John Dewey’s Education Essay

The future of our civilization depends upon the widening spread and deepening hold of the scientific habit of mind. ~John Dewey Science as Subject-Matter and as Method The salient and noteworthy features that highlight the significance of educational significance from 1880 through 1920 in regards to progressive education and pragmatism can best be described as engaging not only the students in an era of academic discipline but also on the levels of teachers and administrators. The lesson of cooperation is one that is a shared in each academic approach; progressive and pragmatism thus the development of education at the turn of America’s twentieth century entailed a refreshed focus on the individual student. The following paper will analyze the commonalities and differences of progressive education and pragmatism and how progressive education has many ties with other philosophies such as humanism and liberalism. Thus, the two main but subtle theorists who will be discussed in this paper are Dewey and Plato. Although structure of Dewey’s belief of progressive education over pragmatic education is different from Plato’s pragmatism and humanism the paper will seek to show how these philosophies are shared in education but how progressive education is needed in order for the student to learn how to adapt to certain situations as well as to find their own route of learning. Education at the turn of the twentieth century must be approached through the achievement of common goals; not through students’ learning alone, but by teachers and administrators. As such, typical classroom schematics that have in that past previous to the concepts of progressive education pointed towards competition, and independent work ethic must be overruled by the more efficient cooperative small group learning dynamic which is one definition of pragmatism. Pragmatism is similar to the concept and theories involved with child psychology prevalent today. The student then with regards to pragmatism is viewed as learning by their own set of standards and by relating current progress to past mistakes. Thus, in the discipline of pragmatism, a student is judged and allowed to learn at their own pace. While other disciplines heightened learning through an array of tests and were exclusively subject oriented, pragmatism guided the student at the early turn of the twentieth century through a varied education in several genres which would ultimately be considered a type of social studies education; combining subject matter into a common arena of education. Schools that have focused on working to deprive others through competitive classroom activities initiate a win/lose strategy that only heightens the disappointment in the kids that lose instead of pointing towards the positive aspects of learning new materials that kids should be excited to learn which was the interest of other schools of thought instead of the curriculum evolution presented by pragmatism. Although pragmatism did present new ideas about citizenship, social conduct, and evolution into the classroom, there was still hesitation on the part of the American about its utilization in the classroom. Progressive education teaches that every child learns differently and must be treated as an individual, and it is through pragmatism that the individual is taught in a scientific fashion to explore their surroundings. No child learns in the same manner and thus, progressive education was essential in the split from America’s past that education was singular in nature and disconnected. Cooperation, however, is the key by which a progressive education was being presented and it is truly through cooperation that progressive education takes it role. It is thus through the individual observation of the world that pragmatism was developed in an educational way. Learning goals in regards to pragmatism can only be realized if consensus is constantly challenged. That is what is meant by ‘Do not block the way of inquiry’. By generalizing education into separate genres the sociology and interrelated issues of each subject become a chaotic discord. Through this type of group learning, individuals learn that nothing is related and that one subject cannot breach another subject. This limits the possibilities of science, math, art, etc. By interrelating subjects, one student who is not interested in a certain genre may see how their study of choice hinges upon another subject such as math calculations to art (i.e. M.C. Escher’s tessellation). Dewey brought to the foreground of early American pragmatism in the 1900’s that teachers should teach according to how the student learns. Thus, the teacher must know the interest of the student, and therefore, the student will make an effort to learn if it is something for which they already have a propensity. Unlike Herbart, Dewey taught that a teacher cannot force a child to learn or even been interested in a subject, it is something the student has to choose. There are five components by which progressive education has worked: positive interdependence, promotive interaction, individual accountability, interpersonal and small-group skills, and group processing. Each of these components teaches students and teachers that learning is not achieved through route memorization but through actively taking part in lessons and developing independent thought. Active learning should be a base by which each classroom is structured. In analysis, active learning simply means that students aren’t spoon-fed the correct answers but instead they question the subject and come up with their own hypothesis and then are allowed to check to see if it is correct: They are not handed the answers and taught to memorize but instead are taught to actively engage in each school subject and come to their own conclusions through proper problem solving techniques (this is applicable in any genre). In active learning, questions are just as important as the answers. Plato highlighted that learners need to think as well as learn for themselves and take what they learn in a classroom setting as a guideline to real life as is stated in his forms. Teachers then are given the duty of making sure they engage students in becoming active learners. Through formal and informal learning, this accomplished. Progressive education in American History is then implemented in the learning strategy of all classrooms together. Cooperation means learning with a group and giving succor to everyone participating in that group. A school then, is merely a larger extension of the classroom group which in turn is an extension of the smaller learning groups within the classroom. The focal point of pragmatism then become the welding of Fine Arts in education. That is, fine arts as the fusion between art, math, history, languages and science. It is with Dewey’s definition of pragmatism that art is a bases by which teachers teach (he considered teaching an art) and how students learn (also an art form) and thus, subject matters were understood through art concepts. Â  Congruency is a term that permeates both progressive education and pragmatism, for the students and teachers. With the diverse relation of subject matters implemented in progressive education Dewey came to identify the hands on experience, thus Dewey believed that learning was manipulative in which the learner abided by the laws of situation in order to be properly stimulated and it is through this that Plato’s system of inquiry is found. In a progressive education then, the common and ultimate goal of the entire system is to improve learning, and the avenues by which material is learned by the students. Progressive education also entailed elements of Humanism as thought of by other philosophers and educators of the time period. In the concern for the individual that pragmatists exhibited, it was only natural that Humanism be involved in the philosophy. Humanism is the value of each person and that feeling extended throughout the human race. Dewey as well as Plato’s belief in humanism was only part of the interdisciplinary status of progressive education. Another strong element within the understanding of progressivism was liberalism. That is to say that liberalism combined with progressive education formed a cohesion of social justice and advocacy consent. Progressive education should be understood within a social context, and not be misguided by ideas pertaining to Constructivism which is similar but models itself towards pupils gaining their knowledge based purely and solely on individualistic efforts, instead of the hands on experience involved with pragmatism. Progressive education, as it is involved with the education system of America from the 1880’s throughout the 1920’s was a system in which pupils were encouraged to challenge themselves with their own knowledge paired with the knowledge they gained in a classroom. Pragmatism was about finding new solutions to old problems and continually challenging those solutions to find better answers. The combining of all subjects through fine arts application was essential to the development of pragmatism in the classroom and enabled students to find interest in areas which would otherwise be off limits because of their lack of attention in subjects which they were not interested. Progressive education has its origins in pragmatism and the separation of the two is problematic to the understanding of American education during the specified time period.