My philosophy of education draws from a variety of established philosophies, ideologies, and theories. It is most reflective of theories such as Progressivism, which is derived from Pragmatism and Liberalism, and Critical Theory, which is derived from Existentialism, Postmodernism, Marxism, and Liberation Pedagogy. Due to the influx of diverse populations entering the United States educational system, my primary reason for siding with these theories is because they account and promote equality for all student populations regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, language, class, sexual orientation, religion, etc. Since diversity is a key issue in our educational system today, I believe that we, as educators, need to focus our efforts to adhere to this demand. Therefore, implementing educational theories such as Progressivism and Critical Theory into our daily practices as educators, rather than traditional theories like that of Essentialism and Perennialism, then we can begin to serve the needs of all students instead of just the majority group. For purposes of this paper, I will explain my philosophy of education as it relates to Progressivism, Critical Theory, and Perennialist Robert M. Hutchins.
Progressivism
Progressives took Dewey and Pragmatist ideas in combination with ideas from Liberalism and created a new theory of education that was much different than traditional theories. They centered their theory around being flexible, promoting change, and breeding innovation. Their emphasized open education, inquiry-based learning, collaborative learning, projects, process learning, authentic assessment, and constructivism (Gutek, 2004).
Progressivism is a theory that I value as an educator, because its focus is on the individual student as they relate to their surrounding environment (e.g., the classroom learning environment, the school they attend, the geographic region they live, or the country of their citizenship). It follows many of ideas of what I believe an education should encompass. The following are some examples: 1) focus on stimulating children’s growth and development through activities that encourage initiative, creativity, and self-expression; 2) implementing an experience-referenced curriculum that includes activities that allow for problem solving, critical thinking, and process learning; 3) focus on collaborative learning that features group cooperation; 4) believe teachers should be facilitators of learning instead of authoritarian task masters; and most importantly, 5) education should be multifunctional and holistic, encompassing all areas of learning (i.e., emotional, physical, social, and intellectual) rather than only focusing on academics, like that of traditional theories (Gutek, 2004).
Progressives are not concerned with metaphysics and universal truths. Rather, they focus on epistemological questions about how we know, and what the most accurate way of knowing is. To answer these questions, they turn to science and our experiences. With regard to values, they do not believe in universally based standards. Instead, they look to human interactions and relationships to govern ethics and aesthetics. Relationships are judged on what they are able to contribute to human growth, development, culture, and most important, satisfaction. Ideas that do not side well with Conservatives, Essentialists, and Perennialists, because of what they call ethical relativism—that right and wrong, good and bad, are defined culturally rather than universally. These critics believe ethical relativism weakens moral character and creates an “anything goes” mentality. However, in response to these critics, a few questions come to mind. How are we as a society able to determine a universal right and wrong, good and bad? More importantly, if we as a society agreed to follow universal truths, who would determine these morals for all members of society? The dominant social class? If this occurred, how would this aid us in developing teaching methodologies that accounted for the increase of diverse students entering the United States school systems?
Furthermore, Progressives follow an inductive logic pattern. This is attributed to their heavy reliance on the scientific method and their belief that learning is process-oriented. Children should be allowed to create their own beliefs and values through reflection about their interactions with their surrounding environment. An idea that is based upon the work of John Dewey, a Pragmatist philosopher, who was a key figure in the development of Progressivism.
According to Dewey, genuine educational goals come from within a person, and from the person’s own activity in the environment. The sole goal of education is growth, which means “that a person is learning more effective, meaningful, and satisfying ways to live, in order to deal with a changing reality and direct the course of her or his own life” (Gutek, 2004, p. 76). He contended that if students learned by experience, then they would not only gain knowledge, but would develop skills, habits, and attitudes necessary in solving a wide variety of problems. He put the “learner in the learning” (Terry, 2006). That is, he involved the learner in the learning process, which for the first time, connected the student to their environment, and allowed the student to see how their interests, needs, or problems connected to their education. Therefore, instead of the learner’s actions being interpreted by others, the learner is interpreting their own actions and determining the correct decision to be made based upon their own thought processes (Terry, 2006).
In sum, Progressives contend that schools should be multifunctional institutions that serve a broad range of individual and social needs. Education should focus on the whole of a person rather than just academics. Curriculum should come from children’s interests, needs, and their exploration with their surrounding environments. This will breed problem solving and critical thinking skills as well as stimulate creativity. They will be able to construct their own concepts of reality. Teachers should be flexible in their lesson plans, have insight into children’s cognitive and emotional growth and development, possess a wide range of skills and subject knowledge, and be skilled in group dynamics for cooperative learning. Overall, these are all characteristics I find personally accurate with regard to schools and teachers educating students from a variety of cultural backgrounds.
Critical Theory
Critical Theory is derived from various educational philosophies (Existentialism and Postmodernism) and ideologies (Marxism and Liberation Pedagogy). It is defined as “a complex set of working assumptions about society, education, and schooling that question and analyze educational aims, institutions, curriculum, instruction, and relationships in order to raise consciousness and bring about transformative change in society and education” (Gutek, 2004, p. 309). They allege that dominant groups control schools and use them to maintain their power over subordinate groups, like Hispanics, African Americans, Native Americans, women, gays/lesbians, etc. These groups are disempowered due to the constructions and barriers created by those in control. Therefore, the goal of Critical Theorists is to raise consciousness of the marginalized groups and to provide the tools needed for their own empowerment (Gutek, 2004).
Critical Theory is another theory I value as an educator, because of its focus on giving every individual the opportunity to have a voice and to be heard. They believe schools are places that should teach equality and social justice. Using their own lives as an initial point of discussion, every individual can enter into what they feel is right or wrong, good or bad, beautiful or ugly. Genuine values are developed by those in power, but result from individuals interacting and sharing their stories. Teachers should encourage students to voice their opinions, beliefs, and concerns about what they hold as correct and what they value. This allows students to understand how their peers view what is right or wrong. Hearing different stories or voices raised in an environment of discourse, lets students see that there are a variety of values, not an imposed set of values. This permits students to find their voice, learn how to articulate their beliefs and feelings, learn to value the opinions of others, and become aware of those that would interfere. As Gutek (2004) states, “Beginning with the individual’s lone voice, the goal is to build the volume of voices, like a chorus, to incorporate many melodies and tones” (p. 317). Inevitably, teachers should guide students in doing this with ethical discussions that slowly show students the injustice of silencing those who are at the margins.
The concept of each individual telling their own story relates to curriculum and instruction. Critical Theorists believe there is an official curriculum and a “hidden” curriculum. The official curriculum includes the prescribed skills and subjects that are imposed on the students. The “hidden” curriculum are those values, behaviors, and attitudes conveyed and imposed on students through school practices that support a capitalist consumer-oriented society. Both forms of curriculum represent the knowledge and values of the dominant group in control. Therefore, Critical Theorists believe that if students are able to discuss their personal life stories with others within the classroom, they can begin to build a classroom environment that promotes the point of view of all students. This then, can be transposed to larger environments these students are apart of, from their microsystems to their macrosystems. For example, most history courses only teach us about the points of view of the European settlers that first came to North America. What they do not teach us are the points of view from any other immigrants that migrated to North America. Therefore, implementing Critical Theory will allow members of each race, ethnic, and language group a voice to tell their own story. Students can then begin to understand the similarities and differences between groups. It is then from these autobiographies that the beginnings of “a historical mosaic of the United States as a multicultural society could arise” (Gutek, 2004, p. 320).
Robert M. Hutchins
Robert M. Hutchins is one of the key philosophers that promoted the Perennialism theory of education. Perennialism is derived from traditional philosophies (Realism and Theistic Realism) and ideologies (Conservatism). Although Perennialism is similar to other traditional theories of education, like that of Essentialism, it is also different with regard to its reliance on metaphysics. Perennialists look to metaphysics to explain the purpose of education, the role of the school, and the organization of the curriculum. They believe these are centered on the fact that human nature is constant and what is distinctly human in man remains the same everywhere (McGettigan, 2000), while Essentialists believe these are centered on history that emphasizes skills and subjects that have contributed to human survival, productivity, and civility (Gutek, 2004).
Hutchins believed that all students, no matter where they are from and what type of college they aspire to attend, should receive a general education that included subjects related to what Essentialists call “Basic Education” (i.e., English, mathematics, science, arts, humanities, history, etc.). However, I do not believe that all people need this foundation in order to obtain their desired careers. There are many people who attend a vocational school after High School and love what they do as well as contribute a need to society. I also do not feel these individuals are to be viewed as any less than those that decide to attend a university. There are some career positions in life where a higher education degree is needed, and there are some where it is not.
Hutchins also believed that the curriculum should be taught using the “Great Books” (McGettigan, 2000). The “Great Books” consisted of classic literature like Plato’s Republic, Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, Rousseau’s Social Contract, Tolstoy’s War and Peace, and many others. He argued that the “Great Books” would serve as preparation for advanced study and as general education to help students understand the world (Gutek, 2004). Each of these books dealt with a fundamental area of Western civilization that could be used as examples of what to do in a different time and place. However, I side with the Progressive and Critical Theory critics on this, discerning that the “Great Books” are useful with regard to studying them for historical purposes, but for the curriculum to be centered on them is absurd. The “Great Books” only tell one story, a story formulated by the dominant social class. These books do not include viewpoints from all members of today’s society, therefore, if implemented, it would continue to perpetuate inequality and social injustice.
Conclusion
My philosophy of education is reflective of educational theories such as Progressivism and Critical Theory. This is due in part, because these theories accommodate all students, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, language, class, sexual orientation, religion, etc., within the United States educational system as well as encourage creativity and breed innovation. In essence, these theories address relevant educational issues in our modern day society—the accommodation and promotion of equality and social justice.
References
Gutek, G. L. (2004). Philosophical and ideological voices in education. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
McGettigan, B. (2000). The educational theory of Robert M. Hutchins (Version 1). NewFoundations. In Dzuback, M.A. (1991), Robert M. Hutchins. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://www.newfoundations.com/GALLERY/Hutchins.html.
Terry, A. (2006). A K-12 developmental service-learning typology. International Journal of Learning, 12(9), 321-330.
No comments:
Post a Comment