+1 Recommend
    • Review: found
    Is Open Access

    Review of 'Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017)'

    Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017)Crossref
    The review has made a historic progression of educational thought, policies and practices .
    Average rating:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of importance:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of validity:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of completeness:
        Rated 4 of 5.
    Level of comprehensibility:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Competing interests:

    Reviewed article

    • Record: found
    • Abstract: found
    • Article: not found

    Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017)

    Edda Sant (2019)
    This theoretical review examines how democratic education is conceptualized within educational scholarship. Three hundred and seventy-seven articles published in English language peer-reviewed journals between 2006 and 2017 are discursively analyzed. Democratic education functions as a privileged nodal point of different political discourses. Two discourses against (elitist and neoliberal) and six discourses pro democratic education (liberal, deliberative, multiculturalist, participatory, critical, and agonistic) construct its meaning. It is argued that the different versions of democratic education respond to various (a) ontological and epistemological assumptions, (b) normative approaches to democracy, and (c) conceptions of the relationship between education and politics. For educational policy, the review provides a critique of elitist and neoliberal policies and support for participatory decision making across discourses. Recommendations for educational practice are made by identifying pedagogies across democratic education scholarship as well as specific pedagogies for each discourse.

      Review information

      Review text

      The very first thing is its narrowing down a topic; the symmetrical discussion of introduction, conclusion, and properly sufficient references.

      The second strength of this review paper is its detailed methodology, the graphical presentation of narrowing down technique of papers for review.

      The eight types of liberal education, three types of liberal educational policies, and the practices of these policies have been discussed with neatness and cleanliness.

        The author is confessional to the apparent drawbacks of this conceptual paper and has broadened the scope of further research on-field.


      Comment on this review

      Version and Review History