In this article, we present a new perspective on how to combine inquiry-based, problem-oriented learning with practices in the Humanities. Our particular interest is how the initial phase of finding “the problem” can be undertaken in a conjoint way with students, that is in the form of inquiry-based learning where there are no pre-defined questions set by the teacher. Inspired by C. Wright Mills, we argue that “the imagination” is key to opening up inquiries into problems, for students and researchers alike. Through an outline of what we call “the Humanities imagination” we develop a set of heuristics for stimulating a turn from topics to problems in the context of the Humanities. We show how combining inquiry-based learning with the Humanities suggests both new pedagogical practices, new models (the teacher as interlocutor), and a new balancing of the ecology of the Humanities emphasizing its particular imaginary over its disciplines.
AndersenASHeilesenSB (2015) The Roskilde Model: Problem-Oriented Learning and Project Work.
London:
Springer International Publishing.
6.
AuerbachESaidMSaidE (1969)
Philology and “Weltliteratur”. The Centennial Review13(1): 1–17.
7.
BiestaG (2016) The Beautiful Risk of Education.
Abingdon:
Routledge.
8.
BridgesW (2019)
A brief history of the inhumanities. History of Humanities4(1): 1–26.
9.
ChuSKWReynoldsRBTavaresNJ, et al. (2017) 21st Century Skills Development Through Inquiry-Based Learning.
Singapore:
Springer.
10.
DeleuzeG (1988) Bergsonism.
New York:
Zone.
11.
DeweyJ (1916) Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education.
New York:
The Macmillan Company.
12.
DeweyJ (1938) Logic, the Theory of Inquiry.
New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
13.
GadamerH-G (1960) Wahrheit Und Methode, Grundzüge Einer Philosophischen Hermeneutik. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
14.
GoodsteinE (2017) Georg Simmel and the Disciplinary Imaginary.
Palo Alto, CA:
Stanford University Press.
15.
GraftonA (2009) Worlds Made by Words: Scholarship and Community in the Modern West.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
16.
HeschelS (1998) Abraham Geiger and the Jewish Jesus.
Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
17.
IrwinR (2006) For Lust of Knowing, the Orientalists and Their Enemies.
London:
Allen Lane.
18.
JordheimH (2001) Lesningens Vitenskap. Utkast Til en ny Filologi [The Science of Reading].
Oslo:
Universitetsforl.
19.
Kierkegaard S (1962) Enten-eller. Kbh: Gyldendal.
20.
KoopmanC (2013) Genealogy as Critique: Foucault and the Problems of Modernity.
Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
21.
LambertC (2009)
Pedagogies of participation in higher education: A case for research-based learning. Pedagogy, Culture & Society17(3): 295–309.
22.
McLindenMEdwardsC (2011)
Developing a culture of enquiry-based, independent learning in a research-led institution: Findings from a survey of pedagogic practice. International Journal for Academic Development16(2): 147–162.
23.
MalletteK (2010) European Modernity and the Arab Mediterranean: Toward a New Philology and a Counter-Orientalism.
Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
24.
MalletteK (2014)
Cosmopolitan philology. Postmedieval: A Journal of Medieval Cultural Studies5(4): 414–427.
25.
MarchandSL (2009) German Orientalism in the Age of Empire: Religion, Race, and Scholarship.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
26.
MarchandSL (2019)
Humanities within the bounds of humility. History of Humanities4(1): 47–57.
27.
MiddendorfJPaceD (2004)
Decoding the disciplines: A model for helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning98: 1–12.
28.
MillsCW (1959) The Sociological Imagination.
New York:
Oxford University Press.
29.
MurtonenMLehtinenE (2009) Learning to be a researcher: Challenges for undergraduates. In: Brew A and Lucas L (eds) Academic Research and Researchers. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill, pp.175–188.
30.
NietzscheF (1966) Werke in Drei Bänden.
München:
Carl Hanser Verlag.
31.
ØdemarkJ (2011)
Genealogies and analogies of “culture” in the history of cultural translation – On Boturini’s translation of Tlaloc and Vico in idea of a new general history of Northern America. Bulletin of Latin American Research30(1): 38–55.
32.
ParkerJ (2008) ‘
What have the humanities to offer 21st-century Europe?’: Reflections of a note taker. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education7(1): 83–96.
33.
PeirceCS (2011) The fixation of belief. In: Talisse RB and Aikin SF (eds) The Pragmatism Reader: From Peirce Through the Present. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp.37–49.
34.
PollockSElmanBAChangK-MK (2015) World Philology.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
35.
RabinowP (2012)
How to submit to inquiry: Dewey and Foucault. The Pluralist7(3): 25–37.
36.
ShanksM (2012) The Archaeological Imagination.
Walnut Creek, CA:
Left Coast Press.
37.
SimmelG (1910)
How is society possible?American Journal of Sociology16(3): 372–391.
38.
SpoerhaseC (2019)
Seminar libraries as laboratories of philology: The modern seminar model in nineteenth-century German philology. History of Humanities4(1): 103–123.
39.
StengersI (2005)
Introductory notes on an ecology of practices. Cultural Studies Review11(1): 183–196.
40.
ThomasTWallaceJAllenP, et al. (2017)
Strategies for leading academics to rethink humanities and social sciences curricula in the context of discipline standards. International Journal for Academic Development22(2): 120–133.
41.
TurnerJ (2014) Philology: The Forgotten Origins of the Modern Humanities.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
42.
WalkingtonH (2015) Students as Researchers: Supporting Undergraduate Research in the Disciplines in Higher Education.
York:
The Higher Education Academy.
