qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw

ertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert
yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopa
sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz
xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv
bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe
rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjk
lzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn



Surname: NOPHALI

Initials: T.K

STUDENT NUMBER: 23767022

Module code: WVOS 311

Date: June 2014

Lecturer: Mr. Setlogelo M.















It is possible to use Authentic Dialogue and Ethical Behavior to educate future generations
towards understanding and acceptance of the virtues of Sameness.
The Greek compound word dialogos means conversation or discourse, the term signify a
particular kind of verbal communication that takes place between two people or more. It is linked
with the quest of knowledge and also has an association of difference. According to Peter Rule
(Vol. 23, no. 4); the two or more partake in dialogue are separate and distinct as individual
beings, as speakers and thinkers, but the conversation brings them together and fashions a unity
process through engagement. Dialogue is an unfolding process, a search for information and
understanding through the medium of spoken language.
Genuine dialogue, also known as authentic dialogue, is proficient in persuading the public to
being responsible for the decent behavior and establishes common grounds on different views.
According to Honeycutt (2010, 190), the traditional understanding of dialogue is to examine the
massages of communications in terms of speech acts. Its a type of dialogue in which two or
more people exchange of ideas in a form of a dialogue, which does not include any
discrepancies.
Ethical behavior is acting in ways consistent with what society and individuals typically think are
good values. It involves demonstrating respect for key moral principles that include honesty,
fairness, equality, dignity, diversity and individual rights.
Authentic dialogue is competent in persuading the community, in this case would be learners, to
being responsible for the ethical behavior and to establishing consensus on different issues. The
level at which authentic dialogue is of the current generation is disadvantageous for
the understanding and acceptance of the virtues of sameness with regard to educating future
generations.
In this essay I wish to reveal the possibility of using authentic dialogue to educate future
generations as dependent on educators/teachers and our very own education system. I will by all
means attempt to bring to light how ethical behavior forms a vital part to the understanding and
acceptance of the intrinsic worth of sameness for future generations.
There are vast challenges posed by the education system presently in our country with regard to
future generations in order to inculcate the possibility of authentic dialogue and equally of ethical


behavior. Differences arising from schools to higher institutions of learning, which are
multiracial or rather mixed with different cultures and races. These challenging differences now
have a threatening effect on the subsistence of and emancipation of authentic dialogue and
equally influence or impacts negatively towards ethical behavior.
The reaction to promoting understanding and acceptance of the virtues of sameness for future
generations is more rested on how past and current issues are dealt with; this is reference to the
manner in which methods of teaching are used. An example of a method of teaching that
deprives genuine dialogue is the traditional method, whereby the teacher is the center of
attraction. Methods such as learner-centered teaching can enhance the dialogical space in the
classroom and equally in the school.
The method would enable learners in a particular class to voice out their views on aspects of race
and gender; the education system should stimulate a dialogue on understanding and acceptance
of sameness. As in at the same time involving learners or students in a situation of indulging in a
conflict and reaching a common view, which leads to unity regardless of their differences.
Throughout the learning process, learners are able to step back and reflect critically on their own
learning and actively engage in the process.
The current education system will forever be surrounded by controversy which is inevitable; I
say this with reference to my opinion of that, even the system itself is not completely
transformed, with regard to bondages of the past apartheid oppression. It can be suggested that
this controversies be confronted head on in order to pave a proper way for the future generations.
Understanding and acceptance of sameness can be established, as in eradicating the view of
different ethnic groups trying to outdo the other. It is useless to base ethnic survival to prohibit
expression through dialogue on a principle matter. I argue the above statement with reference to
oppression that I have observed in certain university (ies) to instill continuation of the usage of
one language instead of a medium of spoken language recognized globally to communicate. This
tendency deprives authentic dialogue amongst the populace and instills difference between
certain groups within. It demises the notion of acceptance of sameness and gives an idea that one
ethnic group is superior to the other.


Another reference is the incident of 2008 in the UOFS (University of Free State), referred to as
the Reitz incident. A newly appointed Rector and Vice-Chancellor Prof Jansen invited and
welcomed back into the four white students back to the University of the Free State (UFS) to
continue their studies. Reasons were presented as to the decision. Jansen (2011:14-15):
To single out the four white students of the Reitz residency will not deal with the enduring
reality of institutional racism, per se. To deal with the individual racism of the four
students, the UFS had an educative responsibility to bring the students back to the
institution in order to engage with them on their attitudes, ideas and behaviour towards
other people. And to deal with the thirst for revenge and retaliation, the institution
desired to set a higher example of what was possible when the language of condemnation
was replaced with language of conciliation; when justice was accompanied by grace;
and retaliation was displaced by restoration.
I value and welcomed the decision by the UFS, by involving the four students in an educative
responsibility. This type of decision stabilizes the acceptance of sameness through genuine
dialogue and non-discrimination because of ethnicity, and enhances the ethical behavior of
students or the community which will be beneficial even to future generations.
Differences in institutions of learning should be used to educate the future generations on
tolerance and understanding in addressing ethical behavioral perspective. For future generations
to pencil in solid lines between the past regime and the current one, a platform for engagement
must be established and be including all present. Ethnicity should not be a stumbling block for
genuine dialogue. The reflection of ethical behavior and responsibility towards the virtues of
sameness must start from within the education system itself.
The utilization of critical and creative thinking is possible in a dialogue session. In a way of
connecting pieces between having strategies and a knowledge base for creative and critical
thinking, and a reflective and safe context in which to practice this thinking. According to
Kenefick, B.A., dialogue process uses basic elements that are necessary to its practice. The
very same elements are also inherent in the ideal of teaching and learning, thus dialogue is
rendered as a tool that could be used to transform both mentality and ethical behavior of ones
learners.


It would create genuine acceptance despite differences in individuals and move towards reaching
a common goal. In other words; the learners would be able to overcome barriers of intolerance,
disrespect with regard to behavior, speak freely in a dialogical space without the fear of
judgment and gain understanding without hesitation.
Therefore, it is possible to educate the future generation using authentic dialogue to enhance
understanding and acceptance of sameness virtues. It allows them to be in a process of thinking
in order to share ideas and formulate meaning of new things through their discussions.
The idea of the new meaning created through this collective thinking is described in the
Principle of enfoldment in Isaacs book. This principle reminds us of not just the importance
of speaking ones own voice, but the importance of being aware of the potential it holds as it
unfolds into deeper meaning as an integral part of the whole in the overall discussion. (Kenefick.
2004).
Dialogue includes the notion of conflict but is framed by a commitment to engage with and learn
from one another, and it is also a view of unity through an authentic dialogical freedom. Buber
understands dialogue as a continuing process of breaking through, which involves fundamental
questions of identity and value.
The possibility of using authentic dialogue to educate future generations is dependent on
educators/teachers and our very own education system. The education system and the method of
teaching in institutions of learning should be re-evaluated. Teachers and schools should create a
platform for engagement, which would enhance an authentic dialogical atmosphere and create
dialogue session for learners to voice out their views, reach a point of conflict and reach a
common view with regard to differences of ethnicity and culture. That will dilute the mentality
and eradicate unethical behavior amongst learners and make them understand and accept
differences within the classroom and out in the community. And equally engage learners actively
in discussions of sameness, and include all present.





References.
Allman, P. Paulo Freire's Contributions to Radical Adult Education", Studies in the
Education of Adults, Vol. 26, No. 2, October, (pp. 144-161, 1994).
Dialogic spaces: adult education projects and social engagement. PETER RULE.
University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. INT. J. OF LIFELONG EDUCATION,
VOL. 23, NO. 4. (JULY/AUGUST 2004), 319334.
JANSEN, J. 2011. We need to talk. North cliff: Book storm (Pty) Ltd. Pan Macmillan
(Pty) Ltd.
Strengthening Morals and Values in Educational Institutions. Dr. E. K. Senah.
Curriculum Development Division Ministry of Education. (February, 2002/2005).
The Use of Dialogue In Education: Research, Implementation and Evaluation. Jane E.
Kenefick. University of Massachusetts Boston. , (June 2004).
The Role of Dialogue in Learning to Teach and Transforming Learning Environments.
Sarah-Kate L & Jennifer Beers (Chapter 8).
Voices in Dialogue: Learning-Centered, Learner-Centered, Teacher-Centered. Global
Learning partners. Issue 17 (2010), pp 13-14.