Philosophical Perspectives in Education

William Allan Kritsonis, PhD

Questions for Consideration

1. How can philosophical inquiry aid the educational leader in examining

problems and decisions facing education in general, and a district or a

campus in particular?

2. How is it possible for educational leaders to create educational theories

and even policies from examining and extrapolating from the various

philosophical systems?

3. How can the study of philosophy, viewed from an educational focus,

stimulate teachers and administrators to think about education in general

terms and for the general good of students; and how will these studies

help to avert empty promises of panaceas, or the lure of subscribing to

propagandistic slogans which mean little to the goals of education?

4. The eleven educational philosophies/theories discussed in this chapter

can be clustered into two major groups. The philosophies within these

groups have strong parallels and the general comparisons can simplify

the process of identifying them. Make a “t-chart” with a “traditional”

heading on one side and “non-traditional” on the other. Place each of the

philosophies on one side or the other as you read.

This chapter is a summary of the major philosophical perspectives in

education. The purpose of this chapter is to assist the reader in relearning,

classifying, comparing, contrasting, and analyzing these philosophical

perspectives. Ultimately, self-analysis and self-evaluation of our own

philosophies of leadership and teaching will result in more deliberate,

purposeful decision making in relation to our visions and goals. The chapter

is divided into the following sections: 1) Potential questions to consider for

preparation for the Comprehensive exams. Our final exam for the

Philosophical Perspectives class had six excellent question, of which I have

included three that have the most likely application to our daily practice as

educators; 2) key terms and definitions; 3) an introduction on why educators

should study philosophy; 4) Idealism; 5) Realism; 6) Naturalism; 7)

Pragmatism; 8) Progressivism; 9) Existentialism; 10) Essentialism; 11)

Perennialism; 12) Social Reconstructionism; 13) Critical Theory; 14)

suggested follow-up activities for application to your personal experiences;

and 15) internet links to relevant sites for each of the philosophies.

Introduction: Why Study Philosophy?

The great philosophers have struggled with the dualistic dilemma of

mind and body for thousands of years. Educators, too, have a dualistic

dilemma between theory and practice: The classroom theories of

professional training and thought, to the classroom practice of professional

action. Gerald Gutek, in Philosophical and Ideological Perspectives on

Education, writes that “theory without practice is insufficient; practice

unguided by theory is aimless” (1). The purpose of studying philosophical

perspectives in education is, ideally, to give aim to the myriad of “practices”

that are being proposed in our current era of educational reform.

When we talk about “philosophy” we are talking about how one views

the world. Every philosophy has an ontology (a view of what reality is), an

epistemology (a view of how we know about that reality), and an axiology

(those concepts that are valued within this reality). How one view’s reality

(ontology) shapes his/her beliefs about knowledge (epistemology). A

particular perspective of reality assumes, or is based on, specific conceptions

of human nature. This chapter’s summary of philosophical perspectives in

education will focus on Idealism, Realism, Thomism, Naturalism,

Pragmatism, Progressivism, Existentialism, Essentialism, Perennialism,

Social Reconstructivism, and Critical Theory.

“Education” refers to the process of enculturation of a society’s young

into the cultural life of the community. This enculturation happens

informally in the society through the family, church, media, government,

and peers. It also occurs more formally in the school setting. Therefore,

philosophers have long recognized the importance of the interaction between

human beings and society. Education, then, is the transmission of values.

The powerful philosophies that have transcended time have also shaped our

view of the world and our view of human nature, and, therefore, our view of

education. The perspective of a philosophy in education must be discussed

in terms other than ontology, epistemology, and axiology. It must

investigate how reality is taught, how truth is taught, why schools exist,

what should be taught (the curriculum), the role of the teacher, the role of

the student, and the school’s attitude toward change.

Two and a half years ago, Cohort VIII presented in depth self-

analyses of leadership style and teaching style in terms of the major

philosophical “isms” mentioned above. To a person, we were amazed at

how our “personal philosophies” were actually a combination of many, if

not all, of the “isms” in one way or another. An analysis of one class period

would likely reveal many of the “isms” being implemented, often

contradictory ones. How does this ‘meritage’ of philosophical ideas survive

in our supposedly rational minds? The study of philosophical perspectives

as systems of thought require us to use the scientific method of analysis to

pull apart the numerous world-views that have been proposed in order to

understand the individual parts more clearly. It is like an inquisitive

youngster who takes apart the lawnmower to understand how it works. In

one pile of parts he/she investigates the workings of the ignition system.

Another pile contains parts that deal with the rotation of the blade. A study

of the individual parts allows for a deeper understanding of how the entire

lawnmower interacts as a system when it is put back together again.

Similarly, in this chapter, we will pull out the different philosophical

perspectives in education with the hope of having a better understanding of

ourselves when they are reassembled. It is this reflective process that creates

consciousness of the theories that underpin our practices. With this

awareness we can evaluate our practices as teachers and administrators

within the context of the educational missions of our district, state, and

nation. In this way, philosophy of education can help us avoid “promises of

panaceas or … propagandistic slogans…” and “encourage teachers to

examine and to formulate the broad personal and professional goals that

should guide educational practice” (Gutek, 10). How appropriate that

Plato’s famous line of “know thyself” is also the purpose of this inquiry.

We must know ourselves as educators in order for our practice to have aim!

Idealism

In Socrates’ and Plato’s era, those known as Sophists proposed one of

the dominant theories of philosophical ethics. The word sophist stimulates

thoughts of “sophomore” (wise fool) and “sophistry” (deceitful

argumentation), but simply stated it was a belief in the relativity of beliefs

about concepts such as truth, beauty, and good. The sophists argued for

situational ethics, which means that truth, beauty, and good change based on

the experiential circumstances of the individual. Therefore, ethics will

change when circumstances change. The sophists believed that education

could be achieved through specialized vocational or professional training

that fit the individual. The emphasis was on specialization.

From a modern anthropological perspective, the sophists have much

in common with our society’s efforts to foster cultural understanding,

religious tolerance, and even acceptance of economically influenced social

behaviors. The term “situational ethics” stirs images of “situational

leadership”, not so much in a consistency of beliefs but in the procedural

interactions with changing circumstances. The Sophists claim that changing

experiences and circumstances impacts ethics. This view hints of

‘primordial’ existentialism. A strong argument can be made that the

Sophists were professing a world-view similar to the more eloquent writings

of later existentialists Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Sartre.

As a student of Socrates and teacher of Aristotle, the Greek

philosopher Plato is considered to be the founder of the western philosophy

of Idealism. Socrates and Plato developed a philosophical system that

responded directly to the dominant Sophists of the day, and created the

foundation for philosophical inquiry by western civilization. Plato’s major

works include The Republic, Protagoras, and Phaedo. Plato’s Cave

Allegory, which has achieved icon status in western learning, defines reality

as the world of the mind. Plato believed that all knowledge of the universe

had an underlying unity and that through the trauma of birth humans lost

memory of this universal knowledge. Therefore, the purpose of education,

and LIFE, was to journey inward into one’s own mind to “educe”, or pull

out, the universal knowledge that existed within. Thus the famous mantra of

“know thyself.” The journey inward is achieved through the Socratic

method of questioning, and dialogue with others as a means to question

ourselves. Through such reflective questioning, Plato believed the universal

(big ‘T’) Truths could be learned.

The cave serves as a symbol for the world where people do not know

themselves, but instead only see man made shadows of ideas. Because of

the lack of inquiry about these shadows, people believe them to be (little ‘t’)

truths. For Plato, the lack of inquiry of one’s own mind results in self-

deception. Such self-deception is equated to imprisonment as the people of

the cave are chained. Freedom is achieved through the arduous journey out

of the cave to the light where the universal Truths will be understood. At

that point, the newly “enlightened” philosopher should return to the cave to

lead, guide, and rescue others. The parallels to western religion and teaching

are astounding. God/Allah/Yahweh is a universal Being and All Knowing

often represented as the light that will lead mankind from darkness. Yet He

lives “within” everyone and individually people must seek Him. This

journey can be difficult and may require difficult changes in a person’s life

and lifestyle. When an individual becomes enlightened to this Universal

Knowledge, he or she should return to lead, guide, and rescue others.

Christianity and Islam in particular have evangelical elements that have

made them two of the most prolific religions in the world.

Plato’s impact on western philosophy reaches far into history to our

modern times, which is why subsequent philosophical perspectives in

education will have elements that are similar to Plato’s Idealism and other

philosophies in between. Nietzsche, regardless of personal opinions of his

work, offers a good definition of knowledge: “the strength of knowledge

does not depend on its degree of truth but on its age, on the degree to which

it has been incorporated…” (The Gay Science, 169-70).

The ontology (what is reality) of Plato is the world of the mind. It is

in the world of the mind where one sees universal Truths or the shadowy

truths. Plato’s epistemology (how do we know) is that ideas are universal

and therefore consistent, allowing knowledge to be recognized like a

reminiscence of the universal ideas that exist within all of our minds.

Idealist axiology (values) is the imitation of the ideal self or emulation of an

‘enlightened’ persona. Based on the Idealist ontology, epistemology, and

axiology, we can understand the Idealist perspective in education. To teach

reality Idealists teach subjects that inquire about the mind such as literature,

philosophy, and religion. Teaching Truth is accomplished through teaching

ideas using lecture and discussion. Lecture and discussion as a teaching

method is consistent with the role of the teacher as a person to be emulated,

the enlightened one, and that goodness is taught through the imitation of

heroes and exemplars. The Idealist educator believes strongly in his or her

role as an exemplar for students. The purpose of a school’s existence is to

sharpen minds and the intellectual process so that students can learn the

“wisdom of the ages” (the Idealist curriculum). The great works that profess

the wisdom of the ages in themselves become exemplars of intellectual

thinking to be emulated. The role of the student is to receive and memorize

knowledge. Students do not create knowledge because knowledge already

exists universally. From an Idealist perspective, since Truth cannot be

changed it must be preserved which means that an Idealist school would be

against changes that threaten the pursuit of the world of the mind. The

Conservatism of Edmund Burke in the 18th century is a more modern

application of Idealism in that he reacted against the revolutionary changes

of his century. He believed in the “accumulated wisdom of the human race,

as a force for social stability” (Gutek, 198).

Realism

Plato’s greatest student was also his greatest critic. After studying

under Plato, Aristotle challenged the Idealist ontology of the world of the

mind as a result of his scientific inquiries into the natural world. Aristotle

created a hierarchy of nature. At the bottom were inanimate objects, such as

rocks, and progressively ranking plant and animal life forms with humans at

the top. What placed humans at the top, according to Aristotle, was the

ability to reason. Aristotle has been called the “Father of Science” because

of his methodical inquiries into the natural world, but when such methods

are built on Plato’s emphasis of self-inquiry, these two Greek philosophers

created a methodology for philosophical inquiry that has permeated the last

two thousand years. Philosophical inquiry has become self-examination

using the scientific method of inquiry. Aristotle’s scientific study of

material, objective reality did not completely disregard his Idealist teacher.

Aristotle believed that humans also possessed a soul, or mind, thus setting

up the great philosophical dilemma about the duality of human nature (mind

and body). Aristotle believed that humankind had the goal to progress

toward happiness, which could be achieved through the sharpening of

reason.

The ontology (reality) for Realism is a world of things.

Epistemologically (how we know), Realists use their senses of observation.

Unlike Idealism, Realism believes that the universal “Truths” exist in front

of us. We don’t discover those “Truths” through reflective inquiry, but

through the application of scientific reasoning. The axiology of Realism

(values), therefore, is the laws of nature that can be revealed through the

application of scientific reason. Teaching reality is done through subjects of

the physical world such as math and science. The purpose of a school’s

existence, then, is to reveal the order of the world and universe, and the

curriculum should teach the laws of physical reality. The curriculum should

also include liberal arts, which sharpen the development of rationality. The

role of the Realist teacher is to display and impart knowledge while the

student manipulates the knowledge and is at best a passive participant.

Since Realists believe that humankind is working toward a “goal”, change is

seen as positive as long as it is orderly. Truth in the Realist school would be

taught for “mastery of information” with the ability to demonstrate or recite

learned material. Basic intellectual access to knowledge is necessary in

order for scientific reasoning that requires problem solving, analysis, and

evaluation.

The Theistic Realism of Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century was an

important step in the survival of Realism in the Age of Faith. Aquinas’

Summa Theologiae successfully argued that reason and faith are

complimentary rather than contradictory as he attempted to synthesize

Aristotle’s philosophy with Christian doctrines. Like Aristotle, Aquinas saw

humankind working toward a greater good on earth, but added that the

ultimate good was the experience of being in the presence of God. Reason

was necessary for the implementation of free will. The ontology,

epistemology, and axiology of Theistic Realism are the same as Realism, but

there are some variations in the perspective of Theistic Realism, or

Thomism, in education. Thomists believe that human beings should

cultivate both spirituality and reason. Aquinas noted that knowledge does

not necessarily lead to morality, so moral education should require the use of

reason to recognize and evaluate “courses of action” (Gutek, 54). Moral

education is an issue that our schools are currently dealing with. Some

politicians believe/argue that poor test scores are a reflection of lower moral

standards. A Thomist would assert that the parent is the primary educator of

a child because they cultivate the “values that support morality, religion, and

education” (Gutek, 56). Research has been accumulating to support the

importance of the role of parental involvement in the academic achievement

of a child, and the influence of home life situations that support a child’s

academic endeavors, or identifies him/her as “at-risk.” Finally, the Thomist

teacher “should be a skilled communicator…” using words correctly, and

communicating within the realm of the student’s experience. The Thomist

teacher should lead a student to new educational outcomes based on what

the student already knows, which requires “careful structuring and

organizing of lessons” (Gutek, 57). Essentially, an orderly, rational

approach to the lesson will lead the student forward. For many Thomists,

and many teachers today, teaching comes from a love of learning and a call

“to serve humanity” (Gutek, 57).

Naturalism

Idealists, Realists, and Thomists have clear lines of demarcation from

one another, but the development of Naturalism in the early 18th century, and

it’s evolution in to the late 19th century, reveals a new view of human nature.

The three primary Naturalists are Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Heinrich

Pestalozzi, and Herbert Spencer. Rousseau often revealed a romantic view

of human nature, Pestalozzi retained a belief in God, and Spencer adapted

Darwin’s evolutionary theories into a competitive ethical system (Gutek,

63). Despite these differences, Naturalists share three common beliefs: 1)

“one must look to nature and to human nature, as part of the natural order,

for the purposes of education”, 2) we understand nature “through the

senses”, and 3) because “nature’s processes are slow…education also should

be unhurried” (Gutek, 63).

The ontology (reality) for Naturalism is nature itself. Naturalists

believe that human nature is defined by the interaction of human beings with

their environment, therefore, “there is no single order of reality” (Gutek, 63).

The subjectivity of human nature is thus introduced … a clear separation

from the objectivity of Idealism and Realism. If human nature is defined

through interaction with nature, the epistemology (how we know) of

Naturalism is observing results using the scientific method of inquiry. A

child can learn how to do something through trial and error. The axiology

(values) of Naturalism is to harmonize one’s life more closely with nature.

Notice how harmony with nature as a goal has replaced Plato’s universal

Truths, Aristotle’s happiness, and Aquinas’ presence of God. Teaching the

reality of Naturalism, if reality is nature itself, is achieved by observation of

nature. Nature will teach us what is real and truth can be learned through

experiences and discoveries, and interactions with others. Nature is the

teacher. The role of the ‘human teacher’ is that of a facilitator that

verbalizes little, focuses on the child’s growth development, and allows the

child to discover in a self-directed, unhurried pace. The role of the

Naturalist teacher is also very different from that of the verbal teacher in

Idealism, Realism, and Thomism. The Naturalist student is involved and

interactive rather than a passive receptacle of pre-existing knowledge. In

this context, schools exist to provide ‘guidance’ over a twenty-year period

until the student develops the habit of being a life long learner. The

curriculum should consist of practical subjects that allow for the mastery of

nature. Naturalist educators see change as a part of nature but warn of the

role of society in the development of character. Since character

development is currently a hot educational issue, it is interesting to note that

Rousseau clarified the difference between two types of self-esteem. The

first was amour de soi, or the intrinsic love of being, and amour propre, or

pride. Rousseau believed that intrinsic love of being could be learned from

nature, but pride and selfishness would be learned from society. Here, the

issue of self-esteem has entered the education lexicon, and would remain a

critical element of educational perspectives up to today.

Pestalozzi (1747-1827) is believed to be the Naturalist who had the

greatest impact on the development of American schools. His life coincided

with the events of the French Revolution and the early nation building of the

young United States. As with Rousseau, Pestalozzi likely received a

traditional education founded on the principles of Idealism and Realism.

Therefore, elements of both will be evident in Naturalism. Like the Realists,

Pestalozzi believed that reason was the key to understanding the natural laws

of the universe. The purpose of studying those laws is where he and the

other Naturalists differed. Pestalozzi argued that children are naturally good

and are only corrupted by society. Therefore, children could be made to be

good through education in spite of their parents and society. In the inner

cities and impoverished rural areas of the United States, the belief of

education as an equalizer, as a tool to create “good” people regardless of

sociological background, is central to the belief that education is critical to

democracy (as argued by Thomas Jefferson and Horace Mann).

Darwin’s Origin of Species, an example of the use of reason to

discover the natural law of specie diversification, inadvertently brought forth

a new twist on Naturalism. Evolutionary Naturalism became popular in its

argument that humankind successfully adapted to a changing natural

environment. Herbert Spencer, however, transferred the natural law to

society, arguing that individuals and even nations compete for survival, and

only the most fit will adapt to the changing social environment being created

by the industrial revolution. Spencer saw education as preparation for a

competitive world and emphasized early identification of skills and talents to

determine where a child’s energies could produce the most beneficial

education for his survival. The undemocratic language of such beliefs is

perhaps one of the reasons that “tracking” as an educational practice, is

considered unethical.

Naturalism took several turns, all of which have influenced our

educational practices, yet the primary contribution is the perspective that

nature (environment) influences the development of human beings (physical,

intellectual, and social). Naturalism serves as a springboard for perhaps the

most influential philosophy in American education; John Dewey’s

Pragmatism, and the introduction of human development as a psychological

process resulting from interaction with a subjective environment.

Pragmatism

Pragmatism is the first educational philosophy credited to American

origin. Despite the demarcation from Idealism, Realism, and Thomism to

Naturalism, these philosophies shared a common view of reality, “in which

truth is a priori, or prior to and independent of human experience” (Gutek,

78). Even the Naturalists who leaned more toward subjectivity believed in

natural laws that could be discovered through reason. Naturalism can be

understood as a bridge between the traditional philosophies of Idealism and

Realism, and Pragmatism. Pragmatism took a step in a different direction in

that it asserted that “truth was … derived from human experience” (Gutek,

78). Gutek argues that Pragmatism is an expression of America’s frontier

experience from the preceding century (1800’s) in which success was

“judged in terms of the consequences that came from transforming the

environment for human purposes” (79). Pragmatism developed in the social

atmosphere of the Industrial Revolution in the last forty years of the 19th

century. Despite the enormous wealth and the growing reputation of

America as the land of financial opportunity, underneath the gild of gold

were the social side effects of industrialization: child labor, filthy tenements,

political corruption, proliferation of disease, toxic food and drugs, a rising

consciousness of social stratification, and undemocratic conduct by big

business and government. The political Progressive movement that

addressed the social problems of industrial America was the backdrop of

John Dewey’s Pragmatism. Progressives set out to change society through

social reform. Dewey, like the American frontiersmen and pioneers that

expanded west, believed in practical application of ideas. Therefore, Dewey

believed that philosophy should solve human problems.

Although Dewey would later disagree with the Progressive

perspective of education, he was himself a Progressive, and he believed he

had a mission to “make the earth a better place to live, by reform and

education” (Gutek, 80). One of the earliest influences on Dewey was his

colleague George Herbert Mead. Mead developed a theory that children

learn through play, and thus, early childhood education could use play as a

connection to later activities, such as work (Gutek, 81). Like the Naturalists,

Dewey believed that a child learns through interaction with his/her

environment (a social environment in this case, rather than nature). For

Dewey’s philosophy of Pragmatism, the ontology (reality) is a world of

experiences. His epistemology (how we know) is still based on sensations,

but is subjective in that individuals experience sensations differently. In

Pragmatism, the school serves a social function for society by providing a

place where “children’s individual tendencies were to be directed toward

cooperative living in the school community” (Gutek, 82). The curriculum

required the “language, skills, and knowledge common to group life” and,

therefore, makes education “a deliberate process of bringing the immature

person into cultural participation by providing the necessary symbolic and

linguistic tools needed for group interaction and communication” (Gutek,

93). In this way, education serves the purpose of transmitting cultural skills,

knowledge, and values to perpetuate the cultural heritage. However, for

Dewey this meant providing the students with the skills, knowledge, and

values to improve social conditions. Subjects include social sciences such as

history and geography, organized sciences, and “making and doing” (Gutek,

99). Dewey’s Pragmatism closed the gap between theory and practice

(thought and action). The curriculum of Pragmatism is one of “making and

doing.” Modern examples of this are not “hands-on” activities as is often

assumed. A better example would be a “hands-on” project that requires the

cooperation of several students.

In the Pragmatist perspective of education, the student is an active

participant and contributes to the learning process. Dewey believed that

teacher questioning (as is the tradition of Idealism and Realism) imposed

external discipline. Instead, activities are problem oriented and required

self-direction and self-discipline. The teacher became a resource person, or

a guide. The role of the teacher is similar to Naturalism, but Dewey’s

Pragmatic student had more focused objectives in his/her learning than

Rousseau’s.

Because of Dewey’s Laboratory School, Pragmatism is also referred

to as Experimentalism. In this phrase we understand the axiology (values)

of Pragmatism. Commonly known as “the public test”, Dewey argued that

how children conducted themselves in the greater society would be a

measurable, pragmatic consequence of their education. As a member of a

society that was experiencing massive immigration in the late 1800’s and

early 1900’s, Dewey was a “moral relativist.” He believed that hierarchical

arrangements of value systems in his modern world created the need to

resolve cross-cultural conflicts. Gutek writes that “the basis of

Experimentalist valuation was found in human preferences, wants, wishes,

desires, and needs” (92). Dewey’s axiology is still relevant today with a

world wide, digitally based economy about to blossom. Americans no

longer wait for the world to come to them; the Internet takes Americans to

the world. The problem of cultural conflict, in Pragmatism, offers a society

the opportunity for “growth of social intelligence and enrichment” (Gutek,

92). Teaching “Truth” through Pragmatism is done through problem solving

and projects, both of which are seen as the basis of social progress.

Progressivism

Progressivism, like Pragmatism, has a strong foothold in Naturalism

while at the same time looking for ways to improve and perfect human

environments by applying intelligence and the scientific method. Human

beings, in this context, are capable of ‘progress’. Progressivism in education

is part of Progressivism in the United States. Progressives such as Woodrow

Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Jane Adams, and Upton Sinclair (to name a

few) used their position as educated citizens to fight the corruptions of

industrial society. Progressives were sometimes called ‘muckrakers’ for

their strategy of digging up unseemly stories of corporate giants. Dewey

would eventually criticize Progressive education as a reaction to traditional

education (Idealism, Realism, and Thomism). That is why Dewey

developed philosophy with pragmatic applications.

The ontology (reality) of Progressivism is that through interaction

with the environment, people grow and develop. Progressive epistemology

(how we know) states that knowledge is the outcome of inquiry and

interaction. Progressive axiology (values) is anything that promotes growth.

Progressives teach their view of reality with subject matter that is associated

with the personal experiences of the children and through interaction with

the environment. This sounds very similar to the Constructivist theory of

learning. Schools exist, for the Progressivist, to serve as a laboratory for

experimentation because the focus is on the growth of the child and not on

the subject matter. The curriculum is similar to Dewey’s Pragmatism in that

there is a focus on group activities, experiences, problem solving, and

projects. The Progressive teacher serves as a resource person and facilitator

of knowledge while the student is free to develop naturally through active

participation. Progressives, like the Naturalists, believed in a child-centered

curriculum. Finally, since the Progressive reality is growth and

development, Progressives are receptive to change in schools that are

associated with the needs of child growth and development.

Existentialism

While Dewey, as a citizen of the Industrial Revolution, wanted

Pragmatism to prepare children to make society better, Existentialism that

began approximately around the same time wanted to free the individual

from “the herd, the crowd, or the mass society” of the Industrial Age (Gutek,

108). Like the Pragmatists, the Existentialists recognized that

industrialization brought as many ills to civilization as it did benefits.

Prominent Existentialists of the 19th century include Soren Kierkegaard,

Freidrich Nietzsche, and Fyodor Dostoyevsky. In the 20th century, Martin

Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre have written some of the most influential

works. Overall, however, Existentialism is not so much a system of thought

as it is a philosophical perspective (Gutek, 107).

Where Dewey’s Pragmatism argued that truth was based on human

experience, the Existentialists argued that truth IS subjectivity (the title of

Kierkegaard’s famous work). In the search for absolutes, or big “T” truths,

Existentialists argue that the only truth that exists for all humankind is that

each individual lives a completely subjective life, with a world-view based

on that individual’s personal experiences. Previous philosophies held the

belief that humankind had an essence prior to existence. In other words, that

there was a ‘human nature’. Existentialists take the interaction between an

individual and his/her environment to its logical conclusion by writing that

existence precedes essence. In other words, there is no human nature until

the individual is born into the world. At that point, like Rousseau and

Pestalozzi, the child is a tabla rasa, or blank slate, onto which the

experiences of life will combine and evolve into a subjective worldview,

with subjective values for that individual. Individuals can communicate

within a society because of similar experiences. However, the previous

experiences and the new experiences that are combined with and the

complex valuations that take place cannot be the same for any two

individuals.

As the Industrial Age flourished, Existentialists revolted against the

objectification of mass society. For an Existentialist, freedom of choice is a

recurring theme, and emphasis is turned from reason to ‘passion’ as a

driving force in human development. Sartre contradicts Aristotle’s belief

that people are rational creatures. Sartre argues that each person freely

chooses his/her own meaning, or essence, because there are no universal

truths or goals that humanity is striving toward. With this absolute freedom

of choice comes responsibility. Nietzsche wrote, in The Gay Science,

“thoughts are the shadows of our feelings – always darker, emptier, and

simpler” (203). Here Nietzsche places passion above reason because reason

is merely a tool to try to understand the complexities of human emotion…to

use words to describe the indescribable.

Existentialism, as a philosophical perspective in education, is

concerned with mass education in school systems that reflect the factory

model of the industrial era. Existentialists believe that the use of the

scientific method to analyze people breaks down “the quality of human

experience into measurable and quantified responses” (Gutek, 114). One

way for Existentialists to inquire about the human experience is a process

known as Phenomenology, which is a method of analyzing conscious

awareness of experiences of how objects or events appear to the individual.

Therefore, the Existential epistemology (how do we know) is personal,

subjective choice. The axiology (value) of an Existentialist is freedom.

Teaching the Existential reality, the world of existing, can be

accomplished through art, ethics, or philosophy. If truth is subjectivity, then

teaching truth is a process of arousing student awareness of his/her

subjectivity. This can be accomplished through Socratic questioning and

dialogue, but unlike the Idealists, the Existential teacher does not know the

answers, and only the student can construct the meaning. The role of the

teacher, then, is one of questioner, and assists the student’s personal journey.

The student’s role is self-determined. Despite the differences from the

ontology and epistemology of Plato’s Idealism, the role of teacher as a guide

for the student’s personal inward journey is interestingly similar. Regarding

change, Existentialism is the exact opposite of Idealism. While Idealism is

anti-change, Existentialism understands that change is required at all times.

Existentialism serves an important role in modern schools because of its role

in the development of humanistic psychology that focuses on the

development of identity rather than breaking an individual down into a set of

identifiable impulses.

Essentialism

Essentialism is an educational philosophy that involves a return to the

basic skills, arts, and sciences that have been useful in the past and will

likely be useful in the future. This theory has had a long history in the

United States and reemerges whenever the issue of school efficiency and

productivity is questioned. There are six primary themes of Essentialism: 1)

elementary curriculum should focus on reading and math literacy, 2)

secondary curriculum should focus on math, science, language, and

literature, 3) discipline is needed for a proper learning environment, 4)

respect for legitimate authority, 5) students must put forth effort to master

knowledge and skills, and 6) teachers must be mature and well-educated in

their subject area. The authors of A Nation at Risk would be considered

Essentialists (Gutek, 266). In this context, the last 20 years of reform as a

result of A Nation at Risk can be interpreted, in part, as an Essentialist

movement. The College Board (Advanced Placement program) produced

Academic Preparation for College, which outlined the essential skills

needed to work in college. The Advanced Placement program, therefore,

has capitalized on the Essentialist revival of late.

The ontology (reality), epistemology (how we know), and axiology

(values) of Essentialism are very similar to the traditional philosophies of

Idealism, Realism, and Thomism, while at the same time oppositional to

Naturalism, Pragmatism, and Existentialism. The ontology of Essentialism

is a world of the mind and things. The role of the Essentialist school is to

transmit cultural elements. The mission is academic not social. The

curriculum of Essentialism is subject-matter curriculum, “organized

according to carefully arranged principles of scope and sequence” (Gutek,

274). The Essentialist teacher is an academic authority figure.

Perennialism

The Perennialists theory of education is closely related to, and based

on Realism and Thomism. Perennialism believes that human nature is

constant. The ontology (reality) of Perennialism is a world of God and

reason. Epistemologically (how we know), Perennialists rely on the

cultivation of reason and revelation, and their axiology (values) are

rationality and intellect. Perennialism is most closely associated with the

Catholic school system. Schools exist to develop reason and reveal God’s

will, teaching the reality of a world of God and reason through disciplinary

subjects and doctrine. This statement alone explains why Perennialists are

sometimes referred to as Neo-Thomists. The curriculum of a Perennialist

school is the “great books”, or classics of the Western world. The role of the

teacher is to tell students what they need to know, or to interpret the great

books for the students. A Perennialist teacher should have a liberal arts and

science background. Like Realism, the Perennialist student is a passive

receptacle. Since human nature is a constant to the Perennialist, no real

change is needed. Perennialists, like the Essentialists, cry out against

believed erosion of academic standards. The Perennialist extends the

erosion to ethical standards as well. Social Reconstructionists argue that

Perennialism is nothing more than a Eurocentric ideology to support

historically dominant institutions.

Social Reconstructionism

Social Reconstructionist oppose the conservative Essentialist and

Perennialist theories regarded to be “reflective theories that mirror inherited

social patterns and values” (Gutek, 307). According to Gutek, Social

Reconstructionists claim to follow the Pragmatism of John Dewey but want

to move beyond reconstructing the individual’s experience to reconstruction

of the social and cultural experience (307). The various forms of Social

Reconstructivism that have developed share three common premises: 1) “all

philosophies, ideologies, and theories are culturally based and emerge from

specific cultural patterns, 2) culture, as a dynamic process, is growing and

changing, and 3) human beings can refashion culture so that it promotes

human growth and development” (Gutek, 307). Social Reconstructionists

reject Realism, Thomism, Essentialism, and Perennialism because they are

all based on “abstract categories of unchanging reality, human nature, truth,

and value” (Gutek, 307). In essence, Social Reconstructionists want

students to be able to evaluate the beliefs and values of their society. Those

beliefs and values that are determined to exist because of custom should be

reconstructed. Science and technology can be used to achieve goals of

social reconstruction and to solve the modern societal crisis of economic

inequalities based on ethnicity. Social Reconstructionists believe that

Americans have not adequately distinguished the difference between

“schooling” and “education.” Americans have a faith in the power of

schooling to solve all problems and saw it as an entity isolated from

economic, social, and political influences. The Nazi’s of Germany and

Soviet Communists demonstrated how school could be used to serve the

interests of the dominant institutions.

When Social Reconstructionists argue for using schools to create a

new social order, they often hear charges of ‘indoctrination.’

Reconstructionists, however, believe that “schools are to identify the major

social problems that contribute to the cultural crisis and are to create the

skills and attitudes that will resolve these problems” (Gutek, 319). The

ontology (reality) of Social Reconstructivism is similar to Progressive

beliefs but is rooted in cultural experiences. The epistemology (how we

know) has several overlapping principals including truth seeking as a social

consciousness, and inquiry through the ‘group mind.’ The axiology (values)

of Social Reconstructionists is social self-realization. Reality is best taught

through history, especially history that focuses on social struggle. Human

survival and education are seen as interrelated. Schools exist for

Reconstructivism to awaken social consciousness and to create equality in

both society and education. The curriculum, therefore, would focus on

problem solving and cooperative learning in the social sciences, such as

economics, anthropology, sociology, political science, and psychology. The

Social Reconstructivist teacher facilitates student growth through problem

solving, group activities, and cooperative learning. The student uses

problem solving as a means to achieve greater social consciousness. Finally,

the school’s attitude toward change is centered on social change since

students must develop social self-realization.

Critical Theory

Brief mention of Critical Theory is needed because of a renewed

interest in multicultural education. Critical Theorists, like the Social

Reconstructionists, argue for an agenda that would transform schools and

society. Critical Theorists see “schools, curriculum, teaching, and learning

as agencies and activities that transcend the exclusively academic and have

important political, economic, social, and educational meanings and

implications” (Gutek, 330). They argue that children of economically

disadvantaged families, and politically disorganized groups, are taught that

they live in a society where “economic, social, and political institutions are

functioning correctly” … giving legitimization to the dominant groups and

preserving the hegemony over the subordinate groups (Gutek, 326). Critical

Theorists argue that schools are political agencies “that empower some and

disempower others” (Gutek, 326). They call for an educational experience

that encourages cultural diversity and a curriculum that uses the students

unique multicultural experiences to “develop new skills and knowledge”

(Gutek, 328).

Terms and definitions

Axiology – That which is valued. The attempt to prescribe what is good and

right conduct.

Epistemology – The methodology of how we understand our view of reality.

The theory of knowing and knowledge.

Ontology – The nature of existence. What is real, or what is reality.

Curriculum – The knowledge considered to have the most worth, and

valuable to the student as a member of society. The organized “experiences

that a student has under the guidance and control of the school” (Gutek, 5).

Activities

1. Take a typical day in a class you teach, or taught, and evaluate the

philosophical influence behind the different elements of the lesson

presentation.

2. Use the list of educational reforms created in Dr. Kester’s Educational

Innovations class and identify the philosophical perspective of the

various innovations.

3. Determine the philosophical perspective of national, state, district, and

campus mission statements.

4. Use the personalities of the school board that exist in your current district

of employment. Knowing that they are likely unaware of the myriad of

philosophies intermingled in their verbal professions of what they think is

“good for the students and district”, discuss how your awareness of

philosophical perspectives in education could assist your practice of

situational leadership.

5. Create a family tree of the philosophical perspectives reviewed in this

chapter. The family tree should reflect the major divisions and

subdivisions to create a visual of the parallels, associations, or

connections between the different philosophies.

6. After reviewing your personal self-analysis again, evaluate co-workers

and determine if your campus or district “allies” and “foes” are labeled as

such because of philosophical differences.

Internet Links

Platohttp://plato-dialogues.org/

Platohttp://classiclit.about.com/cs/plato/index_3.htm?iam=dpile&terms=%22Plato%22

Plato’s textshttp://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_text_plato.htm?iam=dpile&terms=%22Plato%22

Aristotle’s textshttp://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_text_aristotle.htm?iam=dpile&terms=%22Aristotle%22

Aristotlehttp://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/aristotle/index.htm?iam=dpile&terms=%22Aristotle%22

Pestalozzihttp://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-pest.htm

Herbert Spencerhttp://www.utm.edu/research/iep/s/spencer.htm

Pragmatism and Education Power Pointhttp://www.cals.ncsu.edu:8050/agexed/aee501/show13/tsld059.htm

Essentialismhttp://www.edst.purdue.edu/georgeoff/phil_am_ed/ESSENTIALISM.html

Philosophy as a Basis for Curriculum slide showhttp://uwf.edu/coehelp/trial/ch2/tsld001.htm

History of Progressivismhttp://www.ils.nwu.edu/e-for-e/nodes/NODE-86-pg.html

Summary of Some Main Points from Sartre's Existentialism and Human Emotionshttp://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/sartreol.htm

Existentialist Philosophyhttp://atheism.about.com/cs/existentialistphi/index.htm?iam=dpile&terms=%22Existentialism%22

Existentialist Philosophershttp://atheism.about.com/cs/existentialistphi1/index.htm?iam=dpile&terms=%22Existentialism%22

Thomismhttp://www.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/thomism.htm

Critical Theoryhttp://www.uta.edu/huma/illuminations/

The Critical Theory of Jurgen Habermashttp://www.phy.nau.edu/~danmac/habcritthy.html