Prophet or fool? The professional position and role of historians of education

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the professional dilemmas of historians of education in the USA. Design/methodology/approach – This paper uses historiographical analysis. Findings – While some aspects of both “prophet” and “fool” cultural archetypes fit some historians of education, neither archetype is a useful model for discussing the possible professional positions and roles of new scholars. Instead, “border-crossing” is an appropriate metaphor for new scholars in the history of education. Originality/value – This manuscript addresses a topic of concern to many historians of education in multiple countries. It moves beyond material concerns of intellectuals to discuss the cultural archetypes that may be at play.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)23-37
Number of pages15
JournalHistory of Education Review
Volume44
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

historian
history of education
education
intellectual
metaphor
methodology
Prophet
Historian
Fool
Education
Archetypes
Values
Methodology
Manuscripts
Originality
History of Education

Keywords

  • Cultural archetypes
  • Historiographical analysis
  • History of education
  • Intellectual history

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • History

Cite this

Prophet or fool? The professional position and role of historians of education. / Dorn, Sherman.

In: History of Education Review, Vol. 44, No. 1, 01.06.2015, p. 23-37.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{592bab9897a24ed7ae0f30450f0c94ef,
title = "Prophet or fool? The professional position and role of historians of education",
abstract = "Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the professional dilemmas of historians of education in the USA. Design/methodology/approach – This paper uses historiographical analysis. Findings – While some aspects of both “prophet” and “fool” cultural archetypes fit some historians of education, neither archetype is a useful model for discussing the possible professional positions and roles of new scholars. Instead, “border-crossing” is an appropriate metaphor for new scholars in the history of education. Originality/value – This manuscript addresses a topic of concern to many historians of education in multiple countries. It moves beyond material concerns of intellectuals to discuss the cultural archetypes that may be at play.",
keywords = "Cultural archetypes, Historiographical analysis, History of education, Intellectual history",
author = "Sherman Dorn",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1108/HER-03-2014-0016",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "23--37",
journal = "History of Education Review",
issn = "0311-3248",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prophet or fool? The professional position and role of historians of education

AU - Dorn, Sherman

PY - 2015/6/1

Y1 - 2015/6/1

N2 - Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the professional dilemmas of historians of education in the USA. Design/methodology/approach – This paper uses historiographical analysis. Findings – While some aspects of both “prophet” and “fool” cultural archetypes fit some historians of education, neither archetype is a useful model for discussing the possible professional positions and roles of new scholars. Instead, “border-crossing” is an appropriate metaphor for new scholars in the history of education. Originality/value – This manuscript addresses a topic of concern to many historians of education in multiple countries. It moves beyond material concerns of intellectuals to discuss the cultural archetypes that may be at play.

AB - Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the professional dilemmas of historians of education in the USA. Design/methodology/approach – This paper uses historiographical analysis. Findings – While some aspects of both “prophet” and “fool” cultural archetypes fit some historians of education, neither archetype is a useful model for discussing the possible professional positions and roles of new scholars. Instead, “border-crossing” is an appropriate metaphor for new scholars in the history of education. Originality/value – This manuscript addresses a topic of concern to many historians of education in multiple countries. It moves beyond material concerns of intellectuals to discuss the cultural archetypes that may be at play.

KW - Cultural archetypes

KW - Historiographical analysis

KW - History of education

KW - Intellectual history

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930171008&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930171008&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/HER-03-2014-0016

DO - 10.1108/HER-03-2014-0016

M3 - Article

VL - 44

SP - 23

EP - 37

JO - History of Education Review

JF - History of Education Review

SN - 0311-3248

IS - 1

ER -