Foundations of Education: A Social, Political, and Philosophical Approach

Foundations of Education: A Social, Political, and Philosophical Approach Toronto, Ontario: Canadian Scholars Press, 2015: 124 pages ISBN: 978-1-55130-720-6 (paperback) An alluring aspect for many students who take foundations of education is its focus on life's big questions. This is clearly a concern for Jason C. Robinson in his new book, Foundations of Education: A Social, Political, and Philosophical Approach, a succinct foray through central philosophies of education that facilitates a deep exploration of key questions in the field. What is the fundamental source of knowledge? What is the basic nature of humanity? Should children be taught according to their nature, or according to an ideally envisioned society? Who should be privy to a quality education? What and how should students be taught? Such questions implicate teachers throughout our careers, and are but a sample of those that Robinson addresses throughout this reader. Foundations of Education takes the reader on a journey through the works of five influential philosophers--Plato (noting the widely accepted belief that he wrote on behalf of Socrates), Aristotle, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and John Dewey--summarizing each philosopher's implications for education. Each theorist offers an archetypal perspective on the basic nature of humanity, on the individual in/and society, and on the subsequent role for education. They all write from within different generations and nations (with the latter exception being Plato and Aristotle), and the chronological presentation underlies the presupposition (which is sometimes made explicit) that each benefited from the work of his precursors. The outcome is that the reader is presented with a breadth of compelling and sometimes controversial cases on what education is, was, and might be. The philosophers' responses to each foundational question are surprisingly varied, ultimately forming a labyrinth of perspectives for what constitutes education. Plato's ethical rationalism, Aristotle's metaphysics, Locke's empiricism, Rousseau's (pre-) romanticism, and Dewey's pragmatism all serve as ideal types upon which corresponding views for education are implicated. Take, for example, perspectives on the source of knowledge: While Plato suggests that knowledge emanates through reason, abstraction, and principles, Aristotle proposes sensing, observation, and description, Locke, through our ideas of the world, Rousseau, through feelings and emotions, and Dewey through problem-solving, social interactions, and experience. These epistemological positions have enormous consequences for other aspects of the foundations of education. On curricular choices: While Dewey emphasizes science (biology in particular), mathematics, arts, and social studies, Locke has little use for art and science, and highlights instead the importance of reading, memory-work, writing and language. (One might also contrast these conclusions with Aristotle's recommendations for reading, writing, gymnastics, drawing, and music.) On who should be educated: Plato's proposition of extracting for schooling only a handful of philosopher kings was broadened by Aristotle's' suggestion to educate all (five years and older, and except for women and slaves), but Dewey's progressive and experiential approaches were targeted towards all students. Locke and Rousseau's ideal that mainstream education should be structured around partnerships between tutors and parents for individual children seems particularly radical in light of mass public education that we know today. Indeed, a great strength of this book is how it forces the reader to consider the binaries that implicate education. Should education be for the individual or for society? Whether we view child development as one connected to nature or nurture? If life outcomes are mostly as a result of individual agency or social structures? Whether we teach with a focus on the mind (ideas) or on matter (reality, body, world)? …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.