John Dewey, is a highly influential and important 20th ...icolemanma.wikispaces.com/file/view/EDUC+585+John+Dewey... · Web viewJohn Dewey: A Critical Analysis of Dewey’s Ideas

John Dewey: A Critical Analysis

John Dewey:

A Critical Analysis of Dewey’s Ideas and How They Relate

to Current Education Practices

Ian Coleman

EDCT 585

Professor Marker

December 10, 2008

1


Exploring a Curriculum Theorist – John Dewey

Brief Biography of John Dewey

Basic Tenants of Dewey’s philosophy

Critical Analysis of Dewey’s philosophy’s Strengths and Weaknesses

Where and How is this Philosophy Currently Being Implemented

Interview via email of a Special Educator/Scholar, who has written and been

published on Dewey’s Continued Influence.

What I Learned from this Project

Additional Criteria – an Interpretation of Uses of Technology in Special

Education as viewed through a Deweyan Lens.

Biography

John Dewey is a highly influential and important 20th century American

philosopher, whose ideas still ruminate around the world in both philosophical circles and

in everyday life. As one of the founders of the pragmatic philosophy movement, a highly

esteemed scholar, and proponent for educative democracy in which each individual is

given equal opportunity to develop into their own special and unique person, Dewey has

earned a lasting place as one of the great minds of the 20th century.

Born in Burlington, Vermont, on October 20th, 1859, to well off middle class

parents who were small business owners, Dewey is said to have learned an early

2


appreciation for his station and was very compassionate for those less privileged citizens

(Strathern, 2002). As a large lumber depot, Burlington developed into thriving economic

hub, which attracted many poor immigrants, including French-Canadians and the Irish.

While John’s father, Archibold Sprague Dewey, was a mid 19th century American upstart

businessman without formal education or a real taste for religion, John Dewey’s mother,

Lucina, exposed him to philanthropic work within the community as part of her

charitable Christian work (Martin, 2002). This, coupled with John’s upbringing in the

evangelical Christian school was highly influential on his moral view and sympathetic

outlook regarding social issues throughout his life (Strathern, 2002).

After graduating from the University of Vermont, and then working as a

schoolteacher in Oil City, Pennsylvania for three years, Dewey enrolled at the John

Hopkins University of Baltimore in advanced study of philosophy. The university had

one of the best philosophy programs in the United States, and was considered the only

U.S. program that offered the same quality of study as some of the more highly esteemed

European Universities (Strathern, 2002).

During John Dewey’s time at John Hopkins he developed as a philosopher. Much

of John’s early philosophical ideas were influenced by the neo-Hegelian outlook, which

was professed and supported by doctor Sylvester Morris. The ideas of Georg Wilhelm

Friederich Hegel were highly influential at the time and allowed John to explain the

existence of dualities such as his comfortable upbringing juxtaposed with less fortunate

social classes (Strathern, 2002). After completion of studies at the university, John begins

teaching at the University of Michigan in 1884. He marries Alice Chipman who had been

3


a schoolteacher before coming to study at the university of Michigan, and begins to

develop his theories on education.

John had the idea that the education system was not right in the United States

based on his own experience as well as Alice’s experiences. During the next ten years, as

professor at the University of Michigan, John Dewey developed an educational theory

that could be used in real life situations, and real people, versus the more abstract

rhetorical analytical style of the traditional philosophies (Strathern, 2002).

In 1894 John begins teaching at the newly founded University of Chicago during

which time he publishes, The Child and the Curriculum (1902), among other writings.

This article outlined John’s philosophy on education and curriculum.

John was a prolific academic, writer, philosopher who went on to teach at

Columbia University, publish numerous articles and books which discussed classic topics

of philosophy from pragmatic point of view. According to Paul Strathern (2002), John’s

philosophy of pragmatism, or instrumentalism or experimentalism as he preferred to call

it, is “essentially a scientific view of the world. As such, its tendency was to be down to

earth and commonsensical” (p.26). At a time when the scientific method and Darwin’s

theory of evolution had begun to take a firm hold on the foundations of the social,

educational, and political systems for the world, Dewey’s pragmatism allowed for change

and adaptation as the years went by and new scientific discoveries upset the base of

“absolute” knowledge. This is one of the reasons why John Dewey’s philosophy is still

relevant and influential today, in the 21st century. The inherent ability to adapt and

address real life situations as they unfold is something many philosophies had been

lacking.

4


John Dewey, lived to the ripe old age of ninety-two. After observing and

sometimes advising on the education systems of Japan, China, and Russia, heading a

commission to question Leon Trotsky, the exiled communist leader, and continuing to

publish, including works on his theories of Logic and Inquiry, John Dewey died in 1952

in New York. His ideas have been interpreted and employed in the United States of

America’s system of education, in the past as well as present. Viewing current curricular

and pedagogical choices in our schools through a Deweyan lens enables present day

educators to more readily understand his continued influence.

Basic Tenants of Philosophy

Basic tenants of John Dewey’s pragmatism philosophy arise from Dewey’s belief

that education is an ongoing process that is organic, and closely related to familial and

societal needs. According to Dewey, pragmatism emphasizes the interconnectedness of

the individual with society, and supports the belief that education which focuses on only

one or the other of these will fail, as individuals depend on society, and without the

individual, society becomes “only an inert and lifeless mass” (Flinders & Thornton,

2004).

Dewey felt that school should be an extension of the home and community, and

therefore the curriculum should consist of instruction in skills used and needed in these

settings, including the workplace. But it wasn’t learning certain skills that Dewey was

interested in. Instead, he felt that it was the duty of the education system to guide students

to a place where they would be able to think critically, and learn whatever skills became

5


necessary for them to contribute to society, family, community, etc. They would be able

to do so because they had been taught, through a mode of inquiry, to pursue knowledge

and skills that they were interested in and adept at. Through this process the individual

would be able to reach their full potential and make contributions to society accordingly

(Durant, 1926; Strathern, 2002).

In addition to the school being an extension of the community, another basic

tenant of Dewey’s philosophy regarding the school’s role in education is that learning

should be self-directed and include various forms of cooperation in which, the learner

continues the types of interactions that are occurring in the larger world, yet is given the

added benefit of a teacher, or guide, to help them understand the processes and benefits

behind these cooperative interactions (Ornstein & Hunkins, 1988).

Dewey did not believe in teaching set body of knowledge, as he viewed the world

as ever changing and he felt that an appropriate system of education should help teach

individuals to meet new challenges as they arise, rather than relying on just one set of

skills that could easily be outdated or outmoded when new technological advances

occurred. This is idea gets to the heart of Dewey’s philosophy in that pragmatic, or

practical learning, is an ongoing process, and one is never done with education (Martin,

2002).

Critical Analysis of Strengths and Weaknesses of Dewey’s Philosophy

John Dewey’s pragmatism is associated with the progressivism education

movement. These educational philosophies placed a great deal of emphasis on a

democratic form of education in which learning is always taking place, and schools are

6


meant to reflect the types of experiences one is having in their own lives and society and

act as a continuation of that social experience (Bernstein, 1966). Dewey believed that the

teacher played a unique role in the education of the individual. Much as a gardener

cultivates the garden by giving plants the necessary nutrients for their individual needs, a

teacher who is implementing a Deweyan form of education, must “pay close attention to

the particularities, to the individual students and their environmental influences, so that

every instructional strategy can be adjusted in light of these” (Seltzer-Kelly, 2008, p.299).

This can viewed as either strength or a weakness in a pragmatic approach to education,

depending upon the actual implementation. If a teacher is motivated and capable of

staying adequately informed of all of the particularities of an individual student while

adjusting the educational program accordingly, then that student may benefit greatly.

However, a lack of time or care, or implementation of this individualized curriculum

could leave the learner stranded on what is essentially an educational desert island in the

middle of the ocean, isolated from the larger picture or learning process and therefore

deficient in their own progress as a contributing member of society.

A strength of Dewey’s philosophy on education is found in the method of inquiry

through which students are expected to pursue knowledge. By allowing the students

interests and strengths to guide the education process in real life sequences, they are more

likely to remain engaged in the process rather than become bored or disillusioned at

learning “stuff” that does not even relate to real, present day, life. According to Dewey,

“education which does not occur through forms of life, forms that are worth living for

their own sake, is always a poor substitute for the genuine reality, and tends to cramp and

to deaden” (Flinders & Thornton, 2004).

7


Dewey’s belief in the importance of guiding students through the learning process

based in real life experiences was in contrast with much of the teaching of his day, which

was based on traditional philosophies, such as perennialism, and methods of obtaining

knowledge, in which a teacher disseminates a set body of knowledge to the student who

receives the information as a vessel waiting to be filled (Ornstein & Hunkins, 1988;

Strathern, 2002). A benefit of a pragmatic approach to education lies in its inherent

adaptability to new ideas, changes in industry, social pressures, technology, etc.

According to Scot Danforth (2008), Dewey’s ideas allowed for adaptability, and “given

the rapidly changing nature of society, schools must support the widest diversity of

intellectual and practical development for all students so that they might prepare

themselves for the many possible life activities” (p. 50).

Progressivism, and pragmatism garnered much support in the early to mid 20th

century, before a gradual decline of popularity due to its “inability to outline a uniform

theory of the purpose of schooling, or even to establish a set of principles” (Ornstein,

Hunkins, 1988). This “weakness”, or inability to establish a specific criteria for or

purpose of schools, made it difficult for schools to measure progress of students, left

many teachers wondering what exactly they were supposed to teach and ultimately gave

way to more specific or traditional curriculum which was more readily established or

concretely implemented in America’s schools. In addition to this lack of “uniform

theory”, Dewey’s ideas were often misrepresented in progressive schools and therefore

lent his name to many controversies (Martin, 2002).

8


According to Ornstein and Hunkins, many of the basic tenants or ideas of

progressivism and pragmatism were continued for a time in the philosophies behind the

relevant curriculum, the humanistic curriculum, and radical school reform movements.

These ideas are still being put into practice in the present day, with the creation of

educational institutions that base their practices off of Dewey’s ideas of inquiry, such as

the High Tech High, which is part of the San Diego Unified School (Neumann, 2008),

and Technology High at Sonoma State University Campus in which curriculum is

delivered in a more student centered way to meet current societal demands.

Discussion of Where and How Dewey’s philosophy is Currently Being Implemented

Dewey’s ideas regarding education are being implemented sporadically

throughout the world, and have for the most part, given way to the more traditional

philosophy of education, perennialism. As much of the United State’s public education

system is rapidly moving towards a system of national and state standards of education,

which is something Dewey would have most likely abhorred (Vinson, 1998), we need to

look to private schools, public “experimental” schools, colleges within and outside of

universities, as well as in other countries to find examples of Dewey’s philosophy being

implemented on a large scale.

On a small scale, one can see elements of Dewey’s pragmatic philosophy

anywhere that a learner is engaged in problem solving as a way to gain knowledge in an

ever changing environment (Ornstein & Hunkins, 1988). Classrooms, home schools,

apprenticeships, and any other everyday life experience could meet this definition at any

given time. Dewey felt that schools should be a mini democratic society in which

9


students learn based on a method of inquiry rather than simply memorizing a prescribed

set of knowledge.

On a larger scale, Dewey’s methods can be more easily recognized in the

progressive form of education taught in many special educator training programs, and

implemented in school district special education programs. Dewey’s belief that everyone

should be given the chance to reach their full potential so that they may make their own

individual contribution to society (Strathern, 2002) is one of the basic tenants of special

education. As Scot Danforth points out, there is disagreement in special education circles,

whether or not Dewey would be in support of “segregated schooling of students with

intellectual disabilities” with Danforth claiming Dewey would not be in support.

However, it is likely based on Dewey’s belief in a democratic learning environment that

he would support the current mainstreaming special education movement which has

students with disabilities enrolled in general education classes, therefore providing

“students with and without disabilities ample opportunities to interact, develop relations,

and learn together” (Danforth, 2008, p62).

Aside from private schools, which are based on pedagogical and philosophical

models that share similarities with Dewey’s teachings, such as Montessori and Waldorf

schools, there are schools inside and outside of public school districts, which cite Dewey

as their biggest pedagogical influence. One such successful school, that has in turn

become an influence for other similar programs, is High Tech High of the San Diego

Unified School District. Although the name has lead to “considerable misunderstanding”

about the schools program, in which many in the community thought the curriculum was

strictly technology based, the school is “actually a ‘liberal arts school in disguise’ that

10


promotes students’ use of technology in their real world, interdisciplinary, project-based

inquiries related to traditional academic disciplines (Neumann, 2008, p.63). According to

Neumann (2008), the schools physical and aesthetic makeup, which appears to be a high

tech firm, or other similarly suited office environment, communicates to the students that

“the school may provide learning experiences that relate to life outside school, and

improve one’s opportunity in life” (p. 55). High Tech High (HTH) is a modern example

of John Dewey’s philosophy of education in action. Neumann (2008) states that although

visitors to the school would not see any of his writings on the wall or in pamphlets, HTH

is “clearly an exemplar of John Dewey-inspired approaches to teaching and

learning”(p.62) and the “project method of learning” employed at HTH is “the most

distinguishing pedagogical feature of the HTH model” (p.62). High Tech High has been

a model for other schools in the San Diego area (Neumann, 2008).

In Sonoma county, located on the Sonoma state University Campus, is Tech High

of Rancho Cotati Unified School District. Whether or not the program’s philosophy is

based on Dewey’s pragmatism their methods of instruction include a project based

learning approach (http://www.crpusd.org/tech_plan.html).

Added Criteria – An Examination of Technology as viewed through a Deweyan

Lens.

Technology has many uses in education and as I narrow this examination into the special

education realm those applications of technology become even more specific and

widespread in practice. Uses of technology in special education classroom are disability

specific and often, but not always, require specialized training for the teacher to utilize

11


the equipment correctly. Types of technology or adaptive technology in use in special

education programs currently include unmodified desktop computers or laptops with or

without voice recognition software, writing devices such as word processors, visual aids

such as overhead projectors, multimedia projectors, calculators, wheelchairs, lifts for

immobile individuals, braillers and other visual devices for the site impaired, hearing

aides for the hearing impaired, etc. Dewey was a proponent for democratic education, in

which individuals should be given the opportunity to inquire about and then develop

skills that are of interest and capability to themselves (Flinders & Thornton, 2002), and

he felt that “the growth and learning of each student, regardless of ability, is understood

within a collaborative or shared experience of value and achievement among the group”

(Danforth, 2008). This position supports the idea that Dewey would be in support of

technological uses within the classroom and outside of the classroom as the technology

assists the individual in reaching their full potential.

Technology in special education or general education for that matter comes in the

form of an electronic field trip (EFT) when the means (money, time, space, etc.) are not

there to physically travel to a location. Cassady and Mullen examine “Dewey’s (1943)

framework for natural learning impulses for children” to describe the “potential

pedagogical benefits of electronic field trips (EFTs) (p.1) and examine how EFT allow

for inquiry based education as students and teachers are allowed to explore virtually,

online, increasing their experiences. Dewey’s impulses of children, which include

inquiry, communication, construction, and expression, are a perfect implement or model

for use in tapping the “innate inclinations of learners” (Cassady & Mullen, 2006, p. 153)

so that they may utilize appropriate strategies to harness technology in the classroom.

12


Interview/email correspondence with Dr. Scot Danforth: School of Teaching and

Learning – The Ohio State University

In a recent correspondence with Scot Danforth, author of John Dewey’s

Contributions to an Educational Philosophy of Intellectual Disability (2008), I posed two

questions to him for insight and asked for further clarification of his thoughts based on

his expressed position in is article, my current work towards my Masters in Special

Education, and our Dewey connection. I asked about Dewey's ideas and how they are

currently being employed in education as well as an interpretation of how Dewey might

have viewed technology in special education classrooms.

The first question was as follows:

I feel that Dewey would agree with the aims that drive special education (too great to

discuss here), although he would probably be more in support of mainstreaming

individuals with disabilities rather than pull out or special day class models. What are

your thoughts on Dewey and mainstreaming?

Dr. Danforth’s response:

“This was where I really had to restrain myself in writing that article. My personal

desire was to place Dewey in a pro-inclusion camp. He was always a progressive. He was

a strong supporter of unions, one of the founders of the NEA, the NAACP, and bunch of

other progressive acronym groups. But I kept reminding myself that you don't ask

Thomas Jefferson if he is for Obama's green energy policy. You can't pull someone out of

13


history to ask him about an issue we are facing today. The most we can do is ask whether

current day inclusive educators would find Dewey's ideas useful to their cause. Or,

conversely, if critics of inclusion would find much ammo for their cause in Dewey's

philosophy. I think that the inclusive educators would find more to their liking in Dewey.

He was a strong believer in what we now call 'diversity,' the natural differences that exist

from child to child. He criticized schools for assuming that all kids were alike.

I do wonder, though, what Dewey would think of the disability constructs that we

use. Do they help us understand individuals? Or are they thin stereotypes focused on

what kids (supposedly) can't do? Concepts of deficit or lacking did not interest Dewey.

Too often we tend to assume that LD (for example) means that the child is inherently

different from (less than) the non-LD student. Dewey did not view natural differences on

the intellectual hierarchy we tend to use, a top (smartest, ablest) to bottom (least smart,

least able) scale. He viewed differences on a horizontal scheme, variations lacking moral

notions of 'better' or 'worse.' To make a crude metaphor, he viewed natural differences in

growing children more like how we view flavors available at an ice cream shop. Yes,

vanilla and pistachio are not the same, but there is no sense in which one is universally

better or higher than the other. (I made up that bad metaphor, not Dewey, but it fits his

'moral equality' idea.)” (S. Danforth, Personal Email, December 7 2008).

The second question was as follows:

14


Do you have any insight for me regarding a possible Deweyan interpretation of uses of

technology in special education or education in general?

Dr. S. Danforth’s response-

“Again we have to watch out for pulling Dewey out of his historical position.

But...in his time, he was a strong advocate for preparing students for the mechanical and

technological activities of the day. Education had to be relevant, in touch with what was

going on in society at the time. Check out a cool book he wrote called Schools for

Tomorrow. He gives a very readable example of what he thought schools should be

teaching, and it involved lots of what he called industrial skills. In his day, advances in

industry and engineering were moving quickly. But the schools were plugging away at

the old-fashioned 3 R's of the 1800's. Dewey wanted rich academics and lots of activities

building, designing, using the latest machines. When vocational schooling was first

introduced with wood shops and machine shops (his era's version of today's

technologies), he called for all schools and all students to work in both academics and

vocational training. Prepare fully for what society has to offer. Plus he did not want to

split schools into academic training for upper classes and machine training for lower. He

lost out on that debate. But his position can be seen fully in Schools for Tomorrow.

So....can technology educators find support in Dewey's ideas for the use of the

most cutting edge technologies in the schools? I would say a resounding yes. He would

be annoyed to see mechanical and technological developments taking place in society

15


without a strong and real experience for students in those areas in the schools” (S.

Danforth, Personal email, December 7, 2008).

The interview/email correspondence with Dr, Danforth was enriching and useful

in giving me yet more ideas to think about regarding Dewey’s influence on education. To

Dr. Danforth’s credit, I started the interview/email very casually, told him about my lack

of sleep due to being a new daddy and with another one on the way and much of my

cognitive capacity focused on this upcoming arrival my thoughts and sleep depravity

might be playing in to any misinterpretation of his work. I found his responses in kind,

casual, yet insightful, and humorous which makes for engaging food for thought.

What did I learn from this experience?

This experience has given me a more clear understanding of Dewey’s

philosophies, specifically on education, progressivism and pragmatism, a different

perspective on special education, as well as an improved ability to conduct research and

correspond with working professionals or experts on given subject matter. As stated

previously the interview was an extremely valuable part of the project and I have

continued correspondence with Dr. Danforth to let him know where my research has

taken me and to thank him for his time and advice.

I also learned of multiple schools around the United States that approach

education with progressive, Dewey influenced ideas. I am currently gathering more

research on these schools as I work towards my Masters in Special Education. These

16


schools include the Nova Project in Seattle, Washington, and the Central Park East

Schools created by Deborah Meier (R. Neumann, Personal Email, December 7, 2008).

In conclusion, John Dewey’s influence, although not overarching in present day

public school educational pedagogy, has been highly influential in educational circles for

nearly 100 years. His belief that learning is an ongoing process, and that schools should

represent a miniature democratic community in which students can explore ideas through

a method of inquiry is one that resonates with many contemporary educators and can be

found in varied educational settings around the world.

17


References

Bernstein, R. J. (1966). Great American Thinkers: John Dewey. New York: Washington Square Press, Inc.

Cassady, J., & Mullen, L. (2006, June). Reconceptualizing electronic field trips: a Deweyian perspective. Learning,

Media, & Technology, 31(2), 149-161.

Cotati Rohnert Park Unified School District Website. http://www.crpusd.org/tech_plan.html Retrieved from website

December 8, 2008.

Danforth, S. (2008, February). John Dewey’s Contributions to an Educational Philosophy of Intellectual Disability.

Educational Theory, 58(1), 45-62.

Durant, W. (1933). The Story of Philosophy: The Lives and Opinions of the Greater Philosophers. New York: Simon

and Shuster.

Flinders, D.J., & Thornton S. J. (2004).The Curriculum Studies Reader: Second Edition. New York, NY: Routledge

Falmer.

Januszewski, A., & Pearson, R. (1999, February 1). Problem-Based Learning: A Historical Analysis. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED436165) Retrieved December 1, 2008, from ERIC database.

Martin, J. (2002). The Education of John Dewey: A Biography. New York: Columbia University Press.

Neumann, R. (2008, Summer2008). Charter Schools and Innovation: THE HIGH TECH HIGH MODEL. American

Secondary Education, 36(3), 51-69.

Ornstein, A.C., Hunkins, F.P. (1988). Philosophical Foundation of Curriculum, Curriculum: Foundations Principles

and Issues, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall pp.25-51

Seltzer-Kelly, D. (2008, August). Deweyan Darwinism for the Twenty-First Century: Toward an Educational Method

for Critical Democratic Engagement in the Era of the Institute of Education Sciences. Educational Theory,

58(3), 289-304.

Strathern, P. (2002). Dewey in 90 Minutes. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee.

Vinson, K. (1999, January 1). National Curriculum Standards and Social Studies Education: Dewey, Freire, Foucault,

and the Construction of a Radical Critique. Theory and Research in Social Education, 27(3), 296-328.

Wirth, A. (1981, Winter81). An Alternative Image of ‘School and Society’ and the Deweyan Tradition (1950-1980): A

Reply to Merle Borrowman. Educational Studies, 11(4), 393.

18

John Dewey: A Critical Analysis 19

Documents

John Dewey, is a highly influential and important 20th ...icolemanma.wikispaces.com/file/view/EDUC+585+John+Dewey... · Web viewJohn Dewey: A Critical Analysis of Dewey’s Ideas