Category Archives: Philosophy

Biologism

Advertisements

In most cultures, family plays a critical role not only in the lives of children but in maintaining the stability of society. By family, it is meant a traditional family of parents with their biological children. However, there are now questions as to whether genetics should play a role in the family at all.

Definition

Biologism is defined as a preference for biological inheritance. In the context of this post, this means the preference for one’s biological children. Critics of biologism state that this is outdated, old-fashioned, and even prejudical against other children who may not have a family.

There are additional critiques in terms of the patriarchal structure of the traditional home with a need to decenter this normative view for alternative approaches. in simple terms, male-led families with biological children should not be considered normal as it excludes those who cannot experience this. Some have even suggested that people should adopt rather than have their own children as this shows an altruistic nature that may be best for the larger society.

There are several reasons why biologism is not supported. People have made comments that family structures have changed. Today, there are many non-traditional family structures and there are couples who cannot have children. In addition, even traditional means of having a family are challenged through such things as surrogacy, which makes it questionable in terms of who child the newborn baby is.

One question that is asked is should genetics even matter when somebody wants to be a parent. Generally, this innately matters and this is a major criticism. People against biologism believe that parents should love unconditionally regardless of genetics. The world should be inclusive no matter the relations between people. The goal is to ultimately move people beyond family to a concern for the planet. In other words, the planet should be equal to or more important than family relations. this leaves little room for the natural individualism and tribal connections people have had throughout history.

Not New

Despite how fascinating biologism is it might not be a new idea. Plato in his Republic spoke about the dangers of family. Essentially, Plato’s concern was that when people have families they will naturally put their family ahead of the state. When this happens strife and corruption are bound to take place as people fight for their families. By removing families, people should be focused on supporting the government instead. In other words, instead of people fighting other families Plato simply wanted governments to fight each other. Moving the level at which conflict occurs probably will not stop conflict from happening.

Of course, governments need children even if there are no families and Plato had a solution for this. People would “hook up” through a lottery system and any resulting babies would be raised by the state. Children would not know who their parents were and the parents would have no idea which children were theirs because there would be a lot of hooking up to the point that nobody knew who got which person pregnant. One caveat on this is that Plato’s idea was limited to the leadership of the state or what is called the elite. Regular people would in theory at least still have the ability to pair-bond and have children in a traditional sense. Fortunately, Plato’s ideas were never implemented nor is there any evidence that being single and detached from a family is a path to world peace,

Conclusion

The main concern with attacking traditional families and having children is that it is hard to find another approach that is common and equally successful if not superior. There are examples of societies that struggle when they deemphasized or removed families such as ancient Sparta and extreme forms of Communism. Families have been around for all of human history and as with anything involving people there are pros and cons. Just because bad things happen sometimes does not imply that the entire model should be thrown out. The ultimate point is that people should be able to choose for themselves whether they want to approach from a traditional or alternative means.

Sanism

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Mad studies and Sansim are a form of Marxism that looks at power dynamics between those who are considered “normal” mentally and those who are not. As with all other forms of critical studies, Mad Studies wants to overturn the status quo for an untested utopia that has not been proven to solve any of the existing injustices.

Mad Studies

Mad studies is a field of inquiry that rejects how mental health has been medicalized and has become a tool of the pharmaceutical industry. Madness should not be pathologized as there should not be any norms for mental health. Proponents of this point of view call themselves “mad.”

Mad proponents are convinced that there is a need to challenge the idea that people experiencing mental distress need to regulate or control their feelings. One of the reasons they make this claim is that people who do not fall within societal norms for acceptable mental well-being can be discriminated against because of these fall norms. For example, people may lose job opportunities, lose a job they already have, and face other obstacles to success because of the oppression that comes with having what others consider to be mental health issues. In addition, people who are considered mad are also often labeled incompetent and or dangerous.

Sanism

The act of discriminating against people because of their mental well-being is called sanism. When individuals are threatened with sanism they will try and hide their mental illness. Other coping mechanisms can include self-criticism in an attempt to place blame on one’s self. Mad studies are focused on challenging the status quo in regard to mental health.

Mad studies criticize several concepts that are a part of Western culture. Neoliberalism is one frequent target and neoliberalism is an economic and social focus on the the individual and the expectation of personal responsibility. As Mad studies is a child of Marxism means that it will have issues with economic policies focused on the individual. Another issue is with personal responsibility.

Mad studies do not support the idea that people should have to control their emotions and behavior at all times. If a person is having a meltdown at work the people around them should be patient and understanding of this challenge. To go one step further, some proponents of Mad studies believe that self-regulation is harmful.

Other supporters of Mad people have stated that Mad people should be in the workplace to provide mental diversity. In other words, the workplace should include a wide variety of people with different types of mental health from people who can control their emotions and reason to people who have no control of themselves and cannot reason. This is considered a balanced workplace for Mad people.

Conclusion

It is a trying situation for anybody who is experiencing mental health issues. However, how well such people can be included in society depends on the situation. It is unwise to bar Mad people from society completely as it is equally unwise to include them completely without examining the circumstances.

Cultural Relevant Pedagogy

Leave a reply

Advertisements

This post is a summary of the article “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy” by Gloria Ladson-Billings. One of the major contributions of this paper is attempting to define examples of culturally relevant pedagogy in the classroom of several teachers.

Problem

The problem addressed in this paper is multifaceted but can be summarized as follows. The author claims that success is defined in school for minorities by adapting their behavior to the expectations of the teacher and majority culture. For the author, this is poorly defined as meritocracy. The concern with adapting culturally for minority students is that they are not being affirmed in their own culture.

Galdson-Billings continues by stating that schools are guilty of reproducing the current system and thus reproducing the inequities of the existing system. This is a common critical pedagogy critique of the existing educational system. Therefore, students need to develop an awareness of the inequity in school, which calls for the development of a critical perspective or critical consciousness as explained by Friere.

With this background, the author shares the following proposition when she states that pedagogical practice needs a theoretical model that deals with student achievement and the affirmation of minority students’ cultural identity while also developing a critical perspective for challenging inequities in school.

The proposition above addresses the following problems

Student achievement of minority students
Cultural affirmation of minority students
Development of a critical perspective
The need to challenge inequities in school

To put it simply, the other is looking for evidence of the propositions mentioned above in her research.

Questions

Galdson-BIllings lays out the following questions that she wants to answer in this paper.

What is student success?
How can academic success and culture complement each other in settings where student alienation characterizes the school experience?
How can pedagogy promote student success that critically engages larger social structural issues?
What are the implications for teacher preparation generated by this pedagogy?

Notice in question two the use of the word “alienation.” Alineation is a term commonly used in Marxist literature to mean a feeling of estrangement or being marginalized. There is an assumption in this question that students are feeling alienation even before any data is collected.

In question three, the word “critical” is used. Again, the word “critical” has a different meaning and it means to question and oppose power dynamics. In this question, the author is looking for a specific predetermined answer rather than exploring the data

Methodology

Gladson-Billings collected data from 8 teachers who were considered to be excellent teachers. The method of data collection was done through participant observation in which the author was actively involved in the classes that she visited.

There were four phases to the data collection.

Ethnographic interview of the 8 teachers.
Participant observation of the teacher’s teachings 3 days a week for 2 years.
Videotaping of the teachers (this was in the 1990’s)
Teachers observing each other videotaped teaching.

There was no direct explanation of how the data was analyzed but it can be assumed that this was a qualitative study and the result section is focused on summaries and the occasional vignette to provide support for propositions the other shares.

Results

Among the findings, the author shares that students struggle to achieve academic excellence while showing cultural competence. This may be due in part to who has the power to define academic excellence, which the author thinks is unjustly given to the majority culture.

Another major finding is that teachers must help students to understand and critique social inequities. The need to challenge social inequities goes back to the critical pedagogy viewpoint of the paper. Students must become activists to challenge the existing system. The author then shares several examples of students becoming involved in community activism through the support of their teachers.

The author then shares three propositions that emerged from her research.

The culturally relevant teacher’s conception of self and others
How culturally relevant teachers structure social relations.
Culturally relevant teacher’s conceptions of knowledge.

Proposition one stresses the beliefs that the teachers of the study had about students. These excellent teachers believed that all students could succeed, that teaching is an art, that they were members of the community, and that teaching was a way to give back to the community.

Proposition two is focused on social relations. Excellent teachers believed that social relations should be fluid, show connectedness, develop a community of learners, and focus on collaboration and responsibility towards each other all for critical consciousness. On the last point, the relations are developed to be aware of injustices in terms of power dynamics another key part of Marxist thought.

Proposition three addresses conceptions of knowledge or epistemology among excellent teachers. For these teachers, knowledge is not static, which implies it is relative and not fixed, teachers need to be passionate about learning and knowledge, scaffolding is necessary, and there should be multiple forms of assessment.

According to the author, culturally relevant teachers are teachers who demonstrate these propositions in their classes. The goal is to be culturally relevant for developing a critical perspective in the students.

Conclusion

For someone who is looking to understand what critical relevant teaching is this article is an excellent source. Not only is it defined but the author can provide examples from actual teachers in the classroom. Therefore, anybody can implement these examples and be able to show that they are a culturally relevant teacher.

Critical Race Theory in Education

Leave a reply

Advertisements

This post will provide a summary of the the article “Toward a Critical Race Theory of Education” written by Gloria Ladson-Billings and William F. Tate IV. This paper is significant in that it proposes the idea of considering critical race theory as a key component of education.

The authors assume that anybody who reads this article is already aware of what critical race theory is. In short, critical race theory suggests that the world should be seen through a lens of power as it pertains to race. What this means is that those who have power use race to hold down and oppress those who are of a different race. This is most commonly used in the context of whites vs. blacks in the US.

In terms of the actual article itself, the authors clearly share the following propositions as the main ideas they will address in the paper.

Race continues to be significant in the US
US society is based on property rights rather than human rights
The intersection of race and property creates an analytical tool for understanding inequity

Proposition One

The first proposition is almost an axiom of someone who supports the Critical Race Theory view (CRT). Race will always be a major issue in the US because CRT believes that essentially everything begins and ends with a race dynamic. Almost all actions of injustice for blacks and justice for whites are connected with the dynamic of power differences based on race.

What is unique to the first proposition in comparison to the others is that they include several meta-propositions as listed below.

Race is un-theorized
Class and gender cannot explain all the differences in school experience and performance

What the authors mean by race being un-theorized is that much of the ideas of Marxism, which laid the foundation for CRT, were developed by White Marxists who were focused on class rather than race and that they oversimplified race. Therefore, theorizing race involves adding nuance to Marxist thought in relation to CRT. For the authors, race is the main construct to consider when explaining inequity. To simplify, theorizing race means explaining the role of race in education in relation to experiences and performance of minority students primarily black students.

The second meta-proposition of the authors is that class and gender cannot explain all the differences in the academic performance of students. The authors support this point with studies about differences in academic performance and behavior when controlling for class and gender. Race must be a part of the explanation in terms of inequity in the educational experiences of students.

Proposition Two

The second proposition the authors share is that the US is based on property rights rather than human rights. The authors support this point with the reality that in the days of the early republic, only land-owning capitalists had full participation in society. They follow this with the point that a government that is focused on property rights is not concerned with the human rights of individuals since not every singe person holds property.

Governments tend to be pragmatic in that the focus on property rights is because property can be taxed. It’s hard to hide land and other large resources so the government protects property in exchange for protection of the property. The rich have generally paid more in taxes because they have more wealth that they develop from their property (or capital if this term is preferred).

The poor are hard to track and often have a smaller obligation in terms of taxes. To tie property rights to education the authors make the next point that places where there is better property have better schools because these schools get more money to spend. For the authors, this is a form of inequity. In other words, the areas of town with more money should share this money with other areas of town that have less. Better property does not imply a better education because all people are equal.

Proposition Three

The third proposition is not stated directly but the thrust of this proposition is a conclusion based on the previous two. Proposition three uses the idea from proposition one about race not being theorized and proposition two about property rights to state that the cause of poverty (lack of property) combined with poor schooling (lack of nice property) among blacks is a form of structural racism. Structural racism is a system within society that fosters racial discrimination.

From here the authors present several interesting ideas. The first is that white privilege is a form of property that is transferable, can be enjoyed, affects reputation, and can be excluded. In terms of transfer it is meant that whiteness can be transferred by having people accept certain norms (acting white). For enjoyment, it is meant that get to enjoy certain advantages in their education (better teachers, etc.). For reputation, things identified as nonwhite are stigmatized. Lastly, for exclusion, resegregation through such things as tracking or gifted programs is also a form of whiteness as property because these programs generally exclude black students according-to the authors.

Multicultural Paradigm

The authors then pivot to a light criticism of multicultural education. Multicultural education is the idea of getting all cultures to mutually respect each other. No culture is superior to any other culture. The authors critique multicultural education for not ensuring justice and becoming part of the existing system. The authors call for a radical critique of the status quo and thus of multicultural education. An incremental approach is never going to work for bringing change. CRT supporters generally disdain the current system and prefer radical change to incremental approaches to solving what they consider are systemic problems.

The authors go on to state that multiculturalism is attempting to please everybody, which is a futile effort. They then state that they are believers in the philosophy of Marcus Garvey. Garvey is famous in part for attempting to move African Americans back to Africa unsuccessfully.

Conclusion

Ladsen-Billlings and Tate provide an excellent introduction to CRT with their emphasis on the theorizing race within the classroom, pointing their views on the focus on property in a capitalist society, and showing how property and race combined can lead to inequality. The authors also state the need for radical change and call on current efforts through multicultural education is be inadequate. Whether this is right or wrong is left to the reader.

Generative Themes

Leave a reply

Advertisements

A generative theme is a pedagogical tool developed by Paulo Freire. Defining anything that Friere said or did is always tricky. For our purposes, a generative theme is an idea or concept that is relevant to the student’s life that evokes strong emotional responses. Generally, the emotional response is negative.

The reason for evoking a negative emotional response is to try and awaken the student to the injustice of whatever is being discussed. Friere was a huge proponent of awakening political literacy in students. By political literacy, we mean being aware of the oppression that the student is living through and realizing a need to resist those with power through revolution. If generative themes are used to evoke positive feelings it will probably not motivate the students to demand change.

In the Classroom

It is the teacher’s job to discover relevant generative themes for the students. There are several ways this can be achieved. Examples can include surveys, dialog, and exposure to provocative material. Focusing on proactive material, there has been a large amount of controversy about sexuality in schools and its appropriateness.

One motivation for pushing the boundaries in this area is that exposure to controversial sexuality could trigger strong emotions within students about what is okay and acceptable. Teachers can use this to discuss questioning boundaries and fighting for people who are different. Without the shock of sexual material (the generative theme), there would be no emotional engagement of the student and thus less engagement in change.

Another way in which generative themes are inserted into a classroom is by removing Western-centric material for non-Western ideas. The process of doing this is known as decolonization. An example might be deemphasizing the work of European male scientists for female scientists and scientists from other parts of the world. The focus in doing this would often be how these other scientists had to fight discrimination to achieve what they did. Showing the students the injustice these scientists faced could serve as a generative theme to develop strong negative emotional responses, which lead to a desire for change.

Generative themes must always be taken from the students’ lives in order to engage them. This is one reason for the push for culturally relevant teaching. Taking examples from the students’ lives can serve as another mechanism for moving the students to push for change. For example, students might be asked how would it feel to be a slave before the Civil War. This might be followed by how would it feel to be a slave owner.

From slavery, the conversation might move to the present day where some of the descendants of slaves and slaveowners often live different lives because of their past. A final question would ask the students if they think it is fair and just that the system treats people differently based on their past. In all of these questions, the focus was always on feelings.

Why Feelings

The reason for the focus on feelings is to trigger emotional engagement. As the students ponder these questions they will probably feel negative emotions, such as anger or guilt, as they relive in their minds these experiences. The anger and guilt they feel are then used by the teacher to show them how they need to fight oppression. The oppressed student will use their anger for change while the students who are the oppressors will use their guilt to push for change.

It is important to note that nothing the students experienced was real in terms that it happened to them or did they do it to someone else. However, the emotions make the injustice real for the students even though it may not have taken place in their own lives. It is similar to going to a movie on racism and leaving the theater angry or guilty because of what you saw in the movie. However, if the injustice has been experienced in the student’s life it makes it all the more powerful when blame is placed on a structure of power.

To be fair, Friere used generative themes to teach reading. For example, if through dialog the generative theme of poverty was discovered. The teacher is supposed to teach the students how to spell and read the word poverty. However, students are often so distracted by the emotional strange of discovery injustice that academic skill development is secondary to awakening a need for action.

Conclusion

A major problem with generative themes is their emotional focus. Students do not necessarily develop thinking skills in this context. Instead, they learn to express strong emotions, which generally should be controlled. In addition, fighting for justice is so attractive for teachers that it is pushing out the development of actual skills in an academic setting. If students feel the system is unjust and they do not have any competency in basic literacy. The only kind of employment they could do would be community activism and protesting, which when overdone is not necessarily beneficial to society.

Ethical Models

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Ethics is a truly controversial field of discussion. Everywhere people are looking for ethical people. It is difficult for people to agree on what ethical behavior is in many situations. Since there is little consensus on what is ethical, it leads to people making poor choices or doing things they think are right yet are classified as unethical by others.

In this post, we will avoid the minefield of what is ethical and look at various models of ethical behavior. Instead of defining what is ethical, we will look at frameworks for how others define what is ethical.

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism takes a quantitative approach to defining what is right and wrong. According to this school of thought, whatever brings the most good to the most people is ethical. An example of utilitarianism would be found in the story of people in a lifeboat. For the group to survive, somebody has to be thrown in the water. A utilitarian approach would state that throwing someone in the water is practical to save the group.

Naturally, utilitarianism loses track of the individual. The group or the collective is the main actor in the decision-making process, which can lead to the tyranny of the majority over the minority.

Universalism

As it relates to ethics, Universalism is focused on a holistic approach to making decisions. Everyone’s needs are taken into account in this model. The focus is on being humane and making decisions based on duty. Returning to the lifeboat example, if Universalism is the ethical model, then somebody would willingly throw themselves into the water so that the majority of the group could survive. Being bound by duty, someone would sacrifice themself for others.

A related school of thought is virtue ethics, which states how people ought to be rather than the reality of how people actually are. People should be moral, happy, trustworthy, etc. Even though it is rare to find people with such traits consistently, all this is stated.

Of course, these schools of thought are highly idealistic and generally not practical. Universalism may be the best approach on paper but is the least likely to be put into practice as individual people generally put what is best for them first.

Rights

A legal model for ethics is found in rights such as those found in the US Constitution and human rights. IN this approach, the rights of people are the basis for ethical decision-making. Therefore, violating someone’s rights is an ethical violation.

Returning once again to the lifeboat example. It would violate someone’s rights to throw them in the water to die. However, it would also violate everyone’s rights if everybody died. As such, if the rights model is used in such a situation, there is no answer for the sinking lifeboat that needs to throw one person overboard.

This leads to one problem with the rights model, which is determining the ethical thing to do in a situation in which people both have equal rights to something. People can exaggerate their rights and downplay other people’s rights, leading to an impasse that seems to have no hope of being overcome.

The Common Good

The common good is a combination of the ideas behind Universalism and utilitarianism. IN this approach, decision-makers must take into account. This means that people must think about how their decisions impact the people around them. Decisions can be made at the individual level as long as they consider the larger collective.

Returning to the lifeboat, a person would decide about jumping in the water based on how it would affect others. When deciding who to throw in the water, the group may decide based on the level of responsibility a person has. A single man would be a better person to throw in the water than a single mother because the man is perceived to have fewer obligations.

The problem with the common good is broken down to who decides what the common good is. Whoever or whatever makes this decision has dictatorial power over the others.

Conclusion

The point was not to attempt to determine what is ethical. The reality is that everybody has fallen short in one place or another when practicing ethical behavior. It is possible that people sometimes deliberately make poor choices, but the other side of the story is that sometimes the best decision is hard to determine. The real goal should be to examine the thought process and be aware of the failings that led to poor choices in the past.

Science and Thales

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Ionia was a Greek colony in western Turkey founded around 3000 years ago by people looking for land and trading opportunities. This colony of several Greek cities has played a pivotal role in history in several ways. Not only is Ionia famous for rebelling against the Persians, but foundational ideas of science were formed in this place as well. In particular, a man named Thales played a critical part in the development of science.

Role of Greek gods

To understand the influence of Ionia and Thales, it is important to look at the worldview of these people. During this time, religion played a major role in the life of the Greeks. The problem with this was not that it wasn’t scientific. The other problem was the erratic and licentious behavior of the Greek gods. Below are just a few examples from Greek mythology demonstrating the vengeful and wild behavior of Greek gods.

Zeus could not control his behavior around women and was notorious for his unfaithfulness to his wife, Hera.
Hera would often attack the women with whom Zeus was unfaithful by causing the death of the woman involved or persecuting the children of these adulterous relationships such as Heracles.
Poseidon, the god of the sea, raped a woman in Athena’s temple. The victim was then turned into the hideous Medusa by Athena for desecrating her temple.
Behind the scenes of the Trojan War, the gods were at work, not to mention in the many poems of Homer.

This list could go on for pages. The gods were crazy, to say the least. People tried to appease the gods through sacrifices and work. This was not always successful, and people were always looking for ways to obtain security from this.

Looking Towards Nature

Due to the perceived inconsistent behavior of the Greek gods, people began to look to other ways to understand the world, leading them to seek answers in nature. Nature, in comparison to the Greek gods, was somewhat regular in its behavior.

A major proponent of examining nature over mythology was Thales, a sixth-century Ionian who was one of the first philosopher-scientists. Thales looked at facts and observations to understand the world. He believed in trusting his senses rather than the supernatural explanations of his time. This could almost be viewed as a form of atheism. Thales was a well-traveled individual who was also one of the first to take credit for his ideas by writing his name on them. Thereby demonstrates an example of individualism, which was unusual at that time.

However, Thales was not just talk. He backed his position with several major innovations. For example, Thales accomplished several mathematical/scientific feats. Such as the following.

He predicted a solar eclipse in 585 BC. This was important because ancient Greeks viewed solar eclipses as a sign of supernatural abandonment by their unpredictable gods. For Thales to predict such a sign was utterly unbelievable and showed a regularity to nature that the gods never showed.
Using what would later become Geometry, Thales determined the height of buildings such as pyramids by measuring their shadows on the ground. This, of course, was revolutionary at the time.
Thales also used Geometry to calculate how far a ship was from shore. This was a groundbreaking discovery as such knowledge was important for ships always concerned with running aground.
Thales was also one of the first to observe static electricity. He didn’t discover it, but he was one of the first to examine it scientifically.

The volume of work by this pre-Socratic philosopher was hard for people to ignore. His work encourages others to look beyond the supernatural to understand the world around them.

Conclusion

The Greek colony of Ionia was a place that contributed to modern scientific thought. In this colony, Thales began to look beyond the gods for answers and instead looked to nature. By doing so, not only did he make several major discoveries, but he also set an influential example of how people should learn about the world.

Intro to Critical Race Theory

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Critical race theory is a framework used by many to see the world in terms of race and power. Based on postmodernism, this concept is a significant influence on how many people see the world today. Primarily this relates to the difference in power and privilege between people who are white and black.

Tenets

Some proponents of critical race theory believe that race is a social construct developed to maintain the supremacy of white people. In addition, color was also at one time used to justify slavery. However, many also say that race is central when dealing with any issues of power and oppression. A significant problem is that it is difficult to define precisely what critical race theory is, and as with all definitions, there is no consensus.

Other significant tenets of critical race theory are the idea of white supremacy and white privilege, which means that people who are white have certain advantages due to their skin color. Another tenet is the need to give people of color a voice. By voice, it may mean being a part of decision-making and sharing grievances from oppression.

A final central tenet of critical race theory is the idea of intersectionality. Intersectionality is the idea that a person can be a member of more than one oppressed group. A classic example of this is a black woman. Such a person may experience oppression due to their race (black) or sex (female). As such, you can add more and more groups if a person continues to fight them based on the traits that are a part of their being.

Types

There are at least two types of critical theorists, and these are the materialists and the postmodern. The materialist look at how economic, legal, and politics affect race and may be considered to align more with communism. The postmodern focuses more on linguistics, deconstructing discourse to find power imbalances, and searching for implicit bias. Examples of what the postmodern critical race theorists do is look for things as microaggression, hate speech, cultural appropriation. These terms are used every day to attack people on social media. For example, being surprised that someone who is black is married because of the high out of wedlock birth rate would be considered microaggression by some and maybe even hate speech by others. The postmodern camp is generally more common today.

Both of these schools of thought have in common that they both dislike or even hate liberalism with its focus on incremental change. For example, many view Martin Luther King Jr as a liberal because he wanted to downplay color and focus on character. In critical race theory, it is all about color first and then some consideration of character.

Another trait of agreement is the view of knowledge as a social construct. This means that the marginalized groups determine what is true and not some external standard such as science or religion. To determine who is right, look for which group is more oppressed in a particular situation. This can be insanely confusing if it is taken seriously.

Even when there are attempts to end racism, this is viewed with suspicion by critical theorists. There have been accusations that white people give rights and opportunities to blacks only when it benefits them. In addition, legislation that is anti-racist supports racism. If these two beliefs are commonly believed, it makes it difficult for there ever to be any solution to justice and oppression.

Conclusion

Critical race theory is one of many schools of thought that has seized the minds of many. People who adhere to this worldview see race and oppression in most aspects of life. When a person sees problems of oppression everywhere, it is natural to wonder how they can have any sense of happiness or peace.

Brief Intro to Critical Theory

1 Reply

Advertisements

Critical Theory is a difficult concept to explain and understand. Some will say that it is an amalgamation of other theories, while others will reject this. It would not be possible to explain all the nuances of Critical Theory in a single blog post of several hundred words, but an an attempt will be made to provide basic ideas concerning it.

Critical Theory is an extension or perhaps a reaction to the ideas of Karl Marx and communism. Marx was pushing for a proletarian revolution of the working class rising up against the bourgeois. However, except in a few places, this never happened. This left supporters of Marxism frustrated, and they began to explore why this happened. Furthermore, many began to despise Marxism because of its failures.

One conclusion that they made was that Marxism was generally a disaster. The average person does not want to live in a communist state. On paper, it looked good, but in practice, it was often worst than capitalism. This led the early shapers of critical Theory to conclude that people fear freedom, which led to the rise and success of fascists governments over communists ones.

What needed to take place was that people needed to be awakened to their oppressed position in life. Marx had more of a deterministic view of the world in that revolution was inevitable because of the suffering. Critical theorists proposed that people needed to be woke to the oppression they were living under, which happened through people becoming critical.

By critical, it is generally meant to criticize the existing domineering culture. Examples of the West’s dominant culture would be male leadership over women, white leadership over minorities, heterosexual leadership of homosexual, etc. By questioning these imbalances in power and accepted norms, people would call not for an economic revolution but rather for a cultural one. All oppressed classes need to rise up and push for change.

The people who formed the foundations of critical Theory were naturally scholars. Therefore, their views began to permeate universities slowly. This long march through the institutions has been compared to Mao’s long march through China. One of the surest ways to have a long career in academics is to find a problem (the significance of the problem is irrelevant) and announced to the world through papers, media, and conferences how your problem is a big problem and how people need to pay attention to this and the solutions that are being proposed. Generally, people are good at finding problems; however, we tend to get into trouble with the answers we implement.

Critical Theory began to question such ideas as perceived privilege differences between groups (privilege has been defined as normalizing one group’s behavior at the expense of another). Other concepts are attacked, such as objectivity, hard work, and even the reasoning process that people use. These ideas were claimed to be cultural constructs of those with power who then impose their worldview on the oppressed. There are even suggestions of implicit bias, which is a form of bias a person has without even knowing it. For example, there have been accusations that some people are racist strictly because their skin color is the majority group’s color. In other words, guilt by DNA rather than by actual evidence.

The conspiratorial bent of Critical Theory is a powerful way of explaining all suffering within a given context. Another way to look at this is that one can say that Critical Theory can function as a narrative that explains where most suffering comes from for minority groups. Can’t get a job; it’s oppression. Can’t buy a car; it’s oppression. You can’t pass your classes; it’s oppression. This may not have been the intention of the original developers of critical Theory. However, students always extend the ideas of their teachers in the wrong direction. The idea that people are not responsible for the situations they are in but instead, it is the dominant group’s fault is an example of a poor application of the worldview of Critical Theory.

Postmodernism and Meta-narratives

3 Replies

Advertisements

There are questions about life that are hard to answer. Some of these questions include why are we here?, where are we going?, why is the world like this? This post will explore the ideas behind meta-narratives, which often play a role in attempting to answer these philosophical questions. We will also look at meta-narratives in connection with postmodernism.

Meta-narrative

The term meta-narrative is a rather young term with its existence being dated from the early 20th century. A meta-narrative is a narrative or story about the stories/narratives in a society’s culture that attempts to give meaning to life and experiences. In many ways, meta-narratives try to provide answers to the big philosophical questions about life examples of these questions, along with the branch of philosophy they may be derived from are as follows.

What is real (metaphysical)
Where did I come from (axiology)
What is true (epistemology)
What is right and wrong (ethics)
What is beautiful (aesthetics)

The answer to these questions help to provide legitimacy for a society and or religion. Many meta-narratives attempt to answer these questions along with others. For example, Christianity provides answers about reality, the creation of man, truth, strong position on morals and more. Within Christianity, there is a belief in God along with a teaching that the world will eventually end with some living for ever. The ideas of this meta-narrative has led to billions choosing to claim this meta-narrative as the anchor of their beliefs as well as a church structure that has been around for over 2,000 years.

Another example of a meta-narrative, at least for some, would be the theory of evolution developed by Charles Darwin. This meta-narrative has its own explanation of the creation of man, perhaps an implied meaning of what is moral, what is true, and a denial of a higher power that shaped the world. The denial of God in evolution is due to a lack of evidence that meets the criteria set by empiricism. Since the existence of God does not play by the rules of science in terms of how to know what is true, this it implies that there is evidence that perhaps God does not exists. What both religion and science have in common is a desire to try to answer some of these big questions will approaching them from different angles.

Postmodernism & Meta-narratives

Postmodernism is an enemy of meta-narratives. This is partially due to the fact that postmodernism is suspicious of who provided the answers to the questions in meta-narratives. Whoever provided the answer is asserting authority over other people who either choose to believe or were coerced the accept. In addition, by what authority do the people who provide meta-narratives have the right to provide these answers? Religious meta-narrative are grounded in the belief of a higher power and or spiritual experiences, in other words, the source is authoritative. Evolution is grounded in empirical data collected in a scientific manner. However, for the postmodern thinker both of these are tainted ways of knowing because the people who have the power are the ones who provide the answers within the meta-narrative.

The idea of rejecting all meta-narratives, whether spiritual or scientific is a meta-narrative it’s self. Postmodernism’s answer to the big philosophical questions about life is that there are no universal answers to these questions, which is a universal answer against universal answers. It is impossible to say that there are no universal truths without the statement “there are no universal truths” being universal. In addition, it is hard to provide such a statement true without any external authority whether it’s spiritual or empirical.

Within postmodernism, the idea of truth is a cultural construct. What this means is that all the questions that meta-narratives address are answered at a local level only. This is because there are barriers to knowing what is true. However, if we takes these thoughts to one conclusion we would need to ask ourselves why the postmodern response is anymore superior to the religious our scientific one. By what authority or evidence is postmodernism able to make this claim?

Some may claim that lived experiences are the source of knowing in postmodernism but this is not unique. Religions are founded based on the lived experiences of apostles, prophets, disciples. In addition, scientific experiments are highly controlled lived experiences in which an observer watches carefully what happens in a certain controlled situation and then this experience is repeated by others. Rejecting the claims of modernism which involved science and reasoning by using reasoning to reject reasoning seems strange. Claiming that there are no answers or purpose to life with no other authority than confidence should not be enough to move people from the meta-narratives they already have that are also based on confidence.

Conclusion

People want answers to questions and one of the biggest problems with postmodernism is the answer that there are no answers. Instead, postmodernism offers the ideas that there is a power struggle over what people belief that perpetuates a system of darkness without most people even being aware of it. The tenets of postmodernism are just another way of viewing the world without much indication that it is superior to priors models.

Common Goals for Schools

Leave a reply

Advertisements

All schools have different goals and purposes for their being, In this post, we will look at some of the different goals and views schools have for themselves.

Intellectual

People who see the goal of school as intellectual development believe that the growth of the mind and reason is one of the chief aims of schools. Students who are well-rounded mentally are able to function in various challenges in the real world as people who support an intellectual purpose may say.

The development of the mind often happens through the study of the humanities and the “Great Books” of the past. Since the great books provide examples of the sound reasoning that students need, reading these books will help students to develop their own reason and thinking skills. These beliefs are drawn heavily from perennialism and its focus on the past to prepare students for the present and future.

Economic

The economic view sees school as a place to prepare students for the workforce. This means attaining relevant skills and knowledge for employment in the world. As such, students are trained to competency in various areas that they show at least some interests in such as accounting, plumbing, computer science, etc.

With the focus on job skills and the development of the economy, it is clear that the economic view has less tolerance for the study of “Great Books” compared to the intellectual view of the school. Reading irrelevant classics does not benefit industry and is not necessary. However, developing reason and critical thinking is beneficial to industry and should be encouraged in the context of problem-solving of real-life challenges and not intellectual debates. These views are similar to essentialism and its focus on developing practical skills for the application in the real world.

The economic development view of school seems to be the primary mover in education today. Almost everything is focused on the economy and the need for properly trained workers to help the economy grow. Rarely, does industry mourn the ignorance of its workforce in matters relating to the humanities and arts. For people who are not motivated by money and building the national economy, it can be intolerable to study in such a context.

Social/Character

Others view that the purpose of schools is in helping students to conform to the norms of society. This social view believes that a teacher’s job is to help students to find their place in the social structure. What society wants is what the child should become. This echoes the views at least partially of John Dewey.

This belief can lead to a large amount of social stability but a growing undercurrent of resentment from the pressure to conform. For example, the high conformity of the United States in the 1950s was followed by the rebellious 1960s and ’70s. In addition, this view is seen by many as being oppressive today. Society now is pushing heavily the idea of inclusion of everyone. This means that all people are accepted as they are and the norm taught today is conformity to tolerance which is now the standard.

A social purpose is also related to political activism in a democratic context. Schools should be seen as places to develop skills in democracy in order to participate in civic life after graduation. This is important because democratic participation is critical to the success of the nation in the minds of many.

A related idea to social development is character development. Character development is focused on having certain traits as an individual. Whereas in secular education these ideas are often called social traits in religious education this concept is frequently known as character. The difference being that social traits and skills can vary whereas character in the religious context is thoroughly defined by some religious text.

Multi-Purpose

It would be naive to say that any school only has one purpose. Rather, schools serve multiple views. The views listed above are present at most schools in one combination or another. For example, some schools may emphasize intellectual views while also considering economic views. Since schools have a diverse student population it makes it necessary to have diverse views for schools.

One of the dangers a school may face is having a view that is out of harmony with the local community. If people want their kids to get jobs and want the school to focus on economic purposes it would be detrimental for the school to focus on other aspects of education as if they know better. Schools are there to serve the needs of the community and need to keep this in mind when supporting students.

Conclusion

Schools are a part of a society to provide a service to the families that make up the society. Therefore, it is not surprising that different schools have different goals for themselves. The primary responsibility of a person should be to identify the local vies on education in order to understand how to function in that particular context.

Schools & Reconstructionism

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Reconstructionism is a belief among many in education that schools should serve as institutions that train and developed students to enact social change. This is in stark contrast to the view that schools should serve as cultural transmitters. Reconstructionists believe that reverence for the past is neglect of current and future problems. Furthermore, reconstructionists believe in making autonomous individuals who question existing norms, such as the dominant culture, and strive to make the world a just and equitable place.

One of the main influencer’s for the philosophy of reconstructionism was George Counts and his highly influential essay/speech “Dare the School Build a New Social Order?” Counts’ work was written in the context of the Great Depression and proposes that schools should be the source of change in America. His views laid the foundation for the philosophy of reconstructionism. In this post, we will focus on two main branches of reconstructionism. These branches are economic reconstructionism and democratic reconstructionism.

Economic Reconstructionism

Economic reconstructionism tends to have a strongly suspicious view of those in power. In this view, schools are used by the elite i.e. dominant culture to conform students to the existing world view. This allows the elite to maintain power culturally and financially. Schools are either willing or ignorant participants in this system of intellectually and social oppression.

To be fair, there are examples of this taking place in history. Both Hitler and Ferdinand Marcos use various forms of “youth camps” to educate people to support the existing power structure’s worldview. Hitler had the “Hitler Youth” while Marcos had “Village Youth” which was controlled by one of his relatives. The purpose of these groups was to teach loyalty to the status quo through the transmission of state-approved values and beliefs. Or you can say oppressive cultural transmission.

Economic reconstructionists and reconstructionism, in general, are heavily inspired by Karl Marx and his communist views. This includes a deep suspicion of capitalism, which is viewed as oppressive, and catering to the whims of the rich. Marx’s focused on how the bourgeoisie uses capitalism to oppress everyone else. The economic reconstructionist tends to focus more on how those with money use education to oppress students.

The classic text of economic reconstructionists is Pablo Friere’s “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” In this text, Friere explains how he believes the elite actually use education to hold people down. This is based on his experience of teaching adults to read in Brazil. As he taught reading, Friere noticed that the problems were not only reading but the worldview and beliefs of the people. The students were passive, subservient, and indifferent to thinking critically or questioning. For Friere, this was due to how they had been trained in the past by an educational system controlled by those with power who wanted these characteristics in their workers.

There are naturally several concerns with this approach, Economic reconstructionism does not inspire cooperation between the oppressors and the oppressed. Both view each other as enemies which tends to lead to a zero-sum game in which one side wins while the other losses.

A second problem is that there is no end to who is oppressed. If one class topples another it becomes the new dominant group then has to fight off the new group of oppressed people. In other words, it is similar to a game of king of the hill. One group gains power and then uses the same oppressive measures it once despised to stay in power. This is one reason why communist states of today, who were once freedom fighters, are often oppressors now. To put it simply, the only thing that changed was who was doing the oppressing. This constant cycle of changing who is doing the oppressing can make a country unstable. In the end, the problems never end just the person who is blamed for causing them.

Democratic Reconstructionism

Democratic reconstructionist believes in training a politically active citizenry. In contrast to economic reconstructionists who often want to tear down the system, democratic reconstructionists want to work within the system to promote change.

To do this, schools should focus on teaching students about the democratic process, developing critical thinking skills, and solving local community problems. The focus is on problems rather than on conspiratorial views of oppression as with economic reconstructionist.

Democratic reconstructionists are highly influenced by John Dewey and progressivism. The ideas of changing society through the use of the existing system are things that he frequently encouraged through his views on democracy in the classroom. This approach is less antagonistic in comparison to economic reconstructionism. Yet, the peaceful implementation of it does not happen as much anymore. For example, many protests in the name of change have become violent in ways that did not happen decades ago such as the protesting in Hong Kong and India or the violent protesting that takes place in America now.

As such, it is common to acknowledge this approach however, many schools support the more extreme view of economic reconstructionism even though they may believe that they are supporters of democratic reconstructionism. Just examine how people speak only of removing “privilege” and bringing equality even by force if necessary in the name of democracy

Conclusion

Change is a part of life. There will be times when life is good and when it is bad. Reconstructionism struggles with this cycle of good and bad. The primary tenet is that there should be no bad or suffering. However, whenever the oppressed takes over they simply become the new oppressors.

School as a Socializing Agent: Cultural Preservation

1 Reply

Advertisements

Many would agree that education, as found in schools, as an obligation to socialize students to help them fit into society. With this goal in mind, it is logical to conclude that there will be different views on how to socialize students. The two main extreme positions on this continuum of socialization would be

Socializing through the preservation of cultural form on generation to the next
Socializing through the questioning of prior norms and pushing for social change

As I have already mentioned, these may be the two extremes on a continuum going from complete and total cultural preservation to complete and total anarchy. In this post, we will focus the discussion on schools as agents of cultural preservation.

School as Cultural Preserver

In the view of the school as a cultural preserver, the responsibility of the school to society is to support the dominant ideas and views of the culture. This is done through teaching and explaining things from a dominant group’s perspective and excluding or censoring other viewpoints to some degree. In other words, American schools should produce Americans who support and live American values, Chinese schools should produce Chinese who support and live Chinese values, etc.

This approach to schooling has been used throughout history to compel people from minority groups to conform to the views of the dominant group. In the US, there were boarding schools for Native Americans to try to “civilize” them. This was also seen in many parts of Asia in which ethnic tribes were sent to government schools, forbidden to use their mother tongue in place of the national language, and pledge devotion and loyalty to the dominant culture. Through the process of weakening local identities, it is believed by many that it will help to strengthen the state or at least maintain the status quo. If you are in a position of dominance either of these would benefit you.

What this view lacks in diversity, due to minority views being absent, it makes up for it through stability. Schools that support cultural preservation show students their place in society and how to interact with those around them. Through the limits of a specific predefined worldview, it lowers but does not reduce internal social strife.

Problems and Pushback

A natural consequence of schools as cultural preservers is a strong sense of pride in those who belong to the culture that is being preserved. This can lead, at times, to a sense of superiority and pride. Of course, if you are not from the dominant culture, it can be suffocating to constantly have other people’s values and beliefs push upon you.

This sense of exclusion can lead to serious challenges from minority groups. There are countless examples of this in the United States where it seems everyone is pushing back against the establish dominant culture. There are those who are pushing for Black, Latino, Asian, feminist, and other worldviews to be a part of the education of the school. This is not inherently a problem, however, if everyone has an equal voice and everyone is talking at the same time this means that nobody is listening. In other words, a voice needs an ear as much as an ear needs a voice.

Conclusion

It is convenient to take an extreme position and say that using school to preserve culture is wrong. The problem with this is that the people who say this want to preserve the belief that using school to preserve culture is wrong. In other words, it is not the preservation of culture that is the problem. The real battle is over what culture is going to be preserved. Whether it is the current dominant view or the view of a challenger.

Essentialist Teacher

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Essentialism was an educational philosophy that was reacting to the superficiality of instruction that was associated with progressivism and the aristocratic air that was linked with perennialism. Essentialism was a call to teach the basics. This position of providing a no frill basic education for employment is the primary position of most educational positions in the world.

Background

Starting in the 1930’s, essentialism is based on the philosophies of idealism and realism. Essentialism supporters have stressed the need to return to a more subject centered approach vs child centered position. Transmission of knowledge is more important than transforming society.

There were two major moments in American history that propelled essentialism to the forefront of education. The first, happened in 1957 when the Russians launch the Sputnik satellite. Critics of progressivism stated that all this child-centered teaching had crippled an entire generation who lacked basic skills in math and science to compete with the Russians. This was a major blow to progressivism as schools refocused on teaching math and science and having a subject centered curriculum.

In essentialism was not already triumphant it certainly was by the 1980’s when the article “A Nation at Risk” was published. This article stated that American education was mediocre and lead to schools needing to focus on the five basics. By the 1990’s such ideas as “core knowledge” or “common core” was being pushed. Such ideas demonstrate how there are basic truths and ideas that supposedly all students need to have.

Philosophy

School is a place where students master basic skills in preparation for working in society. This includes the three R’s (reading, writing, arithmetic) and some of the humanities. The subject matter cannot always be interesting or even immediately relevant for students.

The mind needs to be trained and some memorization is required. However, there is less of a focus on raw intellectualism such as is found in perennialism. The center of learning is the teacher and the students are there to follow the teacher.

Essentialism has similarities to perennialism. However, there are differences such as the idea that Essentialism does not have a problem with adapting ideas from progressivism for their on own purposes. There is also a general indifference to time honor classics in the humanities for the training of the mind.

In Education

An essentialist teacher is going to focus on developing skills and competency rather the learning knowledge for the sake of knowledge. There will be a focus on the basics of education and the classroom will be subject centered. There will not be much tolerance for meeting needs or understanding differences among students.

Focus on job skills and training towards employment would also be stressed. The focus of the education is in training people to be equipped for the workplace and not for personal fulfillment. If students enjoy what they learn this is an added bonus but not necessarily critical for the learning experience.

Conclusion

Essentialism was in many ways a working-class version of perennialism. Stripped of the humanities and focused on developing job skills, essentialism is the engine of education in many parts of American education. As long as the economy and employment are most important to people we will continue to see a continued support for essentialism.

Perennialist Teacher

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Perennialism was a strong educational movement in the early part of the 20th century. It pushed a call to return to older ways of learning and instruction in order to strengthen the man in preparation for life. In this post, we will look briefly at the history, philosophy, and how a teacher with a perennialist perspective may approach their classroom.

Background

Perennialism came about as a strong reaction against progressivism. The emotional focus of the child-centered approach of progressivism was seen as anti-intellectual by perennialists. In place of child- center focus was a call for return to long establish truth and time honored classics.

Supporters of perennialism wanted a liberal education, which implies an education rich with the classical works of man. The purpose of education was the development of the mind rather than the learning of a specific job skill. This position has often been seen as elitist and has clashed with what the working class need for the education of their children to be in a more practical manner.

A major influencer of perennialism is neo-scholasticism, which is also a supporter of classical studies and was based on idealism. Perennialism was originally focused higher education and high school but by the 1980’s its influence had spread to elementary education. Prominent supporters of this style include Motimer Adler and Maynard Hutchins.

Philosophical Position

Perennialism believes that people are rational rather than primarily emotional beings. This is the opposite of progressivism which is always worried about feelings. Furthermore, human nature is steady and predictable which allows for everyone to have the same education. Thus, the individual is lost in a strong perennial classroom.

The focus of the classroom is not on the student but rather on the subject matter. The classroom is preparation for life and not design for real-life situations as in progressivism. The mind needs to be developed properly before taking action. Through the study of the greats it is assumed this will help the student become great.

Perennialism and Education

A perennialist teacher would have a classroom in which all the students are treated the same way. Material is taught and delivered to the students whether they like it or not. This is because material is taught that is good for them rather than what they like.

This material would include ancient time tested ideas because that is where truth is and exposure to this great minds would make great mind. The learning experiences would be mostly theoretical in nature because training in this manner allows for intellectual development.

The classroom might actually be a little cold by the progressivist’standard that focuses on group work and interaction. This is because of the rational focus of perennialism. When the assumption is everyone is rational and only needed exposure to the content with or without an emotional experience.

Conclusion

Reacting is not always the best way to push for change. Yet this is exactly what brought perennialism into existence. Seeing the lost of absolute truth and long held traditions, perennialism strove to protect these pillars of education. There are some problems. For example, their emphasis on the rational nature of man seems strange as the average person is lacking in the ability to reason and control their emotions. In addition, the one-size fits all when it comes to education is obviously not true as we need people who have a classic education but also people who can build a house or fix a car. In other words, we need vocational training as well in order to have a balanced society.

Another problem is the fallacy of the appeal to tradition. Just because something is a classic does not make it truth or worthy of study. This simply allow the traditions of the past to rule the present. If all people do is look at the past how will they develop relevant ideas for the present or future?

The main benefit of these different schools of thought is that through these conflicts of opinion a balanced approach to learning can take place for students.

Progressive Teacher

1 Reply

Advertisements

Progressivsim is an educational philosophy that in many ways is the foundation of educational theory in the United States. In this post, we will look at the background of progressivism as well as the beliefs and how it may be practiced by a teacher.

Background

Progressivsim is yet another reaction to traditional teacher. The era in which this philosophy was developed was the late 19th to early 20th century. This was a time of rapid change and the development of the philosophy called pragmatism, which had a strong influence on progressivism.

Pragmatism had such beliefs as that there was no fixed truth and that whatever works is true. Progressivism adapted and expended on this idea in the context of education. Another major source of influence on progressivism was the work of Freud who encourage self-expression in his writings.

The primary movers in propagating progressivism includes William Kilpatrick, George Counts, John Dewey, and others. This movement dominated educational theory in America from the 1920’s to the 1950’s until the launching of the Sputnik satellite by Russian moved Americans away from child centered self expressive education to an education focused on the essentials in order to compete in a global competition.

Philosophical Position

In the classroom progressivism does not support a teacher-centered approach, nor a heavy focus on textbooks or memorization. there is even concerns with the classroom environment in that the use of fear or physical punishment is discouraged.

The child is the centered of learning rather than the subject. This means that the interest of the child should be taken into consideration when developing learning experiences. Of course, there is a limit to the child’s input as the teacher has a certain responsibility for the learning. However, to even consider the child’s opinion on learning was somewhat revolutionary at the time.

Students need to be active rather than passive. This means that lectures are unusually because the student not active when listening. Learning by doing is a primary assumption of progressivism. The teacher and the student interact and learn from action rather than from listening.

In order to establish active learning, problem solving is one of the primary tools for teaching. Problem-solving leads to a whole lot of thinking in a systematic manner in ways that are tied to reality rather than to theory.

Lastly, progressivism supports the idea of a democratic classroom. This means that everyone is a learner, including the teacher, and the learning environment encourages discussion and debate. The motive behind this is preparing students to participate in a democratic world.

Progressivism in the Classroom

There is little here to add that was not already mentioned. A progressive teacher is going to support a warm and engaging classroom. The teacher will see themselves as a facilitator of knowledge rather than as a dictator of it. Students will work in groups or alone depending on interest and the content learned will have input from them. There will be few lectures and more hands on learning activities with a focus on the thought process rather than the product of the learning.

Conclusion

Progressivism is yet another philosophical system that claimed to have the answer for learning only to eventually lead t people’s disappointment. It was hard to assess learning during the progressives era due to the open nature of problem solving. In addition, when the Russians beat the Americans into space. Focusing on the child simply became impractical due to the perceived threat of Russia. In many ways, progressivism was successful because when it was no longer practical it was abandon and this is something that progressivism teaches.

Postmodern Teacher

2 Replies

Advertisements

During the last half of the 20th century the philosophical school of post-modernism arose. Just as with existentialism, post-modernism is a school of thought that is anti-definition and anti-organized. As such, it is hard to pinned down exactly what post-modernist believe and stand for in a way that this could be done for older philosophies. In many, ways, as we get closer to the present era the ideas and tenets of the current philosophies become almost invisible perhaps because we are living directly under their effect rather than looking at their influence in the past.

Background

Post-modernism, like almost all philosophies it seems, is a reaction to modernism. Modernism primary tenet was to understand the world through the use of reason. Modernist believed that the world had fixed laws that could be observed and understood. Science was the way to understand reality and attain truth. There was also this sense of continuous progress, which is something that is still repeated in the media today.

However, modernism did not solve all problems and lead to a Utopian existence. Instead, throughout the late 19th and 20th century there were consequences of scientific and social progress from pollution, to atomic destruction, wars, famine, disease, etc. It seemed as if every time science solved one problem it eventually led to more problems that were not anticipated.

The foundation for post-modernism was laid by Friedrich Nietzsche who claimed that truth and God are dead. This shifted knowledge from something that was absolute to something that was human generated.

Pragmatism and existentialism further laid the groundwork for post-modernism with pragmatism’s position that knowledge was provisional and constantly changing. Existentialism simply reinforces Nietzsche’s position that knowledge is constructed rather than discovered.

Perhaps one of the strongest influences on post-modernism is Marxism. Karl Marx was focused on class struggles from an economic perspective. Within Postmodernism this was extended to other aspects of society including feminism, racism, sexism, LGBT, weightism, or generally any minority group who is crying out against the perceived “privilege” of the majority.

Philosophical Implications

Postmodernists essential question everything and it almost seems as if they tear down everything with no real replace for what they are tearing down. It is permissible to have opinions about anything but there is no truth except for the truth that there is no truth because they say so.

An example of questioning reality itself is in the work of Jacques Derrida and his work on deconstructionism. According to Derrida, language has blocked us from understanding reality because we are using words to describe this reality. This means that whenever we read or examine text we have to unpack or deconstruct the assumptions that the author of the text had in terms of their word choices and context. This is critical because the dominant group writes in a way that excludes the minorities and those without power. Of course, you would need to support Derrida’s words even though they may not be representative of reality either

Other postmodern philosophers suggest that reality is socially constructed by those who have power. Those in power shape reality to benefit themselves. There are examples of this in history, as people in power normally portray the powerless negatively. This has even happened in the world of science where views on bloodletting and even the consumption of cocaine.

After identifying these injustices, the postmodernist is not content to identify problems but to push change. The marginal groups need to rise up from the shackles of their oppressors. Pragmatism push change slightly but postmodernism can almost be revolutionary in its language for transformation. Everything is viewed with an eye towards suspicions that begets change except for the idea of viewing everything with skepticism that leads to change.

When everything is viewed as oppression eventually everything is overturned. Whoever gains power will then be viewed as oppressive until they too are overthrown. Eventually, there is nothing left. The problem with postmodernism is not that it identifies problems but that they have no solution beyond tearing everything down over and over again.

In Education

A postmodern teacher is going to be skeptical of absolute truth. They will stress the idea of doubting the text and trying to identify the inconsistencies in an author’s argument. There will be a focus on minority groups and how they are oppressed by those who are privileged.

With deconstructionism, students are trained to be sensitive to language and its use. This is perhaps one reason why such terms as politically correct are used today. People have been trained to be sensitive to language that does not fit the narrative and to identify hurtful language as almost dangerous.

All opinions are expected to be embraced and appreciated no matter how much they lack in validity and credibility unless they are defined as insensitive. Students will never be called upon to store and share the knowledge of the past. Rather, students are change agents who are called to overthrow the social injustice of the planet. This is not revolution as Marx saw it but rather reconstruction of what was deconstructed.

The curriculum is a process and not based on content. The teacher is also a social justice warrior. What is needed is people who challenge the status quo rather than work within it. Therefore, postmodernist thought is much more people in the softer sciences rather than in STEM fields. STEM requires stability in order to expand technology and make discoveries and money. Unfortunately, social stability is not required as much for a sociology or liberal arts major. The idealistic nature of postmodernism denies the reality that life has never been fair ever in the entire history of humanity.

Pragmatic Teacher

1 Reply

Advertisements

In this post, we will take a look at pragmatism. This philosophy has played a critical role in shaping ideas about education for a long time. In particular, we will look at the characteristics of pragmatism, its philosophical implications, and how it may manifest it’s self in the classroom.

Background

Pragmatism is a uniquely American 19th century contribution to philosophy with some of the primary influences in this school being such people Charles Perce, William James, and John Dewey. The era in which pragmatism was developed was the industrial revolution and an era of great change. Science was gravitating towards the idea of evolution, which at the time was astounding and even the religious world was in turmoil with people speaking of the end of the world. This environment of rapid change was deeply influencing the thoughts of many people.

With all the chaos swirling throughout the world pragmatism came to the point that there were no ideals or principles to look for. Rather, the focus was on what works and benefits the most than on conforming to an external standard. This position has had a profound impact on education through the work of the progressives as we shall see.

Philosophical Implications

There are no absolutes with a pragmatist. If there is some form of ultimate reality there is no way to know it here. In other words, while Plato bemoaned the cave and Socrates stated that the cave is all there is, a pragmatist may say that the world of forms is possible but since all we know for sure is the cave we should try to make it as nice as comfortable as possible.

One of the sources of argument that pragmatist make about the constant state of change implying a total lack of absolute truth is changes in science. Examples include, moving from a geocentric worldview to a heliocentric one, or moving from a creationist account of life to an evolutionary one. Since these ideas have changed there must not be any absolute truths to hold on to even though the realm of science is notorious for constant changed.

With all the chaos of the world, pragmatist has decided that truth is what works. Knowledge is based on experience. Through trial and error people learn how to deal with various problems. It is this active process of constructing knowledge through experience that knowledge is constructed. Knowledge is not external or outside the person, instead it is created through interaction with the world. This is a major shift in thinking from pass viewpoint and requires that the individual be an active rather than passive learner because they must interact with the world.

There is a separation in the mind of the pragmatist between knowledge and belief. Beliefs are private while knowledge is publicly available., which means it can be observed and verified by others. True knowledge or truth is relative because of the unstable and changing world that we live in.

Since truth is relative morals and values are relative as well. Local societies decide for themselves what is right and wrong and not an external standard. However, this does not mean anything goes. Stealing is disdained in most societies because it does not work as it tends to encourage crime and chaos. The same for murder. This does not mean to the pragmatist that there are universal moral laws, instead it is simply an indication that different groups of people have had similar experiences with stealing and murder and have made the same conclusion that this does not work.

Pragmatism and Education

A unique belief of pragmatism about students is that they need to be active learners. Students need to experience the world around them through learning activities. School is not preparation but is rather part of life it’s self. Therefore, life long learning is to be expected and not just a temporary period of life in which it is needed for studying.

The teacher is an expert guide who helps the students. They are a guide because the world changes too quickly to just dictate material to students. This means that the teacher is learning as well with the advantage of more experience living in a world of flux. Since truth is changing, there is no fix curriculum from yesteryear. Instead, the student’s interests are the center of how the curriculum is built.

With the focus on the environment, the pragmatic teacher is focused heavily on having students impact the world. This means that an emphasis on social action is a part of the pragmatist classroom. In some classroom social change and attaining social goals (ie social justice warrior) is the entire purpose of education. Other philosophies were trying to maintain the status quo but pragmatism is trying to overturn it if it works.

Conclusion

Pragmatism, like most new movements of their time, is simply a reaction to what came before in response to the challenges of the current context. Pragmatist reject absolute truth except for the absolute truth that there is no absolute truth. The world was truly changing quickly when this school of thought was born. However, unlike Plato, who was also experiencing rapid change and decide to search for absolutes in order to find comfort, the pragmatist reject absolute truth for the comfort of constant change. Instead of trying to preserve knowledge it was better to go with the flow as long as it worked.

Existentialist Teacher

Leave a reply

Advertisements

This post will examine the mysterious position of existentialism, which is basic a school of thought that denies that it is a school of thought. We will look at the origins of existentialism, the characteristics, and its role in education.

Background

Existentialism is all about the individual. In an interesting paradox, existentialism is so individualistic that they do not see themselves as a group with set of beliefs as other philosophies do. There is a rejection of any unified body of beliefs, thoughts, or system.

Early proponents of existentialism include Soren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche. These two 19th century philosophers were reacting to the nature of Christianity during their time. Kierkegaard focused on emphasizing the responsibility of the individual believer and their choices within religion. Nietzsche went in a different direction and became convince that there was no God and that man was responsible for his actions alone. This conclusion eventually drove Nietzsche crazy in a literal manner.

Between the extremes of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche is where most beliefs of existentialism are. Primarily, existentialism is trying to regain the lost of the individual. This sense of lost may have come from more and more people living in cities to work for others along with the growth of the government in providing services. The existentialist longed for the day when people were independent and could do what they wanted in returned for the responsibility for their actions.

Philosophical Implications

According to existentialism, a person must define who they are. Defining who you are is not left to an Absolute Self or Natural Law but to the person who existence. Reality is found within the individual person. This is a major shift from idealism view that reality is beyond this world and realism’s belief that reality is in the physical world.

Truth is based on a person’s choice. People believe what they want because they want to. This seems confusing but it is laying the foundation for post-modernism min the near future with its view of relative truth. Now, the individual is the source of authority and not any other code.

With a lack of external authority existentialism has to determine right and wrong with no source of authority. This source of freedom has been called a slavery to freedom by some. Slavery is bad but paradoxically too much freedom can be burdensome as well since there is no guidance in terms of how to act. Most people want some freedom but perhaps nobody wants complete freedom as this would be injurious to themselves and others if they could truly do whatever they wanted.

Existentialism and Education

A teacher with an existentialist perspective would be surprised at how students are taught. They would see it as oppressive and even with tendency towards being a form of propaganda. Students would need much more choice and responsibility for their own actions since the current form of teaching destroys individualism.

The existentialist teacher is not the center of the instruction but rather a facilitator. The goal is to help students better understand who they are as individuals. This also means that the student should have a choice in what they learn and that the curriculum needs to be somewhat flexible. The goal is the development of the individual and not the society as the society does not care for the ultimate development of the individual.

Conclusion

Existentialism is a system of thought that claims not to be a system because everyone within the system wants total freedom. This is contradictory yet considered consistent among existentialist. The reaction they have towards the growing power of large society gives this philosophy a romantic longing for almost a wild pre-industrialization world. However, though many people may not agree with some of the tenets of this group many do wish that they could have at least a little more personal freedom and individuality.

Neo-scholastic Teacher

2 Replies

Advertisements

Scholasticism and Neo-Scholasticism is a philosophy that has had a stronger influence in Christian education rather than in secular circles. This post will explore the characteristics of these philosophies as well as their role in education.

Background

Neo-Scholasticism began as simply scholasticism and was simultaneously a movement and a philosophy that sprang up during the medieval time period in Europe somewhere between 1050 and 1350 originating in the early universities. This was primarily a movement within the Catholic church as they controlled higher education at this time in Europe. The scholars of this movement were not as concern about discovery new truth as it was with proving and establishing the validity of existing truth. In other words, Neo-Scholasticism was primarily reactionary in nature.

The reason for the reactionary nature of Neo-Scholasticism was the rediscovery of the writings of Aristotle. These writings had been lost for centuries but had been preserved in the Islamic nations. Through interactions with the Muslim world through trade and war Aristotle’s writings were translated from Arabic into Latin. Aristotle’s realistic views were a challenge to the Platonic/idealistic views of the Christian church.

Scholars, for whatever reason, were convinced that church teachings had to be harmonized with the writings of Aristotle. Why religious teachings and beliefs had to bow to the influence of one Greek philosopher is subject of debate but perhaps the status of Aristotle compelled the church to merge his ideas with their own in order to maintain intellectual leadership of Europe.

The leader of this merger of faith and reason was Thomas Aquinas. He proposed that people should learn as much as they can through human reason and have faith in matters that cannot be reasoned about. Therefore, at the heart of scholasticism was human reason which in many ways had displaced faith.

Neo-Scholasticism is the modern equivalent of Scholasticism. The primary difference is that Neo-Scholasticism has religious and secular branch whereas Scholasticism had only one main branch or school of thought.

Philosophical Implications

Scholasticism focus was on accommodating the philosophy of Aristotle with christian thought. Therefore, many of Aristotle’s beliefs are reinterpreted as much as possible to be consistent with Christianity. For example, Aristotle spoke of the Unmoved Mover, which he stated was the first cause of all other causes in the universe. Aquinas equated the Unmoved Mover with God.

Reality had a dualistic nature to it for the scholastic. The natural world was understood through reasoning while the supernatural world was available through revelation and intuition. Truth could be self-evident such as “2+2 = 4” or it can depend on observed experience such as “The average life expectancy is 72 years.” The greatest truth are the unchanging self-evident such as those found in mathematics rather than observed experiential truth.

Morality is governed by reason. There is an assumption that people are rational at their core. The more rational the higher moral quality a person should have.

Neo-Scholasticism and Education

The teacher’s role from a Neo-Scholastic perspective is to help rational students develop their reasoning, will power, and memory. The teacher is the center of the education process and works with students to transfer information. The subject matter takes precedent over the students’ interest.

With its religious roots, Neo-Scholasticism see the teacher as a spiritual leader. This involves discipleship and even discipline at times. Only through this process can the student acquiring understanding of the unalterable truths of the world.

The curriculum of Neo-Scholasticism would include the humanities, math, and foreign languages (primarily Greek and Latin). The humanities allow students to understand the logic and thinking of great minds, math demonstrates unchanging truths, and foreign languages provides rigors training for the mind. The mind is a muscle that must be strengthened through examining the works of other men.

Conclusion

Neo-Scholasticism has not had the impact on education that idealism or realism has. The emphasis on teacher-centered instruction and memorizing is a major departure from modern forms of teaching. A good memory is not the same as a critical thinker. As with all schools of thought, Neo-Scholasticism suffers from a lack of balance. What is really needed is a flexible position that varies depending on the context.

Metaphysics & Education

1 Reply

Advertisements

Metaphysics is the study of reality and the nature or character of it. This branch of philosophy deals primarily with what is real. This may seem like an obvious question with an obvious answer. However, different people answer this question in different ways based on what they believe about the nature of reality and how we come to know it.

There are at least four sub-branches of metaphysics that attempt to address the question of the nature of reality. These four branches are…

Cosmology
Ontology
Anthropology
Theology

We will look at each of these and then try to examine how metaphysics manifest itself in education.

Cosmology

Cosmology deals with the origins of the universe. The main views of the origins of the universe can be seen as a continuum from the universe was created or design by God or the other extreme that everything about the universe has happened by accident as is commonly viewed by evolution. A middle ground along this continuum would be theistic evolution, which states that a divine being used evolution to create the world.

The beliefs an individual has about cosmology affects other aspects of their life, education, and how they interpret what they experience. For example, an atheist scientist see nature and is awed by the random movement of natural selection to create such beauty. However, a theist would see the same evidence in nature and be led to the conclusion that God has created a beautiful climate. When these two sides meet they cannot agree because they have different assumptions or beliefs about origins and interpret what they see based on these beliefs.

Ontology

Ontology is the study of existence. This is probably one of the harder positions to understand. However, ontology deals with such ideas as whether reality is physical or spiritual, or a combination of the two. In addition, Ontology addresses whether reality is orderly and stable.

People’s beliefs about being can impact how the approach life. If there is nothing there is no reason to care or do anything. However, if there is something beyond this life and life was created with purpose this will alter a person’s behavior as they consider how they may be held accountable for their actions.

Anthropology

Anthropology is the study of man. Some questions that anthropology focuses on in particular is the relationship between the mind and the body. Is it the mind or the body the primary agent of behavior. Other questions include examining whether people or good or evil or morally neutral. Lastly, anthropology addresses the question of the freedom people have. Do people have choice or is their behavior determined by their environment?

The nature vs nurture argument is an old argument about the condition of man. The ultimate question is who is responsible for the actions that people take. The answer to this question evolves around views of the will.

Theology

Theology is the study of the nature of God and plays a profound role at least indirectly in all philosophy. Atheist strongly believe there is no God. As such, the support primarily science as a way of understanding reality. Theists believe there is a God or gods and this natural affects how they view realty.

Even among theists there is disagreement over how many gods there are. Polytheists believe in many gods while monotheists believe in one God. Pantheists believe god(s) is in everything and that they are gods. The position a person has on God can change how they view the world. Monotheists often believe in having a relationship with one God in order to prepare for the reality of death in this life and the promise of living forever. Polytheists tend to have a contractual quid pro quo relationship with many different gods in order to do better in this world now and smooth the transition to living another life via some form of reincarnation.

Metaphysics and Education

Metaphysics manifest itself in many ways in education. In terms of cosmology and theology, most schools support the idea that the world came about by chance and that life evolved from almost nothing billions of years ago. This is related to theology in that most schools doubt the existence of God being openly atheistic in nature or may at most be agnostic in nature. In a non-Western context, gods or polytheism is acknowledged and accepted in everyday life but traditional science and atheistic origins of the universe are generally taught in school. This can lead to a dual world view at times.

In terms of ontology and anthropology, the views on ontology vary by culture in education. In the West, the spiritual aspect of man is not acknowledged in education due in part to the focus on science. However, this is beginning to change with the emphasis on mindfulness and meditation in public education. In the East, there is a more open view towards the spiritual nature of man.

In terms of education, students are generally taught that man is inherently good but may be corrupted by his environment and culture. In the East, education teaches that man is good by nature but may make mistakes. Culture is rarely criticized in eastern education.

Conclusion

Metaphysics is a difficult concept to try to address and understand. The important thing to remember is that metaphysics deals with the question of what is reality and that different people answer this question i different ways. How people answer these questions depends in part on their beliefs about cosmology, ontology, anthropology, and theology.

Realistic Teacher

2 Replies

Advertisements

Realism is another philosophy that has had a tremendous impact on education and the world in general. The modern world seems to be almost exclusively realist in terms of its worldview thanks in part to the scientific position that most individuals take on matters.

In this post, we will look briefly at the characteristics of realism. In addition, we will also examine how a teacher who believes in realism may approach teaching and realism’s impact on the broader educational process.

Background

Just as Plato was reacting to the change that was surrounding him when he developed his views on idealism, his pupil Aristotle react to idealism by proposing realism. Realism states that objects we perceive with our senses are independent of our mind. In other words, what see exist independently of us and our mind.

However, realism is not a rejection of idealism but in many ways an extension of it. Aristotle thought that everything was made of a combination of form and matter. Form was similar to the ideals of Plato’s idealism and matter was the new contribution that Aristotle was making which is a focus on the material aspect of an object. Form or ideas can exist without matter, such as the ideal or form democracy. Yet matter cannot exist with a form, such as a physical chair with the idea or form of a chair.

Aristotle further proposed that studying the world or matter would lead to a better understanding of universal ideas. This concept has had a strong impact on research in the development of inductive methodology also known as the scientific method.

Philosophical Implications

Reality as seen through idealism is the physical world. The world is similar to a giant machine in which humans are both passively acted upon and actively influencing as well. There are also natural laws that govern the physical world that can be discovered through observation.

Knowledge is gained only through the senses. Something is true because it was observed. The natural law is within the reality of the natural world and the realist is looking for this through specific examples. This inductive process helps the realist to understand the world around him. In many ways, the Natural Law of the realist is the Absolute Self of the idealist. The difference is in how each is discovered. The idealist thinks about the Absolute Self and knows through intuition that there is an external standard. The realist observes the Natural Law with is senses which confirms the Natural Law’s reality.

Natural Law also extends into the realm of ethics. It is through observing nature and the world that what is right and wrong, beautiful and ugly can be determined according realism. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson alludes to realism when he speaks of “inalienable rights.” In other words, Jefferson was proposing that some of the rights of man are obvious if one examines the world in which they live.

Realism and Education

A realistic teacher stresses that students learn through their senses. This involves teaching methodologies that have students doing and experiencing things rather than just listening. This can include such activities as field trips, group work, projects etc.

On a darker side, a realist teacher may believe that students are a product of their environment. This has been interpreted as meaning that students do not truly have choice as they are simple responding to the stimuli in their environment. This has lead to a push in education for a focus on behaviorism and even classical conditioning. Furthermore, most learning objectives are behaviorist in nature because a teacher can “see” a behavior which is evidence that the student can do something. Off course, this has clash with cognitivism (idealism in the 20th century) which focuses on the mind rather than the behavior.

The teacher’s role is to provide sound information about the reality of the physical world and the Natural Law. This is further supported by a focus on math and science, which today is viewed as a focus on STEM majors. One thing all STEM majors have in common is a focus on what can be seen and a disinterest in the realm of ideas and the highly theoretical. Critical thinking is focus almost exclusively on problem solving and never for the development of an opinion. What really matters are facts and not so much what people think about them.

With the focus on the senses, one thing the teacher and the students will notice is that the world is in a constant state of change. This has led to a rejection of a permanent Natural Law due to the ephemeral quality of reality.

Conclusion

Realism is the primary worldview of education today. Seeing is believing as the saying goes. Almost nothing is taken seriously unless there is clear observable evidence to support it. Of course, many people believe that feelings and personal experience counts as evidence. This is because feelings and personal experience have actual occurred in the individual person’s life.

Idealistic Teacher

1 Reply

Advertisements

Idealism is an ancient philosophy that had a strong influence on education through the 20th century. Recently, this position has been overshadowed by realism, however, the influence of idealism can still be felt in education to this day. In this post, we will describe idealism, explain its implications, and examine how an idealistic teacher views education.

Description

Idealism is focused on reality as consisting of ideas, the mind, and the self. In other words, the mind makes the material world rather than the other way around as found in realism. Plato is the primary author of this philosophy.

The context of Plato’s life was one of change. This was during the time of the Persian Wars in which Greece, Athens in particular, did remarkably well. War naturally brought new ideas to both countries which was leading to changes. In addition, there was a push for individualism from a group of philosophers known as the sophists which were straining the communal culture of Athens.

Some have stated that Plato’s idealism was a reaction against this threat of change. Truth for Plato was permanent and unchanging. Since the world was changing, there could be no truth in this world. Truth must be found somewhere else. The real truth was found in the world of ideas a place that was beyond the senses used in this world.

Plato has rather negative views towards the senses. In his “Allegory of the Cave”, Plato essentially asserts that people who go by their senses are chained and trapped inside a cave of ignorance where they are bound to watch shadows of reality. Those who break free from these chains are those who have gone beyond their senses and used their intellect to reach the world of ideas. Naturally, only an elite handful of chosen ones or philosopher kings are able to do this.

Philosophical Implications

For idealists, the source of knowledge comes from intuition (knowing without conscious thought), revelation (knowing through supernatural encounters), and rationalism (knowing through conscious thought). What is important here is what is missing, which is empiricism (knowledge through the senses). Idealists do not require empirical verification of what is true. In the world today, this is almost laughable but was a core component of education for centuries.

Ethically, idealism emphasizes a belief in an external ethical standard for man. Man cannot be the one to decide what is right or wrong. Instead, morals are determined by the world of ideas through the intellect. There is something called the Absolute self that the individual self is trying to imitate. This Absolute Self is considered by many to be God as seen from a Christian perspective. Again this is something that would not be considered seriously by many educators.

There is an eternal consistency to truth for an idealist. Something is true when it fits with the harmony of the universe. Even art must make sense and must be used in a way that is consistent with the perfect form of the world of ideas. This explains the sonority of early forms of music that have been lost gradually over time.

Idealism and Education

An idealistic teacher is going to focus on the development of the student’s mind. There is a constant striving for perfection in the study of various subjects. Speaking of subjects, the curriculum consists primarily of the humanities and math. History and literature help students to see what is ideal for humans and the study of math is powerful because of its universal nature along with it being self-evidently true. Generally, any subject that brings students into contact with ideas rather than things should be considered for the curriculum

The teacher’s responsibility is to pass their knowledge of the ultimate reality to the student as the teacher has more experience in this and the Absolute Self. Therefore, the teacher is an example for the student. Knowledge is seen as something that is transferred from the teacher to the student either verbally or in writing. This implies that lecturing and direct instruction are key methodologies.

One of the more shocking positions of the idealistic teacher is that the school is not an agent of change. The idealistic teacher and the idealistic school do not train and educate “change agents”. Rather, since absolute truth is unchanging the school should naturally reflect an unchanging nature and support the status quo. Anyone familiar with education in universities today would find this difficult to accept.

Conclusion

With a focus on an otherworldly perfect standard, idealism is strongly out of place in a world that is governed or perhaps controlled by what they see and experience. Whenever people try to appeal to some sort of unqualified standard it is looked upon almost with ridicule. The exception seems to be when people share an emotional objection to something. Feelings have replaced some form of ethereal standard because emotions are experienced rather than thought about.

The overemphasis on ideals is perhaps the weakness of idealism. Plato thought that people who only rely on their senses were trapped in a cave and unaware of true reality. However, the same can be said of a person who is trapped in the world of ideas. The person who is truly free is the one who can move between the senses and the mind or who can move between the reality of t ideas and the physical world. Moving between these positions provides a flexibility that neither has by itself.

Academic Dishonesty and Cultural Difference

2 Replies

Advertisements

Academic dishonesty, which includes plagiarism and cheating, are problems that most teachers have dealt with in their career. Students sometimes succumb to the temptation of finding ways to excel or just survive a course by doing things that are highly questionable. This post will attempt to deal with some of the issues related to academic dishonesty. In particular, we will look at how perceptions of academic dishonesty vary across contexts.

Cultural Variation

This may be frustrating to many but there is little agreement in terms of what academic dishonesty is once one leaves their own cultural context. In the West, people often believe that a person can create and “own” an idea, that people should “know” their stuff, and that “credit” should be giving one using other people’s ideas. These foundational assumptions shape how teachers and students view using others ideas and using the answers of friends to complete assignments

However, in other cultures there is more of an “ends justifies the means” approach. This manifests itself in using ideas without giving credit because ideas belong to nobody and having friends “help” you to complete an assignment or quiz because they know the answer and you do not if the situation was different you would give them the answer. Therefore, in many contexts doesn’t matter how the assignment or quiz is completed as long as it is done.

This has a parallel in many situations. If you are working on a project for your boss and got stuck. Would it be deceptive to ask for help from a colleague to get the project done? Most of us have done this at one time or another. The problem is that this is almost always frowned upon during an assignment or assessment in the world of academics.

The purpose here is not to judge one side or the other but rather to allow people to identify the assumptions they have about academic dishonesty so that they avoid jumping to conclusions when confronted with this by people who are not from the same part of the world like them.

Our views on academic dishonesty are shaped in the context we grow up in

Clear Communication

One way to deal with the misunderstandings of academic dishonesty across cultures is for the teacher to clearly define what academic dishonesty is to them. This means providing examples explaining how this violates the norms of academia. In the context of academia, academic dishonesty in the forms of cheating and plagiarism is completely unacceptable.

One strategy that I have used to explain academic dishonesty is to compare academic dishonesty to something that is totally culturally repulsive locally. For example, I have compared plagiarism to wearing your shoes in someone’s house in Asia (a major no-no in most parts). Students never understand what plagiarism is when defined in isolation abstractly (or so they say). However, when plagiarism is compared to wearing your shoes in someone’s house, they begin to see how much academics hate this behavior. They also realize how they need to adjust their behavior for the context they are in.

By presenting a cultural argument against plagiarism and cheating rather than a moral one, students are able to understand how in the context of school this is not acceptable. Outside of school, there are normally different norms of acceptable behavior.

Conclusion

The steps to take with people who share the same background are naturally different from the suggestion provided here. The primary point to remember is that academic dishonesty is not seen the same way by everyone. This requires that the teacher communicate what they mean when referring to this and to provide a relevant example of academic dishonesty so the students can understand.

Learner-Centered Instruction

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Learner-centered instruction is a term that has been used in education for several decades now. One of the challenges of extremely popular terms in a field such as learner-centered instruction is that the term loses its meaning as people throw it into a discussion without knowing exactly what the term means.

The purpose of this post is to try and explain some of the characteristics of learner-centered instruction without being exhaustive. In addition, we will look at the challenges to this philosophy as well as ways to make it happen in the classroom.

Focus on the Students

Learner-centered instruction is focused on the students. What this means is that the teacher takes into account the learning goals and objectives of the students in establishing what to teach. This requires the teacher to conduct at least an informal needs assessment to figure out what the students want to learn.

Consultation with the students allows for the students to have some control over their learning which is empowering as viewed by those who ascribe to critical theory. Consultation also allows students to be creative and innovative. This sounds like a perfect learning situation but to be this centered on the learner can be difficult

Challenge of Learner-Centered Instruction

Since the learning experience is determined by the students, the teacher does not have any presupposed plan in place prior to consulting with the students. As such, not having a plan in place beforehand is extremely challenging for new teachers and difficult even for experienced ones. The teacher doesn’t know what to expect in terms of the needs of the students.

In theory, almost no class follows such a stringent approach to learner-centered instruction. Most schools have to meet government requirements, prepare students for the workplace, and or show improvements in testing. This limits the freedom of the teacher to be learner-centered in many ways. External factors cannot be ignored to adhere to the philosophy of learner-centered instruction.

Finding a Compromise

One way to be learner-centered while still having some sort of a plan prior to teaching is to rethink the level at which the students have a voice in the curriculum. For example, if it is not possible to change the objectives of a course, the teacher can have the students develop the assignments they want to do to achieve an objective.

The teacher could also allow the students to pick from several different assignments that all help to achieve the same objective(s). This gives the students some control over their learning while allowing the teacher to adhere to external requirements. It also allows the teacher to be prepared in some way prior to the teaching.

Conclusion

The average educator does not have the autonomy to give to students to allow for the full implementation of learner-centered instruction. However, there are several ways to adjust one’s approach to teaching that will allow students to have a sense of control over their learning.

Philosophical Foundations of Research: Epistemology

1 Reply

Advertisements

Epistemology is the study of the nature of knowledge. It deals with questions as is there truth and or absolute truth, is there one way or many ways to see something. In research, epistemology manifest itself in several views. The two extremes are positivism and interpretivism.

Positivism

Positivism asserts that all truth can be verified and proven scientifically and can be measured and or observed. This position discounts religious revelation as a source of knowledge as this cannot be verified scientifically. The position of positivist is also derived from realism in that there is an external world out there that needs to be studied.

For researchers, positivism is the foundation of quantitative research. Quantitative researchers try to be objective in their research, they try to avoid coming into contact with whatever they are studying as they do not want to disturb the environment. One of the primary goals is to make generalizations that are applicable in all instances.

For quantitative researchers, they normally have a desire to test a theory. In other words, the develop one example of what they believe is a truth about a phenomenon (a theory) and they test the accuracy of this theory with statistical data. The data determines the accuracy of the theory and the changes that need to be made.

By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, people were looking for alternative ways to approach research. One new approach was interpretivism.

Interpretivism

Interpretivism is the complete opposite of positivism in many ways. Interpretivism asserts that there is no absolute truth but relative truth based on context. There is no single reality but multiple realities that need to be explored and understood.

For interpretist, There is a fluidity in their methods of data collection and analysis. These two steps are often iterative in the same design. Furthermore, intrepretist see themselves not as outside the reality but a player within it. Thus, they often will share not only what the data says but their own view and stance about it.

Qualitative researchers are interpretists. They spend time in the field getting close to their participants through interviews and observations. They then interpret the meaning of these communications to explain a local context specific reality.

While quantitative researchers test theories, qualitative researchers build theories. For qualitative researchers, they gather data and interpret the data by developing a theory that explains the local reality of the context. Since the sampling is normally small in qualitative studies, the theories do not often apply to many.

Conclusion

There is little purpose in debating which view is superior. Both positivism and interpretivism have their place in research. What matters more is to understand your position and preference and to be able to articulate in a reasonable manner. It is often not what a person does and believes that is important as why they believe or do what they do.

Philosophical Foundations of Research: Ontology

1 Reply

Advertisements

Philosophy is a term that is commonly used but hard to define. To put it simply, philosophy explains an individuals or a groups worldview in general or in a specific context. Such questions as the nature of knowledge, reality, and existence are questions that philosophy tries to answer. There are different schools of thought on these questions and these are what we commonly call philosophies

In this post, we will try to look at ontology, which is the study of the nature of reality. In particular, we will define it as well as explain its influence on research.

Ontology

Ontology is the study of the nature of being. It tries to understand the reality of existence. In this body of philosophy, there are two major camps, ontological realism, and ontological idealism.

Ontological realism believes that reality is objective. In other words, there is one objective reality that is external to each individual person. We are in a reality and we do not create it.

Ontological idealism is the opposite extreme. This philosophy states that there are multiple realities an each depends on the person. My reality is different from your reality and each of us builds our own reality.

Ontological realism is one of the philosophical foundations for quantitative research. Quantitative research is a search for an objective reality that accurately explains whatever is being studied.

For qualitative researchers, ontological idealism is one of their philosophical foundations. Qualitative researchers often support the idea of multiple realities. For them, since there is no objective reality it is necessary to come contact with people to explain their reality.

Something that has been alluded to but not stated specifically is the role of independence and dependence of individuals. Regardless of whether someone ascribes to ontological realism or idealis, there is the factor of whether people or independent of reality or dependent to reality. The level of independence and dependence contributes to other philosophies such as objectivism constructivism and pragmatism.

Objectivism, Constructivism and Pragmatism

Objectivism is the belief that there is a single reality that is independent of the individuals within it. Again this is the common assumption of quantitative research. At the opposite end we have constructivism which states that there are multiple realities and the are dependent on the individuals who make each respective reality.

Pragmatism supports the idea of a single reality with the caveat that it is true if it is useful and works. The application of the idea depends upon the individuals, which pushes pragmatism into the realm of dependence.

Conclusion

From this complex explanation of ontology and research comes the following implications

Quantitative and qualitative researchers differ in how they see reality. Quantitative researchers are searching for and attempting to explain a single reality while qualitative researchers are searching for and trying to explain multiple realities.
Quantitative and qualitative researchers also differ on the independence of reality. Quantitative researchers see reality as independent of people while qualitative researchers see reality as dependent on people
These factors of reality and its dependence shape the methodologies employed by quantitative and qualitative researchers.

Approach, Method, Procedure, and Techniques In Language Learning

10 Replies

Advertisements

In language teaching, in the general area of teaching methodology, people talk about approaches, methods, procedures, and techniques. This post will help to clarify the meaning of these interrelated terms and provide examples of each.

Approaches

An approach is a theory about language learning or even a philosophy of how people learn in general. They can be psychologically focused such as behaviorism or cognitivism. They can also be based on older philosophies such as idealism or realism.

Approaches are fuzzy and hard to define because they are broad in nature. An example of an approach that leads to a method would be the philosophies of scholasticism, faculty of psychology, or even perennialism. Each of these philosophies encouraged the development of the mind in the way of a muscle. Train the brain and a person would be able to do many different things. These philosophies have impacted some methods of language teaching as we will see below.

Method

A method is an application of an approach in the context of language teaching. An example of a method is the grammar-translation method. This method employs the memorization of various grammar rules and the translation of second language material to the student’s native language. Students were able to develop the intellectual capacity to understand the new language through a deductive process of acquiring the rules of the language.The purpose is not to critique this method but to show how it was derived from the approach that the mind needs to be trained through intellectual exercises to be able to accomplish something.

Procedures

Procedures are the step-by-step measures to execute a method. These step-by-step measures are called techniques and will be discussed next. Common procedures for the grammar-translation method includes the following…

The ESL / ELL Teacher’s Survival Guide

The class reads a text written in the second language.
Student translates the passage from the second language to their mother tongue.
Student translates new words from the second language to their mother tongue.
Student is given a grammar rule and derived from the example they apply the rule by using the new words.
Student memorizes the vocabulary of the second language.
Student memorizes grammar rules.
Errors made by the student are corrected by providing the right answers.

This is the process (with variation) that is used when employing the grammar-translation method.

Techniques

A technique is a single activity that comes from a procedure. Anyone of the steps of the procedure list above qualifies as a technique. Naturally, various methods employ various techniques.

Conclusion

Language teaching involves approaches that lead to methods, methods that are broken down into procedures, and procedures that are a collection of techniques. Understanding how these concepts interrelate can help a teacher know the reasons behind their choices in how they choose to teach.

Ancient Philosophies and Education

1 Reply

Advertisements

In research related to education and learning theories, there are two major philosophies that influence almost the entire field of education. The name of these two philosophies are rationalism and empiricism. In this post, we will take a closer look at each of these philosophies and their impact on education.

Rationalism

Rationalism is a form of epistemology that states that knowledge grows from the process of reasoning without reliance on the senses. In this philosophy, there is a strong distinction between knowledge acquired by the senses and by reason. According to Plato, a major proponent of this philosophy, things a.k.a matter are revealed by the senses. Ideas, on the other hand, are revealed by reasoning. This reasoning process is a systematic reflection upon the ideas of the world, which leads to further ideas being developed.

Rene Descartes was a French philosopher of the 17th century. He extended the work of Plato by stating that the primary difference between man and beast was the former’s ability to reason. For Descartes, the external world was mechanical. In many ways, this idea paved the way for naturalism and materialism of the 19th century.

In summary, rationalism is focused upon the development of the mind through thinking processes. This philosophy is at the heart of such learning theories that related specifically to information processing. Rationalism has also influence educational philosophies such as perennialism and to a lesser extent essentialism.

Empiricism

On the opposite end of the spectrum of epistemology is empiricism. Empiricism states that experience through the senses is the only source of knowledge. Aristotle was the developer of this position. He stated that ideas cannot exist independent of the external world. It is the information one gathers not from thinking but from one’s senses that leads to knowledge.

This idea was taken a step further by John Locke in the 17th century. Locke is famous for proposing what he called the tabla rasa. This was a phrase for stating that a person is born a blank slate. As the grow and take in information through the senses does the person acquire ideas about their environment and self.

Empiricism is one of the dominating philosophies of modern time. The scientific method, various learning theories on associational learning, and educational philosophies focused on experiential learning are based on empiricism.

Conclusion

More could be said about these two philosophies. The point that is being made is that they have had a strong influence on education. Most major debates in education share positions stated by one of these philosophies. When people speak of critical thinking and the development of the mind they are pulling concepts from rationalism. When people speak of job skills and hands on training they are deriving arguments from empiricism. In reality, a combination of both will lead to well-rounded individuals.

Constructivism & Curriculum

3 Replies

Advertisements

For some people, there is confusion over constructivism. For starters, constructivism is not considered a theory by many educators. Rather, constructivism is a philosophy that addresses the nature of knowledge and learning.

Constructivist see knowledge as always changing and being developed by the learner and is built upon the work of Piaget, Vygotsky, and even Dewey. In this philosophy, the learner develops knowledge by building upon what they already know. The learner is actively involved in their learning as they interact with their environment and with other people. In behaviorism, it is an external force that acts upon the learner but in constructivism, it is the learner who is acting upon the external environment. The student transforms the knowledge as the internalize it.

A curriculum that is heavily influenced by the philosophy of constructivism has students who are actively engaged in learning in a social environment. This includes such strategies as project-based learning, cooperative learning, and opportunities for problem-solving. For many, including opportunities for reflecting on learning experiences helps students to build knowledge is another aspect of constructivism.

Progressivism & Curriculum

5 Replies

Advertisements

Progressivism is derived from the older philosophy of pragmatism. It grew out of the larger progressivist movement of the earlier 20th century in the United States.

Believers of progressivism believe that since reality is always changing truth is relative and not absolute. There is no reason to focus on a fixed, established body of knowledge. This is in contrast to perennialism and essentialism. Supporters of progressivism also are against a transmission style of teaching where the student passively receives information from a teacher, which is also known as rote learning. Instead, students should be involved in problem-solving and the use of the scientific method. This active forms of learning engaged students and prepare them for the real world

John Dewey was probably one of the biggest supporters of progressivism. He believed that a curriculum should be interdisciplinary. This allows students to make connections between subjects rather than learn in isolation. He also stressed the role of democracy in the classroom. Students and teachers need to plan what will be learned together. This was radical at the time and still highly uncommon in the 21st century.

In many ways, progressivists were the first to champion student-centered learning. However, one criticism of this movement was that it was too student-centered and neglected the subject matter. With time, progressivism splinter into several radical groups and eventually its influence in education declined considerably.

Essentialism & Curriculum

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Essentialism is another prominent educational philosophy. This philosophy is grounded in idealism and realism of the ancient Greeks. The heart of essentialism is the the “essentials” which includes the 3Rs.

A major difference between essentialism and perennialism is essentialism is focused on what is necessary foundational knowledge that students currently need. Perennialism’s curriculum tends to be unchanging since it is focused on absolute truth.

The arts are not a major component of existentialism since art is not deemed necessary. Instead, there is an emphasis on mastering skills and presenting a subject-centered curriculum to students who are not consulted about what they want to learn. The teacher is the center of the learning and the student is to respect the authority of the teacher.

More on essentialism and the role of the teacher can be found here

Perennialism and Curriculum

2 Replies

Advertisements

Perennialism is a specific educational philosophy and is derived from ancient Greek philosophies such as idealism and realism. One of the major tenets of perennialism is that knowledge that has withstood the test of time is what is needed to be taught. The goals of education have been the same throughout time. Human nature is constant and mankind has the ability to understand the truths of nature.

Common characteristics of a perennialist curriculum is a subject centered lessons, organized body of knowledge, and a focuses on developing the thinking skills of students. Lecture, question, and answer are common instructional methods. There is no difference among students and everyone learns the same thing at the same speed. The “three Rs” are one form of this type of curriculum.

A more recent view of perennialism and the teacher is available here

Existentialism & Curriculum

2 Replies

Advertisements

Existentialism is a post-WWII philosophy that has had influence in curriculum. This philosophy’s tenets include people choices define who they are. For example, I am choose to teach this makes me a teacher. Other tenets of this philosophy is individualism, freedom of choice, and personal fulfillment. Choice is what often leads to self-fulfillment. Lastly, there is a somewhat strong anti-authority streak in existentialism in which proponents of this philosophy are against group conformity as they are seen as stripping people of choice.

In education, existentialism can be seen in curriculum’s that emphasize study choice in what they study. The arts are a strong component as well as other forms of the humanities. Self-expression is also important and experiences that contribute to individual choice are highly valued.

There are many supports of this philosophy. Among them includes Maxine Greene, George Kneller, and Van Cleve Morris. Interestingly, this philosophy is unpopular with traditional educators because it is sometimes seen anti-group and establishment beliefs.

Pragmatism

Leave a reply

Advertisements

Pragmatism a.k.a experientialism is in many ways a daughter of realism. This view holds that knowledge changes and are relative. This is in contrast to the tenet of idealism that truth is absolute. In pragmatism, the learners in their environment are constantly changing and the learner develops knowledge through problem-solving. Everything must be tested to be tentatively accepted. This concern for testing ideas is derived from the scientific method. Critical thinking is important for people who support pragmatism. In addition, the teaching focuses more on exploring ideas rather than explaining them. The focus of the curriculum is upon the learner’s experiences with an interdisciplinary approach. As they inquire and discover students are having experiences that prepare them for life. The biggest proponent of this philosophy of learning was John Dewey.

There is more to learn about pragmatism here

Curriculum & Realism

3 Replies

Advertisements

Aristotle is credited with the development of realism. Realism is about viewing the world in terms of what a person experiences through their senses. This is almost the opposite of idealism and its focus on the mind. Realist focus on experiencing things through as you may have guessed, experiences. Experiments in many ways are really just experiences people have had that were conducted in a scientific manner.

Within education, realism can be seen through proponents of experimentalism which emphasizes students have various experiences as part of their education. These experiences can be something as simple as a field trip. Hands on activities in the classroom is another outgrowth of realist thinking. Science is above the liberal arts because of its engagement with the real world in a concrete manner. The goal of realism in education is to encourage active learning through engaging as many senses as possible. Through the avenues of the senses learning takes place.

Idealism & Curriculum

1 Reply

Advertisements

Idealism is a philosophy developed by Plato. One of the many tenets of idealism is that truth can be found through reasoning, intuition, and divine revelation. There is such as thing as absolute truth and the world is composed of ideas primarily.

For curriculum, idealist concepts come through when people believe that learning is mostly an intellectual process. Teaching connects ideas together when teaching the students. The education is highly structured and one of the best examples of this is the liberal arts education. The humanities are viewed as the most important subjects because these fields deal with ideas. The sciences are lower on the scale because they deal with observation.

Many famous educators supported idealism. Among them includes William Harris, Fredrich Froebel, and William Bennett. A more detailed analysis of idealism and teaching is available here.

Curriculum Development & Philosophy

1 Reply

Advertisements

Philosophy is the collection of attitudes, beliefs, experiences, and worldview that people have. These perceptions of reality are summarized and defined as a personal philosophy. A person’s philosophy influences their thinking and actions. Within curriculum, a teacher’s philosophy impacts how they design and implement curriculum.

For example, a teacher who believes that general knowledge is most important will emphasize this in their curriculum. Their philosophy or belief is that general knowledge will prepare students to handle many different problems in life. Where these beliefs come from is the teacher’s own experiences and the values that were passed down to them from their parents and teachers.

There are several different philosophies that we are going to look at over the next few post. Each of these philosophies continues to impact curriculum not only in the US but worldwide.

Exit mobile version

%%footer%%

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: