John Dewey received his undergraduate education at the University of Vermont (1879), pursued post-graduate studies at Johns Hopkins (1884), first joined the University of Chicago faculty from 1894-1904, and spent the rest of his academic career at Columbia University until his retirement in 1930. Philosophically, Dewey was decidely anti-positivist, seeing science as a constant process of exploration. Knowledge as an absolute was anathema to the idea of discovery and experiential learning which were foundational in the way Dewey viewed all fields. Dewey embraced a naturalistic and biological conception of "the living organism as fundamentally bound up with its environment and engaged continually in a myriad of interactions" (p. 8). The idea of "pragmatism" was imbedded in this view and proposed that "an idea may be defined in terms of the practical effects that the idea's object may be said to have" (p. 8) - a practical, applied, and purposeful way of ideating. The idea also contributed to the notion that specializations (i.e. "scientism") were confining and that a scholar ought to be a roving inquirer in search of understanding.
Dewey believed that "the entire life of the mind can be explained within a three-stage model of sensation, idea, and response" (p. 42). These three elements are the foundation for "reflective thinking" which "starts from the presence of a problem (sensation), and.... its first business is to become clear as to what the problem is and why it is a problem (ideation)" (p. 60). Experimental inquiry can then proceed to hypothesizing and testing with these two steps contributing to loop learning that refines knowledge, identifies new problems, and pursues the process yet again (response). Dewey preferred to call this cycle "instrumentalism" rather than pragmatism that was often used to describe his philosophy (p. 68).
Human experiences, whether empirical, ethical, educational, aesthetic, religious or otherwise, are "profoundly rooted in a social and linguistic world" (p. 45) according to Dewey. The heart of useful knowledge then becomes understanding the relationship between means and consequences. This premise inspired Fairfield to explore each of these areas in depth. Given my interest in wholistic and leadership learning, I choose to focus on education in this post.
"A precondition of a viable democratic order is an educated citizenry" (p. 129). This was the core idea expressed in Democracy and Education (1916/1938). Dewey believed that the disconnection from students' experience, excessive information retention, and passivity were the primary challenges that had to be faced in democratic education. The alternative was classroom learning enhanced through inquiry and complemented by out-of-class experiences that resulted in continuous and integrated learning. He was not an "Ivory Tower" advocate nor a "student centered" learning proponent, believing that every learning interaction required teachers who guided rather than relying on independent exploratory activity by students. These ideas contributed to a view that "Liberty of mind, thought, inquiry, and discussion is not adjunct of education but an indispensable ingredient of it" (p. 152). John Dewey's Philosophy of Education reiterates the above points about education in a brief video.
In the subsequent chapters, Fairfield explored how Dewey's view of instrumental learning can transfer to domains such as politics, religion and aesthetics. Dewey advocated a similar process of discovery - sensation, idea, and response - in each of these areas. As an example, exposure in music can be a fluid, adapting, and increasingly complex area of learning. However, when exposure to music is limited, there may be an initial rejection of unfamiliar types of music. By contrast, new experiences can lead to new openness and exposure to the numerous types of music that one can enjoy. The initial sensation and ideation about something new then leads to expanding music listening preferences including styles, formats, and creators of diverse music. Consider how this idea might be applied to politics or religion and imagine how different individual and community dynamics in these areas might be.
My only disappointment with Fairfield's excellent integration of Dewey's contributions to multiple sectors was that student affairs work (commonly referred to as student personnel work in the early 20th century) was not mentioned at all in the education sector nor any other. As a student of higher education history who has written of Dewey as foundational to the field, it is both telling and disappointing that there was no recognition of Dewey's impact to how student affairs was shaped by and likely contributed to the preservation of Dewey's ideas in higher education. While I have not found reference to student affairs work, a very interesting article relating Islam to Dewey demonstrates how "instrumentalism" holds value in learning in other cultures beyond the West.
Fairfield's concluding chapter focused on Dewey's legacy, logging the broad implications and applications of his ideas in today's world. Dewey may have been eclipsed by some philosophers and educators in mid-20th century but many of his ideas are as applicable today as ever. Fortunate for those of us interested in exploring Dewey's ideas in greater depth, Southern Illinois University holds and has published Dewey's complete works. Perhaps the current crises in higher education will result in a return to core ideas of how learning can best be understood and hopefully Dewey's ideas will reemerge in these conversations.
No comments:
Post a Comment