Whole Teachers: A Holistic Education Perspective on Krishnamurtiâs Educational Philosophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative research study, which utilizes a phenomenological inquiry method, is to inquire into the awareness of what it means to be a whole teacher from the perspective of the philosophy of Jiddu Krishnamurti, a philosopher/spiritual teacher. \nFour participants (teachers) were interviewed from the Oak Grove School, an alternative, holistic school founded by Krishnamurti in 1974. This inquiry probed into teachers’ thinking, teachers’ lives, teachers’ inner lives, teachers’ contemplative practices, teachers’ calling/vocation and teachers’ pedagogy. The findings of this inquiry reveal the awareness that exists among the participants with regards to their understanding of Krishnamurti’s educational philosophy and the way in which this philosophy has shaped their lives and the lives of their students (both implicit- ly and explicitly) The findings from this research further show that Krishnamurti’s philosophy has certainly had an impact on the participants’ wholeness. Krishnamurti was never interested in imposing his philosophy on the teachers to think in a narrow groove. Rather, he challenged them to arrive at wholeness or a holistic approach towards living by their own volition, by putting aside all philosophy, including his own. \nThis research points towards the possible ways in which wholeness can be developed using: Innate wisdom (teachers’ inner life, teachers’ calling); wisdom gained through experiencing life (teachers’ life, teachers’ thinking); wisdom gained through their teaching experience (teachers’ pedagogy) and wisdom gained through practices that bring harmony to the mind, body and spirit (teachers’ contemplative approaches). \nAn experiential model titled, The Flower Model: An Experiential Metaphor – which integrates the three stages of awareness – was developed using Krishnamurti’s approach towards wholeness. This model can be used to guide teachers with their respective psychological conditionings that reside or exist in their thinking, lives, inner lives, contemplative practices, vocation and pedagogy/curriculum design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".