Lecture 2: “Philosophy of Education”

Why are we teaching Philosophy? Some teaching education courses will have a whole course on Philosophy, and the philosophy of education in my judgment is extremely important because it makes a huge contribution towards the way you go about teaching. However, today we are going to be dealing with the philosophy of education in a deliberately superficial way, and rather than apologizing for the fact that this is going to be superficial, let's celebrate the fact that it is superficial. It will quickly and neatly introduce you to various perspectives of philosophical thinking. What we believe influences the way we act as teachers. I have very strong opinions. I present these opinions without apology. You are required to know my opinions, but you are NOT required to accept my opinions. I will be talking about four different philosophies. My philosophical position is driven by my spiritual beliefs as a member of the Baha'i Faith.

These are the beliefs I organize my life around and they have their own coherent philosophy. I want you to know what my philosophical positions are. You can better understand why I take certain positions if you know what my own beliefs and biases are. In terms of the four philosophies we will study, my position is eclectic; it shares elements from all four of the philosophies.

Let's look then at philosophical foundations. I believe all teachers have a philosophy of education. In other words, it is not optional for you to have a philosophy of education; you WILL have a philosophy of education. But for some people it is systematic and conscious. For most, it is un-stated and erratic. So, our choice is not whether we have a philosophy or not but whether we understand what our philosophy is. We all have a philosophy of education, but some of us understand it and use it in a systematic way. Other people don't understand their philosophy and as a result, they are not as consistent and they don't work with it as well. So let's look at the value of an intentional philosophy.

First of all, if we have an intentional philosophy and if we understand our philosophy and organize ourselves around that philosophy, then this helps us understand why people's responses differ. I hope, that by the end of the lecture, you will see how different people will respond in very different ways depending on what their philosophy is. And I hope you will begin to predict some of the different ways you will respond to common situations depending on your own philosophy.

As teachers we need to understand how our student's opinions are often shaped by our philosophical positions and how our interactions with each other will be shaped by our philosophical positions so that we will be less amazed why other people may respond differently than we do. We understand our responses will differ, and with this in mind, we gain control over our responses and style. It is very, very important that we increase our consistency. Students will have no trouble whatsoever learning that for some teachers if you turn something in late it is a cardinal sin. Students also learn that some teachers are a little more laid back and if you're a little bit late it's not much of a problem. But what kids have a hard time dealing with is if you're a hard-nose one day and laid back the next, they don't know how to act. So consistency is the name of the game. If you are consistent with your philosophy then you will help your students understand how they should respond. They can learn to respond "your way" but they can't deal with inconsistency. So if you understand your philosophical position and how the components of that position fit together, you're going to do a much better job of figuring out how to deal with your students in a way that they will admire.

For our purposes today we are going to organize philosophy around four different branches. The first branch is metaphysics. Metaphysics is the study of what is real. Some people use the word metaphysics to talk about other worldly things, spiritual things. But in the philosophical sense, metaphysics is used as the study and investigation of what is real. Epistemology is the study of what is true. There is a difference between what is real and what is true. Things can be real and not be true and things can be true and not be real. Axiology is the study of values. What is a value? That's Axiology: to know what to value, and how to value it. Do we value our similarities or do we value our differences? I argue that in a multicultural society, to value our differences are a positive thing and not a negative thing. There are some people who are trying to make everybody alike. They value the similarity of response. In Axiology, we study what is of value and how we come to decide what to value. The fourth category is logic. Logic is how we think clearly.

And so as we look at these four examples of substantially different philosophies, we are going to be studying each philosophy to understand their impact on educational practice. As we look at different branches of philosophy, be careful that you don't think that these are THE FOUR BRANCHES of philosophy. They are NOT THE FOUR. This is ONE WAY of organizing philosophy.

Four branches of philosophy:

Metaphysics--the study of what is real

Epistemology--the study of what is true

Axiology--the study of values

Logic--how one thinks clearly

Philosophers love to make distinctions between mind and brain, and soul, mind, and spirit. They're valid and I don't disparage them, but they are beyond the scope of what we are going to study. We are going to talk about mind and brain and intellect altogether as the stuff of what school is about. There are more distinctions to be made but we are not going to be dealing with those. Our purpose is to highlight the fact that philosophical beliefs influences and shapes our practices as educators and the responses we get from our students. I will try to highlight some of these differences.

The Perennialist will say that nature is constant; nature is out there and nature is what it's all about. Nature is the grand organizer of human experience. You can always count on good old Mother Nature. Sometimes you ask: "Why did he do this?" The reply, "Oh, it's just human nature." Whenever someone responds, "it's human nature," they're being a perennialist. They are assuming that human nature is something that cannot be changed. Some people say that we are just greedy by nature. Well, there are other positions. I believe that as human beings that we have two natures. I remind you this is my position based on my spiritual Baha'i beliefs. We have an animal side and a spiritual side and the animal side and spiritual side of our nature are in constant tension. That is a very different belief from the perennialist who says that human nature is out there and it is constant and that it's unitary. The perennialist will say that it is intellect that distinguishes man from beast, that our ability to think is what gives us consciousness ("I think therefore I am," a position asserted by Renee Descartes), and that our intellect discovers truth which is constant and changeless. Human nature is out there constant and changeless. Mother Nature is out there constant and changeless. And our ability to think and our intellect is there to discover this constant and changeless truth. We are learning from the great ideas of the past. Mortimer Adler is probably one of the greatest perennialists; he was the one who developed the great book series at the University of Chicago.

Now, in marked contrast to the perennialists, we have the Progressivists. Progressivism is at the other end of the scale from Perennialists. The Progressivists say that nature is ever changing. Just when you think you understand nature, nature is going to turn around and play a trick on you and change. Now, can you imagine two people in the same world, one believes that nature never changes and the other believes nature always changes, so obviously they are going to go about life in a very different way. Progressivists say we learn from problem solving and that we put ourselves in a context of problem solving, which is what makes the world go around. We learn how to learn. The Perennialists would say the really important thing is what we learn. The Progressivist would say the most important thing is learning how to learn. And I (Dwight Allen) would say that what we learn and how we learn are both important.

So we learn from problem solving. Education begins with the student. In the world of the perennialist, education begins with the mind. Progressivists would say that learning begins and education begins with the student. The perennialist would say that the school is the way it is and the Progressivist says the schools should be democratic. If we learn that schools should be democratic, if we believe that students should have input in the way schools are organized, that is a very different teacher than the teacher who believes that it is their responsibility to know it all and to get it all organized and just to give it to you - the student. One of the things that is very interesting about distance education, about having this on line format, this looks like it is all set in stone. We have all the lectures organized; they're on line. So it is really hard in this format to give you the impression - which is what I believe - that everything is open, that everything is subject to change. Think of these on line lectures as the markers as we go along, these are the guideposts. We teachers and students remain free to develop them and change them as we see fit.

Essentialists say that the mind is the essential element of reality (that's called idealism). Whereas the mind learns from the physical world and the contact with the physical world is called realism. So, realism and idealism by some definition are both branches of Essentialism. The Essentialist wants us to teach the essentials to live well in the modern world. The child is a learner to be shaped and developed. Now remember, from the Perennialist view, the child is there to learn from the ideas of the past and from Progressivist view, the child should have the opportunity to interact and to shape his or her own Learning. But the Essentialist says that the child is a learner to be shaped and developed. The Progressivist would have the child doing the shaping and developing as well as being shaped and developed. So there is a big difference there between Progressivism and Essentialism. Now the Existentialists, the folks who are way off the chart in the other direction, are the ones who say the child is free. Our job as teacher from an existentialist point of view is to think of the children as those beings that fit across our screen and as they go by we have little impact on them, but they are going on in their wonderful journey of freedom. And the most important thing for us to realize is that human nature is free. In many ways existentialism is a key philosophy of the United States, because existentialism is very much akin to the individualism of the United States. Everyone is free to do his or her own thing. The child is who he or she chooses to be and the child's quest is the quest for personal meaning. So the Existentialist has this view of the child on this quest, going on the journey of life, shaped by all of its experiences. You learn to be what you are; it's your job. Other people can help you, but it is basically your responsibility. And so, the answers for the Existentialist come from within and not from outside. I can suggest things to you if I am an Existentialist, but I have no idea what you are going to do with them. I just have to sit there and admire whatever you do with the ideas I teach you, because you are free. You are this wonderful being that is wandering on this journey of life. Whereas if I am a Progressivist, I have a real job to give you the skills to help you problem solve and to engage you in this democratic dialogue, because we are in this together. There is a difference between, "we are in it together" and "you are on your own."

Let's look at how different philosophical positions will influence the way you act as a teacher. If you are a Perennialist your job is to pass on the wisdom of the past. The wisdom is there and it's your job to pass it on. The Perennialist still likes to have up-to-date textbooks. You want the latest version of the past. I find that kind of quaint. Incidentally, we are always changing our mind about the past. The past isn't something that is stable at all. We keep having new ideas, interpreting history differently all the time. So that makes it a little tough on the Perennialist, who thinks that the knowledge is out there and it hasn't changed. The Progressivist thinks that we are teaching problem solving. For the Perennialist the job is to teach the kids "the stuff," to teach the concepts, and to teach a list of things. For the Progressivist, it's to teach the process of learning things. Whatever we teach, one of the main reasons we are teaching is to help people learn why we are teaching it. The Essentialist says that there is essential knowledge out there. Back to the basics. Actually it is both the Perennialist and the Essentialist that
would take you back to the basics, because both of them believe that there is a basic body of knowledge to be mastered. The Progressivist would say that there are basics as well, but their list would be a very different list than the list of the Perennialist or Essentialist. The Existentialist says education isn't all that much about knowledge at all. What education is about and the purpose of learning is to help the child confront freedom. We as teachers have the responsibility to be a whole lot more aware of our actions. If we are not aware of our actions then we pass along all sorts of misunderstandings to the kids. This then creates very definite consequences for the generations ahead. We can't afford to do that. The basic responsibility of teachers is to both preserve the heritage of the society and to help guide the society to the next century with new understandings. The place where I have the biggest problem with Perennialists and Essentialists is that the world that I see around me is a world that is constantly changing. And I can't imagine even thinking about the world as a place that doesn't change. Teaching kids how to learn, teaching kids how to find things is more important than teaching them a long list of things. But that is a philosophical position and there are people who would disagree with that and I respect that. Mortimer Adler would argue convincingly and people who are trained as Perennialists, function very well in society - that if you really read all of the great books and understood them and really mastered their ideas, you'd be all set to live in any world that anyone could dream up. Why? Because that world basically looks like it is changing but it isn't. That the essential ingredients go on the way they were. Well, I respectfully disagree. But you as a teacher have to understand where you come out on that scale. You have to understand how you are going to deal with the real or apparent changes around us. Take the textbook that you are studying which is the eighth edition. Well, one of the reasons textbook publishers publish new editions is because it increases sales. If you are lucky when you are done with this class and you are tired of the textbook you can turn it in and get half of the price you paid for it.

But, if you are the unlucky ones, that's 1/6 of all the students in ECI 300 who have the textbook the last semester of its edition, the new edition of this textbook comes out and you can't sell it back. You are stuck - or to put it another way, you are fondly encouraged to keep this textbook on your shelf for the wonderful memories it will hold from the wonderful time we have spent together. Is that a fair world? Did you do anything to make the brilliant choice to be in this class in a semester where the textbook doesn't become obsolete at the end of the semester? No, this is the roll of the dice. So, textbook publishers love to publish new textbooks every three years because that evaporates the used textbook market. But there are also true benefits. One of the reasons I am glad you have a new edition of the book, is that there is a good discussion of the Internet. Now, there couldn't have been a good discussion about the Internet three years ago because it wasn't around in the visible sense of the World Wide Web. We live in a world that is constantly changing and our philosophical position has to take that into consideration.

Let's look at the student. The Perennialist student has the job to learn what is taught. If you are a Perennialist, the student is a very passive person. You guys out here, you are my students. I am the teacher. You write down what I say and you learn what I say and that's it. No argument, no discussion, because it is my job as a competent teacher, to know what you must learn. And your job is to simply learn what is taught. If you learn what is taught you're going to be in great shape. That is what the Perennialist says.

Now the Progressivist would say, the child is naturally good and the child is going to learn by Doing. So my job as teacher is to get you more actively involved in the learning process. It is not enough for you to just learn what is taught, you have to actually experience it for yourself. You must learn how to internalize and learn the process of problem solving as well as learn the content you are dealing with.

The Essentialist says that the child will listen and learn. I think that the Essentialist position is quite close to the Perennialist position. The Essentialist child listens and learns. The Perennialist child learns what is taught. On quizzes I will try very hard to write most of the questions so as to not try and trap you in the distinction between Essentialism and Perennialism because I find that to be a distinction without much difference. I use these four philosophical positions because they parallel the textbook. If I were choosing, I would choose somewhat differently.

Now the Existentialist is way off the chart - they are wandering around "on their quest." The Existentialist says that the child is alone to discover meaning. As much as I don't find this position appealing, there is a level of reality to it because it is absolutely true that what I may be talking about may be quite different that what you are learning. Some of you are thinking about your boyfriends or girlfriends or what you are going to make for dinner tonight, and to that extent the Existentialist has a point -- that you are alone to discover meaning. As you are thinking about all those things in-between thinking about the things you are reading, you are making decisions about how to manage your learning time. So in the Existentialist position, as wild as it seems, there are really a lot of realistic things about Existentialism that are compelling. It is very compelling that whatever I teach, you learn what you choose to learn.

I am an eclectic because I believe there are benefits to be learned from all of these philosophical positions. The most important benefit, the big picture of this lecture today is the fact that if you can figure out how to make your philosophical position consistent and predictable, then you will be a more effective teacher. Your students will be able to learn to respond to any philosophical position that you choose to reflect so long as you are consistent enough so they can figure it out. The more you choose to help them figure it out, the more you can help them understand some of the dimensions that will allow them to be more effective students in your class. Students are more effective when they understand the perspective of the professor or the teacher and know how to respond to it. Your students will be more effective learners if they understand your position and learn how to respond to it. I hope as the semester goes on that from time to time you will notice philosophical undercurrents of what we are doing. You will notice that the kinds of things I am teaching you, the kinds of things I am recommending, are tied to a Progressivist point of view, an Existentialist point of view, or whatever. If you do that, it will just be an added plus, an added bonus to help with your learning. Perspective is one of the most powerful learning tools we have, and understanding philosophical underpinnings helps perspective.

Your personal philosophy does have a tremendous impact. We can all work together with different Philosophies, but the philosophy we have, will really influence and impact the way we go about what we do and our motivation for doing it. We should try to understand other peoples' motivation, why they do what they do. It's probably very hard for you to identify with my world because a few weeks before I wrote this I was in Zululand watching bare-breasted native's dance. That is a world that is very far away from the world of Norfolk, Virginia. But this is the world of traditional Zulu society in Southern Africa. This is a very real world for me, and you have a link to that world through me. So we are all linked together.

Now that world and those complex differences require us to have a different level of understanding than we did before. If you grew up in a homogeneous community, and we still have vestiges of that and there are still people who try to recreate that by retreating to a little suburb here or there, you get to a point where all the people are alike. You don't have to go back very long in Massachusetts. Cape Cod is a resort area, the escape area from Boston. Fifty years ago on Cape Cod they had the Jewish community, they had the Catholic community, and they had the Protestant community. If you went to Cape Cod in the summer time and you were Jewish, you'd go to the Jewish community and other people were not welcome. If you went to the Catholic recreation area, other people were not welcome. People who were alike got together and that was it that was their world. But these days that doesn't work anymore. We don't have those neat little separations. We all have to somehow learn to interact with each other and our choice is to either embrace that or resent it, but that is the way it is whether we like it or not. The reality of who we are is a complex, multicultural world. If we go about it in the right way, we can make that and advantage in the world rather than a disadvantage.

The United States is the most diverse nation on the face of the earth. We all are Americans of all sizes and shapes, colors, and religious orientations. We are all here together and to make that the strength that it really is, that is our challenge. Teachers are the first lines of that challenge. If teachers still believe that the world is somehow going to return to this nice little neatly categorized world somewhere, then teachers are the enemy as far as I'm concerned. No longer is society willing to say it's okay to be racist. There are still a lot of racist folks around, but it is not okay. More importantly, all of us are racist to some extent. We haven't really learned how to live together and we are racist whether we are black, white, or whatever. We all have inappropriate reactions based on our own heritage and we all have to learn how to deal with that. But we are making progress and at least the official position of the society no longer endorses that. In the past it did, but no longer. Now teachers are in the position of really helping to change that and help consolidate it. And your philosophical position is one of the things that will influence the way you go about that.