Pedagogy

Personal Philosophy of Education

Below I've included an excerpt from a essay I wrote for my Philosophy of Education I've also included the link so you can read the complete paper on google docs. 

The View of the Learner

We are born into this world not by conscious choice but by happenstance, the famous lyrics by sixties band The Doors captures the theory of thrownness perfectly, “Into this world we’re thrown, like a dog without a bone”. We are thrown into this confusing world and much of our lives are spent trying to make sense of it. The biggest question that we have to answer is, who are we, and what is the purpose of our existence? Humanity has been wrestling with this question ever since Eve ate from the metaphorical Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and became self-aware. I believe that all humans seek to discover who they are as individuals. However public education’s one size fits all curriculum, trying to conform to society, and socioeconomic factors, prevent people from discovering their true selves.

What does it mean to discover ones self, and is discover an adequate word to use? If we follow John Locke’s theory of Tabula Rasa, the idea that we are born into the world blank slates and through experience and perception we shape ourselves, then using the word discover would be fallacious. The act of discovery is to happen upon something that’s always existed or been possible that we’ve just been ignorant of. The word develop is more properly suited to explain what I am getting at. All humans seek to develop their own individual self, to become their own person. Locke’s theory contrasts with Plato’s idea that the soul has existed for eternity and that we are simply recollecting that which we have always known. The best way to sum up these two opposing views is to explain it with the nature vs. nurture argument, are we shaped by our environment or are we born with certain innate qualities?

I believe in free will, that we have control over ourselves, and that through introspection it is possible for us to change. Locke states in his essay Some Thoughts Concerning Education “that the difference to be found in the manners and abilities of men is owing more to their education than to anything else”, if we take this statement as truth and are aware of it, then is it possible by choosing what we learn to actively shape ourselves? Jean Paul Sartre the French existentialist in his work Being and Nothingness stated, “Man is condemned to be free” Rob Harle in his 1999 essay explained that Sartre’s premises  “existence precedes essence” and the idea’s of “being-in-itself” and “being-for-itself” adequately explain the idea that man is condemned to freedom (Harle,1999).

The premise that existence precedes essence can be compared to Locke’s blank slate theory and Plato’s innate idea’s theory. By “essence” Sartre is talking about a quality that has always been, it’s qualities are innate. Plato believed that we are born with certain concepts that are present in our minds from birth, an “essence”. Existence on the other hand is an active state of being. Man has no predetermined self, he is condemned to be free and shape his own self through his choices. Locke posited that we are born blank slates, and it is through education that we can be shaped. If humans are born free, and our ultimate goal in life is to develop our unique self than the model of a one size fits all curriculum is in direct conflict with this goal.

This leads us to the first obstacle in the quest of self-development, public educations one size fits all

curriculum doesn’t foster individuality but rather conformity. A.S. Neill founded the Summerhill

School; its mission statement was to make the school fit the child, instead of making the child fit the

school. Neill argued that traditional schools are wrong because it is based on an adult’s conception of

what a child should be and of how a child should learn. Public school curriculum is designed to

prepare students for standardize test; students have no choice in what they learn. Summerhill School

is an radical example of what freedom in a school looks like, but I agree with Neill that we should

give our students free reign in their education so that they can develop themselves according to what

interest them.  

Here is a link to the full paper click me.