The art of educating free, able and creative people: The theories of Dr. Broddi Jóhannesson

Abstract

Dr Broddi Jóhannesson was one of the most influential leaders in education in Iceland in the twentieth century. He played a leading role in the revolutionary changes that occurred in teacher education in the sixties and seventies. He shaped teachers’ education as headmaster of the teachers’ training college, and later, as the first rector of the newly founded university responsible for teacher education in Iceland, not to mention the fact that he was a legendary teacher who influenced generations of teachers for decades. Broddi Jóhannesson was directly involved in the development of educational policy and teacher education in Iceland through his work on several governmental committees that rewrote the educational policy on teacher education. Finally, he was a pioneer in pedagogical and psychological sciences in Iceland. Broddi Jóhannesson was one of the founding fathers of the national science fund. He was among the first Icelandic social scientists to publish articles in international journals. He served as the editor for Menntamál, the only scholarly journal exclusively devoted to education.

Jóhannesson showed a remarkable consistency in his prolific work across
various roles and immeasurable tasks in all areas of education. In this paper I argue that this consistency was rooted in a carefully worked out and a unique theoretical

framework that Broddi Jóhannesson developed early in his career. While he did not find the time to present his theories in a comprehensive and a systematic manner, many of their key elements are displayed in his writings. I try to show how his theoretical framework was a unique mixture of ideas drawn from classical humanism, science, critical theories and traditional knowledge and wisdom from Icelandic farmers and fishermen. Broddi Jóhannesson emphasized the scientific method as a key element in the demarcation of science. He was especially interested in the experimental method as a model for scientific inquiry. At the same time he stressed the importance of skepticism and the right to question scientific authority and expertise. While Broddi Jóhannesson found general theories and the hypothetico-deductive model of research useful, he argued that this kind of knowledge had to be placed in the proper context, emphasizing the contextdependent aspects of knowledge, expertise and learning. He warned against the use of context independent grand theories that offered solutions to a broad range of human problems on a silver platter.
  In many ways Broddi Jóhannesson was close to pragmatists such as John Dewey, approaching learning from a theory of knowledge that emphasized active learning, play, and experimentation as the basis for both knowledge and learning. Furthermore, the way Broddi Jóhannesson integrated knowledge from national Icelandic culture and the pragmatist theory of learning resembled Veblen´s theory of workmanship and C. Wright Millis’s theory of craftsmanship in the sense that he emphasized a task-oriented approach, stressing informal learning, holistic understanding, skill, and tacit knowledge. What set him apart from all these scholars was his emphasis on humanitarian values and a unique style of analysis and presentation. The theoretical framework Broddi Jóhannesson developed characterized his approach to teaching, and educational policy-making. He placed the student firmly at the center of the school system. The the student´s welfare was to be placed above bureaucratic rules and standardized solutions. Students should have as much freedom as possible to learn and explore important material. In the same vein, he argued that teachers should have the freedom to exercise their skill to meet the diverse needs of students. He was skeptical of bureaucratic organization of school work, fixed curricula and standardized procedures. Instead he argued that the teacher’s knowledge and skill was the key factor that determined the success of the educational system and the students’ welfare. He argued that teaching is a profession and the teachers themselves are responsible for upholding professional and ethical standards.