History of Education: Thinkers, Ideals, Tradition (Canale A-L/Modulo B) a.y. 2025-2026 – Scienze dell'Educazione e della Formazione (EDU)

Teacher: Prof. Carlo Cappa
E-mail: carlo.cappa@uniroma2.it

CFU: 12
Course code: 804002810
Bachelor Degrees: Scienze dell’Educazione
Language: Italian

Course delivery modalities: in-presence
Attendance: Optional
Assessment method: Oral examination

Pre-requisites:
High-school Diploma

Program:
1) Humanism, Renaissance and Education 2) Italian context and European scenario 3) Some authors and themes

Text books:
Francesco Guicciardini, Ricordi, (complete edition) Michel de Montaigne, Saggi (The chapters will be indicated at the beginning of the lesson)

Educational goals and expected learning outcomes:
LEARNING OUTCOMES: In strong relation with the previous module, the course, “History of Education: Humanism and Renaissance”, has two aims: to reach an understanding of educational ideas in Early Modernity and an in-depth analysis of the educational approach of some important authors, such as Michel de Montaigne and Erasmus, that show the complex relation with the previous tradition. Furthermore, during the lessons, some online resources for a better understanding of this crucial period will be presented. KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING: knowledge and understanding of historical development of Western education on humanistic period APPLYING KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING: systematic reading of classical work of this educational tradition MAKING JUDGEMENTS: interpretation of educational works, making reference to their historical context COMMUNICATION SKILLS: mastery of vocabulary of the field LEARNING SKILLS: orienting him/herself in this educational tradition

Educational goals and expected learning outcomes:

LEARNING OUTCOMES:
In strong relation with the previous module, the course, “History of Education: Humanism and Renaissance”, has two aims: to reach an understanding of educational ideas in Early Modernity and an in-depth analysis of the educational approach of some important authors, such as Michel de Montaigne and Erasmus, that show the complex relation with the previous tradition.
Furthermore, during the lessons, some online resources for a better understanding of this crucial period will be presented.
KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING:
knowledge and understanding of historical development of Western education on humanistic period
APPLYING KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING:
systematic reading of classical work of this educational tradition
MAKING JUDGEMENTS:
interpretation of educational works, making reference to their historical context
COMMUNICATION SKILLS:
mastery of vocabulary of the field
LEARNING SKILLS:
orienting him/herself in this educational tradition

Methods and criteria for verifying the learning:
The exam assesses the student’s overall preparation, the ability to combine knowledge about each part of the syllabus, the coherence of argumentation, the analytical ability, and the autonomy of judgment. In addition, the student’s command of language and clarity of presentation are also assessed, in adherence with the Dublin descriptors (1. knowledge and understanding; 2. applying knowledge and experience; 3. making judgments; 4. learning skills; 5: communication skills). The final grade will be based 70% on the student’s depth of knowledge and 30% on the student’s ability for expression (written and oral) and independent critical thinking. The exam will be evaluated according to the following criteria: – Failed: significant deficiencies and inaccuracies in the knowledge and the understanding of the subject matter; poor analytical and synthesizing skills, recurrent generalizations, limited critical and judgmental skills; the arguments are exposed inconsistently and with inappropriate language. – 18-20: Knowledge and understanding of topics barely adequate, with occasional generalizations and imperfections possible; sufficient capacity for analysis synthesis and autonomy of judgment, the arguments are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/non technical language. – 21-23: Fair knowledge and understanding of the subject; proper analysis and synthesis skills with coherent, logical argumentation, but with language that is often inappropriate/non technical. – 24-26: Moderate knowledge and understanding of the subjects; good analytical and synthesis skills with arguments expressed rigorously but with language that is not always appropriate/technical. – 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the subjects; remarkable analytical and synthesis skills. Good autonomy of judgment. Topics expounded rigorously and with appropriate/technical language. 30-30L: Excellent level of in-depth knowledge and understanding of the subjects. Excellent skills in analysis, synthesis, and independent judgment. Arguments are expressed in an original way and with appropriate technical language.

Methods and criteria for verifying the learning:

The exam assesses the student’s overall preparation, the ability to combine knowledge about each part of the syllabus, the coherence of argumentation, the analytical ability, and the autonomy of judgment. In addition, the student’s command of language and clarity of presentation are also assessed, in adherence with the Dublin descriptors (1. knowledge and understanding; 2. applying knowledge and experience; 3. making judgments; 4. learning skills; 5: communication skills).
The final grade will be based 70% on the student’s depth of knowledge and 30% on the student’s ability for expression (written and oral) and independent critical thinking.
The exam will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
– Failed: significant deficiencies and inaccuracies in the knowledge and the understanding of the subject matter; poor analytical and synthesizing skills, recurrent generalizations, limited critical and judgmental skills; the arguments are exposed inconsistently and with inappropriate language.
– 18-20: Knowledge and understanding of topics barely adequate, with occasional generalizations and imperfections possible; sufficient capacity for analysis synthesis and autonomy of judgment, the arguments are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/non technical language.
– 21-23: Fair knowledge and understanding of the subject; proper analysis and synthesis skills with coherent, logical argumentation, but with language that is often inappropriate/non technical.
– 24-26: Moderate knowledge and understanding of the subjects; good analytical and synthesis skills with arguments expressed rigorously but with language that is not always appropriate/technical.
– 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the subjects; remarkable analytical and synthesis skills. Good autonomy of judgment. Topics expounded rigorously and with appropriate/technical language.
30-30L: Excellent level of in-depth knowledge and understanding of the subjects. Excellent skills in analysis, synthesis, and independent judgment. Arguments are expressed in an original way and with appropriate technical language.

Attendance modalities:
Lecture, group discussion of topics and texts. E-learning Attending and participating to topic discussions