1

Educational Philosophy

My primary school thinking when I would hear the word “curriculum” was the book that

helped pace learning and had the answer keys to the workbook. As I have entered the education

field, that definition has very much evolved and throughout my coursework and time in the

classroom I have developed a comprehensive philosophy surrounding it. I’d like to preface this

by saying this philosophy may change as I grow and learn, and I can only speak my truth as the

educator I am right now. This personal truth lends me to lean toward the idea of experimentalism

since things are constantly changing based on current reality and experiences. As the text states,

“The experimentalists encourage the active involvement of the learner in all his or her capacities

in the educational process.” (Gordon, Taylor, & Olivia, 2019) For myself, it feels to be the more

holistic view of learning that prioritizes the learner as whole and all the wonderful gifts they may

bring outside of the traditional memorization, regurgitation, computation, and repeat motion that

I associated with traditional learning growing up. According to Ron Kurtus, the learner uses

knowledge from their own social experiences as a guide for problem solving. I feel like this form

lends itself to more practical applications and creates more buy-in from the student since they

know what they are learning is for a clear reason. A handful of the teaching standards of practice

prioritize making content relevant and making real-world connections and this philosophy

naturally invites that buy-in from the students for that very reason.

Student Learning

I also lean toward the progressive view of education led by thinkers like John Dewey and

William H. Kilpatrick. This view works well in collaboration with experimentalism, since

“Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) has its roots in the experiential works of Dewey,
PHILOSOPHY OF TEACHING AND CURRICULUM 2

Lewin, and Piaget” (McCarthy, 2016). According to the text, this view primarily focuses on

students’ needs and interests (Gordon, Taylor, & Olivia, 2019). Students cannot learn if their

needs are not met. This is especially seen in schools like mine that are composed of primarily

lower income students of color. Many students come into my class having experienced trauma at

home, lacking supplies, and/or not having access to resources like food or reliable housing. I

always try my best to connect them to the school resources available for food and clothing. Our

learners are whole people with complete emotions, and experiences within and outside of the

classroom. There is a quote in the text that states, “The child is the starting point, the center, and

the end…Personality, character, is more than subject matter. Not knowledge or information, but

self-realization, is the goal” (Gordon, Taylor, & Olivia, 2019). I do not seek to modify and

change a student but rather guide them towards a more optimal, fulfilled version of themselves.

Last year, many of my students struggled with their mental health after having been on lockdown

and online learning, and I knew that aside from teaching standards, it was my responsibility to do

what I could for the actual person, not just the student. I connected them with the guidance

counselor and informed them of self soothing techniques. We also discovered that writing and

reading could be great outlets for stress and negative feelings and maximized our classroom

learning in that way. I’ve noticed buy-in naturally occurs when students find material useful

rather than it being something presented to them to simply retain.

Teaching Practices

Both experimentalism and the progressive view of education focus on individuality and

how it can be channeled into collaborative learning. There is an emphasis on group work and

testing ideas through active experimentation. Learning is not bound to the instructional content
PHILOSOPHY OF TEACHING AND CURRICULUM 3

the teacher presents. Hopkin's text states, whereas the traditional curriculum focused on

memorization and mental discipline, progressive education’s main goal was practical relevance”

(Hopkins, 2017). I try to tailor my classroom to those specifications and see that the majority of

learning comes when students are engaged in the material, not because I’m telling them to be but

out of genuine interest in the material itself. This can be achieved through project based learning

opportunities. I am interested in guiding student learning rather than acting like the keeper of

knowledge. Progressive learning has the teacher in that guiding role focused on student centered

learning.

Throughout my teaching experience, I have also been influenced by romanticism

philosophy. I do not subscribe to it in its entirety but I am interested in the emphasis on

differentiation. Dewey arguably “attempted to transform many of the ideals of romanticism into

practicable and realizable goals" (Granger, 2003). Halpin’s text states that the romantic aspect

develops a “progressive argument about what it means today to be a learning subject and a public

educator” (Halpin, 2006). I think in these current times, especially after the learning gaps many

students have been presented with in post-pandemic learning, it is important to have the

philosophical infrastructure to accommodate different types of learners and their academic

realities. Under romanticism, there is an emphasis on meeting each student's learning needs in

order to promote readiness rather than a focus on sticking to a strict curriculum. I’ve learned the

importance of stopping when necessary and creating mini lessons for topics that may be outside

my specific grade level if students are truly showing a need for that instruction. As a fifth grade

teacher, I have students reading at middle school level, students that cannot yet read, and

students throughout that spectrum. Giving the exact same instruction to all students is not going
PHILOSOPHY OF TEACHING AND CURRICULUM 4

to be beneficial when their needs are so different. At the very least students should be given

some form of Tier II or specialized small group instruction.

Conclusion

My next steps include graduating with my masters degree in Elementary Education. I am

then interested in specializing as an ESL teacher working with English Language Learners

(ELLs). When I entered kindergarten, I was placed in an ESOL classroom and my teacher was

the reason I was able to be successful in two languages. I want to pay that forward and work with

students whose primary language is not English. I am originally from Miami, Florida, which is

largely made up of a Latinx and Caribbean population. A large portion of that population are

immigrants or children of immigrants that are English Language Learners. Las Vegas seems to

have a similar need for instructors working with students that have English as a Second

Language and I’m hoping to fulfill that need. I aim to lead my students toward the knowledge

they need to achieve the goals they want for themselves. Each student brings their own unique

talents, as well as needs that the person in the educator role must prioritize meeting. I am still

adjusting the right recipe of these philosophies but overall I seek to prioritize problem solving

and self-growth in my students.

PHILOSOPHY OF TEACHING AND CURRICULUM 5

Work Cited

Gordon ll, W. R., , R. T., Oliva, P. F. (2019). Developing the curriculum: Improved

outcomes through systems approaches, 9th Ed. Pearson Education, INC.

McCarthy, M. (2016). Experiential Learning Theory: From Theory To Practice. Journal

of Business & Economics Research (JBER), 14(3), 91–100.

https://doi.org/10.19030/jber.v14i3.9749

HOPKINS, E. A. (2017). John Dewey and Progressive Education. The Journal of

Educational Thought (JET) / Revue de La Pensée Éducative, 50(1), 59–68.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26372390

Granger, D. (2003). Expression, Imagination, and Organic Unity: John Dewey’s

Aesthetics and Romanticism. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 37(2), 46–60.

https://doi.org/10.2307/3527454

Halpin, D. (2006). Why a Romantic Conception of Education Matters. Oxford Review of

Education, 32(3), 325–345. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4618664