Abstract - Weeblyallisonpyle.weebly.com/.../personal_theory_paper.docx · Web viewAll three...
Transcript of Abstract - Weeblyallisonpyle.weebly.com/.../personal_theory_paper.docx · Web viewAll three...
Piece de Resistance
Allison N. Pyle
Personal Theory of Curriculum submitted forCI 702 Curriculum Theory
at Marshall Universityin partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Doctor of Educationin
Curriculum and Instruction
Dr. Elizabeth Campbell, ProfessorGraduate School of Education and Professional Development
South Charleston, West Virginia2013
Keywords: curriculum theory, humanism, Reggio-Emilia, progressivism, social constructionism, Carl Rogers, Nel Noddings, Abraham Maslow, Herbert Spencer, Loris
Malaguzzi, John Dewey, Lev Vygotsky, Albert BanduraCopyright 2013 Allison Pyle
i
Abstract
Piece de resistance
Allison Pyle
Politicians, scholars, and reformists have been looking for more than a century to a solution to the educational woes plaguing society. Unfortunately there is no recipe that will satisfy the appetites of the various parties involved. Throughout the ages, we have progressed through a series of educational reform efforts spearheaded by humanists, developmentalists, progressivists, transformationists, and a succession of other “ists”. As the educational pendulum swings old ideas are recycled and tweaked to fit a new set of goals and expectations. Just as a recipe for stew, pot pie, or ratatouille may not fit the needs of every family, there is no curricular recipe that will meet the needs of all schools or all students. Due to the changing nature of schools and society, I have created my own “recipe” of who I am by taking a little from some theories, a lot from others, and adding in a few ingredients of my own.
Table of Contents
Abstract................................................................................................................................iiIntroduction: The Ingredients..............................................................................................1Literature Review: Half-baked or Over Done?...................................................................2
Humanism........................................................................................................................2Abraham Maslow.........................................................................................................4
Carl Rogers..................................................................................................................5
Jim Harris.....................................................................................................................6
Nel Noddings...............................................................................................................8
Social Constructivism......................................................................................................9Lev Vygotsky.............................................................................................................10
Albert Bandura...........................................................................................................12
Reggio-Emilia Approach...............................................................................................13Loris Malaguzzi.........................................................................................................15
Progressivism.................................................................................................................17Herbert Spencer.........................................................................................................18
John Dewey...............................................................................................................19
Who Am I?........................................................................................................................21References..........................................................................................................................24
iii
Piece de Resistance
Introduction: The Ingredients
Nel Noddings, Carl Rogers, and Jim Harris have educational philosophies that
closely relate to my own theory of educational leadership and curriculum development.
All three approach education from a humanistic perspective, focusing on caring for the
whole person by creating an environment that provides acceptance, genuineness, and
empathy.
Like Vygotsky and Malaguzzi, I agree that the social aspect of education cannot
be ignored. Students and teachers both bring unique perspectives and experiences to the
educational environment, and this diversity when embraced can enrich the learning of
everyone involved. Malaguzzi also stressed the importance of forming an educational
community including parents, teachers, students, and the larger society. The shared goals
and values of this learning community contribute to an environment that encourages
active participation and exploration, and fostering an intrinsic motivation for learning.
Like John Dewey and the progressive theorists, I believe that education should
utilize personal interests and experiences to prepare students for life and effect social
change; however, I don’t share Dewey’s concern that personalized instruction will foster
egocentricity. Unlike Dewey, Malaguzzi and the Reggio-Emilia educators believed that
personalized instruction in a genuine collaborative environment was the vehicle that
encouraged children to become co-investors in their own education. I believe that this
personalization will provide students with a meaningful education in which they can take
ownership.
1
Literature Review: Half-baked or Over Done?
Humanism
Humanism reemerged as a popular educational trend in the 1970s, primarily as a
response to the previous focus on behaviorism. Proponents of humanistic education
believed that the American school system was too impersonal, and teachers thwarted
students’ abilities to learn and grow (Power, 2008). Humanists believed that educators
should promote teaching students things like conflict resolution, problem-solving,
cooperation, compassion, honesty, and self-knowledge in addition to the academic basics
(Power, 2008). Humanism, as an educational theory, ignited both interest and criticism;
it came to encompass many different ideas. In general, when educators described
humanistic education, they meant one of three things:
teaching a variety of skills including both the basics (language arts and math) as
well as skills necessary for personal and social development (communication,
problem-solving, and self-knowledge)
a compassionate approach to education in which students were taught with
kindness and understanding and teachers fostered a pervasive attitude of respect
dealing primarily with issues of human concern (knowledge acquisition, personal
growth, and finding meaning in one’s existence) (Power, 2008).
As with most theories and educational approaches, there are different viewpoints
encompassed under the umbrella of humanism. There are two main branches associated
with humanism: religious and secular (Huitt, 2009). Religious humanists trace their roots
back to Plato and St. Augustine in addition to other religious scholars and subscribe to the
idea that although human beings are distinct from other animal species, God or a
2
Supreme Being is the center of existence for the human race (Huitt, 2009). Secular
humanists have been accused of being atheistic due to the fact that they believe that the
individual has all that is necessary to grow and develop within him or herself (Huitt,
2009). It is due to this atheistic association that humanism received such criticism as an
educational philosophy.
Although humanistic theories may mean different things to different factions of
people, they all tend to focus on the individual being, giving primacy to human needs and
interests. According to Huitt (2009), humanists believed that it was important to study the
person as a whole, especially the manner in which an individual grows and changes over
his lifespan, paying special attention to self- motivation and goal-setting. This focus on
the individual was also highly criticized, citing a lack of attention to necessary skills.
The purpose of humanistic education is to provide a foundation for personal
growth and development so that learning will continue throughout life in a self-directed
manner (DeCarvalho, 1991). Toward this end, Gage and Berliner (1991) describe five
objectives of a humanistic education: 1) promote independence and self-direction; 2)
develop responsibility of knowledge acquisition; 3) advance creativity; 4) cultivate
curiosity; and 5) spark an interest in the arts.
Humanists believe that individuals have an innate drive to learn in order to reach
self-actualization (Cunningham, Gannon, Kavanaugh, Greene, Reddy, & Whitson, 2004).
The student chooses his or her own learning path based on goals that are specific to
individual needs; the teacher’s role is to create a non-threatening environment that
encourages self-exploration. The teacher facilitates the learning experiences; however,
3
the students are empowered and have control over the learning process (Cunningham,
et.al, 2004).
Abraham Maslow
Abraham Maslow is best known for his hierarchy of needs that includes five
levels ranging from basic needs to self-actualization. In looking at Maslow’s hierarchy,
one seeks to move up the pyramid as basic needs are met in order to fulfill the higher
level growth needs such as social and esteem needs. Maslow believes that one must fulfill
the lower needs before self-actualization, the highest level of motivation, can be met;
however, the stages are not fixed, and one may digress to lower levels throughout life as
challenges and setbacks occur (Maslow, 1943).
After the birth of his child, Maslow began to reject the ideas of behaviorism, as he
realized that he wasn’t in control of this tiny being; he believed that anyone who had a
baby couldn’t possibly be a behaviorist (Goble, 1970). Disagreeing with the behavioral
premise behind the study of human behavior by looking at animal studies and the over
generalizing of human behavior, Maslow moved toward a more humanistic approach
(Goble, 1970). Maslow felt that a comprehensive theory of human behavior must include
both the intrinsic determinants of behavior as well as the extrinsic environmental factors
(Goble, 1970). Moving away from Freudian and Behaviorist philosophies, Maslow
thought a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary approach was necessary to study the whole
being. Maslow began his study on what he termed “self-actualized” persons. Maslow
found that not all productive, talented, successful people met the criteria of being self-
actualized as many of them were psychologically unhealthy; however, he began to define
self-actualization as an active, dynamic process rather than a fixed or final stage of being
4
(Goble, 1970). Maslow’s hierarchy, and specifically his work regarding self-
actualization, although criticized by countless other psychologists, became an important
cornerstone for other humanist theorists.
Carl Rogers
Carl Rogers viewed the facilitation of learning as the aim of education. The
initiation of learning, therefore does not rest in the skills of the teacher, curricular
planning, textbooks, lectures, or other resources, it resides in the relationship between the
learner and the teacher (Zimring, 1999). In order to facilitate learning successfully,
Rogers asserts that there are three core attitudinal qualities that must be evident:
genuineness, positive regard, and empathetic understanding (Zimring, 1999).
Genuineness is a self-explanatory concept in which the teacher is a real person,
not a “faceless embodiment of a curricular requirement” (Zimring, 1999, p. 3). The
teacher is able to enter into the educational experience without presenting a façade, and in
doing so, is able to accept his feelings without imposing them on his students. Judgment
can then be placed on a student product without objectifying the student as being good or
bad (Zimring, 1999).
Carl Rogers developed the idea of congruence in order to reach self-actualization.
Rogers states that in order for a person to reach the highest level of Maslow’s hierarchy
of needs, a person’s ideal self, or who he or she would like to be, must be congruent with
his or her actual behavior (McLeod, 2007). Rogers also believes that childhood
experiences have the greatest impact on an adult’s likelihood to become self-actualized.
Rogers also articulated the idea of positive regard. He stated that there are two
types of positive regard: conditional and unconditional. Unconditional positive regard is
5
where significant others accept and love a person for who he or she is, and it is not
revoked when someone makes a mistake. Conditional positive regard is where praise and
acceptance rely on the behavior of the person. In a situation of conditional positive
regard, the person is not truly loved or valued for who he is, but rather on the condition
that he behaves in a specific way (McLeod, 2007).
Creating an environment that is conducive to self-initiated, experiential learning
also requires empathetic understanding. This empathetic understanding stems from the
teacher’s ability to understand the student’s reactions from the inside and is sensitive to
the process of education and learning as it appears to the student (Zimring, 1999). When
these three core conditions are met, Rogers believes that the likelihood of significant
learning is increased.
Jim Harris
Jim Harris’s work was greatly influenced by Carl Rogers and other humanistic
theorists. Although not well-known, Harris has created a list of ten things one needs to
know about children. The last four rules can be widely applied as tenets of working with
all people. These rules are simple, yet have profound effects: first, the relationship is
key; second, people want to matter; third, the spoken rule versus the real rule; and fourth,
if you want it, teach it (J. Harris, live presentation, Oct. 21, 2010). Harris believes, and
his ideas are reiterated by Rogers and Noddings, that relationships are the key to
successfully working with people. It doesn’t matter how intelligent the population of the
system becomes, if the students we teach are not able to form relationships and interact
positively with others in society, they are not being educated successfully.
6
Jim Harris’s second rule supports creating and maintaining positive lasting
relationships. He states that people want to matter, and in order to help create these
feelings of significance, in children or adults, the teacher needs to create situations in
which students can build confidence in tasks and be proud of their accomplishments (J.
Harris, live presentation, Oct. 21, 2010). Teachers, administrators, and parents in the
educational realm, as well as managers and co-workers in the business sector need to
make a conscious effort to create situations where others can feel significant and
valuable. People need to be contributors- to the class, to the team, to the family, and to
society in general. Some people seek out these opportunities, however, for others; these
opportunities must be fostered in an atmosphere that builds confidence.
Harris’s third rule, again is simple in concept, however, it is easy to break this
rule. The spoken rule versus the real rule is really a test of integrity. Being a man or
woman of your word is really the essence. Harris articulates the importance of saying
what you are going to do and then sticking to it. The spoken rule is what we tell people-
or the persona we put forth for others, the ideal self, according to Rogers. The real rule is
what we actually do- our expectations and how we enforce the rules. In order to be an
honorable person, an honest and ethical leader, the spoken rule and the real rule need to
be the same, or as close as possible.
Harris’s last rule: if you want it, teach it- is really common sense. We cannot
expect others to intrinsically know how to perform or act in a specific way without
articulating those expectations and then teaching people how to meet them. Jim Harris
tells us to be what we want others to be. If we want patience, we must be patient; if we
7
want hard workers, we must work hard; if we want others to be loving, caring
individuals, we must love and care for them.
Nel Noddings
Nel Noddings (1995) is a feminist philosopher, associated with the humanist
movement, who believes that we should nurture children to be competent, caring, loving,
and lovable people. She states that moral life should be embraced as the main goal of
education because such an aim does not work against intellectual development or
academic achievement, but rather, it supplies a firm foundation for both (Noddings,
1995).
Noddings argues that although creating an ethic of caring should not be the only
aim of education, it should be the first (Noddings, 1984). Although both the social-
emotional domain and the intellectual-academic domain are of utmost importance to
human development, it has generally been accepted that their nurturance should be
handled by separate organizations (Noddings, 1984). Typically, schools have been
entrusted with the advancement of the intellectual domain while churches and parents
have been responsible for the child’s moral development. Noddings aptly argues that
“questions concerning the ethical arise in every aspect of human life, and nurturance of
the ethical ideal cannot be assigned to any one or two institutions. All must accept
responsibility” (Noddings, 1984, p. 173).
In her book, Happiness and Education, Noddings (2003) discusses the aim of
education, both as it presently is, rife with focus on standardization and assessment, and
as she believes it should be. In direct opposition to the standardization of education,
Noddings believes that education should promote happiness in whatever occupational
8
path is chosen and should focus on educating students for personal life (Noddings, 2003).
Specifically, she stresses the importance of looking at the aim of education and having
reflective discussions about why we, as a system, promote certain goals in schooling.
Social Constructivism
Social constructivism is a theory that focuses on the social nature of learning.
Learning occurs in a social environment where knowledge is constructed based on the
experiences of the learner. Social constructivism is based on three main assumptions
dealing with reality, knowledge, and learning. Reality is constructed through human
activity and experiences as society invents the properties of the world; therefore, reality
cannot be discovered for it does not truly exist until it is created by human experience
(Kim, 2001). Social constructivists also believe that knowledge is socially and culturally
constructed through interactions among and between humans and their environment
(Kim, 2001). In the final assumption regarding learning, social constructivists believe that
learning is a social process that occurs when individuals are engaged in meaningful
interactions with others (Kim, 2001). Individual experiences and the unique perspectives
gained offer value to the social learning process.
Social constructivism is generally thought of in terms of face-to-face interactions;
however, social constructivists recognize a wide range of phenomena including cultural,
political, and historical influences that impact the social construct of learning (Au, 1998).
In looking at student achievement and the gap between students from different
backgrounds, social constructivists believe that research should view the “societal
conditions that led to its creation and sustain it over time through students’ daily
interactions and experiences in school” (Au, 1998, p. 301). Therefore, the political,
9
historical, and cultural influences on each student may contribute to the cycle of high
levels of educational attainment or low student achievement.
Although humanism tends to look at the individual as the focus, morality and
ethics cannot be ignored. It is in this sense that humanism can be tied to social
constructivism. The shared nature of learning in the view of social constructivism can be
closely linked to the ideas presented by Rogers, Harris, and Noddings that focus on the
relationship between individuals. Acceptance, genuineness, and empathy are key
components of humanist philosophy; however, they are just as important in building the
relationships that are necessary for learning under the social constructivist ideals.
Lev Vygotsky
Lev Vygotsky is perhaps one of the most influential social constructivists of all
time. Vygotsky believed that individual cognitive development was limited to a certain
range, and the only way to reach full development was to engage in social interaction
(Cunningham, et.al, 2004). This idea gave rise to a learning theory of what became
known as the zone of proximal development. The zone of proximal development was the
area of cognition between what the learner was able to accomplish independently and
what he or she could accomplish with scaffolding from a more knowledgeable other
(Clark, Griffin, & Turner, 2007).
Vygotsky described two basic types of activity: reproductive and creative. He
claimed that reproductive activities are those that are closely linked with memory and
consist of reproducing or repeating a behavior that has already been developed or
mastered (Sharpe, 2004). He proclaims the importance of this type of activity by
10
discussing the importance of human ability to adapt based on these reproductive
behaviors. In describing the complexity of the human brain, Vygotsky states,
Our brain proves to be an organ that retains our previous
experience and facilitates the reproduction of this experience.
However, if the brain’s activity were limited merely to retaining
previous experience, a human being would be a creature who could
adapt primarily to familiar, stable conditions of the environment.
All new or unexpected changes in the environment not
encountered in his previous experience would fail to induce the
appropriate adaptive reactions in humans. (Sharpe, 2004, p. 8)
The second type of basic activity that Vygotsky discussed was concerned with
creative or combination behaviors. In addition to the brain’s ability to reproduce previous
behaviors and adapt to new situations, the brain is also able to combine and creatively
reimagine past experiences to form new ideas and behaviors (Sharpe, 2004). Without the
creative activity, Vygotsky argues that humans would be unable to plan, imagine, or
adjust to an unforeseen future, and would therefore; remain in a stagnant present state.
Vygotsky sought to explain human behavior based on the idea of the brain’s
ability to take reproductive activities and use them to evolve into something more
complex. He determined that human behavior can only be fully explained by taking into
account innate responses, conditional reflexes, historical and social experiences, and
“doubled” experience (Van der Veer & Valsiner, 1991). The concept of doubled
experience was important in Vygotsky’s research because it distinguished internal and
external events. Specifically, organisms react twice to an event, first to the external
11
stimuli or event, and then again to the internal reaction or reflection (Van der Veer &
Valsiner, 1991). Keeping with the theme of reflection, Vygotsky believed that teachers
should arrange the learning environment so that students could learn from their own
activities and reactions rather than become passive recipients of knowledge (Van der
Veer & Valsiner, 1991).
In addition to Vygotsky’s contributions to cognitive development, he was a
pioneer in the field of early childhood education. Vygotsky articulated the importance of
play in the development of preschool children. Through play, Vygotsky explains that
children begin to recognize their own actions and equate objects with meaning;
additionally, he argues that imaginary play is a form of abstract thought (Vygotsky,
1966).
Albert Bandura
Albert Bandura is well known for his research regarding social learning,
modeling, and human motivation. Bandura’s initial research on human behavior and
modeling was focused primarily on aggression and the inclination of children and adults
to imitate others’ behavior (Sims & Manz, 1982). In response to a time dominated by
behaviorism, Bandura sought to explain the nature of human behavior based on the
relationship between human behavior, the external environment, and personal factors
rather than focusing on behavior controlled by external factors (Bandura, 1986). This
work, like that of Rogers and Maslow, led him to focus on self-efficacy and its role in
human behavior.
Bandura advocated four approaches to develop self-efficacy. He argues that the
most effective method of attaining a high degree of self-efficacy is through successful
12
mastery experiences (Bandura, 1994). The next two approaches relate closely to social
constructivism as they both deal directly with social experiences. Social modeling can
provide efficacy through indirect exposure to success as the observer believes that he or
she possesses the capacity to achieve similar results by imitating models that are
comparable in stature or skill (Bandura, 1994). Likewise, social persuasion is an effective
means of building efficacy in an individual because verbal encouragement will often
motivate one to give greater effort and persist when self-doubt begins to surface
(Bandura, 1994). Stress management and the ability to control negative emotions also
increase one’s likelihood to have a positive self-regard and a high degree of efficacy
(Bandura, 1994).
Reggio-Emilia Approach
Similar to social construction and the humanist approach to education, the
Reggio-Emilia approach focuses on human interaction, exploration, observation, and
reflection, building on student interests, and working closely with parents and the
community to foster an engaging, connected learning environment. The Reggio-Emilia
approach to education was established in Reggio Emilia, Italy as a part of post-war
reconstruction effort; it was built primarily at the hands of parents, and thus parental
involvement is still a predominant influence under this approach (Hewett, 2001). The
main principle of Reggio-Emilia is in the view of the child; he or she has rights and
should be viewed as competent, creative, valuable, ambitious, and full of potential
(Hewett, 2001). The Reggio-Emilia approach fosters child development by encouraging
children to explore their environment and express themselves creatively through
13
whichever medium they are most comfortable: movement, words, painting, building,
acting, sculpture, music, etc. (Edwards & Gandini, 1998).
Much like the humanistic approach or that of social constructivism, the Reggio-
Emilia approach promotes environments that support collaboration and problem-solving
in which education is seen as a communal event with joint exploration and discussion
between children and adults (Edwards & Gandini, 1998). The Reggio-Emilia approach is
concerned with the child, the teacher, the environment, and the nature of knowledge to be
learned.
The role of the child in the Reggio-Emilia approach is complex, as he or she is
seen as a researcher, a social being, a constructor of knowledge, a communicator, a
collaborator, and a protagonist. Children are one of the three leaders, along with teachers
and parents, and they are seen as strong and capable, able to maneuver and negotiate the
problems posed by their environment (Cadwell, 1997). Children as collaborators operate
on the premise of social constructivism, as they are expected to work in small groups
rather than in isolation, as knowledge is constructed through interactions with others, the
environment, and symbols (Cadwell, 1997). Communication is a key component under
Reggio-Emilia; children are given freedom to choose their method of expression sharing
what they know, understand, question, imagine, and feel (Cadwell, 1997). As an active
constructor of knowledge, children fulfill their innate desire to discover, learn, and make
sense of the world as they take on the role of author in their educational story (Hewett,
2001). The primary form of instruction under the Reggio-Emilia approach integrates
projects where students become the researcher, hypothesizing, questioning, seeking
solutions, experimenting, predicting, and reflecting (Hewett, 2001). Modeled after
14
Vygotsky’s ideas, the Reggio-Emilia approach emphasizes communication and language,
both with adults and other children.
The role of the teacher, under the Reggio-Emilia approach, is unique in that she is
viewed as a co-learner and collaborator. The teacher is a nurturer, guide, facilitator,
researcher, and reflective practitioner. In order to plan appropriate learning environments,
the teacher must carefully observe and listen to children, questioning them, discovering
their interests and needs and then providing open-ended exploration (Cadwell, 1997). The
teacher’s role as a researcher is complex, he or she must use inquiry, observation, and
data to ascertain critical knowledge of student development and learning while designing
environments that pique curiosity and build on children’s interests (Hewett, 2001).
Unique to the Reggio-Emilia approach, teachers acting as reflective practitioners must
constantly evolve and change taking into consideration the influence and ideas of
colleagues, parents, community members, and the children (Hewett, 2001).
Under the Reggio-Emilia approach, the environment is seen as a third teacher.
Every aspect of the learning environment must be carefully planned to maximize the
potential for communication, exploration, and relationship building (Cadwell, 1997).
“Every corner of every space has an identity and a purpose, is rich in potential to engage
and to communicate, and is valued and cared for by children and adults” (Cadwell, 1997,
p. 5).
Loris Malaguzzi
As a teacher and the founder of the Reggio-Emilia approach, Loris Malaguzzi’s
ideas about children and learning are evident, as they are the tenets around which Reggio
education was formed. Specifically, Malaguzzi thought the image of the child was a
15
critical piece; he viewed children as intelligent, strong, ambitious, imaginative, and
curious. He thought that children should be treated with full rights of citizenship and
society, but he argued that many schools have a picture of the child that is much different,
one that is fragile, weak, and incomplete (Malaguzzi, 1993). His view of children and the
role they should play in their own educational experience ties closely with social
constructivist and humanist theory, and it is this view that is the basis of the Reggio-
Emilia approach to education.
Malaguzzi also highly regarded the environment, personal experience and
interaction, and observation and reflection as key components in education. He argued
that one cannot view a child in the abstract because he or she is connected to a certain
reality, one that cannot be separated (Malaguzzi, 1993). Just as a teacher brings his or her
perceptions, biases, hopes, dreams, pleasures, and sadness into the educational
environment, each child also brings in his past, experiences, thoughts, feelings, and
relationships (Malaguzzi, 1993). It is foolish to think that we are able to separate
ourselves from these biases when we teach, instead we must recognize and embrace
them, for that is what makes each individual’s learning experience unique. It is often the
unplanned learning experiences that grow out of conversations and reflections that spark
an interest in our children.
Malaguzzi offers caution to adults. In the learning environment, both adults and
children need to feel important, both need to be active participants. For in the rewards of
their efforts and activity they are valued and strengthened, planting the seeds of the joy of
learning (Malaguzzi, 1993). When adults over-engage in the learning environment,
children become passive and lose power of their own learning. He suggests that adults
16
intervene as little as possible, giving children situations and resources in which they learn
for themselves. He says not to teach children something they can learn for themselves,
instead, what we want to do is “activate within children the desire and will and great
pleasure that comes from being the authors of their own learning” (Malaguzzi, 1993, p.
3).
Progressivism
Progressivism began to take hold as an educational philosophy in response to the
traditional curriculum that prepared students for academic endeavors at universities. It
has been associated in conjunction with several well-known philosophers such as John
Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Johann Pestalozzi, and John Dewey (Hayes, 2007).
Lester Frank Ward challenged the status quo of social Darwinism in the early part of the
twentieth century when he asserted that the so called natural distribution of wealth and
power in human affairs could be changed, thus giving rise to a new era of reform (Pinar,
Reynolds, Slattery, & Taubman, 2004). Ward was credited as providing the theoretical
underpinnings of Progressivism by bridging school and society (Pinar, et. al, 2004).
John Dewey, in criticizing the routinization, memorization, and recitation that
characterized the classical curriculum, argued that the relationship between experience
and education was complex, yet integral (Dewey, 1938). Similar to the social
constructivists, Dewey also stressed the importance of connecting schooling and society;
like Ward, Dewey believed that students should deliberate, organize, and influence social
change (Pinar, et. al, 2004). Although Dewey’s ideas were grossly misunderstood, he
believed that schools should emulate the goals of the society for which their students
would be a part (Pinar, et. al, 2004). His notion of active experience and free
17
communication of ideas was the type of democracy that he thought was essential for both
educational and societal reform (Pinar, et. al, 2004).
The goals of progressive education were complex and often misunderstood.
Dewey’s idea of active occupations was often misconstrued and narrowly associated with
technical skill acquisition (Pinar, et. al, 2004). Although experiential learning was
emphasized, subject matter was integrated and entrepreneurial goals and activities were
incorporated into the curriculum. The Gary Plan, an experimental school community, in
which platoons of students were trained in formal school subjects for part of the day and
actively engaged in practical activities for the other part is one such example (Pinar, et.
al, 2004). Other progressive experiments included the Denver project which focused on
the significance of teachers’ collaborating in the development of curriculum, the
Winnetka plan which attempted to individualize instruction by allowing students to work
on projects or units as long as necessary to attain mastery, and the Lincoln school which
allowed students to go on trips to explore social and economic conditions firsthand as
part of the core curriculum (Pinar, et. al, 2004). The thesis of progressive education can
then be declared as a focus on understanding and action rather than rote memorization
and subordination that characterized classical education.
Herbert Spencer
Although less popular than some other Progressives, Herbert Spencer influenced
both the educational system and other prominent thinkers in many ways. In the late
1800s, Spencer accused the common ideas that people held regarding the world and
humankind’s place in it were fundamentally mistaken; specifically those related to
education (Egan, 2004). He argued that education had been an attempt to force irrelevant
18
information into the minds of children using nearly inhumane methods; instead, he
believed that education should be directly relevant to the lives the students would actually
lead (Egan, 2004).
Spencer articulated a set of developmental principles to help guide educators. He
believed that the laws that should shape learning and development were similar to the
natural laws of the cosmos. First, he believed that the cosmic principle of simple to
complex plays out in all aspects of life, from the evolution of species, the development of
advanced civilizations, and from the changes of the human mind from childhood to adult
(Egan, 2004). Likewise, his other principles are closely related to this idea. He believed
in the principle of the definite to the indefinite, from the concrete to the abstract, and
from the empirical to the rational (Egan, 2004). Educationally, Spencer’s principles also
posed important questions that were deeply rooted in his philosophy of learning. Spencer
believed that education should be a process of self-development and that it should be
pleasurable. Children should be left to explore and discover, rather than be told; they are
not to be passive recipients of knowledge handed to them by teachers. This tenet was a
cornerstone of new pedagogical influences (Egan, 2004).
John Dewey
John Dewey is arguably one of the most recognized theorists associated with the
Progressive movement. In his book Democracy and education, Dewey (1916) describes
the necessity of education in sustaining life. He claims that by transmission, life is
renewed; however, physical maturation and the mastery of skills necessary for
subsistence will not guarantee the lifeblood of the social group (Dewey, 1916). Dewey
promotes communication as the key to promoting expectations and requirements of the
19
social group; however, he believes that these social communities are not built on chance
or proximity, but rather from a coming together of the minds. He says,
Men live in a community in virtue of the things which they have in
common; and communication is the way in which they come to
possess things in common. What they must have in common in
order to form a community or society are aims, beliefs, aspirations,
knowledge- a common understanding- (Dewey, 1916, p. 3).
Like the social constructivists, Dewey believed that education is not only a social
process, but should also serve as an agent for societal change.
In addition to describing how communication is used to perpetuate social aims,
Dewey discussed the importance of experience. He asserted that there were two elements
or phases of experience: action and consequence, importantly noted because he claims
that action alone does not constitute experience (Dewey, 1916). Learning does not occur
until one has faced the consequence of the action in an experience. In education, Dewey
applies this two-phased idea of experience by implying that learning cannot occur
through a transmission of knowledge. Knowledge can only be acquired when it has been
experienced; when one has acted on the subject and then reflected on the consequences,
forming a relationship between the action and the consequence. Dewey claimed that
teaching students to think should be a primary goal of education (Dewey, 1916).
Dewey professed his pedagogic creed, announcing his views on education,
schools, subject-matter, methods, and social progress. In this creed, he claimed that it was
impossible to prepare students for a precise future life, imparting specific skills to enable
him to be successful; therefore, he argued that education should be a means to train each
20
individual to have full command of himself and his capabilities (Dewey, 1897). Dewey
then argued that the schools, as a social institution, should be to bring a child to “share in
the inherited resources of the race, and to use his own powers for social ends” (Dewey,
1897, p. 77).
Who Am I?
A little bit of BAM!
As a person, I am inherently branded with a strong set of values and beliefs. There
are certain tenets to which I subscribe wholeheartedly, unchanging; however, I see myself
wearing different apparel depending on my life phase or specific situation. I don’t see this
changing of costume as duplicitousness to my inner self but rather as an accessory to
showcase who I am at a particular moment in my life.
At my core, I believe that as human beings we have a moral obligation to care for
one another and to teach children empathy. I believe that children are competent, capable
beings who should be treated with love and respect. I believe that the environment is a
key aspect to learning and that the teacher should be a facilitator in designing an
environment that encourages exploration and reflection. I also think that communication
and collaboration between parents, teachers, students, and the community provides a
cohesion that connects learning and experience, affects social change, and gives meaning
to student learning.
I think that children are natural explorers and have a desire to learn; as educators,
I think that it is our responsibility to foster this natural love of learning rather than stifle it
by imposing a rigid, static curriculum on them. Although I subscribe to the idea of
21
individualized learning experiences, I believe that there is a core set of knowledge that all
people should know in order to be successful. I also believe that in this core knowledge
base, some information is best learned through traditional transmission methods rather
than through self-exploration.
Like in the Reggio-Emilia approach, I believe that it is important to build
opportunities for learning based on student interests. Keen observation skills and
reflection are important in recognizing these interests. As students mature, I think that it
is important to afford them multiple and varied opportunities to explore careers and
occupations. Unlike with traditional tracking, I think that students should be given the
chance to explore many traditional and progressive options rather than being “locked in”
to a specific path.
Unlike the picture that many people have of humanist and progressive education,
I don’t think that student led learning, individualized experiences, and exploration will
create egocentric individuals or chaotic classrooms. I think that these experiences will
provide students with a sense of accomplishment and pride while feeding the intrinsic
desire to learn. With careful planning and facilitation, clear expectations and guidance,
and honest communication, I believe that the environment can be one that is open and
conducive to exploration rather than limiting and disordered.
With a sprinkle of progressivism, a shake of humanism, and a dash of social
constructivism, my core beliefs are solidified. I believe that as children grow and mature
their needs change and the level of needed teacher support and guidance varies. However,
regardless of age or maturation level, I firmly subscribe to the idea of unconditional
regard. All students have worth, it is our job as educators to find and cultivate it, forming
22
relationships of trust that encourage our students to take risks and gain confidence to
accomplish goals they may have never thought they could achieve.
23
References
Au, K. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of
diverse backgrounds. Journal of literacy research, 30, 297-319. Retrieved from
http://jlr.sagepub.com/content/30/2/297
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. (In V.S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human
behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press)
Cadwell, L. (1997). Bringing Reggio-Emilia home: An innovative approach to early
childhood education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Clark, B., Griffin, J., & Turner, D. (2007). Sorting out variations on the terms
“constructionism” and “constructivism”. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives
on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from
http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Cunningham, T., Gannon, J., Kavanagh, M., Greene, J., Reddy, L., & Whitson, L. (2004).
Theories of learning and curriculum design: Key positionalities and their
relationships. Retrieved from:
http://level3.dit.ie/html/issue5/tony_cunningham/cunningham.pdf
DeCarvalho, R. (1991). The humanistic paradigm in education. The Humanistic
Psychologist, 19(1), 88-104.
Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. School Journal, 54, 77-80. Retrieved from:
http://dewey.pragmatism.org/creed.htm
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Toledo, OH: Student Handouts, Inc.
24
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Kappa Delta Pi.
Edwards, C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (1998). Hundred languages of children: The
Reggio-Emilia approach-Advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
Egan, K. (2004). Getting it wrong from the beginning: Our Progressivist inheritance
from Herbert Spencer, John Dewey, and Jean Piaget. New York: Yale University
Press.
Gage, N., & Berliner, D. (1991). Educational psychology (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton,
Mifflin.
Goble, F. (1970). The third force: The psychology of Abraham Maslow. New York:
Grossman.
Harris, J. (2010). Live presentation, Oct. 21, 2010.
Hayes, W. (2007). Progressive education movement: Is it still a factor in today’s
schools? Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Hewett, V. (2001). Examining the Reggio-Emilia approach to early childhood education.
Early childhood education journal, 29(2).
Huitt, W. (2009). Humanism and open education. Educational Psychology Interactive.
Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/affect/humed.html
Kim, B. (2001). Social Constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on
learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from
http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
25
Malaguzzi, L. (1993). Your image of the child: Where teaching begins. Seminar
presentation in Reggio-Emilia Italy. Translated by Baji Rankin, Leslie Morrow,
Lella Gandini.
Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.
Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm
McLeod, S. (2007). Carl Rogers. Retrieved from
http://simplypsychology.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/carl-rogers.html
Noddings, Nel. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Los
Angeles: University of California Press.
Noddings, Nel. (1995). A morally defensible mission for schools in the 21st century.
(Reprinted from Clinchy, Evans, ed. Transforming public education: A new
course for America’s future. (New York: Teachers College Press, 1997, p. 27-37).
Noddings, Nel. (2003). Happiness and education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Pinar, W., Reynolds, W., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. (2004). Understanding curriculum.
New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Power, F. (2008). Moral education: A handbook. West Port, CT: Praeger.
Sharpe, M. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East
European psychology, 42(1).
Sims, H. & Manz, C. (1982). Social learning theory. Journal of organizational behavior
management, 3(4).
Van der Veer, R. & Valsiner, J. (1991). Understanding Vygotsky: A quest for synthesis.
Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
26
Vygotsky, L. (1966) Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet
Psychology 12(6).
Zimring, F. (1999). Carl Rogers (1902-1987). Prospects: The quarterly review of
comparative education. Paris: UNESCO International Bureau of Education.
Retrieved from http://www.ibe.unesco.org/publications/ThinkersPdf/rogerse.PDF
27