Voices

i found myself agreeing with very few of the philosophies presented by this reading. The two that i found myself agreeing with the most closely were the philosophies of Pesalozzi and Piaget.

I like the philosophies of Piaget because they were results based. Philosophies are great but honestly i want to know what works in education. Piaget's insistance on scaffolding was inspiring and insightful. I don't see how someone could believe in classroom that did not include scaffolding and co-operation. All human beings are social creatures and so it just makes sense that interpersonal learning benefits children.

Pesalozzi appealed to me because of his belief in teaching the whole student. I do not think teachers can afford to overlook the importance of the loving, caring relationship that pesalozzi stresses between teachers and students. Also, i think students need to be engaged in a range of topics to create well rounded students.

promising futures

For the most part, i feel like the core concepts in the promising futures booklet are concepts so central to the nature of education that needing to type them out as a focus for schools seems almost silly. For example, that every student is respected by both students and teachers is a must for schools, but for some reason even this most basic concept needs to be expressed in print and evaluated. I think that concepts 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, and 14 are the types of fundamentals that seem like they should be unspoken. For example, practice 11 is "Every teacher has sufficient time and resources to learn, to plan, and to confer with individual students, colleagues, and families." How could a teacher be expected to do their job without the resources and time that are required for the job? that practice seems to be just common sense that functions to call attention to the fact that teachers don't always have the time and resources though all schools should be trying to provide them. The core practices that I really pay attention to are the practices that help make connections through education. I think that too often high school feels like fragmented classes that have nothing to do with each other or with life and that should not be the outcome of education. I especially take notice of practices 3 and 6. I think that goal six is important because having an education plan will make students more engaged and responsible for their education. I strongly believe in the power of having self-directed students and think having students putting thought into what they want to get from their education will help produce students that are more personally engaged in their education. The possible downside would be students who don't know how they want to focus their education, but for those students obtaining a general knowledge of different subject matters to inform their decisions for later in life could be an education plan. Practice number 3 seems so important to me because i think students need to understand how the subjects work together to create each other. I especially notice the importance in linking history with English. I think about this more because English is my concentration but still making connections across all subject matters is essential to education.

8 philosophies

Essentialism: This school of thought believes that education should function to teach students a core set of information rather than to transmit underlying truths and morals. The belief is that all individuals need a certain set of information to function in society and that learning this information along with learning mental discipline can give students the the keys to function in society. This school of thought borrows equally from idealism and realism.

Behaviorism: Behaviorists believe that learning is best understood through a close examination of environment, behaviors, and responses. In short, they believe that the environment a student exists in will impact their outcome rather than believing that heritage will pre-determine the behavior and ability of a student. This school of thought is mostly versed in realism.

Positivism: This philosophy of education disregards notions of the mind, spirit, or consciousness. The theory is that education can only be understood in terms of matter and motion. That is to say that the tangible and quantifiable components of our world are the focus of positivism.

Progressivism: This philosophy favors answers and information based on the students experience of life to rooted facts. The idea is that students are taught how to think rather than what to think. This theory of learning naturally requires a flexible classroom environment.

Humanism: Humanism is essentially an existential frame of thought. Humanists believe that schools downplay the relationship between students and teachers and think this is wrong. Humanists believe in creating a self-actualizing person. The belief is that by centering education around the self, students become capable of better understanding academics.

Constructivism: this school of thought is based around hands-on, activity-based education. The idea behind constructivism is that by being allowed to explore, students are capable of creating their own frames of thought. Because the focus of the discipline is centered around helping students create their own frame of thought, this school of thought is primary considered an expression of existentialism.

I know the project was to find the eight philosophies but these six were the only ones that i found in the book and i don't know what the other two might be. I hope to bring this up in class.

For myself, i found that i mostly believed a combination of humanism and progressivism. I think that students are best taught by validating their thoughts and emotions. approaching the student as a complete individual rather than as just as a student allows students to become self-actualized. Self-actualization is something that i am increasingly noticing the importance of lately. I think that part of my inclination to these schools of philosophy is that my subject matter inherently leans towards expression.

the four philosophies

Before i talk about the four philosophies, let me first outline what the major components of each of the philosophies are. They are broken up into three major units that come together to form the whole of these philosophies. these are metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology. they are defined as such:

Metaphysics: Metaphysics is the investigation into reality. this is the part of the philosophy that questions what is reality. the metaphysical piece of the philosophy asks questions such as: "what is existence?", "how can you define human nature?", or "how do we perceive reality?" These questions are vague but essential to defining a philosophy of education.

Epistemology: This is investigation into the nature of knowledge. Epistemology wonders about the limits of knowledge, the source of knowledge, and the cognitive process. This area thinks about the ways of knowing and how that translates into a classroom

Axiology: The final branch of philosophies probes a basic human question, what is of value. Axiology seeks to answer questions about morals (ie. what is good, bad, right or wrong) and also to answer the nature of beauty.

now we are armed to begin discussing the philosophies.

Idealism: Idealists believe in the absolute. They believe that all things exist with a perfect form that can only be understood but can never truly be expressed in the physical limitations of our world. To them, only the concept of universal truth is real. let me give the example of a chair. To an idealist, a chair that we sit in is not the pinnacle of chair, but rather a physical expression of the ultimate truth that is "chair". Idealists search for truth believing that universal truth does exist and is the zenith of knowledge. because they believe in ultimate truths, they think that concepts such as beauty and morality are universal and can be realized for all rather than believing that these concepts are inherently in flux due to changes in social environment. Mostly, they value discussion and lecture since they believe that knowledge is absolute and does not need to be discussed once discovered. they value all students as capable of obtaining what is called the "Absolute Mind".

Realism: Realism is the polar opposite of Idealism. Realists believe that a chair is a chair rather than a manifestation of the concept of chair. To them, the tangible is more relevant than the idea. To a realist, the world around them relays knowledge and they believe that value is derived from nature. realists are more concrete than the vague idealists and believe that natural laws determine knowledge and morality. Realists favor the scientific method of investigation since they think knowledge can be gained by observing the real.

Pragmatism: To pragmatists, reality is determined by experience and interaction with ones environment. Reality is not absolute but a fluid perception of the world. In this school of philosophy, truth is not viewed as concrete. Truth is considered the version of truth that best fits a situation. This branch of philosophy focuses mostly on values rather than truth. The goal of the investigation of value is to determine what works for society. But to pragmatists, even these values cannot be determined universally. all things are in flux and the aim of pragmatism is to prepare individuals to navigate the changes and inconsistencies of truth.

Existentialism: Existentialists believe that meaning and purpose are not a part of the world in which we live. To the existentialist, the only meaning and purpose that surrounds a person is the one which we create. reality is a construct of the human and because they view all components of life as meaningless, existentialists hold as central to their belief that one should never stop questioning. The individual must decide what is reality for them. The individual must decide what is truth. The individual must decide what values to hold dear. To the existentialist, there is not ultimate means of deriving knowledge. logic, intuition, scientific method, it means nothing. what matters is questioning and introspectively creating a set of truths, values, and realities. this belief is unsettling since the individual is asked to derive meaning in an unstable environment that believes that there can never be a true "right" answer.

I find myself to be a little bit of a mix of pragmatism and existentialism. I do understand, to an extent the way in which concepts of truth are created by a social context but ultimately i find myself leaning to the belief that all human beings need to create for themselves their own sense of truth and beauty. reality i guess i look at differently. I think reality is concrete and can be understood by looking hard at a situation from an objective standpoint. I believe in universal truths that are different for all individuals. i know that nearly sounds like an oxymoron but allow me to attempt to explain. the central concept to my philosophy for life is balance. I find that i am happiest when i find myself centered, reflective, and peaceful. For me, this involves a combination of social involvement, personal reflectiveness (mostly through yoga and personal writing), and varying levels of devotion to all aspects of my life. That being said, i know that the balance that works for me is not the balance that would work for all individuals. i think everyone needs to find their own sense of balance. I think i have come to answer to this question over the course of writing about it and i think that answer is that i mostly align myself with existentialism