Reflection

Analyzing the relationship between prospective teachers’
educational philosophies and their teaching-learning

approaches
INTRODUCTION
The attempts to find answers to basic questions to educate “whom”, “for what”, “what” still continue
in modern age. The answers to these questions may alter with respect to different individuals and
societies. On the basis of this difference lies the determining role of the educational beliefs and
values of societies and individuals. This issue holds even further importance for teachers whose
primary responsibility is to shape the individuals and society, since teachers accomplish their
mission within the framework of educational philosophy they adopt and the teaching-learning
approach corresponding to their educational philosophy.
Within this frame, the education philosophies and education-teaching understandings of teacher
candidates gain importance. The aim of this study is to determine whether the education
philosophies and education-teaching understandings of teacher candidates vary according to
demographic features or not and to determine the relation between philosophies and education-
teaching understandings.
Educational philosophy
Originating from Greek language, the word philosophy is derived from philosohia (Sönmez, 2002).
Philosophy is life style, perspective and worldview (Ergün, 2009). In its broadest sense, philosophy
is the knowledge domain reflecting one’s systematic and comprehensive reasoning on the
interaction between man and universe (Gutek, 2001). Pearsall (1998) defines philosophy as the
domain focusing on the basic nature of knowledge and such concepts as reality and existence.
Philosophy is related to the ways of regulating views and knowledge on life itself and involves one’s
questioning of his/her perspective as well as others’ views. Philosophy implies the search for one’s
own beliefs and thoughts (Ornstein and Hunkins, 1993). Tozlu and Yayla (2005) define philosophy
as the combination of values and knowledge system one possesses and abides by. Accordingly
each individual holds a unique philosophy which is also related to one’s own power of thinking
(Ertürk, 2013).
Philosophy lays the foundation of all the other sciences almost all of which hold its own philosophy
(Ergün, 2009). Philosophy makes use of the outputs of science and widens the horizon of science
with the questions posited (Kale, 2009). Education is one of the sciences that philosophy maintains
close relationship with. The relation between philosophy and education is multi -dimensional and
also long-dated (Ekiz, 2007). Human being is the key glue between philosophy and education.
Philosophy is the product of human thought. One other significant component of this product is
relevance of human education. While philosophy establishes a set of qualities and values for
education, education attempts to cluster a system and activities aiming to attain and gain these
values to individuals (Demircio?lu, 2000). Stemming from the relation between philosophy and
education, educa-tional philosophy can be defined as a philosophical branch treating the problems
related to the means, nature, objectives of education via philosophy-specific methods (Cevizci,
2003). Erden (1998) explains educational philosophy’s subject area, the whole set of educational
theories, practice and components, their interrelations and consistency of relations as the discipline
that analyzes via a holistic approach.
The entire education is regulated in line with the philosophy or philosophies that education is based
upon (Sönmez, 2002). Educational philosophy probes into the objectives and nature of education as
well as basic concepts of education such as learning, teaching, discipline and a number of
philosophical questions emerging in educational theories and practices (Yaz?c?, 2009). The primary
question in educational philosophies relates to the scope and meaning of education. For any given
educational philosophy the most meaningful and appropriate explanation is, by answering such
questions, presenting an applicable approach for education (Youngs, 1979). This basis philosophy
lays the foundation of educational objectives primarily followed by the role of context in reaching the
objectives, educational strategy to employ in learning-teaching processes, method-techniques and
the evaluation method to adopt (Tekin and Üstün, 2008).
Throughout history, a great number of philosophical movements and a vast body of educational
philosophies have emerged from their reflections on education (Tekin and Üstün, 2008), which guide
educational practices (Do?anay, 2011). Four educational philosophies mostly agreed upon are;
perennialism, essentialism, progressi-vism and re-constructionism (Ornstein and Hunkins, 1993).
These 4 educational philosophies constituting the focal point of this research are explained below.
Perennialism philosophy states that there are absolute universal facts. A human being’s essence is
the same regardless of time or space. This approach dwells on shaping education in line with in
universal facts. Perennialism philosophy claims that the aim of education should be raising the kinds
of people with a strong and righteous character. Since the key component of human nature is the
mind, intellectual education should be particularly developed in education. As it is argued in this
approach the mission of education should be training the individual for life hence the kind of
knowledge that can teach both spiritual and material facts could be rendered via classical works
(Tozlu, 1997; Fidan and Erden, 1998; Demirel, 2008; Ergün, 2009).
Essentialism philosophy states that the key objective of education must be construed as transferring
to young generations the knowledge and skills that proved to be useful in the past. This philosophy
commissions the school with the task of protecting and transferring the cultural assets. The lessons
are seen as the means to transfer cultural heritage and the main focus is on disciplining the mind.
Essentialism argues that verified facts must be transferred to the children and teenagers by teachers
while students, via learning by heart, can improve all their mental skills since humans are expected
to learn previous knowledge and experiences to advance the civilization. The main focus in this
approach is on the teacher and subject area (Tozlu, 1997; Fidan and Erden, 1998; Ergün, 2009;
Ornstein and Hunkins, 1993).
According to progressivism philosophy, education is not merely the transfer of ready facts but it is
the very life itself. The main argument of this educational philosophy is that education must address
to people’s interests. As per this educational philosophy in which teacher is the guide of learner-
centered education, learning should be via problem solving and individuals should make meaning of
the knowledge useful for him/her via connecting knowledge to real life. Progressivism philosophy
puts forth that the individual must learn practical knowledge via actively participating in real life
(Tozlu, 1997; Fidan and Erden, 1998; Sönmez, 2002; Cevizci, 2003; Ergün, 2009; Ornstein and
Hunkins, 1993).
According to re-constructionism philosophy education is not a means of transformation but a means
of balance. In re-constructionism, educational targets are founding world civilization, securing the
peace and human happiness, transformation via practice, and gaining the basic values such as love,
cooperation and balance. Education has a mission of securing an ideal social order. This philosophy
argues that the mission of school should be reshaping and reforming the society (Ergun, 1996;
Tozlu, 1997; Sönmez, 2002; Cevizci, 2003; Ergün, 2009; Ornstein and Hunkins, 1993).
In terms of their general characteristics perennialism and essentialism philosophies are classified as
traditional philosophies while progressivism and re-constructionism philosophies are known as
modern philosophies (Ornstein and Hunkins, 1993). Adopted educational philosophy is the key
determiner of teaching-learning approaches of the teachers commissioned as the executors of
educational processes (Demirel, 2008; Y?lmaz, Alt?nkurt & Çokluk, 2011).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

At the end of this research aimed at defining the relationship between prospective teachers’
educational philosophy and their teaching-learning approach, it has been concluded that prospective
teachers adopt progressivism and re-constructionism philosophies more than perennialism and
essentialism philosophies. Relevant literature studies manifest data that are consistent with our
findings. In a research concocted by Ekiz (2005) it was concluded that prospective teachers favor
more eagerly progressivism and re-constructionism educational philosophies. In a different study by
Ekiz (2007) it was also detected that prospective teachers entertained negative views toward
perennialism and essentialism but positive views toward progressivism and re-constructionism
philosophies. In Alk?n et al. (2014)’s co-research, the findings manifested that prospective teachers
strongly favor modern educational philosophies (progressivism and re-constructionism), whereas
less favor traditional educational philosophies (perennialism and essentialism). Parallel findings were
gathered from the studied conducted by Y?lmaz et al. (2012) and also Biçer et al. (2013); hence it
was concluded that prospective teachers most frequently adopt progressivism, and essentialism
philosophy the least frequently. Another finding reached via similar studies is that prospective
teachers’ view on education is not cumulatively clustered around one single philosophical view
(Tekin and Üstün, 2008). Analyzed researches proved that some teachers adopted traditional
educational philosophies whereas some favored modern educational philosophies (Ekiz, 2007;
Duman and Ulubey, 2008; Tekin and Üstün, 2008). Each teacher could adopt one single educational
philosophy or more than one educational philosophy (Do?anay and Sar?, 2003). In the same breath
with this finding present study also detected that although the most favored philosophies are
progressivism and re-constructionism, there is not one single philosophy that prospective teachers
focus on uniformly. Still as the more favored ones, perennialism and essentialism philosophies can
be interpreted as an indicator of the consistency with the results in relevant literature.
In current study undermining the relation between educational philosophies and teaching-learning
approaches of prospective teachers receiving pedagogical formation, a set of variables were also
examined to detect the possibility of differentiation in prospective teachers’ views.
Research findings revealed that compared to females, male prospective teachers favored
essentialism educational philosophy more widely while female prospective teachers adopted re-
constructionism educational philosophy more than males. Parallel to these findings, Biçer et al.
(2013) in their study detected that compared to female prospective teachers, male prospective
teachers adopted essentialism philosophy more. Similar findings were obtained from the studies
conducted by Do?anay and Sar? (2003) and Duman and Ulubey (2008) and it was manifested that
male prospective teachers received higher scores in perennialism dimension. Another study pointed
out that male prospective teachers placed more value on religious, moral and cultural aspects
(perennialism-essentialism), while prospective teachers were mostly in favor of student-centered
educa-tion (progressivism-re-constructionism) (Yap?c?, 2013).
In this study it was also detected that there was a significant differentiation in favor of male
prospective teachers in traditional teaching-learning approach. This finding draws parallelism with
Ba?’s (2014) research examining elementary education teachers’ teaching-learning approaches with
respect to a set of criteria. Likewise Aypay’s (2011) research also illustrated that female prospective
teachers’ constructivist scores were higher than male prospective teachers’ scores and male
prospective teachers’ traditional scores were above female prospective teachers’ scores. Rodriguez
and Cano (2007) in their study covering college students identified that constructivist learning scores
were higher than traditional learning scores. Two parallel studies on prospective teachers from Hong
Kong (Chan and Eliot, 2004; Cheng et al., 2009) provided conflicting results concerning prospective
teachers’ adoption of constructivist or traditional approach. In the first research (Chan and Eliot,
2004) it was concluded that prospective teachers did not openly favor constructivist or traditional
approach but in the second research (Cheng et al., 2009) it was identified that prospective teachers
widely adopted constructivist approach.
Teaching-learning approach points to the perspectives on teaching
and learning methods followed in line with adopted educational
philosophy. This approach integrates the meaning of teacher
attributes to teaching and learning and the roles of both the teacher
and the student (Chan and Elliott, 2004).
Two contrasting main approaches in teaching and learning can be

generally named as traditional and modern (Önder and Be?oluk,
2010). Schunk (2009), on the other hand, termed learning approaches
as superficial and deep learning. With respect to their qualities
superficial learning mostly relates to traditional learning-teaching
approach while deep learning is more appropriate for constructivist
learning-teaching approach.
Traditional approach follows teacher and subject-centered teaching

process. This approach views teacher as the source of knowledge and
student as the passive receiver of knowledge. Teachers traditionally
convey the knowledge to students via didactic methods and expects
them to render correct answers (Chan and Elliott, 2004; Schunk,
2009). In this approach favored mostly in crowded classes where
there is limited time for teaching to achieve knowledge-level targets,
teacher is the organizer of knowledge and shares it with students
to achieve meaningful learning (Demirel, 2007). Traditional-approach
based teaching process means fitting students into the models by
disregarding all individualistic differences. In traditional learning
approach students are forced to memorize considerable amount of
knowledge which causes they fail to understand or interrogate. Since
student fails to learn how to learn/he eventually fails to learn by heart
in this method (?ahinel, 2010). As per such qualities it is safe to argue
that traditional approach is established upon perennialism and
essentialism philosophy.
In modern age, the objective of education is to train the kind of
individuals who can reflect, question, criticize and find solutions to the
problems they could face in real life. This is only possible by practicing
an educational approach in which each individual is encouraged to
actively participate into his/her own learning process based on the fact
that each student has individual characteristics (?ahinel, 2010).
Constructivism is among the most popular modern educational
approaches.
Having emerged as the theory on how to teach the knowledge to

learners, constructivism has in time turned into an approach about the
ways learners construct knowledge (Perkins, 1999). Based on Piaget
and Vygotsky’s theories this approach underscores the gravity of
experience in the construction of knowledge and active participation in
the learning process (Miller, 1997).Constructivism argues that
knowledge cannot be received passively from the environment but
constructed via actively exploring. Children can construct new
knowledge by reflecting on their physical and mental actions
(Clements and Battista, 1990). Being a student-centered approach,
learning is not merely a passive reception but rather attainment of
knowledge by actively meaning making, gaining experience and using
primary knowledge sources. Learning is a subjective and situation ally
designed action by environmental factors (Titiz, 2005; Ak?no?lu,
2014).
Constructivist approach became an effective movement after

the1990s in the designation of teaching programs and putting the
programs into action and in Turkey it gained importance with the
implementation of teaching programs in 2005-2006 academic year
(Do?anay, 2011). In constructivist approach which projects students’
active participation in learning process, learners reject to accept the
knowledge as it is and knowledge is constructed by associating with
previously acquired knowledge (Üredi, 2009). Constructivist teacher
should be open-minded, modern, embracing self-development, paying
heeds to individual differences and expert in their fields; additionally a
teacher is not the transmitter of knowledge but providing suitable
learning environments and learning together with the students (Selley,
1999). Parallel to the progressivists, constructivists claim that teachers
are the guides of learning, students are responsible for their own
learning and learning can take place via meaning full experiences.
Drawing a parallelism between teacher’s and student’s role, Oliva
(2005) argues that constructivism is the continuity of progressivism.
Chan and Elliott (2004) claimed that there is a strong bond, as many
studies show, between teachers’ beliefs and their in-class actions and
learning environment. Additionally, Önder and Be?oluk (2010) claim
that learning approach of the teachers may affect the quality of
learning outputs of the students they train. Driven from this point of
view it is feasible to claim that the learning approaches teachers adopt
constitute major place in laying an effective learning environment (Ta?
k?n, 2012).
A number of philosophy-relevant studies have been conducted among

teachers, prospective teachers and administrators. These researches
can be examined under two categories as scale development-
adaptation studies (Semerci et al., 2002; Y?lmaz et al., 2011), and
determining philosophical tendencies with respect to several variables
(Do?anay and Sar?, 2003; Ekiz, 2005; Fung, 2005;Ekiz, 2007; Çoban,
2002; Kaya, 2007;Duman and Ulubey, 2008; Duman, 2008;Tekin and
Üstün, 2008; Üstüner, 2008; Karada? et al., 2009; Do?anay, 2011;Y?
lmaz et al., 2012; Biçer et al., 2013; Yap?c?, 2013; Alk?n et al.,
2014).
As researches on teaching-learning approaches are grouped in terms

of their similarities, it is witnessed that studies conducted by Aypay
(2011) were performed for scale development and adaptation; studies
conducted by Chan (2003), Chan and Elliott (2004), R?driguez (2007),
Ta?k?n (2012), Aypay (2011), Ozan and Çiftçi (2013), Ünal and Ergin
(2006), Ba? (2014) were performed for detecting teaching-learning
approaches and examining with respect to several variables.
Despite the general tendency in literature that teachers’ educational

approaches are constructed on the basis of relevant educational
philosophy (Austin and Reinhardt, 1999; Elisasser, 2008; Karaku?,
2006), no research focusing on the relation between the two variables
was detected in literature review. Within this framework it is deemed
necessary to define the relationship between prospective teachers’
educational philosophy and teaching-learning approach. Present
research holds importance in submitting data on identifying
prospective teachers as the teachers of future, philosophical
tendencies and the kind of teaching approach they follow in line with
their adopted perspective.
The purpose of this research is to analyze the relationship between

prospective teachers’ educational philosophies and their teaching-
learning approaches. Within this framework, answers are sought for
the questions as follows.
1. What is the educational philosophy and teaching-learning approach

adopted by prospective teachers?
2. Does the educational philosophy and teaching-learning approach

adopted by prospective teachers vary with respect to their,
a) gender,
b) departments they study in?

3. Is there a relation between prospective teachers’ educational
philosophy and their teaching-learning approach?
METHOD
In this study conducted to illustrate the interrelation between
prospective teachers’ educational philosophies and their teaching-
learning approaches, relational screening model has been utilized.
Relational screening model is a research model used to detect the
presence and/or level of covariance between two or multiple variances
(Karasar, 2004).
Perennialism
Perennialists believe that the focus of education should be the ideas that have lasted
over centuries. They believe the ideas are as relevant and meaningful today as when
they were written. They recommend that students learn from reading and analyzing
the works by history's finest thinkers and writers. Essentialists believe that when
students study these works and ideas, they will appreciate learning. Similar top
perennialism, essentialism aims to develop students' intellectual and moral qualities.
Perennialist classrooms are also centered on teachers in order to accomplish these
goals. The teachers are not concerned about the students' interests or experiences.
They use tried and true teaching methods and techniques that are believed to be most
beneficial to disciplining students' minds. The perennialist curriculum is universal and
is based on their view that all human beings possess the same essential nature.
Perennialists think it is important that individuals think deeply, analytically, flexibly,
and imaginatively. They emphasize that students should not be taught information that
may soon be outdated or found to be incorrect. Perennialists disapprove of teachers
requiring students to absorb massive amounts of disconnected information. They
recommend that schools spend more time teaching about concepts and explaining they
are meaningful to students. The only example I can think of would be a class about
religion or history. The instructor would use religious books and historical documents.
Perennialist Authors
Robert Maynard Hutchins is considered one of the most

influential members of secular Perennialism. In his book The
University of Utopia (1953), Hutchins states that “The object of
the educational system, taken as a whole, is not to produce
hands for industry or to teach the young how to make a living.
It is to produce responsible citizens”. In The University of
Utopia, Hutchins describes a country that has evolved to
become the perfect society. Utopia’s educational system has
the well-defined purpose of promoting the intellectual
development of the people. Hutchins also laments some of
the improper directions that educational institutions have
taken in the United States. He argues that colleges are
becoming nothing more than trade schools, and poor trade
schools at that. Hutchins claims that universities should focus
on teaching intellectual content, specifically intellectual
content related to the individual occupation, but that
employers should take responsibility for training their
employees. Hutchins also warns that education has shifted its
center of attention from being educational to custodial. He
charges that many schools have become no more than baby-
sitting services for adolescents, sheltering them from the
turbulent world of youth. He cites courses in home economics
and driver’s education as designed to meet a utilitarian
societal need rather than an educational goal. Hutchins also
berates education for the path it has taken regarding
specialization. According to Hutchins, the specialization of
American education has robbed students of the ability to
communicate with other students outside of their field.
Because of the intense emphasis on specialized fields, a
student of biology cannot converse meaningfully with a
student of mathematics because they share no common
educational experience. In The University of Utopia, Hutchins
outlines the educational experience of young Utopians, where
the first ten years of instruction prepare students for the
learning experiences to come. Communication is the primary
skill developed. Students learn to read, write, and discuss
issues in preparation for their future lifetime of learning.
Science and mathematics create a solid foundation for future
learning. Literature, history and geography are also studied to
create the framework for even deeper learning later in life.
Finally, art and music are included in the curriculum because
these are considered necessary to make society great. An
educational staple in Utopia is the reading and analysis of the
so-called Great Books, those books that shaped Western
thought, which are discussed in class using the Socratic
method. Named for Socrates, this approach entails the
teacher’s keeping the discussion on topic and guiding it away
from errors of logic. When a discussion is conducted in
accordance with Socratic principles, unexamined opinions are
put to the test, and only reason itself is the final judge.
Conclusions reached in this type of discussion belong to the
individual himself, while the class or the teacher may not
necessarily agree. The Great Books are a natural choice, since
they are considered to be exemplary, timeless, and ever
relevant to society. Despite his appreciation of the classic and
his belief that education should first focus on higher-level
intellectual pursuits, Hutchins does not discount the value of
empirical research and of the laboratory world. He believes,
however, that such things are best learned through discovery
once a student has achieved a solid educational foundation
and has been released from school and into the outside
world. Once in college, the focus of Utopia’s students shifts
from learning the techniques of communication to exploring
the principal ideas that have propelled mankind. After college,
students face a rigorous exam before an outside board to
demonstrate that they have achieved the level of education
that a free person should have. This rigorous exam is similar
to those taken throughout a student’s education but is more
comprehensive. When the student passes this exam, he or she
is awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree. The degree is conferred
based on the mastery of this information, not on the number
of classes taken, credits earned, or hours spent in class. Once
departing from formal education, a lifetime of learning awaits
the citizens of Utopia, who can visit centers of learning to
explore and discuss ideas and analyze great works. In addition
to Hutchins’s belief that school should pursue intellectual
ideas rather than practical, he also believed that schools
should not teach a specific set of values. “It is not the object
of a college to make its students good, because the college
cannot do it; if it tries to do it, it will fail; it will weaken the
agencies that should be discharging this responsibility, and it
will not discharge its own responsibility.” Schools should not
be in the business of teaching students what is right and just;
they should be in the business of helping students make their
own determinations. With his vivid description of Utopia’s
school system, Hutchins presents us with a detailed portrait of
what our educational world would look like if secular
Perennialists took over our schools.
Jacques Maritain was a French Catholic philosopher who

authored more than 60 books, helping to revive the belief
system of St. Thomas Aquinas for modern times. Maritain
believed that philosophy was the queen of all sciences.
Maritain was a strong defender of natural law ethics. He
viewed ethical norms as being rooted in human nature. For
Maritain the natural law is known, primarily, not through
philosophical argument and demonstration, but rather
through “Connaturality”. Connatural knowledge is knowledge
by acquaintance. We know the natural law through our direct
acquaintance with it in our human experience. Of central
importance, is Maritain’s argument that natural rights are
rooted in the natural law. This was key to his involvement in
the drafting of the United Nations’ Universal declaration of
Human Rights. Jacques Maritain wrote one book and several
essays on education. He considered education to be an art
because its object, when perfected, was the most beautiful of
all the earthly realities. According to Maritain, education
prepares our given faculties and abilities to do what they were
made or created to do. Maritain held that the teacher is
indeed a cause in the education of youth, but not the principal
cause of education, which is the student. He thought everyone
could and should be educated in the important things. He did
not want anyone to be forced to study theology in non-
denominational schools, but he thought anyone without
knowledge of theology simply would not understand the
actual human nature, which is spiritual as well as rational.
Maritain affirms that college education should be given to all,
so as to complete the preparation of young people before
they enter adulthood. Maritain’s elaborate program for all
levels of education attempted to spell out the various stages
of teaching according to the age and maturity of the student.
Another famous Perennialist author is Mortimer J. Adler, who

believed that philosophy should become part of the
mainstream public school curriculum. In his Paideia Proposal
(1982), which sets out his vision for the American public
schools, Adler maintained that education should be basically
the same for everyone, because children share a fundamental
sameness as human beings. Adler states that children must
acquire three different types of knowledge: organized
knowledge, intellectual skills, and understanding of ideas and
values. He advocates a different teaching style for each of
these types of knowledge. For example, he believes that
factual knowledge is best taught through lectures, while
intellectual skills are to be nurtured through coaching and
ethical discussion is to be conducted through the Socratic
method of questioning. According to Adler, education serves
three primary purposes: to teach people how to effectively
use their personal time, how to support themselves ethically,
and how to be responsible citizens in a democracy. He
believes that each individual has the innate ability to achieve
these three objectives, and that education should be a lifelong
pursuit. Adler’s educational vision extends to every level of the
American school system. He believes that every child should
study mathematics, science, history, geography, and other
liberal arts in the lower grades. His vision for secondary school
and college, instead, centers on the belief that students
should acquire an understanding of their own minds as well as
the minds of others. This can be achieved through the
exposure to poetry, drama, and art. Philosophy and art,
therefore, should be the prerogative of everyone. I essence,
Adler envisions that every student should gain an
understanding of truth by applying the filter provided by
Western philosophy. Interestingly enough, Although Mortimer
Adler has written a plan for all public schools in the United
States, his ideas have had the most impact at the college
level. During the 1920s and 1930s, Adler’s belief in the
importance of Classical education led a significant number of
American colleges and universities to adopt “Great Books”
programs — cores of required classes that focus on key works
of Western philosophy and literature. Columbia University,
Adler’s alma mater, adopted a form of this program that
endures today: all undergraduates are required to take one
year-long class in “Masterpieces of Western Literature” and
one more year-long class in “Masterpieces of Contemporary
Civilization”. In addition, students must take one semester in
“Masterpieces of Western Art” and one semester in
“Masterpieces of Western Music”. Many other colleges use
some form of the Great Books program, inspired by Adler’s
ideas.
In primary and secondary education, Adler’s ideas about

great books of Western Philosophy seem to have influenced
the education of prior generations more than the education of
today’s children. Any literature curriculum that involved
reading great works of Western literature and/or philosophy
can be said to be influenced somewhat by Adler’s type of
ideas.
Adler would later go on to be a vocal champion for the value

of classics based education. And for the idea of integrating
science, literature, and philosophy, especially through drawing
forth the centuries long dialogue of ideas on and between
these disciplines within the great books. Thus current scientific
theories and assumptions are shown to be not dry truths
handed whose existence is inevitable, but rather part of a
larger and very lively dialogue of evolving perspectives and
understandings. And finally, Adler advocated for immersing
young people into this environment of debate, hypothesis,
and enquiry by evolving them in active discussion groups.
Rather than simply memorize facts, they were asked to seek
genuine understanding of the material under study.
Robert Maynard Hutchins is considered one of the most

influential members of secular Perennialism. In his book The
University of Utopia (1953), Hutchins states that “The object of
the educational system, taken as a whole, is not to produce
hands for industry or to teach the young how to make a living.
It is to produce responsible citizens”. In The University of
Utopia, Hutchins describes a country that has evolved to
become the perfect society. Utopia’s educational system has
the well-defined purpose of promoting the intellectual
development of the people. Hutchins also laments some of
the improper directions that educational institutions have
taken in the United States. He argues that colleges are
becoming nothing more than trade schools, and poor trade
schools at that. Hutchins claims that universities should focus
on teaching intellectual content, specifically intellectual
content related to the individual occupation, but that
employers should take responsibility for training their
employees. Hutchins also warns that education has shifted its
center of attention from being educational to custodial. He
charges that many schools have become no more than baby-
sitting services for adolescents, sheltering them from the
turbulent world of youth. He cites courses in home economics
and driver’s education as designed to meet a utilitarian
societal need rather than an educational goal. Hutchins also
berates education for the path it has taken regarding
specialization. According to Hutchins, the specialization of
American education has robbed students of the ability to
communicate with other students outside of their field.
Because of the intense emphasis on specialized fields, a
student of biology cannot converse meaningfully with a
student of mathematics because they share no common
educational experience. In The University of Utopia, Hutchins
outlines the educational experience of young Utopians, where
the first ten years of instruction prepare students for the
learning experiences to come. Communication is the primary
skill developed. Students learn to read, write, and discuss
issues in preparation for their future lifetime of learning.
Science and mathematics create a solid foundation for future
learning. Literature, history and geography are also studied to
create the framework for even deeper learning later in life.
Finally, art and music are included in the curriculum because
these are considered necessary to make society great. An
educational staple in Utopia is the reading and analysis of the
so-called Great Books, those books that shaped Western
thought, which are discussed in class using the Socratic
method. Named for Socrates, this approach entails the
teacher’s keeping the discussion on topic and guiding it away
from errors of logic. When a discussion is conducted in
accordance with Socratic principles, unexamined opinions are
put to the test, and only reason itself is the final judge.
Conclusions reached in this type of discussion belong to the
individual himself, while the class or the teacher may not
necessarily agree. The Great Books are a natural choice, since
they are considered to be exemplary, timeless, and ever
relevant to society. Despite his appreciation of the classic and
his belief that education should first focus on higher-level
intellectual pursuits, Hutchins does not discount the value of
empirical research and of the laboratory world. He believes,
however, that such things are best learned through discovery
once a student has achieved a solid educational foundation
and has been released from school and into the outside
world. Once in college, the focus of Utopia’s students shifts
from learning the techniques of communication to exploring
the principal ideas that have propelled mankind. After college,
students face a rigorous exam before an outside board to
demonstrate that they have achieved the level of education
that a free person should have. This rigorous exam is similar
to those taken throughout a student’s education but is more
comprehensive. When the student passes this exam, he or she
is awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree. The degree is conferred
based on the mastery of this information, not on the number
of classes taken, credits earned, or hours spent in class. Once
departing from formal education, a lifetime of learning awaits
the citizens of Utopia, who can visit centers of learning to
explore and discuss ideas and analyze great works. In addition
to Hutchins’s belief that school should pursue intellectual
ideas rather than practical, he also believed that schools
should not teach a specific set of values. “It is not the object
of a college to make its students good, because the college
cannot do it; if it tries to do it, it will fail; it will weaken the
agencies that should be discharging this responsibility, and it
will not discharge its own responsibility.” Schools should not
be in the business of teaching students what is right and just;
they should be in the business of helping students make their
own determinations. With his vivid description of Utopia’s
school system, Hutchins presents us with a detailed portrait of
what our educational world would look like if secular
Perennialists took over our schools.
Jacques Maritain was a French Catholic philosopher who

authored more than 60 books, helping to revive the belief
system of St. Thomas Aquinas for modern times. Maritain
believed that philosophy was the queen of all sciences.
Maritain was a strong defender of natural law ethics. He
viewed ethical norms as being rooted in human nature. For
Maritain the natural law is known, primarily, not through
philosophical argument and demonstration, but rather
through “Connaturality”. Connatural knowledge is knowledge
by acquaintance. We know the natural law through our direct
acquaintance with it in our human experience. Of central
importance, is Maritain’s argument that natural rights are
rooted in the natural law. This was key to his involvement in
the drafting of the United Nations’ Universal declaration of
Human Rights. Jacques Maritain wrote one book and several
essays on education. He considered education to be an art
because its object, when perfected, was the most beautiful of
all the earthly realities. According to Maritain, education
prepares our given faculties and abilities to do what they were
made or created to do. Maritain held that the teacher is
indeed a cause in the education of youth, but not the principal
cause of education, which is the student. He thought everyone
could and should be educated in the important things. He did
not want anyone to be forced to study theology in non-
denominational schools, but he thought anyone without
knowledge of theology simply would not understand the
actual human nature, which is spiritual as well as rational.
Maritain affirms that college education should be given to all,
so as to complete the preparation of young people before
they enter adulthood. Maritain’s elaborate program for all
levels of education attempted to spell out the various stages
of teaching according to the age and maturity of the student.
Another famous Perennialist author is Mortimer J. Adler, who

believed that philosophy should become part of the
mainstream public school curriculum. In his Paideia Proposal
(1982), which sets out his vision for the American public
schools, Adler maintained that education should be basically
the same for everyone, because children share a fundamental
sameness as human beings. Adler states that children must
acquire three different types of knowledge: organized
knowledge, intellectual skills, and understanding of ideas and
values. He advocates a different teaching style for each of
these types of knowledge. For example, he believes that
factual knowledge is best taught through lectures, while
intellectual skills are to be nurtured through coaching and
ethical discussion is to be conducted through the Socratic
method of questioning. According to Adler, education serves
three primary purposes: to teach people how to effectively
use their personal time, how to support themselves ethically,
and how to be responsible citizens in a democracy. He
believes that each individual has the innate ability to achieve
these three objectives, and that education should be a lifelong
pursuit. Adler’s educational vision extends to every level of the
American school system. He believes that every child should
study mathematics, science, history, geography, and other
liberal arts in the lower grades. His vision for secondary school
and college, instead, centers on the belief that students
should acquire an understanding of their own minds as well as
the minds of others. This can be achieved through the
exposure to poetry, drama, and art. Philosophy and art,
therefore, should be the prerogative of everyone. I essence,
Adler envisions that every student should gain an
understanding of truth by applying the filter provided by
Western philosophy. Interestingly enough, Although Mortimer
Adler has written a plan for all public schools in the United
States, his ideas have had the most impact at the college
level. During the 1920s and 1930s, Adler’s belief in the
importance of Classical education led a significant number of
American colleges and universities to adopt “Great Books”
programs — cores of required classes that focus on key works
of Western philosophy and literature. Columbia University,
Adler’s alma mater, adopted a form of this program that
endures today: all undergraduates are required to take one
year-long class in “Masterpieces of Western Literature” and
one more year-long class in “Masterpieces of Contemporary
Civilization”. In addition, students must take one semester in
“Masterpieces of Western Art” and one semester in
“Masterpieces of Western Music”. Many other colleges use
some form of the Great Books program, inspired by Adler’s
ideas.
In primary and secondary education, Adler’s ideas about

great books of Western Philosophy seem to have influenced
the education of prior generations more than the education of
today’s children. Any literature curriculum that involved
reading great works of Western literature and/or philosophy
can be said to be influenced somewhat by Adler’s type of
ideas.
Adler would later go on to be a vocal champion for the value

of classics based education. And for the idea of integrating
science, literature, and philosophy, especially through drawing
forth the centuries long dialogue of ideas on and between
these disciplines within the great books. Thus current scientific
theories and assumptions are shown to be not dry truths
handed whose existence is inevitable, but rather part of a
larger and very lively dialogue of evolving perspectives and
understandings. And finally, Adler advocated for immersing
young people into this environment of debate, hypothesis,
and enquiry by evolving them in active discussion groups.
Rather than simply memorize facts, they were asked to seek
genuine understanding of the material under study.
Robert Maynard Hutchins is considered one of the most influential members of secular Perennialism. In his book The
University of Utopia (1953), Hutchins states that “The object of the educational system, taken as a whole, is not to
produce hands for industry or to teach the young how to make a living. It is to produce responsible citizens”. In The
University of Utopia, Hutchins describes a country that has evolved to become the perfect society. Utopia’s
educational system has the well-defined purpose of promoting the intellectual development of the people. Hutchins
also laments some of the improper directions that educational institutions have taken in the United States. He argues
that colleges are becoming nothing more than trade schools, and poor trade schools at that. Hutchins claims that
universities should focus on teaching intellectual content, specifically intellectual content related to the individual
occupation, but that employers should take responsibility for training their employees. Hutchins also warns that
education has shifted its center of attention from being educational to custodial. He charges that many schools have
become no more than baby-sitting services for adolescents, sheltering them from the turbulent world of youth. He
cites courses in home economics and driver’s education as designed to meet a utilitarian societal need rather than an
educational goal. Hutchins also berates education for the path it has taken regarding specialization. According to
Hutchins, the specialization of American education has robbed students of the ability to communicate with other
students outside of their field. Because of the intense emphasis on specialized fields, a student of biology cannot
converse meaningfully with a student of mathematics because they share no common educational experience. In The
University of Utopia, Hutchins outlines the educational experience of young Utopians, where the first ten years of
instruction prepare students for the learning experiences to come. Communication is the primary skill developed.
Students learn to read, write, and discuss issues in preparation for their future lifetime of learning. Science and
mathematics create a solid foundation for future learning. Literature, history and geography are also studied to create
the framework for even deeper learning later in life. Finally, art and music are included in the curriculum because
these are considered necessary to make society great. An educational staple in Utopia is the reading and analysis of
the so-called Great Books, those books that shaped Western thought, which are discussed in class using the Socratic
method. Named for Socrates, this approach entails the teacher’s keeping the discussion on topic and guiding it away
from errors of logic. When a discussion is conducted in accordance with Socratic principles, unexamined opinions are
put to the test, and only reason itself is the final judge. Conclusions reached in this type of discussion belong to the
individual himself, while the class or the teacher may not necessarily agree. The Great Books are a natural choice, since
they are considered to be exemplary, timeless, and ever relevant to society. Despite his appreciation of the classic and
his belief that education should first focus on higher-level intellectual pursuits, Hutchins does not discount the value
of empirical research and of the laboratory world. He believes, however, that such things are best learned through
discovery once a student has achieved a solid educational foundation and has been released from school and into the
outside world. Once in college, the focus of Utopia’s students shifts from learning the techniques of communication
to exploring the principal ideas that have propelled mankind. After college, students face a rigorous exam before an
outside board to demonstrate that they have achieved the level of education that a free person should have. This
rigorous exam is similar to those taken throughout a student’s education but is more comprehensive. When the
student passes this exam, he or she is awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree. The degree is conferred based on the
mastery of this information, not on the number of classes taken, credits earned, or hours spent in class. Once
departing from formal education, a lifetime of learning awaits the citizens of Utopia, who can visit centers of learning
to explore and discuss ideas and analyze great works. In addition to Hutchins’s belief that school should pursue
intellectual ideas rather than practical, he also believed that schools should not teach a specific set of values. “It is not
the object of a college to make its students good, because the college cannot do it; if it tries to do it, it will fail; it will
weaken the agencies that should be discharging this responsibility, and it will not discharge its own responsibility.”
Schools should not be in the business of teaching students what is right and just; they should be in the business of
helping students make their own determinations. With his vivid description of Utopia’s school system, Hutchins
presents us with a detailed portrait of what our educational world would look like if secular Perennialists took over
our schools.
Jacques Maritain was a French Catholic philosopher who authored more than 60 books, helping to revive the belief
system of St. Thomas Aquinas for modern times. Maritain believed that philosophy was the queen of all sciences.
Maritain was a strong defender of natural law ethics. He viewed ethical norms as being rooted in human nature. For
Maritain the natural law is known, primarily, not through philosophical argument and demonstration, but rather
through “Connaturality”. Connatural knowledge is knowledge by acquaintance. We know the natural law through our
direct acquaintance with it in our human experience. Of central importance, is Maritain’s argument that natural rights
are rooted in the natural law. This was key to his involvement in the drafting of the United Nations’ Universal
declaration of Human Rights. Jacques Maritain wrote one book and several essays on education. He considered
education to be an art because its object, when perfected, was the most beautiful of all the earthly realities. According
to Maritain, education prepares our given faculties and abilities to do what they were made or created to do. Maritain
held that the teacher is indeed a cause in the education of youth, but not the principal cause of education, which is
the student. He thought everyone could and should be educated in the important things. He did not want anyone to
be forced to study theology in non-denominational schools, but he thought anyone without knowledge of theology
simply would not understand the actual human nature, which is spiritual as well as rational. Maritain affirms that
college education should be given to all, so as to complete the preparation of young people before they enter
adulthood. Maritain’s elaborate program for all levels of education attempted to spell out the various stages of
teaching according to the age and maturity of the student.
Another famous Perennialist author is Mortimer J. Adler, who believed that philosophy should become part of the
mainstream public school curriculum. In his Paideia Proposal (1982), which sets out his vision for the American public
schools, Adler maintained that education should be basically the same for everyone, because children share a
fundamental sameness as human beings. Adler states that children must acquire three different types of
knowledge: organized knowledge, intellectual skills, and understanding of ideas and values. He advocates a different
teaching style for each of these types of knowledge. For example, he believes that factual knowledge is best taught
through lectures, while intellectual skills are to be nurtured through coaching and ethical discussion is to be
conducted through the Socratic method of questioning. According to Adler, education serves three primary
purposes: to teach people how to effectively use their personal time, how to support themselves ethically, and how
to be responsible citizens in a democracy. He believes that each individual has the innate ability to achieve these
three objectives, and that education should be a lifelong pursuit. Adler’s educational vision extends to every level of
the American school system. He believes that every child should study mathematics, science, history, geography, and
other liberal arts in the lower grades. His vision for secondary school and college, instead, centers on the belief that
students should acquire an understanding of their own minds as well as the minds of others. This can be achieved
through the exposure to poetry, drama, and art. Philosophy and art, therefore, should be the prerogative of everyone.
I essence, Adler envisions that every student should gain an understanding of truth by applying the filter provided by
Western philosophy. Interestingly enough, Although Mortimer Adler has written a plan for all public schools in the
United States, his ideas have had the most impact at the college level. During the 1920s and 1930s, Adler’s belief in
the importance of Classical education led a significant number of American colleges and universities to adopt “Great
Books” programs — cores of required classes that focus on key works of Western philosophy and literature.
Columbia University, Adler’s alma mater, adopted a form of this program that endures today: all undergraduates are
required to take one year-long class in “Masterpieces of Western Literature” and one more year-long class in
“Masterpieces of Contemporary Civilization”. In addition, students must take one semester in “Masterpieces of
Western Art” and one semester in “Masterpieces of Western Music”. Many other colleges use some form of the Great
Books program, inspired by Adler’s ideas.
In primary and secondary education, Adler’s ideas about great books of Western Philosophy seem to have influenced
the education of prior generations more than the education of today’s children. Any literature curriculum that
involved reading great works of Western literature and/or philosophy can be said to be influenced somewhat by
Adler’s type of ideas.
Adler would later go on to be a vocal champion for the value of classics based education. And for the idea of
integrating science, literature, and philosophy, especially through drawing forth the centuries long dialogue of ideas
on and between these disciplines within the great books. Thus current scientific theories and assumptions are shown
to be not dry truths handed whose existence is inevitable, but rather part of a larger and very lively dialogue of
evolving perspectives and understandings. And finally, Adler advocated for immersing young people into this
environment of debate, hypothesis, and enquiry by evolving them in active discussion groups. Rather than simply
memorize facts, they were asked to seek genuine understanding of the material under study.
Analysis of Four Current Educational Philosophies and Their Impact on Science Education: Towards a
Reformed Christian Philosophy of Science Education
As Knight, author of Philosophy and Education (1998), suggests, Perennialist education focuses on the
importance of using the mind, reasoning, and studying the great works of the past. One key to
understanding the perennialist view of education is the concept ofliberal education. Knight (1998) goes
on to explain that "liberal education in the classical tradition revolved around those studies that made
people free and truly human, as opposed to the training that people received to do specific tasks in the
world of work" (p. 108).
Perennialism has its roots in the philosophy ofNeo-scholastism. Neoscholasticism is a modem form of
Scholasticism, which developed during the Middle Ages. Scholasticism follows the wisdom and teachings
of Aristotle, who taught that the universe has order and design and also believed in cause and effect
relationships. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) was the leading Scholastic who sought to blend Aristotelian
reason with Christian theology. "The basic approach developed by Aquinas was that a person should
acquire as much knowledge as possible through the use ofhurnan reason and then Reformed Philosophy
of Science Education 3 rely on faith in that realm beyond the scope of human understanding" (Knight,
1998, p. 51). Neo-scholastics believe that there is absolute truth in the universe. The mind must be
trained to think if it is to reach that truth.
Perennialist philosophers such as Mortimer Adler and Robert Hutchins have taken the beliefs of the
Thomas Aquinas and applied them to the field of education. The student is seen as a rational being who
has the potential to acquire knowledge and truth. They believe the responsibility of the school is to help
the student develop that potential. The perennialists also believe that people are essentially sinful in
nature (Howick, 1980). Therefore, there should not be too much freedom in the classroom. Adults know
what is important for students to study
Perennialism is subject-centered. In his book Paideia Proposal (1982), Adler advocates that education
should be the same for all students. Adler proposes a threefold course of study that is to be completed
by all students. The first component or mode of learning is acquisition of organized knowledge. This is
accomplished by means of using lectures and responses, textbooks, and other aids. The second mode
oflearning is the development of intellectual skills, such as reading, writing, calculating, observing,
measuring, and speaking. This is accomplished by coaching, drill, and supervised practice. The third
mode of learning is an enlarged understanding of ideas and values. This is accomplished by questioning
and discussion of real books. Schools that follow this philosophy have a focus on the basic subjects and
offer very few electives. There is also little emphasis on vocational training (Knight, 1998).
The teacher's role is an authoritarian role. It is the teacher's responsibility to decide to which set of
knowledge students are to be exposed. Teachers are viewed as mental disciplinarians capable of
developing reason, memory, and will power in their students (Knight, 1998). In a Christian setting,
teachers are also viewed as leaders in the realm of faith.
Education in a perennialist setting is very structured and logical. Many leading perennialist educators
favor a return to a classical concept of education, which used the "trivium" of grammar, logic and
rhetoric stages (Knight, 1998). Classical schools and the Paideia Project are two examples of the recent
use of perennialist philosophies in K-12 education ("A Classical Curriculum," 1996). Proponents of
classical education argue that at the grammar stage (grades 1-4) the mind is ready to absorb facts, and
students still find memorization to be fun. At the logic stage (grades 5-8), students are beginning to think
analytically. These students focus on looking for relationships between the facts learned in the grammar
stage and begin to look for cause and effect. At the rhetoric stage (9-12), students learn to write and
speak with force and originality. These students apply the rules oflogic to the information learned in the
grammar stage and express their conclusions.
Three very important perennialist educators were Mortimer Adler, Robert M. Hutchins, and in the
ecclesiastical realm, Jacques Maritain. Adler (1902-2001) was a professor, philosopher, and educational
theorist. He was a proponent of a liberal arts education that should be the same for every child. In his
book Paideia Proposal (1982), Adler describes his vision for American public schools: that all children
acquire knowledge, skills, and understanding of ideas and values. While a professor at Reformed
Philosophy of Science Education 5 University of Chicago, Adler along with Robert Hutchins, the college
president, led the charge to revive interest in studying the "Great Books of the Western World". They
believed that the great works of the past were filled with wisdom that has applications today.
ProgressivismPage 2 of 36PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, EDUCATION
(education.oxfordre.com). (c) Oxford University Press USA, 2016. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only;
commercial use is strictly prohibited. Please see applicable Privacy Policy and Legal Notice (for details
seePrivacy Policy).Subscriber: Universitatsbibliothek Wien; date: 02 May 2017Summary and
Keywords“Progressivism” is a collective term used in historiography to characterize historical phases in
which particular ways to think about progress are detectable. Hence, “progressivism” is more a
historiographical label used by historians than a term used by those thinkers identified as being part of a
progressive phase in history. Even though important scholars have argued that the idea of progress can
be traced back to antiquity, others have argued that ideas of progress—as a more or less linear
alternative to a cyclical way of thinking—are found for the first time in the transition from the early
modern period to modernity (ca. 1700). These ideas of progress can be linked to the advancement of
knowledge, to the perfecting of the soul or then of the social order, and they link the notion of
“progress” with notions like “perfection” and “development.” As a rule, “progress” did not include
notions of future chaos or imponderability but rather was understood as an ordered proceeding to the
future that was interpreted either as the redemption or materializing of a more or less predetermined
road (individually and/or socially), as a contribution to adjustment of social development understood as
dangerous or wrong, or as resulting from a forecast and planned future. All of these attempts over the
last three and a half centuries to conceptualize progress in one way or another were connected to
research, and they affected ideas on education; most of them were even closely related to educational
aspirations, methods, programs, and/or policy.The two great and independent motives of “progress”
can be identified first around 1700 in France and England with regard to advancement in knowledge and
the sciences (1), and in Germany with regard to the perfection of the soul. The idea of human perfection
and the advancement of the knowledge based on modern sciences were merged in the Enlightenment
prior to the French Revolution and its philosophical legitimation (2), leading in the German realm to a
philosophy of history that subordinated all of human and natural history to a great narrative from the
past to the future (3). The emergence of sociology gave the narrative a national frame that was
supported by the erection of modern schooling, but by the end of the 19th century, the modern
conditions of social and political life as actual expressions of progress were perceived as not redeeming
the promises of the Enlightenment and the philosophy of history, which led to a schism in the
interpretation of “true” progress. These critical perceptions triggered a reaction labeled the Progressive
Era, which aimed to readjust the modern conditions of life to particular, often religious ideals of social
order in which progress was more tightly connected to (idealized) visions of the past (4). The educational
ideas and ideals of this Progressive Era proved to be sustainable, but they were attacked during the Cold
War period, which saw an emphasis on technocratic aspects of governance and specific ideas of
economic and social development. The ramifications of this focus, which called for planning the future
and adjusting education to these plans, can be seen in the case of the OECD (5).

seePrivacy Policy).Subscriber: Universitatsbibliothek Wien; date: 02 May 2017Keywords: modern
sciences, perfectibility, enlightenment, philosophy of history, sociology, nation building, Progressive Era,
progressive education, Cold War, development, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development“Progressivism” is understood as a collective term used in historiography to characterize
historical phases in which particular ways to think about progress are detectable, and as a rule, these
particular ways were less descriptive or explanative than we would find in antiquity and the Middle
Ages; they were more programmatic, future-oriented, and as a rule optimistic. The idea of progress is,
as John B. Bury wrote in his seminal book of 1920, characterized as a “synthesis of the past” with “a
prophecy of the future,” focusing less on interpretation of the advancement of the past to the present
and more on its “bearings on the future.”Against that background it is not surprising that progressivism
discourses (often) represent narrations of salvation, less of providence but more of redemption.
Accordingly, progressivism belongs to a Protestant grid of thinking rather than to a Catholic. It is no
coincidence that in 1864 Pope Pius IX declared in his Syllabus of Errors that “progress, liberalism and
modern civilization” did not correspond to the Catholic Church; and vice versa, it is also not a
coincidence that early manifestos on progress, John Milton’s Paradise Regained of 1671 or John
Bunyan’s The Pilgrim’s Progress of 1678, were written by two Protestant authors, who aimed at
redemption on earth or building the city upon the hill.In this sense, styles of thought that can bear the
historiographical label “progressivism” are as a rule, at least in the broadest sense, religious, and
thereby normally Protestant or at least sharply distanced from the Catholic Church. They aim at social,
political, and/or economic reform in the direction of visions of redemption or ideals of social
coexistence. Relying on the active participation of humans, eras of progressivism are at least latently
educational, and it is therefore no coincidence that parallel to the emergence of progressivism in the
last third of the 17th century, a cultural process called the educationalization of social problems arose in
the same intellectual circles, which led to a thorough educationalization of the world and the modern
self. In this respect, progressivism was almost always connected to (new) conceptions of research,
knowledge, and learning, and to the way that research, knowledge, and learning were and are related to
ideas of education as a cultural technology to make the desired future citizen(s) of an envisioned and
sought-after future.12345 67

seePrivacy Policy).Subscriber: Universitatsbibliothek Wien; date: 02 May 2017Modern Sciences and
“Useful” Knowledge: England and France in the 17th CenturyEvidence of expressed optimism regarding
the future can be detected in the last third of the 17th century in England and in France, and in both
cases the self-perception of being part of a progressive momentum was derived from advancements in
generating new, scientific knowledge. Even though some 20 years ago Steven Shapin, by pointing at long
path dependencies, clarified that something like the “scientific revolution” has never occurred, it
nevertheless is true that during the 17th century there was a growing awareness of being able to
generate a basis for progressing toward a (better) future, without (yet) actually implying questions of
social reform. The modern sciences in the 17th century were restricted to nature and its allegedly
eternal laws that, once discovered, could and should be “useful.” Hence, knowledge derived from the
study of nature could be astonishing, pleasing, and even useful with regard to early technology and
industry in everyday life. Three quite interdependent events in England and France illustrate the visions
of progress in that time period: scientific progress in the context of the Royal Society in London, the
reform of higher education based on this progress, and a heated debate on the question as to whether
the “moderns” were indeed more advanced than the “ancients
Forerunners
Progressive education can be traced as far back as to the works

of John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, with both being
respectively known as paternal forerunners to the ideas that would be
demonstrated by theorists such as Dewey. Locke first speculated,
“truth and knowledge… are out of observation and experience rather
than manipulation of accepted or given ideas “ (Locke as cited in
Hayes, 2007, p. 2). He further discussed the need for children to have
concrete experiences in order to learn.
Rousseau furthered this assumption in Emile where he made a

standpoint against students being subordinate to teachers and that
memorization of facts would not lead to an education. (See:Emile, or
On Education)
Another forerunner to progressive education was Johann Heinrich

Pestalozzi (1746–1827). His research and theories closely resemble
those outlined by Rousseau in Emile. He is further considered by
many to be the “father of modern educational science” (Hayes, 2007,
p. 2). His psychological theories pertain to education as they focus on
the development of object teaching, that is, he felt that individuals best
learned through experiences and through a direct manipulation and
experience of objects. He further speculated that children learn
through their own internal motivation rather than through compulsion.
(See Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic motivation). A teachers task will be to help
guide their students as individuals through their learning and allow it
unfold naturally. (Butts and Cremin, 1953)
The “Progressive Education Movement,” starting in the 1880s and
lasting for sixty years, helped boost American public schools from a
budding idea to the regular norm. John Dewey, a principal figure in
this movement from the 1880s to 1904, set the tone for educational
philosophy as well as concrete school reforms. His reactions to the
prevailing theories and practices in education, corrections made to
these philosophies, and recommendations to teachers and
administrators to embrace “the new education,” provide a vital account
of the history of the development of educational thinking in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.4 Dewey placed so called
pragmatism above moral absolutes and helped give rise to situational
ethics.[2]
commercial use is strictly prohibited. Please see applicable Privacy Policy and Legal Notice (for details seePrivacy
Policy).Subscriber: Universitatsbibliothek Wien; date: 02 May 2017“Real” and “Useful” Knowledge in the Service of
ProgressThe year 1667 saw the publication of Thomas Sprat’s History of the Royal Society of London, For the
Improving of Natural Knowledge. The Royal Society, which was devoted to the experimental or scientific study of
nature, was barely seven years old at the time. Evidently, Sprat’s purpose behind the historiography was not so
much exact reconstruction of the seven-year history of the Royal Society but rather the construction of a new age
with regard to power and knowledge. According to Sprat, the Royal Society was devoted to serve the
“Advancement of Experimental Philosophy,” contributing to “the Benefit of humane life, by the Advancement of
Real Knowledge.” By the time of the foundation of the Royal Society in 1660, the hero of this account had long
been dead: Francis Bacon, who had died in 1626. Sprat characterizes Bacon as a “new Philosopher,” who has “not
onely disagreed from the Antients, but ha[s] also propos’d to themselves the right course of slow, and sure
Experimenting”; in Bacon’s books “there are every where scattered the best arguments, that can be produc’d to
the defense of Experimental Philosophy; and the best directions, that are needful to promote it.”Bacon would have
been pleased by Sprat’s narrative, for both the title and the frontispiece of his major work, the Novum Organum
Scientiarum, published in 1620, indicated in a programmatic way something new to come. The title is a reference
to the up-to-then more or less unquestioned authority of Aristotle’s work Organon, a treatise in which logic and
syllogism were defined as the foundations of science. Bacon’s emphasis on the new indicates his intention to
define new (and better) grounds of scientific research, based on experiments (and not on syllogisms). The same
purpose is also expressed in the frontispiece of the book, in which two “pillars” on both sides of the Strait of
Gibraltar, known as Pillars of Hercules, are depicted. These pillars had previously been symbolized by the motto
Non plus ultra (no way beyond that point), but on the frontispiece of the Novum Organum, two ships are sailing
through them toward the West, and below stands the motto Many will pass through and knowledge will be the
greater. How important this symbol of the Non plus ultra was can be seen a year after Sprat’s History of the Royal
Society, in 1668, when the Puritan Joseph Glanvill published a book dedicated to the Royal Society that
ostentatiously deleted the “non” from the non plus ultra in the title: Plus Ultra, or The Progress and Advancement
of Knowledge Since the Days of Aristotle.New Knowledge and Curriculum Reform in Higher Education in
EnglandThe extent to which Bacon expected progression through his method generating new knowledge may be
disputed, but to some of his successors, most often in Puritan circles, it was clear that new knowledge had to be
“useful knowledge,” as John Webster, a Protestant clergymen and supporter of the Commonwealth, claimed in
1654. To this end, Webster argued, the “Herculean pillars” (p. 8) had to be trespassed, and accordingly, the
9101112131415

Policy).Subscriber: Universitatsbibliothek Wien; date: 02 May 2017institutions of higher education, devoted so far
to the “Scholastick learning,” had to be completely changed; to Webster, “speculative” disciplines were simply a
crime if they were “of no use or benefit to mankind.” Correspondingly, the teaching of classical languages should
be abandoned, for, as Webster argued against the background of his Puritanism, the emphasis on language and
grammars diverted men from the essentiality in reading the Bible, to experience the Holy Spirit, “for the letter
killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.” Furthermore, the Aristotelian logic, the syllogism, was labeled “civil war of
words,” “fruitless and vain”; it had to be abandoned and the reluctance of higher education with regard to
arithmetic, geometry, and “Optical Art” had to be overcome.But it was not only the whole curriculum of higher
education that needed to be changed in order to generate useful knowledge for progress, but also the scholarly
customs, for, as Weber complains, the students “never go out by industrious searches, and observant experiments,
to find out the mysteries contained in nature.” Aristotle, as taught in schools, was often “superfluous,
Tautological, frivolous, and needless.”Aristotle and the dissemination of knowledge based on his philosophy were
seen not only as old-fashioned but even as hindering true progress, as Glanvill, mentioned above, demonstrated in
his 1668 Plus Ultra, or The Progress and Advancement of Knowledge Since the Days of Aristotle. In Plus Ultra,
Glanville aims at demonstrating the usefulness of new knowledge based on the scientific method and at the same
time at “detecting the immorality, weakness, and vanity of the Spirit that opposeth it.” Philosophy “must not be
the work of the Mind turned in upon it self, and only conversing with its own Idaeas,” but must “be raised from the
Observations and Applications of Sense, and take its Accounts from Things as they are in the sensible World.”
Glanvill adds that it had been Bacon who had put an end to the “unprofitableness of the former Methods of
knowledge.” As opposed to the logics of Aristotle, we “must seek and gather, observe and examine, and lay up in
Bank for the Ages that come after. This is the business of the Experimental Philosophers; and in these Designs a
progress hath been made sufficient to satisfie sober expectations.”Glanvill’s demonstration of the superiority of his
current time over the ancient Greeks and his certainty about building a scientific basis for the future (“for the Ages
that come after”) had a successor that became much more famous, maybe because it was a real, contested debate
that was triggered at the most impressive court of the time, Versailles, the center of political power in France since
1682, when Louis XIV had moved there from Paris. It became famous as the Quarrel of the Ancients and the
Moderns.The Quarrel of the Ancients and the ModernsBy the end of the 17th century, the intellectual centers of
Europe were in London and in Paris, and despite some rivalries and even wars, the exchange across the Channel
was intense. For instance, John Glanvill, mentioned above, translated in 1687 a book by the outstanding French
Cartesian Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle, Entretiens sur la pluralité des mondes, that had been published a year
earlier. In this book, Fontenelle explained to 16171819202122232425262728

Policy).Subscriber: Universitatsbibliothek Wien; date: 02 May 2017the public in easy-to-read French (and not in
Latin) why, based on Copernicus’s insights, the heliocentric model of the universe was right, and why the
geocentric model was wrong, no matter what the official position of the Catholic Church was on this topic.Precisely
at this time, Fontenelle became part of a heated debate at the French court in Versailles known as the Quarrel of
the Ancients and the Moderns. It had been triggered by the Frenchman Charles Perrault, who, on occasion of Louis
XIV’s recovery from an operation in 1687, presented a poem titled Le siècle de Louis le Grand (The century of Louis
the Great) to the Académie française. In the poem, Perrault praised the accomplishments of Louis XIV’s times and
challenged the authority of antiquity that up to then had remained (almost) unquestioned. Precisely because of
the advancement of the modern sciences, promoted by Louis XIV, the moderns were much more sophisticated
(perfectionné) than the ancients.The French intelligentsia accepted Perrault’s praise of the French king, but some
challenged the pretention concerning the ancient authorities; one of the prominent opponents was the poet
Nicolas Boileau-Despréaux (usually called Boilau). On the other side, Fontenelle, among others, published
Digression sur les anciens et les modernes(Digression about the ancients and the moderns), in which he argued
that the (natural) sciences were ruled by a regularity other than immutable nature itself, and that therefore
progress was indeed possible. Hence, whereas Fontenelle did not challenge the perception of a circular system of
nature, he identified the sciences such as physics, medicine, and also mathematics as progressing extremely slowly
but continually toward perfectibility (“qui se perfectionne avec une extrême lenteur, et se perfectionne toujours”).
The human mind and its faculty to generate knowledge were, in contrast to nature, progressing toward
perfectibility. But what about the social and political realm of life?At the end of the 17th century, leading scientific
circles in Paris and London were in no doubt that they were in a first phase of eminent progression based on
modern scientific methods. Even though they hardly would have doubted that the new knowledge had impacts on
life and that the progress was on a road to perfection, it was not believed that their discovered natural laws would
have much impact on (reforming) the social and political life; there were simply no social theories in existence and
thus none that would need to be adjusted to the new scientific epistemology. Even though there was something
“democratic” in the learning conception of the moderns, there were no democratic inclinations in their visions. The
extension of their conception of progress to the social and political realm was to depend on a theory of natural
rights of men that, ironically or not, originated in the German Protestant theory of natural law that was designed
with no inclination toward either the modern sciences or the political or social side of life.29303132

Policy).Subscriber: Universitatsbibliothek Wien; date: 02 May 2017Natural Rights of Men, Progress, and
Perfectibility, and the French RevolutionConnecting modern knowledge and progress to social or political reforms
is an idea of the 18th century, and as a rule it is connected to broader educational aspirations. First and rather
unsystematic thoughts were developed by the author of the famous Projet pour rendre la paix perpétuelle en
Europe (Project for perpetual peace in Europe), Abbé de Saint-Pierre, in his 1718 publication Discours sur la
polysynodie, where he advocated the political restriction of absolute monarchy and the importance of more
republican forms of government. Saint-Pierre expressed his faith in the ability of men to perfect themselves,
depending on the political and social conditions and accordingly on institutions, not least educational institutions,
as he propagated the same year (1718) in his Projet pour perfectionner l’éducation (Project to improve/perfect
education). As a matter of fact, the concept of “perfection” was expanded from the realm of knowledge and
cognition to the human as person and to the social realm through Protestant natural law theories, which in turn
laid the basis, at the end of the century, of legitimating the French Revolution
on the language and practice of schooling in the United States. It is best to start this story in the
present time, where the meaning of progressivism is well defined. Today progressivism means
pedagogical progressivism. It means basing instruction on the needs, interests and developmental stage
of the child; it means teaching students the skills they need in order to learn any subject, instead of
focusing on transmitting a particular subject; it means promoting discovery and selfdirected learning by
the student through active engagement; it means having students work on projects that express student
purposes and that integrate the disciplines around socially relevant themes; and it means promoting
values of community, cooperation, tolerance, justice and democratic equality. In the shorthand of
educational jargon, this adds up to ‘child-centered instruction’, ‘discovery learning’ and ‘learning how to
learn’. And in the current language of American education schools there is a single label that captures
this entire approach to education: constructivism. As Lawrence Cremin has pointed out, by the 1950s
this particular progressive approach to education had become the dominant language of American
education.2 Within the community of professional educators—by which I mean classroom teachers and
the education professors who train them—pedagogical progressivism provides the words we use to talk
about teaching and learning in schools. And within education schools, progressivism is the ruling
ideology. It is hard to find anyone in an American education school who does not talk the talk and
espouse the principles of the progressive creed. This situation worries a number of educational
reformers. After all, progressivism runs directly counter to the main thrust of educational reform efforts
in the US in the early twenty-first century. Reform is moving in the direction of establishing rigorous
academic frameworks for the school curriculum, setting performance standards for students, and using
high stakes testing to motivate students to learn the curriculum and teachers to teach it. Education
schools and their pedagogically progressive ideals stand in strong opposition to all of these reform
efforts. To today’s reformers, therefore, education schools look less like the solution than the problem.3
But these reformers should not be so worried—for two reasons. First, this form of progressivism has had
an enormous impact on educational rhetoric but very little impact on educational practice. This is the
conclusion reached by historians of pedagogy, such as Larry Cuban and Arthur Zilversmit, and by
contemporary scholars of 2 Cremin, Lawrence A. The Transformation of the School: Progressivism in
American Education, 1976–1957. New York, 1961: 328. 3 Hirsch Jr., E. D. The Schools We Need and Why
We Don’t Have Them. New York, 1996; Public Agenda. Different Drummers: How Teachers of Teachers
View Public Education. New York, 1997; Ravitch, Diane. Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms.
New York, 2000. 278 D. F. Labaree teaching practice, such as John Goodlad and David Cohen.4
Instruction in American schools is overwhelmingly teacher-centered; classroom management is the
teacher’s top priority; traditional school subjects dominate the curriculum; textbooks and teacher talk
are the primary means of delivering this curriculum; learning consists of recalling what texts and
teachers say; and tests measure how much of this students have learned. What signs there are of
student-centered instruction and discovery learning tend to be superficial or short-lived. We talk
progressive but we rarely teach that way. In short, traditional methods of teaching and learning are in
control of American education. The pedagogical progressives lost. The other reason that reformers
should not worry about contemporary progressivism is that its primary advocates are lodged in
education schools, and nobody takes these institutions seriously. Our colleagues in the university think
of us as being academically weak and narrowly vocational. They see us not as peers in the world of
higher education but as an embarrassment that should not really be part of a university at all. To them
we look less like a school of medicine than a school of cosmetology. The most prestigious universities
often try to limit the education school’s ability to grant degrees or even eliminate it altogether. There is
not enough space here for me to explain the historical roots of the education school’s lowly status in the
US but the conclusion is clear: we rank at the very bottom.5 As a result of this, we have zero credibility
in making pronouncements about education. We are solidly in the progressive camp ideologically, but
we have no ability to promote progressive practices in the schools. In fact, we do not even practice
progressivism in our own work, as seen in the way we carry out research and the way we train
teachers.6 Why is it that American education professors have such a longstanding, deeply rooted and
widely shared rhetorical commitment to the progressive vision? The answer can be found in the
convergence between the history of the education school and the history of the child-centered strand of
progressivism during the early twentieth century. Historical circumstances drew them together so
strongly that they became inseparable. As a result, progressivism became the ideology of the education
professor. Education schools have their own legend about how this happened, which is a stirring tale
about a marriage made in heaven, between an ideal that would save education
pro·gres·siv·ism
(prə-grĕs′ĭ-vĭz′əm)
n.
1. The principles and practices of political progressives.
2. Progressive education.
pro·gres′siv·ist n.
pro·gres′siv·is′tic adj.
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
pro•gres•siv•ism
(prəˈgrɛs əˌvɪz əm)
n.
1. the principles and practices of progressives.
2. (cap.) the doctrines and beliefs of a Progressive Party.
[1890–95]
pro•gres′siv•ist, n., adj.
Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright
2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
progressivism
1. Also called progressionism, progressism. the principles and practices ofthose advocating pro
gress, change, or reform, especially in political matters.
2. (cap.) the doctrines and beliefs of the Progressive party in America. —progressivist, n.
Meanings[edit]
The meanings of progressivism have varied over time and from different
perspectives. Progressivism became highly significant during the Age of
Enlightenment in Europe, out of the belief that Europe was demonstrating that
societies could progress in civility from uncivilized conditions to civilization
through strengthening the basis of empirical knowledge as the foundation of
society.[2] Figures of the Enlightenment believed that progress
had universalapplication to all societies and that these ideas would spread
across the world from Europe.[2]
In the modern era, a movement that identifies as progressive is "a social or
political movement that aims to represent the interests of ordinary people through
political change and the support of government actions"[3] In the 21st century,
those who identify as progressive may do so for a variety of reasons: for
example, to favor public policy that reduces or ameliorates the harmful effects of
economic inequality as well as systemic discrimination, to advocate for
environmentally conscious policies, as well as for social safety nets and rights of
workers, to oppose the negative externalities inflicted on the environment and
society by monopolies or corporate influence on the democratic process. The
unifying theme is to call attention to the negative impacts of current institutions or
ways of doing things, and to advocate for progress, that is, for positive change as
defined by any of several standards, such expansion of democracy, increased
social or economic equality, improved well being of a population, etc.
The contemporary common political conception of progressivism in the culture of
the Western world emerged from the vast social changes brought about
by industrialization in the Western world in the late-19th century. Progressives in
the early-20th century as well as now, take the view that progress is being stifled
by vast economic inequality between the rich and the poor; minimally
regulated laissez-faire capitalism with monopolistic corporations; and intense and
often violent conflict between workers and capitalists, thus claiming that
measures were needed to address these problems.[4] Early-20th century
progressivism was also tied to eugenics[5][6][7] and the temperance movement,[8]
[9]
both of which were promoted in the name of public health, and were promoted
as initiatives toward that goal. Contemporary progressives promote public
policies that they believe will lead to positive social change.
Progressivism in philosophy and politics [edit]

From the Enlightenment to the Industrial Revolution[edit]
Immanuel Kant
Immanuel Kant identified progress as being a movement away from barbarism

towards civilization. 18th-century philosopher and political scientist Marquis de
Condorcet predicted that political progress would involve the disappearance of
slavery, the rise of literacy, the lessening of inequalities between the sexes,
reforms of harsh prisons and the decline of poverty.[10] "Modernity" or
"modernization" was a key form of the idea of progress as promoted by classical
liberals in the 19th and 20th centuries who called for the rapid modernization of
the economy and society to remove the traditional hindrances to free
markets and free movements of people.[11]
Contemporary mainstream political conception[edit]
John Stuart Mill
In the late 19th century, a political view rose in popularity in the Western world
that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality between the rich and
the poor, minimally regulated laissez-faire capitalism with out-of-
control monopolisticcorporations, intense and often violent conflict between
workers and capitalists and a need for measures to address these problems.
[12]
Progressivism has influenced various political movements. Modern
liberalism was influenced by liberalphilosopher John Stuart Mill's conception of
people being "progressive beings".[13]British Prime Minister Benjamin
Disraeli developed progressive conservatism under "one-nation" Toryism.[14][15] In
France, the space between social revolution and the socially-conservative
laissez-faire centre-right was filled with the emergence of Radicalism, which
thought that social progress required humanism, republicanism and
anticlericalism, and which was until the mid twentieth-century the dominant
influence on the centre left in many French- and Romance-speaking countries.
Similarly in Imperial Germany, Chancellor Otto von Bismarck enacted various
progressive social welfare measures out of conservative motivations to distance
workers from the socialist movement of the time and as humane ways to assist in
maintaining the Industrial Revolution.[16] Proponents of social democracy have
identified themselves as promoting the progressive cause.[17]The Roman Catholic
Church encyclical Rerum novarum issued by Pope Leo XIII in 1891 condemned
the exploitation of labour and urged support for labour unions and government
regulation of businesses in the interests of social justice while upholding the
rights of private property and criticizing socialism.[18] A Protestant progressive
outlook called the Social Gospel emerged in North America that focused on
challenging economic exploitation and poverty and by the mid-1890s was
common in many Protestant theological seminaries in the United States.[19]
Theodore Roosevelt
In the United States, progressivism began as a social movement in the 1890s

and grew into a political movement in what was known as the Progressive Era.
While the term "American progressives" represent a range of diverse political
pressure groups (not always united), some American progressives
rejected social Darwinism, believing that the problems society faced (poverty,
violence, greed, racism and class warfare) could best be addressed by providing
good education, a safe environment, and an efficient workplace. Progressives
lived mainly in the cities, were college educated and believed that government
could be a tool for change.[20]American President Theodore Roosevelt of
the Republican Party and later the Progressive Party declared that he "always
believed that wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand".
[21]
President Woodrow Wilson was also a member of the American progressive
movement within the Democratic Party.
Progressive stances have evolved over time. Imperialism was a controversial
issue within progressivism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly in
the United States where some progressives supported American
imperialism while others opposed it.[22]
In response to World War I, progressive President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen
Points established the concept of national self-determination and criticized
imperialist competition and colonial injustices; these views were supported
by anti-imperialists in areas of the world that were resisting imperial rule.[23] During
the period of acceptance of economic Keynesianism (1930s to 1970s), there was
widespread acceptance in many nations of a large role for state intervention in
the economy. With the rise of neoliberalism and challenges to
state interventionist policies in the 1970s and 1980s, centre-left progressive
movements responded by creating the Third Way that emphasized a major role
for the market economy.[24] There have been social democrats who have called
for the social democratic movement to move past Third Way.
[25]
Prominent progressive conservative elements in the British Conservative
Party have criticized neoliberalism.[26]
Adler states:
... our political democracy depends upon the reconstitution of our schools. Our
schools are not turning out young people prepared for the high office and the
duties of citizenship in a democratic republic. Our political institutions cannot
thrive, they may not even survive, if we do not produce a greater number of
thinking citizens, from whom some statesmen of the type we had in the 18th
century might eventually emerge. We are, indeed, a nation at risk, and nothing
but radical reform of our schools can save us from impending disaster...
Whatever the price... the price we will pay for not doing it will be much greater. [2]
Hutchins writes in the same vein:
The business of saying ... that people are not capable of achieving a good
education is too strongly reminiscent of the opposition of every extension of
democracy. This opposition has always rested on the allegation that the people
were incapable of exercising the power they demanded. Always the historic
statement has been verified: you cannot expect the slave to show the virtues of
the free man unless you first set him free. When the slave has been set free, he
has, in the passage of time, become indistinguishable from those who have
always been free ... There appears to be an innate human tendency to
underestimate the capacity of those who do not belong to "our" group. Those
who do not share our background cannot have our ability. Foreigners, people
who are in a different economic status, and the young seem invariably to be
regarded as intellectually backward ...[3]
As with the essentialists, perennialists are educationally conservative in the
requirement of a curriculum focused upon fundamental subject areas, but stress
that the overall aim should be exposure to history's finest thinkers as models for
discovery. The student should be taught such basic subjects as English,
languages, history, mathematics, natural science, philosophy, and fine arts.
[4]
Adler states: "The three R's, which always signified the formal disciplines, are
the essence of liberal or general education."[5]
Secular perennialists agree with progressivists that memorization of vast
amounts of factual information and a focus on second-hand information in
textbooks and lectures does not develop rational thought. They advocate
learning through the development of meaningful conceptual thinking and
judgement by means of a directed reading list of the profound, aesthetic, and
meaningful great books of the Western canon. These books, secular
perennialists argue, are written by the world's finest thinkers, and cumulatively
comprise the "Great Conversation" of humanity with regard to the central human
questions. Their basic argument for the use of original works (abridged
translations being acceptable as well) is that these are the products of "genius".
Hutchins remarks:
Great books are great teachers; they are showing us every day what ordinary
people are capable of. These books come out of ignorant, inquiring humanity.
They are usually the first announcements for success in learning. Most of them
were written for, and addressed to, ordinary people.[3]
It is important to note that the Great Conversation is not static, which is the
impression that one might obtain from some descriptions of perennialism, a
confusion with religious perennialism, or even the term perennialism itself. The
Great Conversation and the set of related great books changes as the
representative thought of man changes or progresses, and is therefore
representative of an evolution of thought, but is not based upon the whim or
fancy of the latest cultural fads. Hutchins makes this point very clear:
In the course of history... new books have been written that have won their place
in the list. Books once thought entitled to belong to it have been superseded; and
this process of change will continue as long as men can think and write. It is the
task of every generation to reassess the tradition in which it lives, to discard what
it cannot use, and to bring into context with the distant and intermediate past the
most recent contributions to the Great Conversation. ...the West needs to
recapture and reemphasize and bring to bear upon its present problems the
wisdom that lies in the works of its greatest thinkers and in the discussion that
they have carried on.[3]
Perennialism was a solution proposed in response to what was considered by
many to be a failing educational system. Again Hutchins writes:
The products of American high schools are illiterate; and a degree from a famous
college or university is no guarantee that the graduate is in any better case. One
of the most remarkable features of American society is that the difference
between the "uneducated" and the "educated" is so slight.[3]
In this regard John Dewey and Hutchins were in agreement. Hutchins's book The
Higher Learning in Americadeplored the "plight of higher learning" that had
turned away from cultivation of the intellect and toward anti-intellectual
practicality due in part, to a lust for money. In a highly negative review of the
book, Dewey wrote a series of articles in The Social Frontier which began by
applauding Hutchins' attack on "the aimlessness of our present educational
scheme.[6]
Perennialists believe that reading is to be supplemented with mutual
investigations (between the teacher and the student) and minimally-directed
discussions through the Socratic method in order to develop a historically
oriented understanding of concepts. They argue that accurate, independent
reasoning distinguishes the developed or educated mind and they thus stress the
development of this faculty. A skilled teacher would keep discussions on topic
and correct errors in reasoning, but it would be the class, not the teacher, who
would reach the conclusions. While not directing or leading the class to a
conclusion, the teacher may work to accurately formulate problems within the
scope of the texts being studied.
While the standard argument for utilizing a modern text supports distillation of
information into a form relevant to modern society, perennialists argue that many
of the historical debates and the development of ideas presented by the great
books are relevant to any society, at any time, and thus that the suitability of the
great books for instructional use is unaffected by their age.
Perennialists freely acknowledge that any particular selection of great books will
disagree on many topics; however, they see this as an advantage, rather than a
detriment. They believe that the student must learn to recognize such
disagreements, which often reflect current debates. The student becomes
responsible for thinking about the disagreements and reaching a reasoned,
defensible conclusion. This is a major goal of the Socratic discussions. They do
not advocate teaching a settled scholarly interpretation of the books, which would
cheat the student of the opportunity to learn rational criticism and to know his
own mind.
Religious perennialism[edit]
Perennialism was originally religious in nature, developed first by Thomas
Aquinas in the thirteenth century in his work De Magistro (The Teacher).
In the nineteenth century, John Henry Newman presented a defense of religious
perennialism in The Idea of a University. Discourse 5 of that work, "Knowledge
Its Own End", is a recent statement of a Christian educational perennialism.[7]
There are several epistemological options, which affect the pedagogical options.
The possibilities may be surveyed by considering four extreme positions, as
indicated in the following table:
Idealistic Rationalism Realistic Rationalism
Idealistic Fideism Realistic Fideism
Colleges exemplifying this philosophy

phi·los·o·phy
/fəˈläsəfē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1. the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially
when considered as an academic discipline.
o a particular system of philosophical thought.
plural noun: philosophies
"Schopenhauer’s philosophy"
o the study of the theoretical basis of a particular branch of knowledge or experience.
"the philosophy of science"
synonyms: thinking, reasoning, thought, wisdom, knowledge
"a lecturer in philosophy"
Singer, Marcus G., “Philosophy” The World Book Encyclopedia, 1994 World Book, Inc. Chicago [530
words]— definition and importance
Philosophy is a study that seeks to understand the mysteries of existence and reality. It tries to
discover the nature of truth and knowledge and to find what is of basic value and importance in
life. It also examines the relationships between humanity and nature and between the individual
and society. Philosophy arises out of wonder, curiosity, and the desire to know and understand.
Philosophy is thus a form of inquiry – a process of analysis, criticism, interpretation, and
speculation.
The term philosophy cannot be defined precisely because the subject is so complex and so
controversial. Different philosophers have different views of the nature, methods, and range of
philosophy. The term philosophy itself comes from the Greek philosophia, which means love of
wisdom. In that sense, wisdom is the active use of intelligence, not something passive that a
person simply possesses.
At its simplest, philosophy (from the Greek

or phílosophía, meaning ‘the love of wisdom’) is the study of
knowledge, or "thinking about thinking", although the
breadth of what it covers is perhaps best illustrated by a
selection of other alternative definitions:
 the discipline concerned with questions of how one should live
(ethics); what sorts of things exist and what are their essential
natures (metaphysics); what counts as genuine knowledge
(epistemology); and what are the correct principles of reasoning
(logic) (Wikipedia)
 investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality,
knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than
empirical methods (American Heritage Dictionary)
 the study of the ultimate nature of existence, reality, knowledge and
goodness, as discoverable by human reasoning (Penguin English
Dictionary)
 the rational investigation of questions about existence and
knowledge and ethics (WordNet)
 the search for knowledge and truth, especially about the nature of
man and his behavior and beliefs (Kernerman English Multilingual
Dictionary)
 the rational and critical inquiry into basic principles (Microsoft
Encarta Encyclopedia)
 the study of the most general and abstract features of the world and
categories with which we think: mind, matter, reason, proof, truth,
etc. (Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy)
 careful thought about the fundamental nature of the world, the
grounds for human knowledge, and the evaluation of human
conduct (The Philosophy Pages)
perennial
The Paideia Proposal, a book published in 1982 by Mortimer Adler,

described a system of education based on the classics.
Perennialism. “The purpose of the university is nothing less than to
procure a moral, intellectual, and spiritual revolution throughout the
world” – Robert Hutchins.
progressivism
noun
pro·gres·siv·ism | \ prə-ˈgre-si-ˌvi-zəm \
Definition of progressivism
1: the principles, beliefs, or practices of progressives
2capitalized : the political and economic doctrines
advocated by the Progressives
3: the theories of progressive education
ducational theory[edit]
Progressive education can be traced back to the works of John Locke and Jean-
Jacques Rousseau, both of whom are known as forerunners of ideas that would
be developed by theorists such as John Dewey. Considered one of the first of the
British empiricists, Locke believed that "truth and knowledge… arise out of
observation and experience rather than manipulation of accepted or given ideas".
[2]:2
He further discussed the need for children to have concrete experiences in
order to learn. Rousseau deepened this line of thinking in Emile, or On
Education, where he argued that subordination of students to teachers and
memorization of facts would not lead to an education.
Johann Bernhard Basedow[edit]
In Germany, Johann Bernhard Basedow (1724–1790) established the
Philanthropinum at Dessau in 1774. He developed new teaching methods based
on conversation and play with the child, and a program of physical development.
Such was his success that he wrote a treatise on his methods, "On the best and
hitherto unknown method of teaching children of noblemen".
Christian Gotthilf Salzmann[edit]
Christian Gotthilf Salzmann (1744–1811) was the founder of the Schnepfenthal
institution, a school dedicated to new modes of education (derived heavily from
the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau). He wrote Elements of Morality, for the
Use of Children, one of the first books translated into English by Mary
Wollstonecraft.
Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi[edit]
Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746–1827) was a Swiss pedagogue and
educational reformer who exemplified Romanticism in his approach. He founded
several educational institutions both in German- and French-speaking regions of
Switzerland and wrote many works explaining his revolutionary modern principles
of education. His motto was "Learning by head, hand and heart". His research
and theories closely resemble those outlined by Rousseau in Emile. He is further
considered by many to be the "father of modern educational science"[2] His
psychological theories pertain to education as they focus on the development of
object teaching, that is, he felt that individuals best learned through experiences
and through a direct manipulation and experience of objects. He further
speculated that children learn through their own internal motivation rather than
through compulsion. (See Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic motivation). A teacher's task will
be to help guide their students as individuals through their learning and allow it to
unfold naturally.[3]
Friedrich Fröbel[edit]
Friedrich Wilhelm August Fröbel (1782–1852) was a student of Pestalozzi who
laid the foundation for modern education based on the recognition that children
have unique needs and capabilities. He believed in "self-activity" and play as
essential factors in child education. The teacher's role was not to indoctrinate but
to encourage self-expression through play, both individually and in group
activities. He created the concept of kindergarten.
Johann Friedrich Herbart[edit]
Johann Friedrich Herbart (1776–1841) emphasized the connection between
individual development and the resulting societal contribution. The five key ideas
which composed his concept of individual maturation were Inner Freedom,
Perfection, Benevolence, Justice, and Equity or Recompense.[4] According to
Herbart, abilities were not innate but could be instilled, so a thorough education
could provide the framework for moral and intellectual development. In order to
develop a child to lead to a consciousness of social responsibility, Herbart
advocated that teachers utilize a methodology with five formal steps: "Using this
structure a teacher prepared a topic of interest to the children, presented that
topic, and questioned them inductively, so that they reached new knowledge
based on what they had already known, looked back, and deductively summed
up the lesson's achievements, then related them to moral precepts for daily
living".[5]
John Melchior Bosco[edit]
John Melchior Bosco (1815–1888) was concerned about the education of street
children who had left their villages to find work in the rapidly industrialized city
of Turin, Italy. Exploited as cheap labor or imprisoned for unruly behavior, Bosco
saw the need of creating a space where they would feel at home. He called it an
'Oratory' where they could play, learn, share friendships, express themselves,
develop their creative talents and pick up skills for gainful self-employment. With
those who had found work, he set up a mutual-fund society (an early version of
the Grameen Bank) to teach them the benefits of saving and self-reliance. The
principles underlying his educational method that won over the hearts and minds
of thousands of youth who flocked to his oratory were: 'be reasonable', 'be kind',
'believe' and 'be generous in service'. Today his method of education is practiced
in nearly 3000 institutions set up around the world by the members of
the Salesian Society he founded in 1873.
Cecil Reddie[edit]
While studying for his doctorate in Göttingen in 1882–1883, Cecil Reddie was
greatly impressed by the progressive educational theories being applied there.
Reddie founded Abbotsholme School in Derbyshire, England in 1889. Its
curriculum enacted the ideas of progressive education. Reddie rejected rote
learning, classical languages and corporal punishment. He combined studies in
modern languages and the sciences and arts with a program of physical
exercise, manual labour, recreation, crafts and arts. Abbotsholme was imitated
throughout Europe and was particularly influential in Germany.[6] He often
engaged foreign teachers, who learned its practices, before returning home to
start their own schools. Hermann Lietz an Abbotsholme teacher founded five
schools (Landerziehungsheime für Jungen) on Abbotsholme's principles.[7] Other
people he influenced included Kurt Hahn, Adolphe Ferrière and Edmond
Demolins. His ideas also reached Japan, where it turned into "Taisho-era Free
Education Movement" (Taisho Jiyu Kyoiku Undo)
John Dewey[edit]
In the United States the "Progressive Education Movement", starting in the 1880s
and lasting for sixty years, helped boost American public schools from a budding
idea to the regular norm. John Dewey, a principal figure in this movement from
the 1880s to 1904, set the tone for educational philosophy as well as concrete
school reforms. His thinking had been influenced by the ideas of Fröbel and
Herbart.[8][9] His reactions to the prevailing theories and practices in education,
corrections made to these philosophies, and recommendations to teachers and
administrators to embrace "the new education", provide a vital account of the
history of the development of educational thinking in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries. Dewey placed pragmatism above moral absolutes and
helped give rise to situational ethics.[2][10] Beginning in 1897 John Dewey published
a summary of his theory on progressive education in School Journal. His
theoretical standpoints are divided into five sections outlined below.
What education is[edit]
Education according to Dewey is the "participation of the individual in the social
consciousness of the race" (Dewey, 1897, para. 1). As such, education should
take into account that the student is a social being. The process begins at birth
with the child unconsciously gaining knowledge and gradually developing their
knowledge to share and partake in society.
The educational process has two sides, the psychological and the sociological,
with the psychological forming the basis. (Dewey, 1897). A child's own instincts
will help develop the material that is presented to them. These instincts also form
the basis of their knowledge with everything building upon it. This forms the basis
of Dewey's assumption that one cannot learn without motivation.
Instruction must focus on the child as a whole for you can never be sure as to
where society may end or where that student will be needed or will take them.
John Dewey on Progressive Education. ... By this, Dewey meant
that philosophy had to be grounded in the practical conditions of
everyday human life, and that human knowledge should be linked to
practical social experience. This philosophy underpinned all
his educational thinking.
The Views of John Dewey

Dewey believed that human beings learn through a 'hands-on'
approach. This placesDewey in the educational philosophy of
pragmatism. ... From Dewey's educationalpoint of view, this means
that students must interact with their environment in order to adapt
and learn.
Progressive education is essentially a view of education that

emphasizes the need to learn by doing. Deweybelieved that human
beings learn through a 'hands-on' approach. This places Dewey in the
educational philosophy of pragmatism. Pragmatists believe that reality
must be experienced.
“A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will [either] cease to be
great or cease to be a democracy.” (Teddy Roosevelt, 1910)

Reflection

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Reflection

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reflection

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analyzing the relationship between prospective teachers’

educational philosophies and their teaching-learning

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Two contrasting main approaches in teaching and learning can be

Traditional approach follows teacher and subject-centered teaching

Having emerged as the theory on how to teach the knowledge to

Constructivist approach became an effective movement after

A number of philosophy-relevant studies have been conducted among

As researches on teaching-learning approaches are grouped in terms

Despite the general tendency in literature that teachers’ educational

The purpose of this research is to analyze the relationship between

1. What is the educational philosophy and teaching-learning approach

2. Does the educational philosophy and teaching-learning approach

b) departments they study in?

Robert Maynard Hutchins is considered one of the most

Jacques Maritain was a French Catholic philosopher who

Another famous Perennialist author is Mortimer J. Adler, who

In primary and secondary education, Adler’s ideas about

Adler would later go on to be a vocal champion for the value

Robert Maynard Hutchins is considered one of the most

Jacques Maritain was a French Catholic philosopher who

Another famous Perennialist author is Mortimer J. Adler, who

In primary and secondary education, Adler’s ideas about

Adler would later go on to be a vocal champion for the value

ProgressivismPage 3 of 36PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, EDUCATION

ProgressivismPage 4 of 36PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, EDUCATION

Progressive education can be traced as far back as to the works

Rousseau furthered this assumption in Emile where he made a

Another forerunner to progressive education was Johann Heinrich

ProgressivismPage 6 of 36PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, EDUCATION

ProgressivismPage 7 of 36PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, EDUCATION

ProgressivismPage 8 of 36PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, EDUCATION

Progressivism in philosophy and politics [edit]

Immanuel Kant identified progress as being a movement away from barbarism

John Stuart Mill

In the United States, progressivism began as a social movement in the 1890s

Idealistic Rationalism Realistic Rationalism

Idealistic Fideism Realistic Fideism

Colleges exemplifying this philosophy

At its simplest, philosophy (from the Greek

The Paideia Proposal, a book published in 1982 by Mortimer Adler,

The Views of John Dewey

Progressive education is essentially a view of education that

You might also like