This material on didactic pedagogy was very useful for me and made me rethink my attitude to my school education period. I really liked that the Dr.William Cope and Dr.Mary Kalantzis pointed out 8 dimensions of pedagogy, and then gave an explanation for each of them. Their explanation was reinforced by photographs of previous years, which helped me to better understand the characteristics of didactic pedagogy. The stand-out idea for me was the socio-cultural dimension of didactic pedagogy as building of a social architecture of sameness.

I was born in the Soviet Union and received a soviet school education, which can be fully defined as didactic. By the way, as additional material, we have been given assignments that were called: "Didactic assignments on the Russian", "Didactic assignments on Mathematics."

I spent all 11 years of my school in the classrooms, exactly the same as those shown in the photographs by the Dr.Cope. This is what he called the architectonic dimension, the space where the learning happens. In my school, these were strict rooms, four walls, the kids sat at their desks, two people at each desh, three rows, everyone looked at the teacher, who was always at the center of the room. We had to sit only with our hands folded in front of us, answer only after rising hand and let by the teacher to speak. Now my kids study in a completely different environment, they can move tables, sit in a circle, look at each other, and work in teams. This is the first change in the nature of education that I experience as a parent.

The discursive dimension in Soviet education consisted of teacher’s lectures, reading textbooks, and answering questions of the teacher. We never had the opportunity to discuss something either with each other, let alone with the teacher.

Now, as a teacher myself, I structure my classes in such a way that students can make their own conclusions. I explain only various theories, and then students should decide which of them to apply. The main thing for me now is to enable the student to reproduce knowledge himself. This is the second change in the nature of education that I experience now as a teacher.

The socio-cultural dimension of didactic pedagogy had been a very important dimension. The schools were focused on creating an identity of sameness. The children with disabilities did not go to ordinary schools, they went to separate “correctional” schools. The children with disabilities never studied in all my school. Now in my country the government has been trying to change this situation and increase inclusiveness. The recent policy aims at increasing the number of kids with disabilities attending the regular “mainstream” schools. This is the third change I can observe.

The intersubjective element of didactic pedagogy in Soviet times consisted in the absolute power of the teacher and the obedience of the student. Teachers could use physical violence, slaps were used, especially against boys. Now, in current education system, physical violence is completely prohibited. The student is equal to the teacher, and the teacher must respect their students. This is the fourth change that I experience in education.

In conclusion, I would like to share the OECD report on reforms in Kazakhstan’s secondary education after gaining independence. It reveals the measures taken by the government and the goals that still to be achieved in order to move to transformative pedagogy. (https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264245891-5-en.pdf?expires=1644598794&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=8A5EF71863AF5BAB97B52B1EBB3CEE3A)