“Through this Homer teaches”: The Exegetical Scholia on the Lessons of the Iliad

Higher education in general and teacher education in particular have been subjected to significant changes. As there are few studies examining how actors rhetorically position themselves within this context, the ambition of the paper is to study conversations between teacher educators related to norms and values in education. The aim of the paper is to study interpretative repertoires and subject positions that are constructed in conversations between teacher educators and to discuss these in relation to qualities in teacher education.The theoretical framework emanates from post-structuralist and social constructionist theories. The empirical material consists of group conversations with teacher educators. The findings reveal that the practical and theoretical appear to be in contrast, which in turn seem to affect education quality. Finally, implications of the findings are discussed, where a future diagonal diverse discourse, combining theoretical and practical knowledge, is argued for.

Educational value in teacher education courses is unquestioned; however, there are still many doubts about the practicality of the knowledge acquired from university courses and a field-based course in school practicum. The purpose of this study is to identify the practicality of the educational knowledge from the above courses for pre-service teachers in confronting field-based challenges in school practicum. A survey method was utilized to collect the data about pre-service teachers’ perceptions on the acquisition of educational knowledge as well as practicality of the knowledge. A total of 298 Taiwanese pre-service teachers were invited to fill in a validated questionnaire in January 2013, which is the last month in school practicum. Data were analyzed using the Friedman test and multiple regression analysis. This study concludes that disciplinary content knowledge was perceived as the top-ranked one among six categories of educational knowledge from university courses, while this category of knowledge was perceived as the fourth-highest order on practicality of the knowledge. The finding implies that university courses do not fit to the needs of pre-service teachers in confronting challenges in school practicum. Except for disciplinary content knowledge, other categories of educational knowledge tended to maintain approximate rank-order. Another finding reveals that all categories of educational knowledge from the field-based course were significant predictors of practicality of the educational knowledge, while all those acquired from university courses were not. A recommendation was proposed that teacher educators in universities should build a course version of practical knowledge through integrating field-based experiences into teacher education courses.

This chapter defines forms of knowledge as generic ways elements are united as one knowledge, and explains the difference between three forms of knowledge: knowledge that something is the case, practical knowledge of what one does intentionally, and knowledge how to do something. It argues that the difference between these forms of knowledge primarily concerns the unity of their different objects—a fact, an action, and a practice-form, respectively—and their associated explanatory roles. The role of unifying abstraction in specifying forms of knowledge is discussed and distinguished from empirical hypothesis. In order to clarify how unifying abstraction can go wrong, the idea that factual knowledge is the most general form of knowledge, of which know-how and practical knowledge are, at best, species, is criticized on the grounds that practical knowledge and knowledge how play epistemic explanatory roles that factual knowledge cannot play. A sketched account of the genus knowledge is given, on which to know is to think what is, in a way that makes it no accident that what one thinks is. Specific forms of knowledge are then coordinated with different ways things can be, which display distinctive temporal features. These reflections are applied to clarify what is at stake in extant debates about whether knowledge how is a species of knowledge that and about whether knowledge that is an ability or a state. In conclusion, the chapter reflects on the role and legitimacy of unifying abstraction in philosophy.

It is common in epistemology to distinguish different kinds of knowledge: factual, practical, and objectual knowledge, which are commonly expressed by the ‘know-that’, ‘know-how’ and ‘know-plus-noun-phrase’ locutions. Some philosophers argue that either practical or objectual knowledge is not reducible to factual knowledge but forms a distinct kind. This chapter asks if these distinct types of knowledge are still knowledge in a recognisable sense; it asks, in other words, whether there is a genus of knowledge to which the distinct species of factual, practical, and objectual knowledge belong. The search for a comprehensive conception of knowledge in this chapter remains unsuccessful. Nontheless, I argue that anyone who believes in genuinely different kinds of knowledge will have a very good reason to try to succeed where I failed.

Batik is Indonesia's cultural wealth from time to time. Batik is one of Indonesian cultural arts that is well known to foreign countries, there are educational values in batik activities, in the world of education the introduction of Batik already exists from the elementary school education level, but few teachers are able to provide practical experience of batik. Therefore, teachers in elementary schools must be equipped with experience and knowledge of batik practice through training so that they can teach students. This study uses a qualitative method, where the teacher learns while doing (Learning By Doing). The learning process starts from the introduction of Batik and the educational values in it, how to make batik patterns, to coloring. Hopefully many elementary school teachers can play an important role in contributing to the preservation of Batik art.Keywords: Batik, Educational Value, Elementary School

Minerva is a response to problems that beset higher education writ large. We focus in large part on the most significant problem, which centers on the value of higher education. We address this problem by teaching “practical knowledge,” which is knowledge the students can use to achieve their goals. Practical knowledge is rooted in critical thinking, creative thinking, effective communication and effective interaction. We also have considered in depth how to teach this material effectively; all of our pedagogy is informed by the science of learning, which has led us to develop new forms of active learning. In addition, we have developed a software platform that supports our unique pedagogical and curricular model. This platform provides tools that not only facilitate teaching but also--and more importantly--enhance student learning. Furthermore, we believe that the future is increasingly international and thus our students learn to use practical knowledge in a global context. To achieve this, no one nationality is a majority—so students learn from each other—and students live and study together in up to seven different cities around the world. Finally, the Minerva talent agency supports our students from the beginning of their tenure through their post-graduate career, helping them succeed for many years to come.

Just as factual memory might be defined in terms of factual knowledge, so it seems that practical memory, remembering how to do something, can be defined in terms of practical knowledge, knowing how to do it. To remember how to drive a car is to know how to drive one, where this is not knowledge I have just acquired, but something I knew before; just as factual memory is retained factual knowledge, so, in the same way, practical memory is retained practical knowledge. And just as practical knowledge seems to consist in possessing certain acquired abilities and skills, so too does practical memory; to remember or know how to drive a car is simply to be able to do so. There do not seem to be any special problems here.

Introduction. In а modern world, higher education institutions (HEIs) play a key role in the development of science, technology, industry, economics and, most importantly, the development of humans, their individual and social consciousness, which are key innovative resources for sustainable development. At the same time, the specificity of the HEIs’ intellectual capital leads to the formulation of a paradox: higher education is both the most and the least (at least domestic one) intellectualized economic structure. HEIs are a source of knowledge, their staff, students and graduates – its carriers and, at the same time, domestic universities are stagnating in their development, not using this knowledge as a value-generating income factor.
 Aim and tasks. The purpose of the study is to develop a model in order to analyze the formation and implementation of HEIs’ intellectual capital in the entire structure of their economic activities. The model is proposed in order to identify the motives and ways of its development and the awareness of its main feature – a dual-natured direction, manifested for universities, scientific and teaching staff, students, business and state.
 Results. The article deals with an analysis of possible directions for achieving the goals of the HEI in the implementation of its chosen business model, as well as the relationship of elements of intellectual capital, should be based on the proposed model, which allows its management to ensure the synergistic effect of the totality of its components.
 Conclusions. The study presents the main sources of innovative advantage, and also describes how the intellectual capital of the HEI is related to its market value. It is a process of commercialization of knowledge, which generates intellectual capital at the HEI, giving it not only scientific and educational value, but also market value. Collaboration between HEIs and industry offers researchers the opportunity to increase the value of their intellectual capital through monetary or contextual support for research, which contributes to their greater scientific productivity. As for students, this allows them, in particular, to gain practice, learn to apply theoretical knowledge in practice and respond to business needs.

I (heart) social ventures: Identification and social media engagement

The aim of this paper is to present the reception of Janusz Korczak’s writings in Italy and its relevance for Italian educational studies and to open some new perspectives on the author’s writing activity. The paper is composed of three parts and each of them focuses on different suggestions. After a short presentation on what has been translated and received in our Country, we will focus on some peculiar aspects of Korczak’s writing practice, in particular on its educational value. In this paper we assume that Korczak’s whole practice is a perfect example of circularity between experience and reflection; his thoughts and his actions embody the integration of theoretical assumptions with a practical knowledge. This allows us to suggest a that a great part of the Polish author’s works can be considered autobiographical as it often results from the reflection that follows his personal experiences. In the last part we focus on Korczak’s meaning of infancy, on his attempts to give children a voice and on the epistemological consequences they suggest.

This qualitative dissertation study contributes to conversations around the practical knowledge gap–professional behaviors or practices which are underdeveloped in available research–between critically oriented literacy teacher preparation programs and praxis in early career classrooms. Critical literacy, or engaging with major texts, discourses, and ways of communicating in a culture or context, attempts to locate and disrupt power imbalances and encourage justice-oriented activism. While teacher candidates (TCs) often practice critical literacy in their training programs, they often struggle to facilitate critical literacy instruction in their own classrooms. Using Thematic Analysis (TA) for data reduction and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) for data analysis, I explore TC discussion–both spoken and written–in an English Language Arts (ELA) Methods course (Methods) that centered critical texts and topics. Data sources include demographic surveys, Intersectional Identity Maps, recorded book club conversations, transcripts of recorded book club conversations, reflective book club writing, semi-structured interview recordings, and transcripts of semi-structured interview recordings. In analyzing these data, I address 1) the discourse moves TCs make in order to sustain or evade sociopolitical talk during conversations around critical topics and 2) how TCs talk about enacting critical conversations in future classroom instruction. The study’s findings highlight patterns across TC talk, primarily in how they (a) imagine future students relating to Young Adult Literature (YAL) texts, (b) conceptualize adolescents, (c) weigh what is appropriate content to discuss in the ELA classroom, and (d) conceptualize the role of the ELA teacher. Broadly, TCs privileged relatability when endorsing/rejecting YAL, positioned adolescents as too immature to engage with critical topics and texts, determined that sexual content in YAL undermined its educational value, and conceptualized the teacher as content-area, sociohistorical, and cultural “expert” while simultaneously limited in decision making authority. The implications for teacher educators feature practical vehicles–assignment and discussion prompts for modeling effective facilitation of critical conversations–and pinpoint where additional practical knowledge must be built, regarding when and how teacher educators should more precisely coach TCs toward criticality in their own reading and talk experiences.

Collective intelligence [1, 2] is a key characteristic of innovative groups and organizations that self-organize in online environments to generate and disseminate knowledge for public good. Collaborative Innovation Networks (COINs) [3] and Knowledge Building communities [4] represent powerful models that inform the emergence and sustainability of collective intelligence in organizational contexts, as well as educational contexts. For example, a key dynamic of COINs and Knowledge Building communities is collective responsibility for advancing the state of community knowledge [5], as indicated by decentralized social structures and rotating leadership over time [6]. Additionally, both COINs and Knowledge Building communities engage in knowledge practices that leverage the affordances of online environments, using embedded data analytics to visualize group dynamics, troubleshoot emergent issues, and identify promising areas for improvement. This study highlights the theoretical intersections between these two models of organizational innovation in order to explore technological designs for visualizing collective intelligence in Knowledge Forum [7], an online platform optimized for knowledge creation and innovation. More specifically, the six indicators of COINs [8] - rapid response, balanced contribution, central leaders, rotating leadership, honest sentiment, and innovative language - are refined and adapted within the context of Knowledge Building communities, wherein the design challenge is enabling self-organization around idea improvement. Using social network analysis, lexical analysis, sentiment analysis, and statistical analysis, next-generation designs for Knowledge Forum analytics are proposed. The educational value and practical implications of these designs are discussed within the context of education for innovation in technology-based societies.

Knowledge is an understanding of someone or something, such as facts, information, descriptions or skills, which is acquired by individuals through education, learning, experience or by discovering. We have to distinguish two forms of knowledge, which is on the one hand “explicit knowledge” and on the other hand “tacit knowledge”. Explicit knowledge is not a homogenous resource, but it can be qualified as factual knowledge, which is verbalized, codified, systematic and formal. Persons have easy access to explicit knowledge and it can be easily transmitted to others. It is transferred through written or verbal media.Tacit knowledge can be defined as skills, procedure and ideas and is learned mostly through experience over time. Tacit knowledge is a personal type of knowledge that cannot be shared simply through written or verbal communication, because it is not codified. Tacit knowledge can be seen as the knowledge practitioners have in their minds. To put theoretical knowledge into practice means to create tacit knowledge. Knowledge in general is an accumulation of education and experience – a mixture of explicit and tacit knowledge. Both forms of knowledge together make the difference between a novice and an expert. An efficient tool transferring collective knowledge into practice is called “Knowledge Management” (KM). Strategies and processes to gather, identify, structure, value, and share intellectual assets of companies. As a kind of “map of knowledge” it is considered as a useful tool to distribute knowledge and is seen as a help to settle in the world of “Practice” more quickly. A “community of practice” (CoP) is a group of people who share a common interest or create a platform with the goal of gaining knowledge related to a specific topic. The members of the group learn from each other by sharing information and experience within the group. The path becoming a lawyer can be a long process in Germany. The university education is marked by the idea, that a lawyer has to understand all branches of law und its system. The German system of studying law followed two predominant ideas, which is Comprehensive Knowledge and a dual education system. A jurist has to understand and to know every branch of law and was prepared with comprehensive knowledge for the next step – walking in the field of daily business matters. Specialization for a certain field of law is a personal and individual matter and doesn`t influence the university education. Comprehensive knowledge should enable the candidate to handle various challenges and to apply their knowledge in practice without being limited on a special kind of theoretical knowledge. Transferring explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge starts with using common sense, empathy and active listing skills. Transferring knowledge into practice needs first at all common sense. Common sense is practical judgement or a basic ability to perceive, understand and judge daily situations without special knowledge and without specialized training or deliberative thoughts. What distinguishes the humanities from the natural sciences is the mode of approach to any question. Knowledge in relation to Humanity means a structured way of thinking, which is a process of putting a framework to an unstructured problem. Knowledge means also critical thinking, which is the objective analysis of facts to form a judgement. Solving legal problems needs a rational, skeptical and unbiased analysis and the evaluation of factual evidence. Efficient transferring knowledge into practice needs structured thinking in both matters and is the only successful way to connect knowledge and practice.

Outreach visits reflect newer developments in adult learning theory, where the learner is actively involved in the session. Previous studies have indicated a positive effect of outreach visits on GPs' behaviour. However, the empirical role of the facilitator in the visits is poorly described. To explore general practitioners' perception of the outcome of a facilitator programme about dementia, in relation to central aspects of the facilitator's communicative role during the visits. Observational studies, and focus group discussions with participating general practitioners (3 groups, 19 participants) as well as with facilitators (4 participants) in Vejle County, Denmark. Facilitators drew both on a 'factual' knowledge of dementia and a more 'experience-based' knowledge when conveying programme messages. They described themselves as 'carriers of experience'. All general practitioners described an outcome of the programme, and all wished to receive a future visit by a facilitator on new topics. The outcome was described not as ground-breaking medical news, but as practical effects in terms of knowledge of dementia, motivation for working with dementia, structured assessment and management of dementia and critical reflection of established practices regarding dementia. Some general practitioners remained critical as to whether this outcome justified the resources used in the programme. The experience-based dialogue was described as central to the outcome as it linked factual knowledge to clinical practice. This study confirms that outreach visits contribute to the integration of factual knowledge in clinical practice, but it also underscores the importance of addressing tacit communicative practices during facilitator visits and their implications for the outcome of the programme.

We read with interest the study by Yitzhaki et al. evaluating ChatGPT-4 against a PICU specialist in answering open-ended medical education questions [1]. The authors' methodological strengths—such as the use of a closed question set not previously available to the model and a blinded multi-centre evaluation—offer valuable internal validity. Their conclusion that ChatGPT-4 tends to outperform on factual recall but lags on complex clinical reasoning aligns with emerging evidence from other specialties, where LLMs frequently excel in structured factual tasks but underperform in nuanced, context-dependent reasoning [2, 3]. Structured dual-response models Studies in otolaryngology and neurosurgery indicate that hybrid workflows—where an AI produces an initial, comprehensive draft that is subsequently curated by specialists—can yield higher overall accuracy and educational value than either source alone [2, 3]. In Yitzhaki et al. dataset, the observed preference for combining human and AI responses in ≈37% of cases suggests that a formalised “AI first-draft + expert validation” workflow may harness AI completeness while preserving clinical safety [1, 3]. Embedding evidence traceability A key limitation noted by the authors was the absence of source citations in ChatGPT-4's outputs, reducing trainees' ability to appraise provenance and strength of evidence [1]. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) frameworks have been shown to improve citation accuracy and transparency in medical AI outputs [4, 5]. Implementing RAG-style pipelines in PICU-focused educational tools could permit direct linking of AI statements to primary literature, guidelines, or review articles, thereby facilitating critical appraisal skills among trainees. Repurposing AI to scaffold clinical reasoning Where LLMs currently underperform on reasoning tasks, they may nevertheless be pedagogically valuable when used as Socratic tutors—prompting learners to articulate differential diagnoses, justify management choices, or recognize gaps in their reasoning—rather than as definitive answer generators. This scaffolding approach is consistent with AI applications in surgical training, where AI prompts have been used to stimulate reflective decision-making and structured reasoning [6, 7]. We propose that future work in PICU education should evaluate prospective interventions that operationalise these principles: (a) implement dual-response workflows with mandatory expert verification; (b) deploy retrieval-augmented models that return linked, labelled evidence; and (c) assess AI use as a reasoning scaffold with outcomes including trainee diagnostic accuracy, reasoning process measures, learner engagement, and indicators of automation bias. Such studies should include robust blinded assessment and both formative and summative educational endpoints. In summary, Yitzhaki et al. provide an important empirical foundation showing that modern LLMs can contribute meaningfully to factual teaching in PICU settings but require structured oversight for reasoning tasks [1]. Rather than viewing LLMs as a binary replacement for educators, we suggest viewing them as adaptable partners within transparent, evidence-traceable learning ecosystems that amplify educator capacity while safeguarding clinical reasoning standards. All authors have substantial contributions to conceptualization, literature review, writing – original draft, and writing – review and editing; and gave final approval of the version to be published. AI tools were used to enhance the clarity and coherence of language. All insights and analysis were developed and verified by the authors. The authors have nothing to report. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.