My Philosophy of Education

April 2007

Introduction:

Having been involved in the field of education for most of my life, I have noticed many differences between the academic world today and that of twenty years ago. I grew up in an educated family; both of my parents were teachers. They sent me to a school which was reputable for its strict discipline and high academic standards. Thanks to the strict discipline and solid educational foundation I received in my childhood, I benefited from the experience. Among other things, I always had high respect for teachers. Later, I even followed my parents’ career paths by becoming a teacher. I had never questioned much about the integrity of education and the teaching profession until my recent encounters with the current Hong Kong educational system.

I left Hong Kong to pursue graduate studies in America in 1985. After living in America for sixteen years, I traveled to Beijing, China in order to teach at an international college, and eventually returned to Hong Kong in the autumn of 2002. I soon realized that many changes had taken place in Hong Kong, particularly after 1997. Based on my recent experiences in Hong Kong classrooms, I have noticed the following major changes: 1) Students’ academic levels, including language standards, have dropped; 2) Students, in general, are not serious about learning; 3) Students are not as focused and mature as students were before; 4) Classroom discipline is poor and; 5) Teachers are not respected by students, parents and society as much as they once were.

Such deteriorations in educational standards reflect changes in attitudes in society towards the value of education, and it concerns me a great deal. I have been trying to figure out what went wrong. To my pleasant surprise, the Philosophy of Education course I took at HKIEd gave me some answers to my puzzle. As it turns out, there are five major theories of education: 1) Perennialism; 2) Essentialism; 3) Progressivism; 4) Reconstructionism; and 5) Existentialism. While Perennialism believes in eternal values and human rationality, Essentialism focuses on essential knowledge. Progressivism and Reconstructionism, on the other hand, believe in problem-solving skills rather than subject contents. Existentialism focuses on personal growth. I began to realize that my former education was based primarily on the first two theories, Perennialism and Essentialism. However, the current trend in education is based primarily on Progressivism. No wonder things have changed!

In this paper, I will first discuss the five educational philosophies; then, I will compare their similarities and differences. I will also explain why I agree or disagree with certain theories, and discuss problems in today’s educational environments. Finally, I will summarize my own philosophy of education.

Perennialism:

According to Ellis, Cogan and Howey:

The basic purpose of a perennialist education is to help the student uncover and internalize the lasting truths. Since these truths are universal and constant, it follows that they should be the goals of a genuine education. The truths are best uncovered through the careful training of the intellect in order to discipline the mind. Character training is also important as a means of developing one’s spiritual being. The training of both the intellect and the spirit are central.[i]

The emphasis on a pursuit of truth and character training was common in both Confucianism and ancient Greek philosophies. In Rune’s Dictionary of Philosophy, Confucianism is defined as follows:

Confucianism advocated true manhood as the highest good, the superior man as the ideal being, and cultivation of life as the supreme duty of man. It was toward this moralism and humanism that Confucius taught the doctrines of “chung,” or being true to the principles of one’s nature, and “shu,” or the application of those principles in relation to others, as well as the doctrine of Golden Mean (chung yung), i.e., to find the central clue of our moral being and to be harmonious with the universe.[ii]

Runes continues by saying that, “Humanism was further strengthened by Mencius who insisted that man must develop his nature fully because benevolence and righteousness are natural to his nature which is originally good, and again reinforced by Hsun Tzu who, contending that human nature is evil, advocated the control of nature. Amid this antagonism between naturalism and humanism, however, both schools conceived reality as unceasing change and incessant transformation, perpetually in progress due to the interaction of the active (yang) and passive (yin) cosmic principles.”[iii]

In Platonism: It is through intellectual or rational cognition that man discovers another world, that of immutable essences, intelligible realities, Forms or Ideas. . . Within the World of Forms, there is a certain hierarchy. At the top, the most noble of all, is the Idea of Good (Repub. VII); it dominates the other Ideas and they participate in it. Beauty, symmetry and truth are high-ranking Ideas; at times they are placed almost on a par with the Good (Philebus 65; also Sympos, and Phaedrus passim). There are, below it other Ideas, such as those of major virtues (wisdom, temperance, courage, justice and piety) and mathematical terms and relationships, such as equality, likeness, unlikeness and proportion. . .[iv]

In Aristotle “the highest good of man is found in theoretical inquiry and contemplation of truth. This alone brings complete and continuous happiness because it is the activity of the highest part of man’s complex nature, and of that which is least dependent upon externals, viz. the intuitive reason, or nous. In the contemplation of the first principles of knowledge and being man participates in that activity of pure thought which constitutes the eternal perfection of the divine nature.”[v]

Ellis, Cogan and Howey further explain the concepts of a perennialist education as follows:

The curriculum of a perennialist education would be subject-centered and would draw heavily upon the disciplines of literature, mathematics, and the humanities, including history. It would be what is commonly termed a ‘liberal’ education. . .

The teacher, accordingly, must be one who has mastered a discipline, who is a master teacher in terms of guiding discussion which will enable the student to deduce the proper truths, and whose character is beyond reproach. The teacher is to be viewed as an authority in the field whose knowledge and expertise are not to be questioned.

The role of the school becomes one of training intellectual elite who know the truth and will one day be charged with passing this on to a new generation of learners. The school must prepare children and youth for life.[vi]

Perennialist ideologies are deeply rooted in my own upbringing, and have long been adopted as guiding principles of my professional life. I would not consider it ever being “replaced” by any other ideology which might disregard moral training as the core of education.

Essentialism:

Essentialism has been the most prominent educational philosophy. Similar to Perennialism, Essentialism is also subject-oriented. According to Ellis, Cogan and Howey:

The purpose of essentialist education is to pass on cultural and historical heritage through a core of accumulated knowledge which has persisted over time and thus is worthy of being known by all. This knowledge, along with the appropriate skills, attitudes, and values, embodies the essential elements of an education. The learner’s task is to internalize these elements of an educated citizen.

The role of teacher is again viewed as a master of a particular subject field and as a model worthy of imitation. Teachers are to be respected as authorities in areas of knowledge and because of the high standards they hold. The classroom is very much under the teacher’s influence and control.

The role of the school becomes one of conserving and transmitting to the current generation of learners and the cultural and historical heritage through the accumulated wisdom and knowledge of the traditional disciplines. This is a school where each student will learn the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values necessary to making him a contributing member of society.[vii]

Compared to Perennialism, Essentialism is a more practical approach to education. One may consider Perennialism the theoretical foundation and Essentialism the practice of the theory.

Progressivism:

Progressivism is the prevailing trend of education today. According to Ellis, Cogan and Howey, the basic underlying principles of Progressivism are summarized by Kneller as follows:

1. Education should be life itself, not a preparation for life.

2. Learning should be directly related to the interests of the child.

3. Learning through problem-solving should take precedence over the inculcating of subject matter.

4. The teacher’s role is not to direct, but to advise.

5. The school should encourage cooperation rather than competition.

6. Only democracy permits – indeed encourages – the free interplay of ideas and personalities that is a necessary condition of true growth.[viii]

Furthermore:

The purpose of progressive education is to give the individual the necessary skills and tools with which to interact with his or her environment – an environment which is in a constant change. These tools should include problem-solving skills which the individual can use to define, analyze, and solve problems of both a personal and a social nature. In addition, the learning process should focus upon cooperative behaviors and self-discipline, both of which are necessary for functioning in a democratic society.

A progressivist curriculum is generally built around the personal and social experiences of the students. It draws most often upon the social sciences as the core of the subject matter to be utilized in the students’ problem-solving experiences and projects. But since problem-solving involves communication skills, mathematical processes, and scientific inquiry, the curriculum is truly interdisciplinary in nature.

The progressivist teacher must help students define meaningful problems, locate relevant data sources, interpret and evaluate the accuracy of data, and formulate conclusions. This teacher must be able to recognize at what point a student needs instruction in a particular skill in order to proceed further in his or her inquiry. This requires a teacher who is patient, flexible, interdisciplinary, creative, and intelligent. It is not an easy role to fulfill.

The progressive school is generally viewed as a microcosm of the larger society. It is here that the young learner can study problems and issues faced by the community as a whole. The school becomes a living-learning laboratory, a working model of democracy.[ix]

The theory of Progressivism itself sounds very idealistic. However, when it is put into practice, the result is disappointing. From observing students today, their subject knowledge is sacrificed for something else which is certainly not problem-solving skills or critical thinking. Students are not motivated to think! The only skill they are more proficient than their seniors are “IT” skills, technology-based applications, which they utilize for entertainment purposes much more so than on learning.

The followings may help to explain why Progressivism does not work well by itself:

Letting young children make democratic decisions in learning is unrealistic. Young children are not mature and rational enough to make the right decisions about what they should learn. Children prefer playing to learning. They do not like to learn anything they perceive as being too difficult or boring. Child-oriented curricula must cater towards the limited attention spans and spontaneous interest needs of the child. Learning must be fun. A happy learning experience is an essential motivation for future learning. However, proper guidance is necessary to lead students to further explore meanings in life. Unfortunately, “a teacher who is patient, flexible, interdisciplinary, creative, and intelligent” as mentioned above, is not easy to find.
Expecting self-discipline from young students is too naive. Children are restless. They need appropriate discipline and supervision from adults. They need to establish good habits and to learn proper behaviors in the classroom and in public. They need to be trained to further their attention spans and to better concentrate in class.
Progressivism discourages students from competition by escaping from reality. The real world is competitive. Without a high level of expertise in particular disciplines, one cannot excel. Job hunting is a competition. Anybody who gets a job has won the competition in the job interview. Almost all famous musicians today have won prizes in music competitions. Students should be encouraged to enter competitions to improve their abilities and to boost their confidence.
Considering progressive school a microcosm of the larger society is also a fallacy. In the real world, the people whom the students will encounter might not be as caring, patient, flexible, creative and intelligent as their teachers are. The kinds of problems they might typically encounter might not be the same kinds of problems they used to deal with in the classroom, either. Many problems in the adult world are not fun and games; they are complicated social, economic, or political issues which require substantial knowledge or expertise, or deep intellectual perspectives in those issues. Would students from a progressive classroom be ready to solve these serious problems?

Reconstructionism:

To respond to the last point mentioned, above, Reconstructionism seems to be able to offer a solution. According to Ellis, Cogan and Howey:

The purpose of a Reconstructionist education is to raise the consciousness of students regarding the social, economic, and political problems facing humankind on a global scale, and to instruct them in the necessary skills to solve these problems. The ultimate goal of a Reconstructionist education is the creation of a new society, an interdependent global society.

The Reconstructionist curriculum takes as its subject matter the multitude of social, political and economic problems facing humankind. This includes, as well, the social and personal problems of the students themselves. It uses the organizing structures of the social science disciplines and the processes of scientific inquiry as the methods for working toward the solution of these problems.

The role of the teacher is very similar to the progressivist role. The teacher must make students aware of the problems facing humankind, help them identify problems they are committed to working on, and then ensure that they have the necessary skills to do so. The teacher must be skilled in helping students deal with controversy, and change for most of the problems to be solved, are very controversial. The teacher must encourage divergent thinking as a means to creating potential alternative solutions to these problems. Further, the teacher must be well organized and capable of orchestrating many different activities simultaneously. It is a difficult role but a very challenging and stimulating one.

The Reconstructionist school becomes the primary agency for social, political, and economic change in society. Its task is to develop ‘social engineers,’ citizens whose purpose is to radically alter the face of contemporary and future society.[x]

Compared to Progressivism, Reconstructionism is more serious and socially progressive in nature. The main problem, like that of Progressivism, is also being unrealistic. First of all, radically altering society is not easy; it requires good cooperation from the government and the citizens. Secondly, the kind of teacher described above is not easy to find, either: the job is so challenging that it would discourage many educated individuals from entering the profession.

Existentialism:

According to Ellis, Cogan and Howey:

Existentialism is a philosophy that stresses individualism and personal self-fulfillment. The basic purpose of education as related to the existentialist position is to enable individual develop her or his fullest potential for self-fulfillment.

Because each individual has specific needs and interests related to his or her self-fulfillment, there is no generally prescribed curriculum. Rather, the individual learner draws upon these experiences, subject-matter fields, and intellectual skills necessary to attain self-fulfillment. The processes of reflective thought are generally emphasized. The humanities and the arts are often viewed as appropriate subject areas which further the necessary introspection and reflection. Students are encouraged to pursue projects that will help them develop needed skills and acquire requisite knowledge.

The teacher’s role is again similar to that of a progressivist or Reconstructionist teacher, i.e., to guide the learner and gently stimulate reflective thoughts through probing questions. Existentialism insists not that the teacher be ‘successful,’ but that the teacher is honest. In an atmosphere of mutual trust the students know that the teacher’s interpretation of a subject is a wise one, and the teacher knows that the student will weigh this interpretation with the respect it deserves. Thus the dialogue that is education rests on trust between persons, a trust that the teacher must earn by integrity and create with skill.

The school should be a forum where students are able to engage in dialogue with other students and teachers to help them clarify their progress toward self-fulfillment.[xi]

Being a musician, I am very familiar with this type of education both as a student and as a teacher of music composition. Personal interaction between teacher and student is essential in this type of specialized study. Similar to Perennialism and Essentialism, the teacher is the expert in the subject area and is respected. The Existentialist approach to education has to be the most profound level in modern day education. That is how artists, musicians and serious specialists in various disciplines receive their professional training.

Reconciliation of Ideas:

No educational philosophy is perfect. Each of the five philosophies of education discussed above has its own strengths and weaknesses, and tends to correspond to certain stage of students’ mental development. It is wrong to expect young children to acquire the level of maturity as older children do, and it is equally wrong to treat adult students as children. Among the five philosophies, I support the first two, Perennialism and Essentialism for general education and the last one, Existentialism, for advanced education, special study and self-fulfillment.

The main drawback of the type of general education with which I grew up is the so-called “spoon-feeding” of knowledge and an examination-oriented educational systems in which so many students have fallen victims to a surface-learning of information: They simply did not fully understand the knowledge nor do they know how to apply the knowledge in real life. I can understand why educational reform is necessary. I do agree that developing problem-solving skills are important. However, replacing subject-oriented curricula with child-oriented curricula is not an ideal solution to the problem of education. Speaking of problem-solving, here is a problem to solve: the break-down of moral values in society. Should there be educational reform, it should be a reform in moral education for the public at large that should not be restricted to the classroom.

Change is not a new thing that is exclusive to the modern day world; changes happen throughout human history. Despite all the changes, some axis always remain the same in humankind, such as love and hatred, good and evil, harmony and conflict, and hope and despair. In order to live in a harmonious world, people must attain good moral character, and love and respect for each other. Therefore, the main goal of education at all times should produce citizens with high morals. Pursuit of the truth through knowledge is essential. Practical skills to solve problems in daily-life are useful, but should not be a replacement for primary goals. Without moral education, pursuit of the truth and enlightenment of the intellect as a backbone, all the skills students acquire to survive in daily life are merely superficial. They are confined to being a functional and consuming mass in a materialistic society with no cultural, intellectual or spiritual depths.

Conclusion:

I truly believe that moral values and rationality are the foundations of education because they enable personal growth and social harmony. Basic knowledge of various disciplines is essential for daily living. As life experiences are accumulated, a person should be able to acquire problem-solving skills and critical thinking, and have the capacity to attain intellectual and spiritual growth.

Any civilized government should place education as a top priority on its social agendas. Quality of education cannot be compromised. Good education produces refined citizens. Poor education produces shallow citizens. Cutting funding in education directly affects the quality of education, and eventually the quality of citizens and social living. When a society only has wealth, but little morality, social problems occur. Social problems are man-made. Instead of teaching students to solve problems, why not eliminate the problems in the first place? When a teacher deals with a class full of poorly behaved children from dysfunctional families, whatever the teacher try to teach in the classroom becomes useless. The parents and society at large need to be educated first.

Teachers should always be respected in society because they are responsible for training good citizens for the future. Teachers are not baby-sitters, entertainers or social workers. Teachers are teachers. A teacher should remain the authoritative figure in the classroom. A good teacher being a role model for students could be a mentor for life. The impact of teachers on students can be profound.

As vulgarity prevails in our modern world, school might well be the last sanctuary for moral and cultural disciplines. It should always maintain high academic and ethical standards, and provide necessary resources and support for the teachers.

End Notes

[i] Arthur K. Ellis, John J. Cogan and Kenneth R. Howey. Introduction to the Foundations of Education (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1981), 363-4.

[ii] Dagobert Runes, ed. Dictionary of Philosophy. (Totowa, New Jersey: Rowman and Allanheld, 1984), 79.

[iii] Ibid., 67-8.

[iv] Ibid., 253-4.

[v] Ibid., 35-7.

[vi] Ellis, Cogan and Howey. Introduction to the Foundations of Education, 364.

[vii] Ibid., 365.

[viii] Ibid., 366-7.

[ix] Ibid., 367-8.

[x] Ibid., 368-9.

[xi] Ibid., 369-70.