12

IGNORAMUSES AND SAGES

Using Freirean Concepts to
Co-construct Socially Just Initial
Teacher Education Practices

Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

Introduction
At the point of encounter, there are neither utter ignoramuses, nor perfect
sages; there are only people who are attempting, together, to learn more
than they now know.
(Freire, 2002/1970, p. 90)

One inherent epistemological conundrum in attempting to provide an account

of historically situated sociocultural practices is where to begin. The where in
the previous sentence refers simultaneously to locational and temporal posi-
tioning. In order to be trustworthy and authentic, such an account must make
explicit both the moment in which the account is constructed and the physical
space where that account and its contents are enacted, which includes those
meanings and meaning-making mechanisms that have been reified as relevant,
and the inquiries that are worth pursuing. This chapter describes an applica-
tion of Freirean pedagogical principles to the elaboration of a framework for
initial teacher education (ITE) within the context of a national public teacher
education college in South America. In doing so, it addresses the tensions and
problems that have emerged from such an attempt within the temporal frame of
the first two decades of the twenty-first century characterized by the oscillation
experienced in the region between the political left and the right.
The theoretical backdrop against which this chapter has been written incor-
porates ITE practices deeply grounded in a view of teaching for social justice
(Cochran-Smith, 2010; Diniz-Pereira, 2017; King, 2006). Underpinning the
narrative is a conception of learning as socially mediated in highly situated

DOI: 10.4324/9781003175728-14

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 196 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 Ignoramuses and Sages 197

communities engaged in teaching and learning practices (in our case, the teaching-
learning of English as a Foreign Language or EFL), and oriented toward increas-
ing the opportunities of participation of all actors involved in the activity of this
community mediated by the semiotic tool of a foreign language.
The initial impetus for this elaboration stemmed from the failure posed by the
local ITE curriculum to allow for the contemporizing of an orientation toward
teaching for social justice while also attending to the standards-dependent man-
datory contents that characterize it. As a consequence, the curriculum left little,
if any, leeway for the Teacher of Teachers (ToT) and the Student Teachers (STs)
to actually engage in teaching for socially just praxis.
At a time when many countries in South America have veered drastically to
the right, the re-emergence of neoliberal educational policies that seek stand-
ardization and the promotion of positivist ITE practices (Diaz Maggioli, 2017)
has rendered efforts to contextualize and empower STs futile. These neoliberal
influences – as enacted through the curriculum as well as the provisions and
resources available for teacher education – stand a chance to widen, even more,
the gap between the education of the most affluent members of society and those
who struggle to remain within public educational systems. Even though this sit-
uation has remained unchanged for many years, one wants to believe that there
is hope in the potential of engaged communities to affect the status quo, since, as
Freire, himself, reminds us “The popular classes learn and know, in spite of the
obstacles imposed on them.” (1996, p. 136).

Context
Human activity consists of action and reflection: it is praxis; it is transfor-
mation of the world…Human activity is theory and practice; it is reflec-
tion and action.
(Freire, 2002/1970, p. 125)

There is only one degree-granting institution for education in Uruguay. The

provisions for ITE are administered by a National Council for Teacher Education
through programs offered in 33 campuses nationwide. All campuses implement
the same mandatory National Curriculum that has three distinctive strands: one
strand dealing with General Pedagogical Knowledge (Shulman, 1987); a second
strand that addresses Content Knowledge (Shulman, 1987); and a third strand
oriented toward the development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (Shulman,
1987) encompassing four-yearlong Subject Didactics courses. Starting with the
second course and all through the third course, STs engage in teaching practice
under the supervision of a Cooperating Teacher. In the last year of the program,
STs get their own group in the public education system and are supported by
the Subject Didactics teacher. This arrangement poses the first hurdle STs have

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 197 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 198 Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

to overcome. Subject Didactics courses tend to be mostly theoretical, whereas

teaching practice is intended to function as the turf where that theory is put
into practice. Because the national teacher education system offers no provi-
sions for Subject Didactics and Cooperating teachers to interact and collaborate,
the divide between theory and practice soon becomes evident. This causes STs
to constantly struggle to remain faithful to the theoretical orientations of their
Subject Didactics teacher while, at the same time, trying to duly serve the for-
eign language students and the Cooperating Teacher. In practice, this translates
into a marked imbalance of power that affects all actors alike. To use Veal and
Rikard’s (1998) construct, during the second and third courses, Cooperating
Teachers, ST, and their students form what can be called a “functional triad”
(Veal and Rikard, 1998, p. 109), with adults focusing on helping learners fulfill
their learning needs. However, there are times during the academic course when
Subject Didactics teachers perform supervisory visits on the ST. It is at these
times that the triad becomes dysfunctional as the Subject Didactics Teachers
become the most powerful figure in the triad, with the Cooperating Teachers
in second place, and the STs in third. During these instances, language learners
disappear from the triad, when they should be the true center of teaching-
learning activity for all those involved. Hence, any dialogue that ensues from
the interaction mutes the voices of the learners all the actors above are intended
to serve.
The pressures waged by this situation prompt the emergence of a techni-
cist epistemology, where the focus of teaching-learning activity is redirected to
the faithful replication of the pedagogical “communiqués” (Freire, 2002/1970,
p. 72) of the Subject Didactics curriculum, and not to the provision of socially
just teaching to learners who would otherwise not be afforded the opportunity
to learn a foreign language. In this way, the “banking” concept of education
(Freire, 2002/1970, p. 72) is perpetuated through the very practices that should
seek to overcome it. It is the force of the contextual conditions that lead all these
actors to perform their roles in compliance, thus being unable to exercise their true
praxis for the benefit of the language learners.
Already in 1995, Cowen described the promotion of standardized knowledge
about teaching as knowledge “fit for teachers” (Cowen, 1995, p. 18), meaning
that teaching is only about skills that can be deployed on demand, regardless of
the context in which they are enacted. Adherence to such a perspective is a trait
of neoliberal approaches to teacher education that seek to code behaviors as evi-
dence of teaching capacity, with no consideration of the context and community
in which the teacher is expected to teach, a fact Gray and Block (2012) refer to
as the “MacDonaldisation of Teacher Education” (p. 115).
Ironically, and in contrast with reality as experienced by ToT and STs, the
National Teacher Education curriculum in Uruguay mandates quite the oppo-
site. The document clearly specifies that aspiring teachers in Uruguay need to

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 198 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 Ignoramuses and Sages 199

Know what to teach (content or disciplinary knowledge); know how to

teach (pedagogical and didactic theory and practice); know who they teach
[…] and, lastly, know why they teach, that is to say, what is the ideal of a
human and a citizen that society expects, and which education should
help develop so as to sustain the supreme goal of preserving the autonomy
of the individual (Dirección de Formación y Perfeccionamiento Docente
[DFPD], 2007, p 5).
[italics in the original. Translation by the author]

In this light, ITE should be about providing STs with the affordances needed
to exercise their agency about teaching-learning in dialogue with their students
and with other significant actors. ITE should be about increasing everyone’s
opportunities of participation in communal activity so as to transform, and not
merely accept a readily given reality. When they fail to do so by implementing
“communiqués” (Freire, 2002/1970, p. 72) instead of establishing an authentic
communicative dialogue, they act in a way reminiscent of Borges’ story The
Circular Ruins (1964) where the protagonist attempts to dream a child for himself,
only to discover that he, himself, is the figment of someone else’s imagination.
But, as Freire reminds us, “Reality is really a process, undergoing constant trans-
formation” (2002/1970, p. 75).
It was in this context that the author sought to take action in order to trans-
form the current situation. He did so in order to heed the mandate of the National
Curriculum but also, and more importantly, to promote a dialogic approach to
teacher education that would allow STs to learn to “affirm, model and sustain
socially just learning environments” (Adams, 2016, p. 27) in dialogue with the
content, participants, and resources at their disposal.
To this avail, the work of Paulo Freire served as a guide to keep the develop-
ment of the framework open, honest, and transformative as ToT and STs sought to
engage in and with the world they inhabited with the purpose of transforming it.

The E.N.A.B.L.E. Framework for ITE

‘Problem-posing’ education, responding to the essence of conscious-
ness—intentionality—rejects communiqués and embodies communica-
tion…Liberating education consists in acts of cognition, not transferals of
information.
(Freire, 2002/1970, p. 79)

Because the purpose of this project was originally to engage communities of STs
in enhancing their opportunities of participation in teaching-learning activ-
ity with a view toward generating socially just practices, a decision was made
to provide the framework with a name that would clearly and unambiguously

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 199 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 200 Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

reflect such intentions. The acronym E.N.A.B.L.E. (Diaz Maggioli, 2021) was
chosen to nominate each of the elements in the framework so that each letter
would stand for a key concept, while the whole term would reflect the fact that
enabling is not a finished act, but just an act of beginning, of constantly being in
a state of becoming.
At the core of the framework lies the notion that, in order to learn to teach-
learn, all actors involved need to develop the necessary humility to open their
discourse and identity to authentic dialogue, as “…dialogue imposes itself as
the way by which [people] achieve significance as human beings” (Freire,
2002/1970, p. 88). The source of that dialogue lies in the STs’ narratives of their
performances as teacher-learners, which would be subjected to the scrutiny of
the community, problematized, and finally thematized in order to construct ten-
tative instances of praxis, that is to say, tentative interpretations of reflexions on
action and for future action. Seen in this light, the framework is generative in that,
in capturing the idea that reality is a process and not a given situation, it provides
affordances for interactions based on the notion that education is “constantly
remade in praxis. In order to be, it must become” (Freire, 2002/1970, p. 84).
Additionally, the framework is also generative as it brings out into the open any
potential power imbalance pertaining to the roles of teachers and learners, by
allowing spaces to name and rename reality through engagement in true praxis.
Because of this, the framework is seen not as a prescriptive set of steps to be
taken but as a heuristic to help understand and organize the potential affordances
for co-constructing teaching-learning that might ensue from transformative
dialogues about becoming an educator. It is given here not as a template but as a
critical pedagogy environment where dialogue leads necessarily to transforma-
tive action which would, in turn, allow for social justice to emerge. Crookes
(2013) defines critical pedagogy thusly:

Critical pedagogy is teaching for social justice, in ways that support the
development of active, engaged citizens who will, as circumstances permit,
critically inquire why the lives of so many human beings, perhaps includ-
ing their own, are materially, psychologically and spiritually inadequate.
(p. 8)

To Wink (2000) engaging in dialogue through three key moments is a useful

way of enacting critical pedagogy. These moments include naming, reflecting,
and acting. The job of the ToT, in turn, involves creating a safe space for nam-
ing, reflecting, and deciding on action, asking hard questions for the students
to deepen their conscientização1 (Freire, 2002/1970, p. 35) of the reality under
analysis, and to assist STs with codifications.
Thus, the intention of the framework is to orient the dialogue of ToTs and STs
by allowing them to chart a course toward more socially just teaching-learning

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 200 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 Ignoramuses and Sages 201

while affording them the space (both physical and historical) to effect significant
changes in their reality and that of the students they serve. It is in the tensions
and affordances of this space that STs are able to define justice in praxis.

The Starting Point: Engaging STs

The educator needs to know that his or her ‘here’ and ‘now’ are nearly
always the educands’ ‘there’ and ‘then’…you never get there by starting
from there, you get there by starting from some here.
(Freire, 2002/1992, p. 58)

By the time an individual starts their formal ITE journey, they have become
expert judges of teaching and learning by having sat for countless hours in class-
rooms as students. During that time, they bore witness to good and bad teaching
and to countless instances of professional decision-making. Lortie (1975) referred
to these constructs as “the apprenticeship of observation.” Hence, when start-
ing on their path to professional development, STs bring to the dialogue a host
of experiences, beliefs, and personal theories that can significantly affect the
way in which they engage with and exercise their praxis. Because of this, the
framework starts with an exploration of the STs and their teaching-learning
experiences, bearing in mind that, besides the experiential component, they are
also in possession of funds of knowledge (Vélez-Ibáñez & Greenberg, 1992) that
are the experiential byproduct of their living in and with the world.
Both the apprenticeship of observation and the funds of knowledge can posi-
tively or negatively affect the way that STs engage in dialogue, as well as how
they act in the world and with the world. Their actions, as filtered through the
beliefs derived from these constructs, can favor some students, while making
others invisible or, even, irrelevant. Hence, it is important to start from where
we find STs and help them disclose the effect of these constructs in their partici-
pation in teaching-learning community activity. Because these are strongly held
beliefs that act as a lens through which we perceive reality, starting the journey
from their disclosure opens up the prospectiveness of the dialogue by allowing
multiple perspectives on the same phenomenon. Thus, power itself becomes the
object of conscientização and the ToT’s role is to increase the prospectiveness
of communication, not by manipulating the discourse or the interaction but
by creating a safe space where STs can name and rename their reality. In order
to promote the disclosure of the apprenticeship of observation and STs’ funds
of knowledge, the ToT can start the dialogue by promoting self- and peer-
assessment regarding the prescribed curriculum content. S/He can provide STs
with feedback on their self-assessment and contrast it with the assessment that
language learners may make of the STs’ ideas or actions. This cacophony of voices
creates the turf for true conscientização, though admitting that manipulation is

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 201 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 202 Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

indeed a possibility. Hence, both ToT and STs should constantly remind them-
selves that there is not a single, correct reading of reality, but that reality is a
co-construction of all those who partook in activity, and that every ST has the
chance to question him/herself thus “Who do I serve doing what I do, against
whom or in favor of whom, and why do I do what I do?” (Freire, 1996, p. 115).

The Discipline of Noticing

People will be truly critical if they live the plenitude of their praxis, that
is, if their action encompasses a critical reflection which increasingly
organizes their thinking and thus leads them to move from a purely naïve
knowledge of reality to a higher level, one which enables them to perceive
the causes of reality.
(Freire, 2002/1970, p. 131)

Once the influences of the apprenticeship of observation and funds of knowl-

edge have been explored and action is taken to minimize their negative impact,
STs need to become acquainted with the curriculum content they are supposed
to learn. We can think of this curriculum content as theories and practices that
have been reified through theoretical or empirical research. These contents are
the fodder that usually promotes the mirage that learning a concept or a skill and
enacting it in the classroom is an action free of political bias, and that its imple-
mentation in the classroom by STs is an instance of good practice.
This technicist rational position continues to heavily influence the field of
ITE. For example, recently, Grossman (2018) has reported on the work of the
Core Practices Consortium, in promoting the notion of “core practices” as a
unifying thread for new ITE curricula. These core practices are described as
“Identifiable components of teaching that teachers enact to support learning.
These components include instructional strategies and the subcomponents of
routines and moves” (Grossman, 2018, p. 184). While this definition has taken
hold in the field of ITE, it offers no new vantage point from which to understand
critical teaching-learning action for social justice. What is missing in this defi-
nition are two relevant dimensions: reference to the core concepts that support
these practices and the core characteristics that describe how they are enacted
and the effect they have on STs and their students. Hence, when the framework
makes reference to “noticing” (Mason, 2002), it does not imply the discovery
of information owned by the ToT but instead, the emergence of a space where
STs can “name the world, to change it. Once named, the world in its turn reap-
pears to the namers as a problem and requires of them a new naming.” (Freire,
2002/1970, p. 88).
By helping STs to dialogically notice a certain curriculum content, ToTs ena-
ble STs to access “the organized, systematized and developed ‘re-presentation’…

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 202 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 Ignoramuses and Sages 203

of the things about which they want to know more” (Freire, 2002/1970, p. 93).
In other words, noticing is a tool for conscientização (Freire, 2002/1970, p. 104)
in that once named, the curriculum content becomes a problem to explore and
a new reality to co-construct.
The process of noticing has three moments (Mason, 2002). First, there is the
awareness-raising moment where the ToT as a facilitator proposes exploratory
classroom tasks for STs to undertake in their teaching practice or uses images,
classroom transcripts, videos, and similar tools as initial codifications. The next
step involves “marking” (Mason, 2002, p. 33) that concept. Here STs rename the
concept brought to their attention by the ToT through the lenses of their prior
knowledge and experience. Finally, STs register the curriculum content by pro-
viding their own codifications stemming from their interaction with language
learners in the classroom. Those codifications can be aided by the Cooperating
Teacher, thus expanding the initial noticing.

Providing Access
To learn, then, logically precedes to teach.
(Freire, 2001, p. 31)

Once STs have noticed, marked, and registered the new curriculum content,
they need to be able to fully understand it. For this, they need to know the his-
toricity of the content, why it has a place in the ITE curriculum, and how it plays
out in teaching-learning. They also need to understand its syntactic structure
(how it is represented and organized within the discipline) and semantic struc-
ture (how the profession names, reifies, re-names, and enacts that content). In
other words, STs need facilitation from the ToT oriented toward deconstructing
the new concept so that they can re-construct it through their own praxis. At
this stage, the goal is a deep understanding of the new concept.
It is during “accessing” that the ToT will make salient for STs the connections
between theory and practice through tools such as videos, lesson plans, lesson
transcripts, modeling, scripts, demonstrations, and by providing access to pro-
fessional literature that can inform the STs’ engagement with the new content.
STs, in turn, will provide connections with their teaching practice. They will do
this through codifications. Wink (2000) defines codifications as “the concept,
captured on paper, in the dirt, on the chalkboard, on the wall. It is the thought,
painted. It is the symbol, symbolized. I have known teachers to codify thoughts
in pictures, in action, in clay, in paint” (p. 43).
The codifications provided by STs are intended to be the representations
of how the new content plays out in their classrooms, in interaction with the
students they serve and in the way they think about, and name their teach-
ing self. These are looked at in the teacher education classroom and discussed.

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 203 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 204 Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

From these depictions, themes emerge that allow the posing of problems about
teaching-learning that STs will work collaboratively to investigate through their
teaching and with the help of the cooperating teacher.
The dialogue that ensues from a discussion of these codifications is the pre-
cursor to action. It is the seed that will germinate in reflection for action, and
which will empower STs to engage in praxis. However, before they can act, a
consideration of the impact of those actions on the language learners needs to
ensue. Hence, the next moment in the framework is oriented toward enabling
further reflection and further dialogue on the implications of STs’ understanding
of the new curriculum content.

Building Bridges
Teachers first learn how to teach, but they learn how to teach as they teach
something that is relearned as it is being taught
(Freire, 1998, p. 17)

Next, the framework provides an interface between the teacher education class-
room and the teaching practice classroom oriented toward deepening the STs’
reflection so as to enhance their action without these affecting learners nega-
tively. As we have said before, the apprenticeship of observation and our funds of
knowledge are the lenses through which we make sense of our reality. Teaching
is a highly complex activity that requires of its practitioners real ethics of car-
ing, a concern not just for the well-being of the learners, but for their futures, as
well. The investigations that STs undertake in their journey toward becoming
full-fledged educators carry with them the potential that, in the zest to change
reality, STs jump to premature action with the consequence that this action can
negatively affect learners.
Hence, the framework makes allowances for a time and space where STs can
rehearse and test out their action in the safety of their teacher education com-
munity. The process is akin to that depicted by Freire (2002/1970) whereby STs’
investigations prompt the emergence of thematics that are then co-constructed
with a view toward action by STs, their Subject Didactics and Cooperating teach-
ers, other STs and the language learners in the teaching practice classroom. This is
done through engagement in teaching-learning activity prior to enacting individ-
ual new understandings of curriculum contents in the teaching practice site. Some
of the tools that mediate this form of activity include ST-generated materials,
pedagogical materials used during teaching practice, microteaching sessions, con-
trolled experiments, analysis of lesson observation forms, scripts and protocols for
core practices, collaborative planning sessions, peer coaching, and the provision
of formative feedback by ToT, Cooperating Teacher, peers, and language learners.
Additionally, this stage fosters and anticipates the construction and emer-
gence of three distinct modes of mind (Malderez and Wedell, 2007) that are

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 204 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 Ignoramuses and Sages 205

characteristics of the activity of teaching-learning. These are ways of thinking

that professional teachers use to make sense of and co-construct their reality, and
which require different kinds of engagement with it.
The first mode of mind involves deliberative thinking that uses logic and
language to work things out and can be readily made explicit. It is equivalent
to Aristotle’s notion of episteme (Aristotle, 1999), which we have referred to as
core concepts.
A second mode of mind is unconscious. Claxton (1997, cited in Malderez and
Wedell, 2007) calls this the “undermind.” It enables the processing of experi-
ences of various sorts (feelings, impressions, reactions, memories) and produces
what we know as experiential knowledge. It equates the Aristotelian notion of
phronesis (Aristotle, 1999). Because this kind of knowledge is implicit in experi-
ence, it requires much longer periods of time for processing, and it is susceptible
to interference from our apprenticeship of observation and funds of knowledge.
However, “While both the amassing of experiences needed for this kind of
unconscious thinking and the work at converting them into experiential word-
less knowing takes time, the outcomes of such work can spontaneously, and
rapidly, emerge into our consciousness.” (Malderez & Wedell, 2007, p. 31). This
second mode of mind can be equated with what we have called core character-
istics, or the attitudinal component of knowledge.
The third and last mode of mind is called “fast-mind” mode and it works
very quickly when there is no chance to stop and ponder on our actions in a
conscious way. All teachers use this mode of thinking, but with different levels
of efficacy. It surfaces when we automatically apply teaching procedures we have
accrued through practice and can be equated with what we have described as
core practices. Interestingly, the experiential basis of this mode of thinking also
prompts what teachers call the intuitive “gut feeling” or the justification for act-
ing quickly in response to emerging classroom situations. This mode of mind, as
Eraut (2000, p. 256) rightly observes, is the product of the process of intuition
and, as such, it is, indeed “a way to knowing.”
All three modes of thinking are refined as we engage in teaching action.
However, not all teaching action is praxis. Moving directly from understand-
ing a particular curriculum content related to teaching-learning and enacting it
without due reflection can lead to the replication of procedures that may conspire
against the learners’ opportunities to learn, which is, in itself, a form of oppres-
sion. Thus, the bridging moment of the framework intends to heed Freire’s
admonition that “To no longer be prey to [the force of oppression], one must
emerge from it and turn upon it. This can be done only by means of the praxis:
reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it.” (2002/1970, p. 51).
Finally, the bridging moment allows the time and space to initiate thoughtful
action, see its consequences, and be able to rename that action for the benefit of
the learners within the safe environment of the teacher education community
whose role is to listen, understand, question, and support.

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 205 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 206 Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

Acting in/With the World

If a teacher truly believes in democracy, he or she has no option, upon
realizing his or her incoherence, than to shorten the distance between
what he or she says or does.
(Freire, 1996, p. 162)

The “bridging” moment of the framework affords STs the opportunity to recon-
sider their orientation toward reflective action and, thus, to make their praxis
concrete. It allows consideration and reconsideration of intentions, the explicita-
tion of core concepts, the calibration of the implementation of core practices,
and the reflection on the dispositions used in enacting the intended actions.
Thus, mismatches between our thinking and our doing are brought out in the
open for us and others to analyze, question, and change.
It is time now to launch our praxis, to act in and with the world and to sustain
our dialogue with the learners. At this stage, STs implement the results of their
investigations so far, not in their teaching practice group but with their teach-
ing practice group. Prior to teaching, they will have created their own lesson
plans that they will have shared with their Cooperating or Didactics teacher.
Additionally, they may have constructed rubrics or other lesson observation
instruments with a view to using them not as assessment tools but as road-
maps to chart their teaching-learning journey with their learners and also to
be able to engage in dialogue after the lesson. Lastly, they will engage their
learners in dialogue about that specific lesson by asking them questions oriented
toward disclosing further thematics that may be the starting point for further
explorations.
Throughout this component of the framework, peer support becomes fun-
damental, as well as the support of the ToT, the Cooperating Teacher, and
the language learners. They all act as sounding boards, as observers, and as
coresearchers working with the individual ST’s motives and agenda, gaining
progressively deeper levels of conscientização about their own position vis-à-vis
the particular curriculum content. Along the process, inequalities stemming
from the approach to teaching-learning will surface and will thus be susceptible
to questioning and further praxis.

Extending Our Reach

Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradic-
tion, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simul-
taneously teachers and students.
(Freire, 2002/1970, p. 72)

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 206 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 Ignoramuses and Sages 207

The final component of the framework brings to bear the realization that in
reaching the end, we find ourselves at the beginning. Every instance of praxis
leaves an indelible mark on the actors that prompts renewed impetus for dialogue
and investigation. It is at this stage that the nature of the teaching-learning pro-
cess becomes most readily evident. As we engage in self-assessment, planning for
the future, and reflecting on our actions, we become ever so conscious about the
dialectics involved in the teaching-learning act. Vygotsky (1987) used the Russian
term “obuchenie” to refer to the fact that in any educational encounter both teacher
and learner influence one another, we teach as we learn, and we learn as we teach.
The last moment in the framework allows for this dialectic to become evi-
dent. One is a teacher and a learner at the same time, and we all teach and learn
from one another. The fact that the ToT will not try to normalize the findings
of the STs’ investigations but will act as a catalyst for the posing of questions that
will prompt further investigations is the ultimate act of humility. At the end of
the process, we all become ignoramuses and sages simultaneously.

Conclusion
In this chapter, I have made explicit a framework for ITE that is deeply rooted
in Freirean pedagogical principles. The framework intends to promote a social
justice orientation to the activity of ITE by providing the time and space for
all actors to be able to engage in dialogue leading to reflection, which, in turn,
prompts transformative action. In the process, ToTs, STs, Cooperating teachers
and language learners learn to see reality, learn to act in and with the world and
thus become teacher-learners able to transform their reality so that everyone
stands the best chance for future.
Additionally, the framework recognizes the dialogic and dialectical nature
of the ITE process. This process is mediated by our own experiential resources,
by the support we receive from more knowledgeable others, by the opportunity
to work collaboratively in co-constructing our teaching-learning stance, and
by the generosity we display when helping less-knowledgeable co-participants
learn. The E.N.A.B.L.E. model as it has been described in this chapter is illus-
trated in Figure 12.1.
The ideas of Paulo Freire permeate the model and its enactment. As it has
been said before, the aim of this particular codification of the current reality of
ITE in Uruguay is not to prescribe a way to go about learning about teaching-
learning. Instead, it is intended to provide a network of support for dialogues,
reflections, and actions that are risky and brave at the same time. More impor-
tantly, by coming full circle to where we started, it allows the ongoing posing
of questions about more just teaching-learning practices because, after all, social
justice is not a destination; rather it is a road we must build together.

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 207 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 208 Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

DIATION
* ME ING TO SEE
:S
LEARN EL
G F
IN
NOTICING
-
Introducing Core Practice.
H

A
Explicit connection with Core Concepts
C

and Core Characteristics

C
De
EA

CE
con

AC
Classroom tasks, images,

str he C
ING

ion

videos, lesson plans,

uct ore

C
ser e
vat

t
of th th

lesson transcripts

ES
Videos,
CIPR CAL T

ing

SS
AG

observation forms, lesson plans,

SIN
hip wi

an racti
ob

Stimulated journal or
NG

lesson

dr
ces ng

P
recall,

eco e
nti ecti

magazine articles,

G
transcripts,
E

, SCAFFO
simulations,

nst
book chapters, observation forms,
pre onn

c
images, videos,

ruc
books modeling, scripts,
C

lesson transcripts,

tin
demonstrations,

g
journaling
ap

journal or magazine
articles, book chapters, books.
O

Student teacher-generated materials

Self-assessment. Microteaching. Controlled experi-
im nd its d Co
Re men soci Char

Peer-assessment. ments. Observation forms.

ple
fle
a

me e
ToT’s formative feedback. Scripts and Protocols.

on ractic
LEAR

cti tatio ted acter

Rubrics.

nt
Student feedback. Collaborative planning.
ng n o Co

Observation
an

en re P
as re

*Action planning. Peer coaching.

an

forms. Lesson
d a the e Con cs

afe Co
Reflective Self-assessment
EX

vir
plans. Student
a

sse Cor
NI N

a s the
journals.

ING
Formative
f
TE

assessment of

L
RE

ssi e P epts

feedback
hin ng
ng

teaching.
ND

wit mpti

IDG
r isti

DI
GT

on actic

Peer support.
ING

e
the e

ToT support.
r

Att

BR
c
O
,

N
G BE

Implementing the Core Practice

G
CO

M
N

in real-life settings
E D
O
,
O
I
GT
C
LAUNCHING
N
NI N
R O
LEAR
LL A
AB E
ORATIVE L

FIGURE 12.1 The E.N.A.B.L.E. model (Diaz Maggioli, 2021)

Note
1 This term refers to raising awareness about contradictions at the social, economic,
and political levels so as to be able to take action and achieve liberation from
oppression.

References
Adams, M. (2016). Pedagogical foundations for social justice education. In M. Adams
& L. A. Bell (Eds.), Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice. (pp. 27–55). Abingdon:
Routledge.
Aristotle (1999). Nicomachean Ethics. Cambridge: Hackett.
Borges, J. L. (1964). The Circular Ruins. In W. Gibson (Ed.), Labyrinths: Selected Stories
and Other Writings. (pp. 45–50). New York, NY: New Directions.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2010). Toward a theory of teacher education for social justice. In
A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), Second International

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 208 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 Ignoramuses and Sages 209

Handbook of Educational Change. Springer International Handbooks of Education. (Vol. 23,

pp. 445–467). Dordrecht: Springer.
Cowen, B. (1995). The state of teacher education: The knowledge fit for teachers. In R.
Gardner (Ed.), Contemporary Crises in Teacher Education. (pp. 18–34). Birmingham:
British Association of Teachers and Researchers in Overseas Education.
Crookes, G. (2013). Critical ELT in Action: Foundations, Promises, Praxis. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Diaz Maggioli, G. (2017). Ideologies and discourses in the standards for language teach-
ers in South America. In L. Kamhi-Stein, G. Diaz Maggioli, & L. de Oliveira (Eds.),
English Language Teaching in South America: Policy, Preparation and Practices. (pp. 31–53).
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
. (forthcoming, 2021). Theory and Practice of Initial Teacher Education. London:
Routledge.
Diniz-Pereira, J. (2017). Modelos críticos de formación docente: la experiencia del MST.
In I. Silva-Peña, J. Diniz-Pereira, & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Justicia social: La dimensión olvi-
dada de la formación docente [Social Justice: The Forgotten Dimension in Teacher Education].
(pp. 121–136). Santiago: Mutante Editores.
Dirección de Formación y Perfeccionamiento Docente (DFPD). (2007). Principios guía
del Sistema Único de Formación Docente para Uruguay [The Uruguayan Unified Teacher
Education System: Guiding Principles]. Montevideo: Author.
Eraut, M. (2000). The intuitive practitioner: A critical review. In T. Atkinson & G.
Claxton (Eds.), The Intuitive Practitioner: On the Value of Not Always Knowing What One
Is Doing. (pp. 255–268). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Freire, P. (1996). Letters to Cristina: Reflections on My Life and Work. New York, NY:
Routledge.
. (1998). Teachers as Cultural Workers: Letters to Those Who Dare Teach. Boulder,
CO: Westview Press.
. (2001). Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy, and Civic Courage. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
. (2002/1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
. (2002/1992). Pedagogy of Hope. New York, NY: Continuum.
Gray, J. and Block, D. (2012). The marketisation of language teacher education and neo-
liberalism: Characteristics, consequences and future prospects. In D. Block, J. Gray,
& M. Holborow (Eds.), Neoliberalism and Applied Linguistics. (pp. 114–143). Oxon:
Routledge.
Grossman, P. (2018). Teaching Core Practices in Teacher Education. New York, NY:
Routledge.
King, J. (2006). If our objective is justice: Diaspora literacy, heritage knowledge, and the
praxis of critical studyin’ for human freedom. In A. Ball (Ed.), With More Deliberate
Speed: Achieving Equity and Excellence in Education–Realizing the Full Potential of Brown
v. Board of Education, 105th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education.
(pp. 337–357). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Malderez, A. and Wedell, M. (2007). Teaching Teachers: Processes and Practices. London:
Continuum.
Mason, J. (2002). Researching Your Own Practice: The Discipline of Noticing. Oxon:
Routledge.

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 209 08/01/22 5:00 PM

 210 Gabriel Díaz Maggioli

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard
Educational Review, 57, 1–22.
Veal, M. L. and Rikard, L. (1998) Cooperating teachers’ perspectives on the student
teaching triad. Journal of Teacher Education, 49 (2), 108–119.
Vélez-Ibáñez, C. G. and Greenberg, J. B. (1992). Formation and transformation of funds
of knowledge among U.S. Mexican households. Anthropology & Education Quarterly,
23(4), 313–335.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The Collected Works of Lev S. Vygotsky. Volume I: Problems of General
Psychology. (Edited by Rieber, R. and Carton, A.). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Wink, J. (2000). Critical Pedagogy: Notes from the Real World. New York, NY: Longman.

BK-TandF-BARROS_9781032007915-211590-Chp12.indd 210 08/01/22 5:00 PM