What do you think?
Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education
Excerpt from Democracy and Education
The following pages embody an endeavor to detect and state the ideas implied in a democratic society and to apply these ideas to the problems of the enterprise of education. The discussion includes an indication of the constructive aims and methods of public education as seen from this point of view, and a critical estimate of the theories of knowing and moral development which were formulated in earlier social condi tions, but which still operate, in societies nominally democratic, to hamper the adequate realization of the democratic ideal. As will appear from the book itself, the philosophy stated in this book connects the growth of democracy with the development of the experimental method in the sciences, evolutionary ideas in the biological sciences, and the industrial reorganization, and is concerned to point out the changes in subject matter and method of education indicated by these developments.
The following pages embody an endeavor to detect and state the ideas implied in a democratic society and to apply these ideas to the problems of the enterprise of education. The discussion includes an indication of the constructive aims and methods of public education as seen from this point of view, and a critical estimate of the theories of knowing and moral development which were formulated in earlier social condi tions, but which still operate, in societies nominally democratic, to hamper the adequate realization of the democratic ideal. As will appear from the book itself, the philosophy stated in this book connects the growth of democracy with the development of the experimental method in the sciences, evolutionary ideas in the biological sciences, and the industrial reorganization, and is concerned to point out the changes in subject matter and method of education indicated by these developments.
452 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1916
About the author
John Dewey
1,028 books745 followersJohn Dewey was an American philosopher, psychologist and educational reformer whose ideas have been influential in education and social reform. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophy of pragmatism and of functional psychology. He was a major representative of the progressive and progressive populist philosophies of schooling during the first half of the 20th century in the USA.
In 1859, educator and philosopher John Dewey was born in Burlington, Vermont. He earned his doctorate at Johns Hopkins University in 1884. After teaching philosophy at the University of Michigan, he joined the University of Chicago as head of a department in philosophy, psychology and education, influenced by Darwin, Freud and a scientific outlook. He joined the faculty of Columbia University in 1904. Dewey's special concern was reform of education. He promoted learning by doing rather than learning by rote. Dewey conducted international research on education, winning many academic honors worldwide. Of more than 40 books, many of his most influential concerned education, including My Pedagogic Creed (1897), Democracy and Education (1902) and Experience and Education (1938). He was one of the founders of the philosophy of pragmatism. A humanitarian, he was a trustee of Jane Addams' Hull House, supported labor and racial equality, and was at one time active in campaigning for a third political party. He chaired a commission convened in Mexico City in 1937 inquiring into charges made against Leon Trotsky during the Moscow trials. Raised by an evangelical mother, Dewey had rejected faith by his 30s. Although he disavowed being a "militant" atheist, when his mother complained that he should be sending his children to Sunday school, he replied that he had gone to Sunday School enough to make up for any truancy by his children. As a pragmatist, he judged ideas by the results they produced. As a philosopher, he eschewed an allegiance to fixed and changeless dogma and superstition. He belonged to humanist societies, including the American Humanist Association. D. 1952.
In 1859, educator and philosopher John Dewey was born in Burlington, Vermont. He earned his doctorate at Johns Hopkins University in 1884. After teaching philosophy at the University of Michigan, he joined the University of Chicago as head of a department in philosophy, psychology and education, influenced by Darwin, Freud and a scientific outlook. He joined the faculty of Columbia University in 1904. Dewey's special concern was reform of education. He promoted learning by doing rather than learning by rote. Dewey conducted international research on education, winning many academic honors worldwide. Of more than 40 books, many of his most influential concerned education, including My Pedagogic Creed (1897), Democracy and Education (1902) and Experience and Education (1938). He was one of the founders of the philosophy of pragmatism. A humanitarian, he was a trustee of Jane Addams' Hull House, supported labor and racial equality, and was at one time active in campaigning for a third political party. He chaired a commission convened in Mexico City in 1937 inquiring into charges made against Leon Trotsky during the Moscow trials. Raised by an evangelical mother, Dewey had rejected faith by his 30s. Although he disavowed being a "militant" atheist, when his mother complained that he should be sending his children to Sunday school, he replied that he had gone to Sunday School enough to make up for any truancy by his children. As a pragmatist, he judged ideas by the results they produced. As a philosopher, he eschewed an allegiance to fixed and changeless dogma and superstition. He belonged to humanist societies, including the American Humanist Association. D. 1952.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 147 reviews
November 25, 2012
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/852
If we were to pretend for a moment that we wanted to live in a democracy – that is, a democracy in deed rather than merely in word – what actually would that mean? The word, of course, has become so abused as to effectively mean nothing. Is there a nation on earth now that doesn’t call itself a democracy? There was a joke once that the easiest way to tell if a country was a democracy or not was to see if it had 'democracy' in its name and if it did that was a sure sign it was not. But such jokes are designed to make us feel smug – and if there is one law to the universe it is that whatever makes us feel smug is invariably bad for us.
Democracy means that the people get to rule – but how do we go about making the people worthy of such a responsibility? To Dewey that is the point of education – and not just any kind of education, but one that allows people to think for themselves, that teaches them first and foremost to be inquirers.
This week in the city were I live a video was released on YouTube that has gone viral of some arsehole abusing a French woman for the infinite crime of singing a French song on a bus. In response to the French woman singing a group of passengers started chanting Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oi, Oi, Oi. This is now the Australian national song – notice it has one word followed by a meaningless grunting noise, just enough for the all-too-average Australian to learn nearly by heart (after prompting, obviously). I can understand why the arseholes on that bus became upset with the French woman – imagine her being able to remember the words of a song more than one word long? What a bloody show-off! Two of the men on the bus wanted to cut her with a box cutter, one wanting to cut her breasts off. He also called her a motherfucker. The Freudian nature of this racist rant is hard not to notice.
These are people that have not been served well by our education system, although it would be unfair to blame everything on education. The problem is that we presume that an entire section of society are basically incapable of any meaningful education or if they are capable then they ought to receive an education that will provide them with the best hope of getting a job. So, we focus on things that are easy to test – reading, writing and figuring (as he refers to them here – which made me wonder when ‘the three Rs’ became the thing to say). We don’t really wonder if these are enough to ensure a properly functioning democracy – we don’t really consider the role that education might play in forming a democracy. Education is much more likely to be seen as something related to human economic considerations, rather than our social ones. But Dewey’s arguments have become more urgent with time, rather than less so. When he was writing this his arguments (for ensuring an education that would enable people to think for themselves) were more a ‘moral’ necessity than a literal necessity. Moral in the sense that if you are running a democracy it is questionable to have an education system that is primarily concerned with reproducing social classes – in the ways that the education systems in most of the first world do. Today these arguments have much more than mere moral weight.
The problem is that today it is very hard to know what kinds of jobs are going to be available in ten years time. It is also the case that our world is becoming much more complex – all of the things that the right-wing of politics deny (global warming, ecological crisis, equality crisis) are very likely to become increasingly pressing. The problems we will face in a decade or two are going to need us to be able to think and respond in ways that require much more sensitivity than was displayed by the grunting mob on that Melbourne bus. You know, Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oy, Oy, Vey just isn’t going to cut it anymore.
Dewey’s point is that we need to stop thinking about preparing kids for the future, and think about how to educate them so that when they leave school they don’t see that as the end of their education, but rather that they have been empowered with the tools that will allow them to continue their education for the rest of their lives. It is hard to imagine that this book was first published in 1916. Life-long learning – who’d have thought. But the complexities of living in a democratic society demand being able to respond to change. And change – or development, rather – are good things. For Dewey the point of life is to keep growing and that is only possible if we keep learning. So, the point of education is to encourage people to grow throughout their lives by continuing to be able to learn.
This book is structured so that each chapter ends with a summary paragraph. Really, even just reading over the summary paragraphs is worthwhile in itself. But Dewey writes so clearly and so forcefully that there is really no hardship in reading this. And the force of his arguments make it very hard to argue with him. He is logical, smart and keenly focused on providing the best possible education for people so that they can fully participate in a democratic society and so that we can reap the benefits of their participation. This is an excellent book and one that is well worth reading.
If we were to pretend for a moment that we wanted to live in a democracy – that is, a democracy in deed rather than merely in word – what actually would that mean? The word, of course, has become so abused as to effectively mean nothing. Is there a nation on earth now that doesn’t call itself a democracy? There was a joke once that the easiest way to tell if a country was a democracy or not was to see if it had 'democracy' in its name and if it did that was a sure sign it was not. But such jokes are designed to make us feel smug – and if there is one law to the universe it is that whatever makes us feel smug is invariably bad for us.
Democracy means that the people get to rule – but how do we go about making the people worthy of such a responsibility? To Dewey that is the point of education – and not just any kind of education, but one that allows people to think for themselves, that teaches them first and foremost to be inquirers.
This week in the city were I live a video was released on YouTube that has gone viral of some arsehole abusing a French woman for the infinite crime of singing a French song on a bus. In response to the French woman singing a group of passengers started chanting Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oi, Oi, Oi. This is now the Australian national song – notice it has one word followed by a meaningless grunting noise, just enough for the all-too-average Australian to learn nearly by heart (after prompting, obviously). I can understand why the arseholes on that bus became upset with the French woman – imagine her being able to remember the words of a song more than one word long? What a bloody show-off! Two of the men on the bus wanted to cut her with a box cutter, one wanting to cut her breasts off. He also called her a motherfucker. The Freudian nature of this racist rant is hard not to notice.
These are people that have not been served well by our education system, although it would be unfair to blame everything on education. The problem is that we presume that an entire section of society are basically incapable of any meaningful education or if they are capable then they ought to receive an education that will provide them with the best hope of getting a job. So, we focus on things that are easy to test – reading, writing and figuring (as he refers to them here – which made me wonder when ‘the three Rs’ became the thing to say). We don’t really wonder if these are enough to ensure a properly functioning democracy – we don’t really consider the role that education might play in forming a democracy. Education is much more likely to be seen as something related to human economic considerations, rather than our social ones. But Dewey’s arguments have become more urgent with time, rather than less so. When he was writing this his arguments (for ensuring an education that would enable people to think for themselves) were more a ‘moral’ necessity than a literal necessity. Moral in the sense that if you are running a democracy it is questionable to have an education system that is primarily concerned with reproducing social classes – in the ways that the education systems in most of the first world do. Today these arguments have much more than mere moral weight.
The problem is that today it is very hard to know what kinds of jobs are going to be available in ten years time. It is also the case that our world is becoming much more complex – all of the things that the right-wing of politics deny (global warming, ecological crisis, equality crisis) are very likely to become increasingly pressing. The problems we will face in a decade or two are going to need us to be able to think and respond in ways that require much more sensitivity than was displayed by the grunting mob on that Melbourne bus. You know, Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oy, Oy, Vey just isn’t going to cut it anymore.
Dewey’s point is that we need to stop thinking about preparing kids for the future, and think about how to educate them so that when they leave school they don’t see that as the end of their education, but rather that they have been empowered with the tools that will allow them to continue their education for the rest of their lives. It is hard to imagine that this book was first published in 1916. Life-long learning – who’d have thought. But the complexities of living in a democratic society demand being able to respond to change. And change – or development, rather – are good things. For Dewey the point of life is to keep growing and that is only possible if we keep learning. So, the point of education is to encourage people to grow throughout their lives by continuing to be able to learn.
This book is structured so that each chapter ends with a summary paragraph. Really, even just reading over the summary paragraphs is worthwhile in itself. But Dewey writes so clearly and so forcefully that there is really no hardship in reading this. And the force of his arguments make it very hard to argue with him. He is logical, smart and keenly focused on providing the best possible education for people so that they can fully participate in a democratic society and so that we can reap the benefits of their participation. This is an excellent book and one that is well worth reading.
September 10, 2012
I have read and taught this book several times. I first read it in 1974 (! True! I know! I look so youthful for my age!) when I was myself preparing to become an English teacher. It was work I read in a Philosophy of Education class, where Dewey's progressivism/experimentalism was opposed to essentialism (a more conservative approach to the classroom). And here we still see Dewey read by millions of future teachers to help them envision a classroom connected to student experience, to local communities and contexts vs. the more standardized approach we see today. His view is responsive to actual human beings and their needs vs. paternalistically assuming what "everyone needs".
He wrote something like 90 books, and many of them, including this one, written as they are by a philosopher--even if a pragmatist philosopher--more than a century ago, are rather dry, meticulously crafted, but sometimes a little boring, I'll admit it, a little creaky, and sometimes problematic in his conceptions from time to time (i.e., he talks in the abstract of "savages" in a couple of places, which would not have been shocking in his day but would now be unacceptable).
But some of the insights and ideas about progressive education are still astonishing and feel in present in the "Common Core" world of today's schooling, revolutionary.
Learning by doing? That's Dewey. He largely invented that phrase, that approach with respect to schooling (though others historically have approached learning in this way, of course).
The democratic classroom. His idea. When he was close to the end, he was asked to summarize his career, and he uncharacteristically pithily said, "Democracy is conversation." So people can't ONLY learn by being the repositories of Great Professorial Lecturers (though we can all name great ones we learned from); we have to talk. Learning is social, the self you are continually becoming is social and growing, socially constructed and not prefigured completely by genetics.
"Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself." Dewey!
"Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination." Dewey!
"Arriving at one goal is the starting point to another." Dewey!
“Were all instructors to realize that the quality of mental process, not the production of correct answers, is the measure of educative growth something hardly less than a revolution in teaching would be worked.” Dewey!
"We only think when we are confronted with problems." Dewey!
"All genuine learning comes through experience." John Dewey
He wrote something like 90 books, and many of them, including this one, written as they are by a philosopher--even if a pragmatist philosopher--more than a century ago, are rather dry, meticulously crafted, but sometimes a little boring, I'll admit it, a little creaky, and sometimes problematic in his conceptions from time to time (i.e., he talks in the abstract of "savages" in a couple of places, which would not have been shocking in his day but would now be unacceptable).
But some of the insights and ideas about progressive education are still astonishing and feel in present in the "Common Core" world of today's schooling, revolutionary.
Learning by doing? That's Dewey. He largely invented that phrase, that approach with respect to schooling (though others historically have approached learning in this way, of course).
The democratic classroom. His idea. When he was close to the end, he was asked to summarize his career, and he uncharacteristically pithily said, "Democracy is conversation." So people can't ONLY learn by being the repositories of Great Professorial Lecturers (though we can all name great ones we learned from); we have to talk. Learning is social, the self you are continually becoming is social and growing, socially constructed and not prefigured completely by genetics.
"Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself." Dewey!
"Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination." Dewey!
"Arriving at one goal is the starting point to another." Dewey!
“Were all instructors to realize that the quality of mental process, not the production of correct answers, is the measure of educative growth something hardly less than a revolution in teaching would be worked.” Dewey!
"We only think when we are confronted with problems." Dewey!
"All genuine learning comes through experience." John Dewey
August 30, 2007
A philosophical text on the relationship between democracy and education written at the turn of the last century. Dewey discusses the role of industrialization in forming our educational system, and how this cannot hold up in a democracy. We cannot build cogs for a machine if we want a real democracy, he argues, we must have thinking participants.
Also, what he says applies even more today as tech moves so fast it is impossible to train children for it. What we need to teach, he agues is thinking skills, not rote. Excellent reflections here. Densely packed.
Also, what he says applies even more today as tech moves so fast it is impossible to train children for it. What we need to teach, he agues is thinking skills, not rote. Excellent reflections here. Densely packed.
i-want-money
August 2, 2016"In praise of Dewey: He knew how to protect democracy – not by rote and rules but by growing independent-minded kids. Let us not forget it" by Nicholas Tampio ::
https://aeon.co/essays/dewey-knew-how...
Let's not forget what it is that makes America great. Or how to.
https://aeon.co/essays/dewey-knew-how...
Let's not forget what it is that makes America great. Or how to.
September 24, 2013
Early in my presidential career, a colleague intent on giving me a finer appreciation of higher education recommended I read some of John Dewey's works. I dutifully purchased a couple his books. They sat on my dresser, unread, reproaching me, until this weekend, when I picked up "Democracy and Education." Written in 1916, Dewey's thesis speaks to the issues of career and liberal education.
There is a tension between the wish to prepare students for careers and educating them in the liberal arts. The discussion is often presented as a choice, an either/or that will put a student on one path or the other. In my earlier post about Wake Forest University, we see them trying to complement liberal arts studies with a gloss of career training.
Underlying these discussions is a concern that training students for careers is short-changing them, or somehow inferior to preparing them for civic life. Taylor Branch, in his first book about Martin Luther King, Jr., "Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954-63," discusses the tension between W. E. B. Du Bois' goal to educate an African-American elite and Booker T. Washington's emphasis on educating a wider group of African-American's in the trades as a path toward the middle class. When I worked at Chicago Public Schools, I saw a similar tension among those advocating for Career and Technical Education (CTE) and those who wanted every student to go to college, as if the two were antithetical.
Dr. David Potash, my colleague at Wright College, touches on this debate in his latest blog post, "High Expectations for Higher Education." Dr. Potash critiques Anthony Kronman's view that Higher Ed is straying too far from the pursuit of wisdom. In Potash's words, "If a college education can help a student to think seriously and then choose, whether this takes place in philosophy or accounting or nursing, then we have a successful education."
Dewey brings the weight of philosophical argument to the debate. I regret not having read him sooner. In Dewey's view, the role of education in a democracy is to prepare the young to take part fully in preserving and growing society. Vocational training is an important part of that education. In Dewey's words,
Dewey's affection for "gainful pursuits" is in part informed by Aristotle. In the debate between vocational and liberal arts training, Dewey points out that Aristotle considered training in the fine arts vocational training. Dewey takes a broad, positive view of career training. In Dewey's view, preparing students for careers is not the opposite of preparing them for participation in civil society. Instead, he sees it as the opposite of sloth.
He believes that too narrow a preparation is undesirable. He says that providing a career orientation to education will "make school life more active, more full of immediate meaning, more connected with out-of-school experience." (Kindle Locations 5370-5371.) He admits that it will not be easy to do this. We are dealing with this challenge at HWC, where industry partners are telling us that in addition to the 'hard' industry skills, they want students who think critically and write well.
Our efforts will be worth it. If we can successfully synthesize the liberal and vocational arts, we can prepare our students for rich lives where they continually learn and adapt in their careers. Again, in Dewey's words,
To my forgotten colleague who pressed Dewey upon me, thank you for the suggestion. I spent a rewarding weekend immersed in the philosophical support for College to Careers.
There is a tension between the wish to prepare students for careers and educating them in the liberal arts. The discussion is often presented as a choice, an either/or that will put a student on one path or the other. In my earlier post about Wake Forest University, we see them trying to complement liberal arts studies with a gloss of career training.
Underlying these discussions is a concern that training students for careers is short-changing them, or somehow inferior to preparing them for civic life. Taylor Branch, in his first book about Martin Luther King, Jr., "Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954-63," discusses the tension between W. E. B. Du Bois' goal to educate an African-American elite and Booker T. Washington's emphasis on educating a wider group of African-American's in the trades as a path toward the middle class. When I worked at Chicago Public Schools, I saw a similar tension among those advocating for Career and Technical Education (CTE) and those who wanted every student to go to college, as if the two were antithetical.
Dr. David Potash, my colleague at Wright College, touches on this debate in his latest blog post, "High Expectations for Higher Education." Dr. Potash critiques Anthony Kronman's view that Higher Ed is straying too far from the pursuit of wisdom. In Potash's words, "If a college education can help a student to think seriously and then choose, whether this takes place in philosophy or accounting or nursing, then we have a successful education."
Dewey brings the weight of philosophical argument to the debate. I regret not having read him sooner. In Dewey's view, the role of education in a democracy is to prepare the young to take part fully in preserving and growing society. Vocational training is an important part of that education. In Dewey's words,
Occupation is a concrete term for continuity. It includes the development of artistic capacity of any kind, of special scientific ability, of effective citizenship, as well as professional and business occupations, to say nothing of mechanical labor or engagement in gainful pursuits.
Dewey, John (2013-09-10). Democracy and Education (Illustrated) (Kindle Locations 5219-5221). Kindle Edition.
Dewey's affection for "gainful pursuits" is in part informed by Aristotle. In the debate between vocational and liberal arts training, Dewey points out that Aristotle considered training in the fine arts vocational training. Dewey takes a broad, positive view of career training. In Dewey's view, preparing students for careers is not the opposite of preparing them for participation in civil society. Instead, he sees it as the opposite of sloth.
The opposite of a career is neither leisure nor culture, but aimlessness, capriciousness, the absence of cumulative achievement in experience, on the personal side, and idle display, parasitic dependence upon the others, on the social side.
Dewey, John. Kindle Locations 5218-5219.
He believes that too narrow a preparation is undesirable. He says that providing a career orientation to education will "make school life more active, more full of immediate meaning, more connected with out-of-school experience." (Kindle Locations 5370-5371.) He admits that it will not be easy to do this. We are dealing with this challenge at HWC, where industry partners are telling us that in addition to the 'hard' industry skills, they want students who think critically and write well.
Our efforts will be worth it. If we can successfully synthesize the liberal and vocational arts, we can prepare our students for rich lives where they continually learn and adapt in their careers. Again, in Dewey's words,
It signifies a society in which every person shall be occupied in something which makes the lives of others better worth living, and which accordingly makes the ties which bind persons together more perceptible— which breaks down the barriers of distance between them. It denotes a state of affairs in which the interest of each in his work is uncoerced and intelligent: based upon its congeniality to his own aptitudes.
Dewey, John. Kindle Locations 5376-5379.
To my forgotten colleague who pressed Dewey upon me, thank you for the suggestion. I spent a rewarding weekend immersed in the philosophical support for College to Careers.
February 16, 2013
Dewey has a great deal of practical advise for educators who wish to form functioning adults capable of enjoying their lives. As a history teacher, I particularly like his comments on the necessity of teaching material with actual purpose to the students now rather than trying to convince them this stuff will be important later down the road. Let them learn the stuff that's important later, well, later. Use their interests natural to their age to push education forward rather than trying to damper that force. Rather than dividing subjects, combine. Let's talk about, say, hydrofracking by discussing both the science and the social implications rather than putting those things in different classrooms (or, more likely, none at all, since it won't be on the state test). He, like I, would be appalled by our educational system today. One size fits all, here's a test to prove your intelligence...ugh.
That said, his utopian socialist stuff kept getting in the way. I don't disagree with wanting everyone to find "meaningful" vocations in life, but I'm not sure how it's any different than what Dewey calls in chapter 22 the English School (aka classical liberalism) except that the latter doesn't deliver on perfect results and still has inequalities. Maybe he's dealt with the social and economic problems elsewhere, but an explanation as to how everyone could even achieve such meaningful vocations isn't present here. Even in a world of perfect property equality, some people are going to be calling the shots and others are not; that's just how things work in large social groups.
Much can be gained from this book, but like all books, one must read it with a critical eye. Have a conversation with the author rather than sit down for a written lecture.
That said, his utopian socialist stuff kept getting in the way. I don't disagree with wanting everyone to find "meaningful" vocations in life, but I'm not sure how it's any different than what Dewey calls in chapter 22 the English School (aka classical liberalism) except that the latter doesn't deliver on perfect results and still has inequalities. Maybe he's dealt with the social and economic problems elsewhere, but an explanation as to how everyone could even achieve such meaningful vocations isn't present here. Even in a world of perfect property equality, some people are going to be calling the shots and others are not; that's just how things work in large social groups.
Much can be gained from this book, but like all books, one must read it with a critical eye. Have a conversation with the author rather than sit down for a written lecture.
March 4, 2022
Cái hay nhất của tư tưởng Dewey không phải lấy học sinh làm trung tâm như mọi người lầm tưởng. Mọi người đã hiểu quá sai về Dewey. Dewey là người khởi xướng phong trào chấm dứt tư duy nhị nguyên, đa nguyên ngấm sâu vào trong tiềm thức của các đất nước phương tây có tư tưởng "Dĩ âu vi trung"(lấy châu Âu làm trung tâm) quay lại thể nhất nguyên: Hứng thú và Kỉ Luật; Kinh nghiệm và Tư duy; Lý thuyết và Thực hành; Phương pháp và Nội dung... đều là nhất nguyên, đều là vòng tròn đạo, chúng tương hỗ và bổ trợ nhau. Ví dụ trong học có hành, trong hành có học và học và hành đi liền với nhau; phương pháp có nội dung, nội dung có phương pháp, nội dung và phương pháp gắn với nhau bởi một trục triết lý giáo dục xuyên suốt... Dewey đề ra một lộ trình vĩ đại giúp con người tiết kiệm hàng nghìn nghìn tỉ đô-la. Nhưng vẫn có những điểm Dewey không lường trước về Đạo Đức nhị nguyên phương tây nó ảnh hưởng khiến những kẻ hiểu cách làm của Dewey lại trở nên thành tầng lớp thống trị và lại tìm cách lu mờ phương pháp của Dewey cho tầng lớp bị trị... Điển hình là sự phân cấp giáo dục đại trà và giáo dục tinh hoa(cho tầng lớp quý tộc, cho những người có điều kiện...) và dẫn đến thực trạng xã hội phân hóa giàu nghèo ngày càng tăng. Lỗi không phải ở Dewey mà lỗi ở con người...
Giáo dục chính là cuộc sống, chúng ta không thể nào tách rời nó ra được. Chúng ta vẫn còn đang lạc lối với tư tưởng học hết đại học rồi ngừng học, ra làm chỉ tích lũy kinh nghiệm.. nhưng không nhìn nhận nó là giáo dục thì kiến thức ta hấp thu chả đáng là bao. Nhà trường phải là một xã hội và xã hội là một nhà trường. Mong GDVN áp dụng được tư tưởng này, Bộ đã mở cho các trường tư có triết lý riêng nhưng còn loạn lắm.
Giáo dục chính là cuộc sống, chúng ta không thể nào tách rời nó ra được. Chúng ta vẫn còn đang lạc lối với tư tưởng học hết đại học rồi ngừng học, ra làm chỉ tích lũy kinh nghiệm.. nhưng không nhìn nhận nó là giáo dục thì kiến thức ta hấp thu chả đáng là bao. Nhà trường phải là một xã hội và xã hội là một nhà trường. Mong GDVN áp dụng được tư tưởng này, Bộ đã mở cho các trường tư có triết lý riêng nhưng còn loạn lắm.
August 31, 2019
Democracy and Education
John Dewey
8.31.19
This seminal work deserves to be read today. It has a lot to say about educational battles we’re still fighting but also how a vibrant humanistic education system is necessary for a thriving democracy. In fact, you work backwards from Deweys’ theories. Suppose you had a thriving democracy and wanted to destroy it. Attached the type of education of Dewey desires would be a good place to start.
Broader purposes of education:
Once societies get to a certain size (geographically and otherwise), only education can pass along culture and civilization. While DNA can pass on the traits needed to live, and informal learning can pass on local customs, civilization’s perish without formal education - there is simply no way to pass them on. “With the renewal of physical existence goes, in the case of human beings, the recreation of beliefs, ideals, hopes, happiness, misery, and practices. The continuity of any experience, through renewing of the social group, is a literal fact. Education, in its broadest sense, is the means of this social continuity of life.”
(p. 2).
Dewey rejects the notion of education as just learning of facts and knowledge. Instead, education is social and prepares people with skills and attitudes to live in a democracy (e.g. being able to argue and accept other arguments, for example). Education is about training the person for the social environment. Isolated learning is not education.
“A being connected with other beings cannot perform his own activities without taking the activities of others into account. For they are the indispensable conditions of the realization of his tendencies. “(p. 9)
[Comparing learning with the end training] “But the horse, presumably, does not get any new interest. He remains interested in food, not in the service he is rendering. He is not a partner in a shared activity. Were he to become a copartner, he would, in engaging in the conjoint activity, have the same interest in its accomplishment which others have.” (P.10). The piercing question Dewey begs is why do we educate people like horses.
Dewey sums up the goal of education as education itself “[o]nly education that makes for power to know as an end in itself, without reference to the practice of even civic duties, is truly liberal or free.” (p. 195).
These passages show how Dewey ties principles of education to to principles of democracy.
Democracy and Education
“The sort of education appropriate to the development of a democratic community was then explicitly taken as the criterion of the further, more detailed analysis of education. (p. 247). .
[T]he development of a truly democratic society, a society in which all share in useful service and all enjoy a worthy leisure. It is not a mere change in the concepts of culture–or a liberal mind–and social service which requires an educational reorganization;
The educational transformation is needed to give full and explicit effect to the changes implied in social life. The increased political and economic emancipation of the "masses" has shown itself in education; it has effected the development of a common school system of education, public and free. It has destroyed the idea that learning is properly a monopoly of the few who are predestined by nature to govern
(pp. 196-197).
Relating to the Dewey’s pragmatism is is idea of continuous reconstruction. In both education and democracy, progress is never ending process of fits and starts. “The ideal of a continuous reconstruction or reorganizing of experience, of such a nature as to increase its recognized meaning or social content, and as to increase the capacity of individuals to act as directive guardians of this reorganization.” (p. 247).
“Knowledge is not just something which we are now conscious of, but consists of the dispositions we consciously use in understanding what now happens. Knowledge as an act is bringing some of our dispositions to consciousness with a view to straightening out a perplexity, by conceiving the connection between ourselves and the world in which we live.” (p. 263).
“In an analogous way, since democracy stands in principle for free interchange, for social continuity, it must develop a theory of knowledge which sees in knowledge the method by which one experience is made available in giving direction and meaning to another.” (p. 264).
Without this type of education Dewey warns, “Men still want the crutch of dogma, of beliefs fixed by authority, to relieve them of the trouble of thinking and the responsibility of directing their activity by thought. They tend to confine their own thinking to a consideration of which one among the rival systems of dogma they will accept.” (p. 259).
Equality
Dewey smells elitism in much of the traditional learning structures. Universities provide education for those who don’t need to labor. Education focused on labors provide skill but not the social skills to fully participate in democracy. There is Neo-Marxist element to Dewey’s critique - similar to Marx’s argument that specialization robs workers of value of the full range of their talents. “The failure to fully educate into a democracy is a type of theft. But when we confine the education of those who work with their hands to a few years of schooling devoted for the most part to acquiring the use of rudimentary symbols at the expense of training in science, literature, and history, we fail to prepare the minds of workers to take advantage of this opportunity.(p. 199). Such social divisions as interfere with free and full intercourse react to make the intelligence and knowing of members of the separated classes one-sided.] (p. 263).
Pragmatism
The education theory “which is advanced in these pages may be termed pragmatic. Its essential feature is to maintain the continuity of knowing with an activity which purposely modifies the environment. (p. 263).
Pragmatism and morals
Acts “are moral in an emphatic sense not because they are isolated and exclusive, but because they are so intimately connected with thousands of other attitudes which we do not explicitly recognize–which perhaps we have not even names for. To call them virtues in their isolation is like taking the skeleton for the living body. The bones are certainly important, but their importance lies in the fact that they support other organs of the body in such a way as to make them capable of integrated effective activity. p. 273).
Social theory of virtue: To possess virtue does not signify to have cultivated a few namable and exclusive traits; it means to be fully and adequately what one is capable of becoming through association with others in all the offices of life. 274
The different types of education.
Dewey rails again the type of education the treats humans as biological repository of facts. Yet, he criticizes equally the type of education that so focuses on the wants of the individual without the broader social context.
“Hence one of the weightiest problems with which the philosophy of education has to cope is the method of keeping a proper balance between the informal and the formal, the incidental and the intentional, modes of education.”
(p. 7).
The difference between man and ants
”The parts of a machine work with a maximum of cooperativeness for a common result, but they do not form a community. If, however, they were all cognizant of the common end and all interested in it so that they regulated their specific activity in view of it, then they would form a community. “ (p. 4).
“Making the individual a sharer or partner in the associated activity so that he feels its success as his success, its failure as his failure, is the completing step. As soon as he is possessed by the emotional attitude of the group, he will be alert to recognize the special ends at which it aims and the means employed to secure success. His beliefs and ideas, in other words, will take a form similar to those of others in the group. He will also achieve pretty much the same stock of knowledge since that knowledge is an ingredient of his habitual pursuits. (p. 11).
Learning technical skills must be within social context. “When the acquiring of information and of technical intellectual skill do not influence the formation of a social disposition, ordinary vital experience fails to gain in meaning.” (p. 7).
John Dewey
8.31.19
This seminal work deserves to be read today. It has a lot to say about educational battles we’re still fighting but also how a vibrant humanistic education system is necessary for a thriving democracy. In fact, you work backwards from Deweys’ theories. Suppose you had a thriving democracy and wanted to destroy it. Attached the type of education of Dewey desires would be a good place to start.
Broader purposes of education:
Once societies get to a certain size (geographically and otherwise), only education can pass along culture and civilization. While DNA can pass on the traits needed to live, and informal learning can pass on local customs, civilization’s perish without formal education - there is simply no way to pass them on. “With the renewal of physical existence goes, in the case of human beings, the recreation of beliefs, ideals, hopes, happiness, misery, and practices. The continuity of any experience, through renewing of the social group, is a literal fact. Education, in its broadest sense, is the means of this social continuity of life.”
(p. 2).
Dewey rejects the notion of education as just learning of facts and knowledge. Instead, education is social and prepares people with skills and attitudes to live in a democracy (e.g. being able to argue and accept other arguments, for example). Education is about training the person for the social environment. Isolated learning is not education.
“A being connected with other beings cannot perform his own activities without taking the activities of others into account. For they are the indispensable conditions of the realization of his tendencies. “(p. 9)
[Comparing learning with the end training] “But the horse, presumably, does not get any new interest. He remains interested in food, not in the service he is rendering. He is not a partner in a shared activity. Were he to become a copartner, he would, in engaging in the conjoint activity, have the same interest in its accomplishment which others have.” (P.10). The piercing question Dewey begs is why do we educate people like horses.
Dewey sums up the goal of education as education itself “[o]nly education that makes for power to know as an end in itself, without reference to the practice of even civic duties, is truly liberal or free.” (p. 195).
These passages show how Dewey ties principles of education to to principles of democracy.
Democracy and Education
“The sort of education appropriate to the development of a democratic community was then explicitly taken as the criterion of the further, more detailed analysis of education. (p. 247). .
[T]he development of a truly democratic society, a society in which all share in useful service and all enjoy a worthy leisure. It is not a mere change in the concepts of culture–or a liberal mind–and social service which requires an educational reorganization;
The educational transformation is needed to give full and explicit effect to the changes implied in social life. The increased political and economic emancipation of the "masses" has shown itself in education; it has effected the development of a common school system of education, public and free. It has destroyed the idea that learning is properly a monopoly of the few who are predestined by nature to govern
(pp. 196-197).
Relating to the Dewey’s pragmatism is is idea of continuous reconstruction. In both education and democracy, progress is never ending process of fits and starts. “The ideal of a continuous reconstruction or reorganizing of experience, of such a nature as to increase its recognized meaning or social content, and as to increase the capacity of individuals to act as directive guardians of this reorganization.” (p. 247).
“Knowledge is not just something which we are now conscious of, but consists of the dispositions we consciously use in understanding what now happens. Knowledge as an act is bringing some of our dispositions to consciousness with a view to straightening out a perplexity, by conceiving the connection between ourselves and the world in which we live.” (p. 263).
“In an analogous way, since democracy stands in principle for free interchange, for social continuity, it must develop a theory of knowledge which sees in knowledge the method by which one experience is made available in giving direction and meaning to another.” (p. 264).
Without this type of education Dewey warns, “Men still want the crutch of dogma, of beliefs fixed by authority, to relieve them of the trouble of thinking and the responsibility of directing their activity by thought. They tend to confine their own thinking to a consideration of which one among the rival systems of dogma they will accept.” (p. 259).
Equality
Dewey smells elitism in much of the traditional learning structures. Universities provide education for those who don’t need to labor. Education focused on labors provide skill but not the social skills to fully participate in democracy. There is Neo-Marxist element to Dewey’s critique - similar to Marx’s argument that specialization robs workers of value of the full range of their talents. “The failure to fully educate into a democracy is a type of theft. But when we confine the education of those who work with their hands to a few years of schooling devoted for the most part to acquiring the use of rudimentary symbols at the expense of training in science, literature, and history, we fail to prepare the minds of workers to take advantage of this opportunity.(p. 199). Such social divisions as interfere with free and full intercourse react to make the intelligence and knowing of members of the separated classes one-sided.] (p. 263).
Pragmatism
The education theory “which is advanced in these pages may be termed pragmatic. Its essential feature is to maintain the continuity of knowing with an activity which purposely modifies the environment. (p. 263).
Pragmatism and morals
Acts “are moral in an emphatic sense not because they are isolated and exclusive, but because they are so intimately connected with thousands of other attitudes which we do not explicitly recognize–which perhaps we have not even names for. To call them virtues in their isolation is like taking the skeleton for the living body. The bones are certainly important, but their importance lies in the fact that they support other organs of the body in such a way as to make them capable of integrated effective activity. p. 273).
Social theory of virtue: To possess virtue does not signify to have cultivated a few namable and exclusive traits; it means to be fully and adequately what one is capable of becoming through association with others in all the offices of life. 274
The different types of education.
Dewey rails again the type of education the treats humans as biological repository of facts. Yet, he criticizes equally the type of education that so focuses on the wants of the individual without the broader social context.
“Hence one of the weightiest problems with which the philosophy of education has to cope is the method of keeping a proper balance between the informal and the formal, the incidental and the intentional, modes of education.”
(p. 7).
The difference between man and ants
”The parts of a machine work with a maximum of cooperativeness for a common result, but they do not form a community. If, however, they were all cognizant of the common end and all interested in it so that they regulated their specific activity in view of it, then they would form a community. “ (p. 4).
“Making the individual a sharer or partner in the associated activity so that he feels its success as his success, its failure as his failure, is the completing step. As soon as he is possessed by the emotional attitude of the group, he will be alert to recognize the special ends at which it aims and the means employed to secure success. His beliefs and ideas, in other words, will take a form similar to those of others in the group. He will also achieve pretty much the same stock of knowledge since that knowledge is an ingredient of his habitual pursuits. (p. 11).
Learning technical skills must be within social context. “When the acquiring of information and of technical intellectual skill do not influence the formation of a social disposition, ordinary vital experience fails to gain in meaning.” (p. 7).
July 11, 2011
Every educator in primary and secondary education should read this. Dewey was clearly ahead of his time. If education would implement more of his notions of educating for the whole person and connecting learning to life all students would likely be better prepared for navigating the world's complexities and solving complicated social problems.
July 21, 2017
In his "Autobiography", Mill notes that his father recognized that the purpose of a good education was not to simply stuff the mind with facts, but to teach the mind to reason, to inquire and to question. This, it seems to me, is Dewey's ultimate point also: the point of a good education should be to create minds prepared to engage critically with the world. It hardly needs to be noted that our current system of system fails in this regard; but a critic of Dewey may, with justice, note that since our desire to survive outweighs our desire to live critically, the student who approaches her studies as simply a pathway to a job is fully justified in her approach. It seems to me therefore, that for a Deweian system of education to be implanted, our society must first radically be changed, especially with regard to the redistribution of wealth, which would allow more people to treat education as a way to acquire the critical-thinking skills which Dewey lauds, and not just a way to acquire a living.
October 12, 2012
This book, written in 1916, is rich, insightful, and yet completely alive today. It is not only a book on pedagody, but also on philosophy and social science. Well written, objective, offering the fundamentals of the construction and maintanance of a democratic society based of the free sharing of knowledge (as a continuous process) and thought. Not only educators and parents are strongly recommended for reading, but in fact everyone.
September 16, 2013
This is the most accessible of Dewey's books I have so far had the chance to read. His ideas are usually fascinating, but his writing style extremely boring. For example, Experience and Nature is filled with brilliant ideas, and I consider it a very important book in my personal hierarchy, but I managed to fall asleep reading it... more than once. Democracy and Education is significantly different in this respect. Highly recommended for those who want to start studying Dewey.
June 17, 2007
about MUCH more than democracy and education. still incredibly relevant and insightful, despite having been written in the early 20th century. arguably dewey's best and most sweeping work. one of the most satisfying reads i've had, fiction and nonfiction. seriously, seriously good. seriously.
dewey would be at my dream dinner party, no doubt.
dewey would be at my dream dinner party, no doubt.
March 24, 2022
Detta är en välmenande bok, som är skriven på ett sätt som gör den lätt att "vulgärläsa". Det är obehagligt enkelt att använda boken till vad som helst, från bildningsförakt till folkförakt. Vilket inte är speciellt välförtjänt, för när man väl tar sig igenom Deweys totala ovilja att låta sin ideologi möta verkligheten, så finns det en hel del värdefulla idéer om utbildning där.
För att ta fasta på de viktigaste:
1) utbildning är en kulturs sätt att växa. Den handlar om att ge handledning i beteenden från de framgångsrika medlemmarna av kulturen.
2) utbildning kräver att man arbetar med det som finns i elevens föreställningsvärld, och måste helst göras genom handgripliga övningar, för att kunskapen skall fastna. Erfarenhetsfrämmande utbildning kommer inte att göra det.
3) utbildning har två disparata mål, som Dewey associerar med elitutbildning och folkutbildning. Den senare handlar om att installera önskvärda idéer, den förra om att avinstallera idéer och installer förtroende att pröva och ställa frågor.
Jag förstår inte de som menar att den är egalitär - till och med för mig som knappast är vänster är den snarare obehagligt elitistisk, i det att den förkastar som trivial utbildning för färdigheter, till förmån för utbildning för utbildningens skull, eller de sk. sköna konsterna. Han noterar till och med att träning i dessa historiskt fått folk att förakta de rent födoskapande färdigheterna, och personer som brukar dem. Vad värre är, han verkar uppskatta det.
Jag förstår inte heller de som förkastar boken som bildningsfientlig. Det är absolut lätt att förvränga texten på det sättet - Dewey har en del olyckliga formuleringar, som i princip handlar om att värderingar och fakta kan feltolkas, och att det därför är viktigt att installera dem med varsamhet, vilket man kan tolka som att fakta och värderingar inte bör läras ut, om man struntat i att läsa texten, utan bara läser rubrikerna.
Summa summarum: Dewey är användbar, men flummig. Han strävar efter att vända på tankarna ordentligt, och lyckas vara allsidig till priset av att vara tvetydig. Man måste nog använda karln med varsamhet, för hans idéer är i denna bok så spretiga, att de kan användas för att rättfärdiga vad man än vill.
För att ta fasta på de viktigaste:
1) utbildning är en kulturs sätt att växa. Den handlar om att ge handledning i beteenden från de framgångsrika medlemmarna av kulturen.
2) utbildning kräver att man arbetar med det som finns i elevens föreställningsvärld, och måste helst göras genom handgripliga övningar, för att kunskapen skall fastna. Erfarenhetsfrämmande utbildning kommer inte att göra det.
3) utbildning har två disparata mål, som Dewey associerar med elitutbildning och folkutbildning. Den senare handlar om att installera önskvärda idéer, den förra om att avinstallera idéer och installer förtroende att pröva och ställa frågor.
Jag förstår inte de som menar att den är egalitär - till och med för mig som knappast är vänster är den snarare obehagligt elitistisk, i det att den förkastar som trivial utbildning för färdigheter, till förmån för utbildning för utbildningens skull, eller de sk. sköna konsterna. Han noterar till och med att träning i dessa historiskt fått folk att förakta de rent födoskapande färdigheterna, och personer som brukar dem. Vad värre är, han verkar uppskatta det.
Jag förstår inte heller de som förkastar boken som bildningsfientlig. Det är absolut lätt att förvränga texten på det sättet - Dewey har en del olyckliga formuleringar, som i princip handlar om att värderingar och fakta kan feltolkas, och att det därför är viktigt att installera dem med varsamhet, vilket man kan tolka som att fakta och värderingar inte bör läras ut, om man struntat i att läsa texten, utan bara läser rubrikerna.
Summa summarum: Dewey är användbar, men flummig. Han strävar efter att vända på tankarna ordentligt, och lyckas vara allsidig till priset av att vara tvetydig. Man måste nog använda karln med varsamhet, för hans idéer är i denna bok så spretiga, att de kan användas för att rättfärdiga vad man än vill.
January 21, 2021
Дуже сподобалась книга, наполегливо раджу усім, хто працює з освітлю.
Прагматизм як філософський напрям досить природно має своє бачення освіти, в центрі якого лежить поняття досвіду, активної цілепокладеної взаємодії зі світом. Хоча цій книжці сто років, Демократія і освіта просто на диво актуальна і сьогодні. Проблеми шкільної освіти, описані в ній (схоластичність, формалізм, ізольованість окремих предметів, знання як готовий продукт, що його треба запакувати у голови, відірваність як змісту, так і методів навчання від досвіду учнів), досі актуальні. Так само актуальні і цікаві пропоновані Д'юї рішення. Він не пише про конкретні педагогічні прийоми, радше про підхід до визначення цілей освіти і та підходів до їх реалізації. Але ця книга буде корисна як людям, котрі займаються освітньою політикою (наприклад, пишуть стандарти), так і практикуючим педагогам.
Єдина проблема із цією книжкою - її дуже складно читати( навіть із досвідом роботи з академічними текстами та базовими знаннями соціальної теорії та історії філософії продиратися крізь неї було тяжко. Складно уявити, як це робитиме людина без такого бекграунду. Припускаю, що справа у перекладі, тож зрадію, якщо книгу перевидадуть.
Прагматизм як філософський напрям досить природно має своє бачення освіти, в центрі якого лежить поняття досвіду, активної цілепокладеної взаємодії зі світом. Хоча цій книжці сто років, Демократія і освіта просто на диво актуальна і сьогодні. Проблеми шкільної освіти, описані в ній (схоластичність, формалізм, ізольованість окремих предметів, знання як готовий продукт, що його треба запакувати у голови, відірваність як змісту, так і методів навчання від досвіду учнів), досі актуальні. Так само актуальні і цікаві пропоновані Д'юї рішення. Він не пише про конкретні педагогічні прийоми, радше про підхід до визначення цілей освіти і та підходів до їх реалізації. Але ця книга буде корисна як людям, котрі займаються освітньою політикою (наприклад, пишуть стандарти), так і практикуючим педагогам.
Єдина проблема із цією книжкою - її дуже складно читати( навіть із досвідом роботи з академічними текстами та базовими знаннями соціальної теорії та історії філософії продиратися крізь неї було тяжко. Складно уявити, як це робитиме людина без такого бекграунду. Припускаю, що справа у перекладі, тож зрадію, якщо книгу перевидадуть.
March 10, 2021
definitely the most important book to my thesis and a relevant read for anyone interested in why education happens the way it does and how to reform it
Read
April 22, 2023Boooooo John Dewey sucks and ruined everything! Everything. Yes I'm inculcating a single individual with everything that I don't like about the empiricist, technocratic character of American education and thereby negating the complex socio-historical conditions of early 20th-century intellectual culture among progressive positivist WASP milieus that gave rise to a highly secularized education system which gradually phased out all forms of knowledge that were not experimentally arrived at. Three cheers for positivism and the actual deletion of the soul from realms of knowledge. Plato weeps in his grave. Beelzebub gives three cheers for the STEM kids of the technocratic future as suburban GEN-Z college grads scroll through Tik-Tok numbly on break from their mindless 6-figure computer jobs before going home to minimalistically furnished one-bedroom studio apartments to watch Last of Us with their cats alone, only so they can lay awake in their air-conditioned bedrooms until past 4am and rise three hours later, ready to do it all again.
Just kidding. Please give this a like if you enjoy my semi-ironic diatribes against all forms of scientific positivism.
Tbh Dewey is pretty common-sensical, and I like that about him. He's trying to close the ostensible divide between 'book-learning' (rationalist) and job-oriented (empiricist, hands-on, pragmatic) education. He thinks that in a democracy, the two should be one. All forms of knowledge that do not directly relate to current social life and help a student become a democratic citizen should be subtracted from curricula. Except that...who's to decide which forms of knowledge are not 'practical'? Progressive, atheistic East Coast Johns Hopkins grads like Mr. Dewey? Say goodbye to all that totally useless tripe you remember from your Lutheran catechism classes. What does any of that stuff have to do with real life, after all? That this sort of thinking leads necessarily to some highly damaging historical amnesias and the replacement of all forms of authority with display of power seems obvious, though I'm sure it wasn't necessarily obvious at the time.
An education system managed and theorized by the elite may be far less democratic than Big John seems to think. And of course, education is only ever education in a specific tradition. The so-called neutral space of the immanent, objective, 'secular' carries positive assumptions about human identity that are by no means disinterested: Dewey sees humans primarily as socio-economic units. This is at odds with a great number of ideas about human identity from ages past, most notably, perhaps, the good ol' notion of imago dei. The corporate overlords cackle with glee as Dewey's ideas continue to thrive, and as those masquerading as progressives simply carry his pragmatic conclusions to their furthest conclusions, conclusions which inevitably benefit the rich, the wealthy, the well-to-do.
Just kidding. Please give this a like if you enjoy my semi-ironic diatribes against all forms of scientific positivism.
Tbh Dewey is pretty common-sensical, and I like that about him. He's trying to close the ostensible divide between 'book-learning' (rationalist) and job-oriented (empiricist, hands-on, pragmatic) education. He thinks that in a democracy, the two should be one. All forms of knowledge that do not directly relate to current social life and help a student become a democratic citizen should be subtracted from curricula. Except that...who's to decide which forms of knowledge are not 'practical'? Progressive, atheistic East Coast Johns Hopkins grads like Mr. Dewey? Say goodbye to all that totally useless tripe you remember from your Lutheran catechism classes. What does any of that stuff have to do with real life, after all? That this sort of thinking leads necessarily to some highly damaging historical amnesias and the replacement of all forms of authority with display of power seems obvious, though I'm sure it wasn't necessarily obvious at the time.
An education system managed and theorized by the elite may be far less democratic than Big John seems to think. And of course, education is only ever education in a specific tradition. The so-called neutral space of the immanent, objective, 'secular' carries positive assumptions about human identity that are by no means disinterested: Dewey sees humans primarily as socio-economic units. This is at odds with a great number of ideas about human identity from ages past, most notably, perhaps, the good ol' notion of imago dei. The corporate overlords cackle with glee as Dewey's ideas continue to thrive, and as those masquerading as progressives simply carry his pragmatic conclusions to their furthest conclusions, conclusions which inevitably benefit the rich, the wealthy, the well-to-do.
December 7, 2025
I LOVED this book. Such well thought out ideas covering the full range of education theory: its history, aims, methods, and consequences. It was written in 1916 (!), but everything feels totally applicable today. This should be mandatory reading for anyone from kindergarten teachers all the way to PhD professors. Along with those invested in education (parents) and those with great control over education (positions). I feel like my education could have been so much better if my teachers had read this.
As an aside, I am so pleased by the structure of the book. Chapters are split into sections, then subsections, then individual points, then sub-points, all while being clearly marked off and signposted, and are even concluded by CHAPTER SUMMARIES. It’s so beautiful. It kind of resembles a human readable form of Wittgenstein’s TLP.
As a warning: the prose can be really dense. I spent a majority of the time highlighting and re-reading passages to make sure I fully grasped them. I ended up reading about 10 pages/hour (I’m an incredibly slow reader), so it took me around 30 hours over the course of a year to finish. It was well worth the time and effort.
5/5
As an aside, I am so pleased by the structure of the book. Chapters are split into sections, then subsections, then individual points, then sub-points, all while being clearly marked off and signposted, and are even concluded by CHAPTER SUMMARIES. It’s so beautiful. It kind of resembles a human readable form of Wittgenstein’s TLP.
As a warning: the prose can be really dense. I spent a majority of the time highlighting and re-reading passages to make sure I fully grasped them. I ended up reading about 10 pages/hour (I’m an incredibly slow reader), so it took me around 30 hours over the course of a year to finish. It was well worth the time and effort.
5/5
Read
September 28, 2016cuốn sách lầy nhất năm .__. đọc từ 1/2 đến nay là gần 1/10 - 8 tháng. Thời gian thực đọc thì cũng k dài đến thế, dù cuốn này cũng dài thật... Số trang hơn 400, lại thêm khổ giấy to, in khổ bé chắc cũng 600 - 700 trang. Túm lại, một cuốn tinh hoa, ngôn từ không quá khó hiểu, tuy nhiên tương đối khô khan, kiểu sách nghiên cứu, phải khá khó khăn mới có thể tìm thấy hứng thú khi đọc cuốn này - với một người đọc phổ thông như mình. Một công trình phù hợp để ngâm cứu: đóng cửa đọc một lèo khoảng 2 ngày thì đẹp, mỗi chương đọc tập trung mất khoảng 30 phút - và cách tốt nhất để đọc cuốn này là đọc kiểu nghiên cứu. Một bức tranh khá toàn cảnh về giáo dục. Đôi lúc sẽ có cảm giác Dewey đi quá sâu xa với nội dung đang được đề cập, đến nỗi chẳng hiểu điều ông ý viết liên hệ thế nào với tên gọi của chương .__. . Mình khá mất tập trung khi đọc cuốn này, cũng k hiểu hết, và cũng chẳng định hiểu hết. Phew, cuối cùng cũng nhẹ được 1 cái nợ, chuyển sang trả nợ nốt cụ Heidegger và Bùi Giáng =.="
September 17, 2020
I went through my entire teaching degree and beyond knowing, hearing and constantly seeing this book come up in reference lists, and finally I found the time to experience it for myself. Written over 100 years ago, this book continues to be so relevant and important as a guide to thinking holistically, understanding the need for the teacher to be a listener and not just a voice. Science is huge for Dewey, and it is through the lens of science that he believes a critical approach to education can be formed, but not science for the sake of science, science as a platform for creativity, imagination and curiosity; for dispositional learning.
February 18, 2016
I really wanted to like this book. I have long been a fan of educational progressivism and have encountered Dewey's ideas before. However, actually reading him was physically painful. Dewey is one of those university lecturers that believes that the relevance of his content somehow sanctions his monotonous and verbose delivery. Form *is* important, Mr. Dewey. Your ideas might have been revolutionary, but your writing style was mediocre.
March 31, 2012
The summaries at the end were pretty helpful, as I thought the text somewhat dense and meandering. Great ideas overall, though.
April 9, 2020
Wow!!!
February 3, 2023
An inspiring book that seems to be very much ahead of its time. Much of the ideas in the book seem like integral elements of any modern educational philosophy that strives to be progressive. Nevertheless, much of the ideas still seem very utopian, not achieved because of conversative impulses in the society or austere economic policies. Very essential ideas for any educator that wants to achieve a democratic disposition in their work, not as an isolated process but as an entire outlook on life.
The downside of the book is its dragging writing. It seems that hundred years ago there were no editors so the writing is very repetitive at times. I'm sure it could have been a hundred pages shorter with more concise writing.
The downside of the book is its dragging writing. It seems that hundred years ago there were no editors so the writing is very repetitive at times. I'm sure it could have been a hundred pages shorter with more concise writing.
May 3, 2022
Woof, this one was a bear to get through. I'm afraid I did not glean a whole lot from this book. This was way too deep down in the educational philosophy trench for me to get much out of. A teacher might appreciate some of the insights and hair-splitting that Dewey does here, but I was not the right audience. I did a lot of skimming and appreciated the brief synopses he would place at the end of each chapter, but this mostly sailed right over my head.
Read
May 15, 2024did not yet read some of the middle of it but i will get around to it at some point
August 31, 2026
Critically relevant book in the big two six… I wish it weren’t
September 28, 2017
Recognizing the challenges that existed in larger society with regards to capricious activities outlined by the economic / industrial need and the duality of concepts such as subject matter and method, work and play, thinking and experience, individual and the world to name a few, Dewey philosophized the reconstruction of education. Having published this book in 1916, it’s interesting to understand the socio-economic context in which he was writing. Almost a century after the industrial revolution and the advent of World War 1, the meaning and function of ‘social efficiency’ had been completely re-defined, infiltrating each facet of humankind’s existence. Ironically and sadly, a century later, not much has transformed. The industrial / manufacturing / economic needs have only become more rigid, the gap between labor and leisure is stark, and as observed by Dewey, students are merely being prepared in schools to conform to the adult life that awaits them.
Imagining Dewey’s world for a moment, where students as part of the miniature community commence solving problems posed by the teacher while finding solutions to issues that are new to them, begin to live for the present. Spaces are created where social occupations from society are weaved into the mini-community, and students begin to engage with material in an interdisciplinary manner, working as budding doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, astronauts etc., instead of looking at disciplines in isolation. It is worth nothing that concepts that we study “originally sprang up, not out of the ground, not out of nature, but out of human life and human needs” (Dewey, 1899a, p.191, as cited in Kliebard, 1995, p.56). And thus, literally beginning from basics where thinking and experience amalgamate, with students learning how to think and continually experiencing a ‘diversity of energies’. However, designing such a curriculum and school would require ruminating through a blend of aspects such as the physical space, how the inter-disciplinary curriculum would be designed, what would be the basis of the assessment, a teacher’s facilitative role, whether a state/national board would certify the school, parent’s trepidations, whether students would be considered prepared for higher education or get jobs with economic sustainability, issues that Dewey does not address in his book.
Working with the larger vision that “democracy stands in principle for free interchange, for social continuity, it must develop a theory of knowledge which sees in knowledge the method by which one experience is made available in giving direction and meaning to another” (DE, p. 330). In current schools, what seems to be in operation is the anti-thesis of democracy, where pupils are distracted, there is over-pressure, congestion of the course of study and narrow specializations (DE, p. 237). Closely correlated, is the disciplining and punishing of the students when they fail to perform, react, resolve or engage with the material at hand. So the question really is, how does one build meaningful democratic experiences for students? How does one introduce concepts of learning so that students are able to draw broader connections with their own experiences and the world around them?
Before I delve further into these questions, I would like to highlight different authors’ definitions of democracy that helps me better understand a democratic school space. West (2004) views democracy as a collective, dynamic and striving movement rather than a static order of stationary status quo, insinuating that it is integral for schools to be inclusive spaces where each actor contributes to decision-making and knowledge construction. Further, Davies (2002) deems that the antithesis to democracy is authoritarianism, where the education system is characterized by minimal responsibility, critical enquiry, debate and participation with the indicators being teacher-centered discipline, rote learning and fear. Research demonstrates that teaching methods that encourage competition result in discipline and therefore, conflict. When a student is faced with failure, it can lead to low self-esteem and frustration, predisposing the individual to tension or violence (Davies, 2005). Davies (2005) introduces the concept of “interruptive democracy” signifying interruption to the normalized processes of violence and exclusion. She elucidates that democratic education has to be open to handle difference, identity, and fear, as well as taking risks of allowing students to learn from mistakes.
With Dewey promoting democratic practices, collaboration and alternative viewpoints in curriculum, a limitation is the assumption that teachers would want to introduce democratic practices instead of current hierarchal structures or foster collaboration instead of competition that currently motivates students to compete against each other and perform better. It’s assumed that a teacher would want to encourage the development of alternative viewpoints. In a hierarchical structure, teachers’ roles have been validated by the authority and control that they exert. The nuances of student and teacher expectations therefore, would need to be clarified before attempting to establish democratic spaces, which otherwise could be viewed as threatening spaces by teachers.
Based on the previous class discussion and aiming to bring the lake into our classroom, I return to the earlier posed questions, how does one build meaningful democratic experiences for students? How does one introduce concepts of learning so that students are able to draw broader connections with their own experiences and the world around them? I would like to share a few models of schooling that are working towards building a community, with students optimizing their potential and their present.
The Green School, Bali: “Green School’s mission of “a community of learners making our world sustainable” sets the core philosophy of why and how the School educates. The “Green School Way” is to prepare for the real world by being involved in it now; to have impact now; to take responsibility now; and to model and practice the skills and mindsets that we will need later on, now”, https://www.greenschool.org/
Krishnamurthy Schools: Krishnamurty advocates that change is only possible “through a complete transformation of human consciousness” (Thapan, 2001, p. 1) leading to the cultivation of reflective, active and moral citizens. http://www.kfionline.org/education-ce...
Tagore’s Shantiniketan School: http://newlearningonline.com/new-lear...
Inspired by Sri Aurobindo, who contends that the education system should create individuals who realize their responsibilities towards society by being committed to social justice, secularism, democracy, equality of opportunity and most of all to a welfare state (Bora & Sirwal, 2011), is the model of Mirambika: http://www.mirambika.org/Pgcw01.htm
Re-imagining a school space based on Dewey’s vision, I would like to play a ‘what if’ game…What if students were re-aligned beyond classes, abilities and age? Acknowledging each child’s individual strengths and interests, what if the time engagement on varied tasks was unique for each student. Rather than being in a particular class or subject, what if the students got an opportunity to design their learning time in collaboration with the teacher as a guide, as part of their individual learning contract. In a week, what if they could choose which areas or fields they would like to engage with, each spread across a number of hours, and through their school years the aspiration could be to explore all possible spaces of the community. A facet that Dewey couldn’t taken into consideration back then was technology and I am highly intrigued by how technology can be leveraged in re-imagining school spaces, where praxis/participatory, dialogical and problem-posing methods are posed; varied, multiple and alternative content and viewpoints are encouraged; and flattened organizational structures, which instead of promoting compartmentalization and hierarchy could encourage connection and collaboration (Hantzopoulos, 2011).
References:
Bora, G. & Sirwal, D.R., (2011) Understanding Indian-Value System through Sri Aurobindo‟s Education System (An online anthology of Sri Aurobindo's Ideas). Centre for Positive Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Studies (CPPIS), Pehowa (Kurukshetra). Retrieved from file:///Users/kamiyakumar/Downloads/U...
Davies, L. (2005). Schools and war: urgent agendas for comparative and international education. Compare, 35(4), 357-371.
Davies, L. (2002). Possibilities and limits for democratisation in education. Comparative Education, 38(3), 251-266.
Dewey, J. (2004). Democracy and education. Courier Corporation.
Hantzopoulos, M. (2011). Institutionalizing critical peace education in public schools: A case for comprehensive implementation. Journal of Peace Education, 8(3), 225-242.
Kliebard, H. M. (1995). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958. RoutledgeFalmer.
Thapan, M. (2001) J. Krishnamurti. UNESCO: International Bureau of Education, Vol. XXXI, No.2, June 2001, p. 273-286, Paris
West, C. 2004. Democracy matters: Winning the fight against imperialism. New York: Penguin
Imagining Dewey’s world for a moment, where students as part of the miniature community commence solving problems posed by the teacher while finding solutions to issues that are new to them, begin to live for the present. Spaces are created where social occupations from society are weaved into the mini-community, and students begin to engage with material in an interdisciplinary manner, working as budding doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, astronauts etc., instead of looking at disciplines in isolation. It is worth nothing that concepts that we study “originally sprang up, not out of the ground, not out of nature, but out of human life and human needs” (Dewey, 1899a, p.191, as cited in Kliebard, 1995, p.56). And thus, literally beginning from basics where thinking and experience amalgamate, with students learning how to think and continually experiencing a ‘diversity of energies’. However, designing such a curriculum and school would require ruminating through a blend of aspects such as the physical space, how the inter-disciplinary curriculum would be designed, what would be the basis of the assessment, a teacher’s facilitative role, whether a state/national board would certify the school, parent’s trepidations, whether students would be considered prepared for higher education or get jobs with economic sustainability, issues that Dewey does not address in his book.
Working with the larger vision that “democracy stands in principle for free interchange, for social continuity, it must develop a theory of knowledge which sees in knowledge the method by which one experience is made available in giving direction and meaning to another” (DE, p. 330). In current schools, what seems to be in operation is the anti-thesis of democracy, where pupils are distracted, there is over-pressure, congestion of the course of study and narrow specializations (DE, p. 237). Closely correlated, is the disciplining and punishing of the students when they fail to perform, react, resolve or engage with the material at hand. So the question really is, how does one build meaningful democratic experiences for students? How does one introduce concepts of learning so that students are able to draw broader connections with their own experiences and the world around them?
Before I delve further into these questions, I would like to highlight different authors’ definitions of democracy that helps me better understand a democratic school space. West (2004) views democracy as a collective, dynamic and striving movement rather than a static order of stationary status quo, insinuating that it is integral for schools to be inclusive spaces where each actor contributes to decision-making and knowledge construction. Further, Davies (2002) deems that the antithesis to democracy is authoritarianism, where the education system is characterized by minimal responsibility, critical enquiry, debate and participation with the indicators being teacher-centered discipline, rote learning and fear. Research demonstrates that teaching methods that encourage competition result in discipline and therefore, conflict. When a student is faced with failure, it can lead to low self-esteem and frustration, predisposing the individual to tension or violence (Davies, 2005). Davies (2005) introduces the concept of “interruptive democracy” signifying interruption to the normalized processes of violence and exclusion. She elucidates that democratic education has to be open to handle difference, identity, and fear, as well as taking risks of allowing students to learn from mistakes.
With Dewey promoting democratic practices, collaboration and alternative viewpoints in curriculum, a limitation is the assumption that teachers would want to introduce democratic practices instead of current hierarchal structures or foster collaboration instead of competition that currently motivates students to compete against each other and perform better. It’s assumed that a teacher would want to encourage the development of alternative viewpoints. In a hierarchical structure, teachers’ roles have been validated by the authority and control that they exert. The nuances of student and teacher expectations therefore, would need to be clarified before attempting to establish democratic spaces, which otherwise could be viewed as threatening spaces by teachers.
Based on the previous class discussion and aiming to bring the lake into our classroom, I return to the earlier posed questions, how does one build meaningful democratic experiences for students? How does one introduce concepts of learning so that students are able to draw broader connections with their own experiences and the world around them? I would like to share a few models of schooling that are working towards building a community, with students optimizing their potential and their present.
The Green School, Bali: “Green School’s mission of “a community of learners making our world sustainable” sets the core philosophy of why and how the School educates. The “Green School Way” is to prepare for the real world by being involved in it now; to have impact now; to take responsibility now; and to model and practice the skills and mindsets that we will need later on, now”, https://www.greenschool.org/
Krishnamurthy Schools: Krishnamurty advocates that change is only possible “through a complete transformation of human consciousness” (Thapan, 2001, p. 1) leading to the cultivation of reflective, active and moral citizens. http://www.kfionline.org/education-ce...
Tagore’s Shantiniketan School: http://newlearningonline.com/new-lear...
Inspired by Sri Aurobindo, who contends that the education system should create individuals who realize their responsibilities towards society by being committed to social justice, secularism, democracy, equality of opportunity and most of all to a welfare state (Bora & Sirwal, 2011), is the model of Mirambika: http://www.mirambika.org/Pgcw01.htm
Re-imagining a school space based on Dewey’s vision, I would like to play a ‘what if’ game…What if students were re-aligned beyond classes, abilities and age? Acknowledging each child’s individual strengths and interests, what if the time engagement on varied tasks was unique for each student. Rather than being in a particular class or subject, what if the students got an opportunity to design their learning time in collaboration with the teacher as a guide, as part of their individual learning contract. In a week, what if they could choose which areas or fields they would like to engage with, each spread across a number of hours, and through their school years the aspiration could be to explore all possible spaces of the community. A facet that Dewey couldn’t taken into consideration back then was technology and I am highly intrigued by how technology can be leveraged in re-imagining school spaces, where praxis/participatory, dialogical and problem-posing methods are posed; varied, multiple and alternative content and viewpoints are encouraged; and flattened organizational structures, which instead of promoting compartmentalization and hierarchy could encourage connection and collaboration (Hantzopoulos, 2011).
References:
Bora, G. & Sirwal, D.R., (2011) Understanding Indian-Value System through Sri Aurobindo‟s Education System (An online anthology of Sri Aurobindo's Ideas). Centre for Positive Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Studies (CPPIS), Pehowa (Kurukshetra). Retrieved from file:///Users/kamiyakumar/Downloads/U...
Davies, L. (2005). Schools and war: urgent agendas for comparative and international education. Compare, 35(4), 357-371.
Davies, L. (2002). Possibilities and limits for democratisation in education. Comparative Education, 38(3), 251-266.
Dewey, J. (2004). Democracy and education. Courier Corporation.
Hantzopoulos, M. (2011). Institutionalizing critical peace education in public schools: A case for comprehensive implementation. Journal of Peace Education, 8(3), 225-242.
Kliebard, H. M. (1995). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958. RoutledgeFalmer.
Thapan, M. (2001) J. Krishnamurti. UNESCO: International Bureau of Education, Vol. XXXI, No.2, June 2001, p. 273-286, Paris
West, C. 2004. Democracy matters: Winning the fight against imperialism. New York: Penguin
October 22, 2025
Si teniu insomni llegiu aquest llibre. És la medicina
June 3, 2024
Very helpful for thinking about education at all levels. His ideas on the unity of method and subject matter are particularly good. Certainly a book I will return to.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 147 reviews