Pragmatists and
Existentialists embrace similar perspectives in regard to reality, truth, and
ethics. Precise details separate
pragmatism and existentialism into two philosophical schools of thought;
however, unifying the conceptual, overlapping ideas of pragmatic and
existentialist thinkers enables one to construct a perspective of education
comprised of valuable insights from both schools of thought, to envision a
future founded upon the principles of unity.
To move forward as individuals and as a collective social world,
humanity must discard “either-or” perspectives of pragmatism and existentialism
and instead embrace a fusion of both schools of philosophical thought. Operating under the belief that reality
proves a human construct and truth remains relative, education must value both
the experiences of the individual and the shared experiences of humanity. Furthermore, the unification of individual
realities must prove a fundamental aspect of education. Students must understand the well-being of
the self and the well-being of humanity as mutually dependent conditions
incapable of division.
·
Unification of the Mind and the
Heart: Education of the Whole
The
current pressures of high-stakes testing and national accountability standards
force educators to accept the following falsehood: a well-educated individual scores high on
tests and regurgitates learned academic information. As schools begin to focus more attention and
resources on academic instruction, many schools allow an emphasis on academics
to extinguish emotion and aesthetics from the classroom. Jane Roland Martin
argues that education must foster both academic and emotional thinkers;
education must develop the student liberally, vocationally, and emotionally. Instead of viewing students as either
“disembodied minds,” capable of purely intellectual thought, or “mindless
bodies,” limited to working without emotion and critical cognitive thought,
Martin asserts that education must unite students’ minds and emotions in order
to truly educate the whole individual (2012, p.189).
Martin
also insists that education teaches not only the “productive processes” (i.e.
vocational, political, cultural, and economic), but that education also teaches
the “reproductive processes” (knowledge about marriage, child-rearing, and
household functions) to enable individuals to create working families and
working societies (2012, p.184-185). Martin
endorses a curriculum that encourages higher-level thinking in such disciplines
as philosophy and history, yet Martin also contends that a curriculum must teach
students skills and knowledge essential to societal roles. In Martin’s eyes, education must expose
students to the naturally intertwined “productive” and “reproductive” processes;
preparing students with the vocational and relational skills required to productively
perform and fulfill societal roles and familial functions.
Similarly, Nel Noddings argues that education must value
students as more than subjects of academia; Noddings challenges schools to care
for each student’s spiritual self and employ educators insistent upon
cultivating strong teacher-student relationships. According to Noddings, “the capacity to care”
proves “as much a mark of personhood as reason or rationality” (2012, p.213). Noddings views education as the way to
increase a “capacity to care” within the hearts of the next generation (2012,
p.213). Instead of establishing schools
as distinctly academic institutions, Noddings believes that the need to care
proves a pressing societal shortcoming demanding immediate attention and
rectification. Comparable to Martin,
Noddings also advocates a curriculum involving experiential learning, promoting
the notion of caring as an “ethic of relation” (2012, p.216), while
simultaneously equipping students with the skills required to actively care for
members of the social world. Noddings
boldly declares that the ability to care proves as important as the ability to
perform academically. From Nodding’s
perspective, intelligence does not equal a capacity to care. Instead of separating human existence into
intellectual thought and emotional feeling, Noddings encourages educators to
see the value of uniting the human mind and heart for the betterment of the
self and the social world.
·
Unification of the Past and the
Future: Education for Existing
In addition to focusing education on
purely academic learning, high-stakes testing and accountability establish
schools as academic bootcamps rather than institutions of learning and
growth. Currently, education focuses on
preparing students for the next assessment, for the next set of standards, for
the next grade level’s academic criterion.
The mantra of education reiterates the importance of “the future,” emphasizing
the next academic milestone while failing to attend to the value of the past
and the critical importance of the present.
Pragmatists and existentialists view reality as a human construct;
whether continuous human choice or conscious human verification guides the
construction of reality, pragmatists and existentialists agree that the
experiences of the individual result in the construction of individual
realities. However, these independently
constructed realities ultimately shape the formation of a complex, collective
reality for the social world. Therefore,
education must value the human experiences of the past and vigilantly attend to
the human experiences of the present to construct positive future realities for
both the individual and for the collective social world.
Hannah Arendt refers to the past as
the “old world,” the future as the “new world,” and the present as “the gap” (2008,
p.129). In order to construct future
realities, an individual must first understand the reality he or she enters
upon birth, as well as the constantly changing realities he or she currently
lives in. Essentially, in order to construct
new realities, an individual must first understand his or her present reality
in relation to the present realities of the collective social world. However, Arendt’s interpretation of the
“present” proves more complex than everyday existence; one must examine
Arendt’s perspective of the “present” in the context of her interpretation of
time. Arendt’s “old world”, “new world”,
and “gap” (2008, p.132) prove an interconnected network requiring careful
navigation and attentiveness. According
to Arendt, every choice an individual makes constructs a new reality. If an individual acts without attending to
“pearls” of past experiences (2008, p126.), he or she jeopardizes the future of
the social world through instinctive, ego-centric decisions potentially detrimental
to present and future realities. Though
Arendt values the wisdom found in the “pearls” of the “old world” (2008, p.126),
Arendt’s attention to the influence of human experiences in the construction of
realities demands that humanity attends to the “between” in regard to the past
and the present. Education must enable
students to evolve as thinkers capable of living in the “present”, as a single
consciousness simultaneously examining the past and the future while existing
in the present.
In the same way, John Dewey
denounces the idea that education and society exist as separate societal
entities; instead, Dewey, asserts that education proves a vital component of a
continuously changing society. Dewey also
views individual and social realities as direct constructs of human
experiences. According to Dewey,
experiences alter the engaged individual or society and result in subsequent
experiences. Just as a ripple spreads
across a pond, subsequent experiences construct numerous realities and
transcend time to affect future realities.
Through Dewey’s philosophical lens, education proves a highly
influential sequence of experiences in the construction of individual and
collective realities. Therefore, rather than
focusing education on the next
assessment or the next grade level,
Dewey proposes that education operates as an “ever-present process”; this “ever
present” perspective focuses education on the development of adaptable learners
prepared to engage in experiences and construct realities beneficial for both
the self and for the collective social world (2012, p.119).
·
Unification of Autonomy and
Societal Citizenship: Education for the Self and Society
Ideals of individualism and
self-interest fill today’s classrooms.
High-stakes testing promotes an egocentric attitude in regard to
learning and education. Academic accountability
standards teach our students to focus on individual achievement, transforming education
into a highly individualistic endeavor centered on individual mastery of
academic content. While the results of high-stakes
testing influence classroom, school, and community decisions, students rarely
work in cooperation to promote academic improvement for all students. Instead, students sit in isolated seats,
bubble in individual answer sheets, and interpret individual scores to assess individual
academic worth. The current state of
education teaches the youngest members of society to live highly
individualistic lives, to envelop themselves in individual realities and exist
apart from the shared realities of the social world. Though individual experiences and realities
remain highly importance, the life of the individual exists as one puzzle piece
in the existence and continuance of humanity.
Individuals working in isolated spheres of individual realities will
never solve humanity’s problems and conflicts; instead, future hope for
humanity depends on the collaborative efforts of individuals existing within
the social world, on the unification of the self with the rest of
humanity.
Maxine Greene promotes the notion of
social unification through aesthetic inquiry, viewing education as a gateway to
freedom. However, Greene’s definition of
freedom extends beyond the ability of an individual to act independently.
Greene defines freedom as the engagement of an individual in the creation of
authentic public space for the purpose of constructing a collaborative,
diverse, free society. Essentially, Greene’s
definition requires autonomous individuals to actively engage in experiences to
achieve freedom and well-being for the communal social world. Furthermore, Greene insists that education must
enable individuals to reach beyond themselves and empower individuals to connect
individual realities to the collective social world. Ultimately, Greene views education as a catalyst
of a just and free social order. Educators must promote individual freedom
within the classroom, but also encourage students to exercise autonomy for the
benefit of the collective classroom community.
Furthermore, educators must urge students to extend the interdependence between autonomy and freedom outside the walls of the
classroom, preparing students to view individual freedom as a crucial element
in the formation of a free and just social world.
No comments:
Post a Comment