Idealism
Plato and Socrates are considered the fathers of idealism, an
educational philosophy that places emphasis on developing inner understanding
of long-withstanding and universal abstractions such as “truth, goodness, and
beauty” (83). Idealists believe
that the physical world, which we come to understand through our senses, is
just an “imperfect” representation of the spiritual world, which is perfect and
not subject to change. Thus, an
individual should have the goal of discovering universal ideas and “absolute
truths” through introspection, questioning, and imitation (83). Idealists also believe that every
individual is born with the predisposed ability to make such discoveries within
themselves. The purpose of
education, then, is to guide students towards this inner uncovering of truth
and wisdom. Teachers ought to play
the role of “ideal role model” (83) for their students by acting as givers of
knowledge and a springboard for questions and reflective learning. Idealistic teaching methods often
involve lectures, discussion, and imitation of the great leaders of the
past. Curriculum is rigorous and
centered on subjects and ideas rather than the child, and focus is placed on
lessons within the humanities (with an emphasis on historical events and
peoples). Socratic dialogue (the
practice of the teacher challenging student beliefs through questioning and
reflection) stems from the philosophy of idealism and has been proven as an
“effective teaching tool” (85) when implemented carefully.
Realism
The development of realism can be attributed to Aristotle,
Plato’s best-known student. Unlike
idealism, realism does not consider ideas to be the “ultimate reality” and
believes in the separation of the physical world and the mind (i.e., they are
independent of each other); truth can exist in the physical world. Thus, scientific investigation and the
use of the senses to discover truth is possible, often through a combination of
sensation and abstraction.
Realists’ interpretation of the world occurs in a more logical manner
than that of idealists (who think more abstractly) and depends on rational
thinking and reasoning to help uncover natural laws and the values that stem
from in. A “realist” curriculum
may include use of textbooks and standardized tests, as well as a break down of
disciplines into “separate areas of investigation” (86). In other words, a curriculum based on
realism is very specialized.
Teachers are expected to be well-versed in their subject areas, but also
have a broad enough background to show students connections between
disciplines. Unlike idealists,
realists understand that ideas change, so emphasis is placed on
experimentation, observation, logic, and classification.
Pragmatism
Pragmatism came about in the nineteenth century and is
different from idealism and realism in that it believes in an “open universe”
that is in a constant state of change (87). In other words, the world is becoming rather than being. To pragmatists, change in
important, and change within and individual (and the world) occurs through
knowledge. However, in order for
change to be effective, an individual must “understand what it means to know.” Knowing, according to pragmatists, is a
“transaction or conversation between the learner and the environment” (87-88). Therefore, pragmatists believe that people
learn best through experience and applying knowledge to real-world
situations. Pragmatists also
understand that values can change, and that certain values may work in one
place or at one time but not work in another place or time. The teacher’s role is to help students
learn to question what they observe so that they can become active problem
solvers in a changing world.
Curriculum is interdisciplinary, helping students to apply their
knowledge to the outside world in a variety of contexts, and the school
functions as “a community of learners” (88).
Existentialism
Existentialism can be viewed as daunting and hopeless, or as
extremely opportunistic. According
to existentialists, nothing exists beyond an individual’s lived existence, and
final reality resides within each individual. Unlike the other philosophies, with existentialism, nothing
is absolute, including change.
Instead, we “live in an alien, meaningless existence” (90). While this may sound bleak,
existentialists believe that each individual is able to create his/her own
existence and meaning, and that this road to meaning and self-discovery is
empowering: “for some, the very meaningless life compels us to instill life
with meaning” (90). To
existentialists, knowing is a personal reflective experience, and the most
significant knowledge is personal and nonscientific, focusing on the human
condition and personal choices.
Existentialism is based on choices, freedom, and the opportunity for individuals
to define themselves—this is how we become authentic human begins. School can become slightly
controversial in the eyes of existentialists in that it can “de-emphasize” the
individual. However, this does not
mean that schools and curriculum cannot be designed to allow self-discovery;
schools that focus on self-direction and personal choice rather than tracking,
measurement, and standardization can still fit existentialist beliefs. Within the classroom, existentialism
places emphasis on questions, discussions, and interactions that guide students
towards the discovery of and fulfillment of their inner purposes. Thus, the teacher’s job is to encourage
students to become to people they want to be, rather than allowing them to be
heavily influenced by outside sources (e.g., society or their parents). With existentialism, individual
authenticity and development is the main focus.
So, which
philosophies best reflect my personal beliefs?
After reading about these four philosophies, I can say with
confidence that my personal educational beliefs fall somewhere between those of
pragmatism and existentialism.
Essentially, I believe that the purpose of learning is to help students develop
a personal identity that gives them a sense of direction and meaning in life
(existentialism) while simultaneously preparing them to function within and
contribute to a dynamic and changing world (pragmatism).
As someone who spent the majority of my adolescent years
attempting to please others and never truly focusing on myself, I fell into a
trap of passivity when it came to my learning and concern for my future. All throughout my schooling, I was part
of a heavily tracked group of students who were placed in upper-level courses
(honors and AP). At the time, I
was content with my education because it was all I knew and because I was “at
the top” of my class, but never had the opportunity to discover the person at
the core of my being. When it came
time to apply to colleges, I based my decisions on what others thought were
best for me as I had yet to develop enough of personal identity to decide for
myself. I ended up attending an
Ivy League university simply because it was “expected of me,” and I spent my
entire freshman year in misery. I
was confused, overwhelmed, and out of touch with myself, unsure of what I
really wanted and unable to think critically enough to problem solve and make
my own decisions without fear of letting other people down. Who was I? The “perfect” student, sure, but somehow, that wasn’t enough
for me anymore. It wasn’t until I
broke away from the expectations bestowed upon me and transferred schools that
I began to learn to make my own decisions and find meaning in my life.
I do not want my students to have to wait until they are in
college to catch a glimpse of the person—the authentic being that they carry
around deep inside of them every day—that they truly are. Today, I am still in the process of
getting to know the “real” Laura, and while this is fine, I wish I had been
given more opportunities to get to know her earlier in life. Thus, I feel that certain components of
existentialism have a place in schools, including greater opportunities for
student choice and self-discovery.
I believe that the more comfortable an individual is with him/her self,
the more likely he/she will find direction and meaning in life, and the more
open to learning he/she will become.
I feel that in order to have a well-rounded education,
components of pragmatism ought to be paired with those of existentialism. Pragmatic ideals reminds us that
nothing in life is static, and that change is constantly happening all around
us. Even the person within us,
whom we discover through existentialism, is subject to change. Pragmatism prepares students to adapt
to change, problem-solve, and apply their knowledge to real-world
situations—all of which are essential for becoming highly functioning members
of society.
The fact that I identify most with these two philosophies,
however, does not mean that I cannot derive any value from idealism and
realism. For example, I believe
that it is important for students to learn about historical events and people
(idealism) and to be able to think rationally (realism), but more so in the
sense that they can use such knowledge to better understand themselves and the
world around them than as “sole” bases for learning. It is the dynamic and interdisciplinary principles of
pragmatism and existentialism that I believe are necessary for developing the
motivated, self-fulfilled, open-minded individuals who will ultimately lead us
to the future our world is waiting for.
No comments:
Post a Comment