpret reality and responsibility which, based on an analysis of the action contexts, is translated into strategies and projects that promote the development of intercultural competence for all the actors involved in the educational relationship and for the educational environment in a broad sense. The choice of teaching methods should therefore be made within a properly inclusive approach which fuels relationships as a social and intra-individual activity.

Cooperative learning, as a teaching-learning method towards social mediation in which human development is understood as an active, external and necessarily social process, can then serve as a springboard for intercultural competence. Through the organisation of the group, this competence manages to unfold as a process of problematisation, which corresponds to the ability to discuss and give an account of one’s own ideas, involving the recognition of the critical incident and/or of the situation-problem, identifying the details and conditions with respect to rules and principles and the provision of reasoned and shared solutions. It is precisely this discursive posture, which manifests itself to justify the chosen solution to conflicts, disputes or, in general, to situations of impasse, that substantiates intercultural competence and its potential applicability not only to a specific case, but to the family of situations in which it is placed for structural homology.

 

Bibliografia

Anderson J. (2009), Cognitive Psychology and its implications, New York, Worth.

Baldacci M. (2018), La problematica scolastica odierna. In S. Ulivieri (a cura di), Le emergenze educative della società contemporanea. Progetti e proposte per il cambiamento, Lecce, Pensa MultiMedia, pp. 7-16.

Barrett M. (2011), Intercultural competence, «EWC Statement Series», vol. 2, pp. 1-29.

Bauman Z. (2000), La società sotto assedio, Roma-Bari, Laterza.

Bauman Z. (2002), Modernità liquida, Roma-Bari, Laterza.

Brackett M.A., Mayer J.D. e Warner R.M. (2004), Emotional intelligence and its relation to everyday behaviour, «Personality and Individual Differences», vol. 36, n. 6, pp. 1387-1402.

Bronfenbrenner U. (1986), Die Ökologie der menschlichen Entwicklung, Stuttgart, Klett.

Castiglioni I. (2005), La comunicazione interculturale: competenze e pratiche, Roma, Carocci.

Castoldi M. (2016), Valutare e certificare le competenze, Roma, Carocci.

Ciancio B. (2014), Sviluppare la competenza interculturale. Il valore della diversità nell’Italia multietnica. Un modello operativo, Milano, FrancoAngeli.

Cohen, E.G. (1999), Organizzare i gruppi cooperativi. Ruoli, funzioni, attività, Trento, Erickson.

Cyrulnik B. (2003), Il coraggio di crescere: gli adolescenti e la ricerca della propria identità, Milano, Frassinelli.

Damiano E. (2008), Il sapere della competenza. Indagine sulla pertinenza scolastica di una categoria didattica emergente, Convegno Siped «Un’opportunità per la scuola: il pluralismo e l’autonomia della pedagogia», Monte Sant’Angelo.

Damini M. (2014), How the group investigation model and the six-mirrors model changed teachers’ roles and teachers’ and students’ attitudes toward diversity, «Intercultural Education», vol. 25, n. 3, pp. 197-205.

Delors J. (1997), L’educazione: un tesoro è nascosto dentro. Rapporto della Commissione Internazionale sull’educazione per il Ventunesimo secolo, Roma, Armando.

Dewey J. (1964), Scuola e società, Firenze, La Nuova Italia.

Domenici G. (2003), Manuale della valutazione scolastica, Roma-Bari, Laterza.

Fantini A. e Tirmizi A. (2007), Exploring and assessing intercultural competence, «World Learning Publications», vol. 1, pp. 1-74.

Fiorucci M. e Catarci M. (2015), Il mondo a scuola. Per una educazione interculturale, Roma, Edizioni Conoscenza.

Fiorucci M., Pinto Minerva F. e Portera A. (a cura di) (2017), Gli alfabeti dell’intercultura, Pisa, ETS.

Frabboni F. e Pinto Minerva F. (2013), Manuale di pedagogia e didattica, Roma-Bari, Laterza.

Freire P. (1974), Teoria e pratica della liberazione, Roma, AVE.

Giaccardi C. (2005), La comunicazione interculturale, Bologna, Il Mulino.

Johnson D.W., Johnson R.T. e Holubec E.J. (a cura di) (1992), Advanced Cooperative Learning, Edina, MN, Interaction Book Company.

Lamberti S. (2006), Cooperative Learning: una metodologia per la gestione efficace dei conflitti, Padova, Cedam.

Lamberti S. (2010a), Apprendimento cooperativo e educazione interculturale. Percorsi e attività per la scuola primaria, Trento, Erickson.

Lamberti S. (2010b), Cooperative Learning. Lineamenti introduttivi, Verona, QuiEdit.

Le Boterf G. (1994), De la competence: essay sur un attracteur étrange, Paris, Les Edition d’Organization.

Lévinas E. (1979), La traccia dell’altro, Napoli, Pironti.

Lewis M. e Haviland-Jones J.M. (a cura di) (2000), Handbook of emotions, New York, Guilford Press.

Maslow A.H. (1954), Motivation and personality, New York, Harper.

Milani L. (1967), Lettera a una professoressa, Firenze, Libreria Editrice Fiorentina.

Milani M. (2018a), La competenza interculturale e il ruolo del “saper sentire”, «Pedagogia Oggi», vol. 16, n. 2, pp. 387-399.

Milani M. (2018b), La competenza interculturale in ambito scolastico: il ruolo dei contesti organizzativi, «MeTis», vol. 8, n. 2, pp. 556-573.

Milani M. (2019), Pedagogia e competenza interculturale: implicazioni per l'educazione, «Encyclopaideia - Journal of Phenomenology and Education», vol. 23, n. 54, pp. 93-108.

OECD (2018), Preparing our youth for an inclusive and sustainable world. The OECD PISA global competence framework, Paris, OECD.

Ongini V. (2011), Noi domani. Un viaggio nella scuola multiculturale, Roma-Bari, Laterza.

Perrenoud P. (2003), Costruire competenze a partire dalla scuola, Roma, Anicia.

Pescarmona I. (2014), Learning to participate trough complex instruction, «Intercultural Education», vol. 25, n. 3, pp. 187-196.

Pinto Minerva F. (2002), L’intercultura, Roma-Bari, Laterza.

Portera A. (1997), Tesori sommersi. Emigrazione, identità, bisogni educativi interculturali, Milano, FrancoAngeli.

Portera A. (2010), Intercultural and Multicultural Education. Epistemological and Semantic Aspects. In A. Portera e C.A. Grant (a cura di), Intercultural and Multicultural Education. Enhancing Global Interconnectedness, New York, Routledge.

Portera A. (2011), Siamo sicuri che si tratti di comunicazione interculturale?, «Cultura & Comunicazione», vol. 3, pp. 23-38.

Portera A. (a cura di) (2013), Competenze interculturali. Teoria e pratica nei settori scolastico-educativo, giuridico, aziendale, sanitario e della mediazione culturale, Milano, Franco Angeli.

Portera A. e Dusi P. (a cura di) (2005), Gestione dei confliti e mediazione interculturale, Milano, FrancoAngeli.

Portera A. e Dusi P. (a cura di) (2016), Neoliberalismo, educazione e competenze interculturali, Milano, FrancoAngeli.

Portera A. e Grant C.A. (a cura di) (2011), Intercultural and Multicultural Education. Enhancing Global Interconnectedness, New York, Routledge.

Portera A. e Grant C.A (a cura di) (2017), Intercultural Education and Competences. Challenges and Answers for the Global World, Newcastle upon Tyne, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Premoli S. (2008), Pedagogie per un mondo globale. Culture, panorami dell’educazione, prospettive, Torino, Edizioni Gruppo Abele.

Rychen D.S. e Salganik L.H. (a cura di) (2003), Key Competences for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning Society, Göttingen, Hogrefe and Huber.

Salovey P., Bedell B.T., Detweiler J.B. e Mayer J.D. (2000), Current directions in emotional intelligence research. In M. Lewis e J.M. Haviland-Jones (a cura di), Handbook of emotions, New York, Guilford Press.

Santerini M. (2017), Da stranieri a cittadini. Educazione interculturale e mondo globale, Milano, Mondadori.

Sergiovanni T.J. (2000), Costruire comunità nelle scuole, Roma, Las.

Sharan Y. (2017), What Cooperative Learning Contributes to the Intercultural Classroom. In A. Portera e C.A. Grant (a cura di), Intercultural Education and Competences. Challenges and Answers for the Global World, Newcastle upon Tyne, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Tramma S. (2009), Pedagogia della comunità. Criticità e prospettive educative, Milano, FrancoAngeli.

Trinchero R. (2016), Costruire, valutare, certificare competenze. Proposte di attività per la scuola, Milano, FrancoAngeli.

Ulivieri S. (a cura di) (2018), Le emergenze educative della società contemporanea. Progetti e proposte per il cambiamento, Lecce, Pensa MultiMedia.

Vygotskij L.S. (1978), Mind in society, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Vermersh P. (2005), Descrivere il lavoro. Nuovi strumenti per la formazione e la ricerca: intervista di esplicitazione, Roma, Carocci.

Weil S. (1990), La prima radice. Preludio ad una dichiarazione dei doveri verso l’essere umano, Milano, SE.

 

 

[1] According to Barrett (2011, p. 23), the term appropriate «[...] means that interactions do not violate the cultural rules and norms which are valued by one’s objectives in the interactions».

[2] Problem-situations should thus be homologous on a structural level and significantly different as regards their circumstances and content compared to those already known and tried in school activities.

Autore per la corrispondenza

Marta Milani
Indirizzo e-mail: marta.milani@univr.it
Via Vipacco, 7, 37129 Verona, Italy

© 2017 Edizioni Centro Studi Erickson S.p.A.
ISSN 2421-2946. Pedagogia PIU' didattica.
Tutti i diritti riservati. Vietata la riproduzione con qualsiasi mezzo effettuata, se non previa autorizzazione dell'Editore.

Back