Abstract
At the outset of the 21st century when the
practical and utilitarian dimensions of education are considered very important
and strengthened, teachers are required to broaden their knowledge-base so as
to be able to make productive pedagogic decisions in this direction. Here
arises the need for providing professional help to the teacher during teacher
education programmes. Educating teachers about different kinds of knowledge
(Schulman, 1986) can be of help in this regard. But the whole process of
teaching and learning can serve its purpose effectively if teachers develop and
construct a sound conceptual base in philosophy of education and apply that in addressing
various education-related problems in their respective contexts. The current
paper aims at establishing this belief and tries to prove that an
application-oriented version of philosophy of education can surely guide
teachers in choosing appropriate approaches and methods; shaping their
attitudes and belief systems; and working towards achieving the highest goals of
education.
1. Changing Educational Goals and
Demands on the Teacher
Changes in the social, cultural, political, economic,
etc spheres of human life have been inextricably present in every age and stage
of history. These changes are often the product of human thinking as much as
human thinking shapes them. But these changes are not equally contributed by
every citizen in the society. Often, there is a politically dominant group that
decides the course of change though it is also true that no single group
remains as the dominant force forever. There has been resistance and there have
been power struggles. This is in fact a continuous process. Amidst these
societal changes across history, ‘education’ has been playing a powerful role.
It has helped diverse sections of the society in very dissimilar ways. Some have
used it for maintaining domination; a few have learnt to resist domination;
some have found reconciliation; and some others have confirmed to the dominant
social ways. But all these groups of people are guided by different
philosophies and ideologies. Thus, there are many philosophers and philosophies
of education. The educational goals of a particular society on a point in
history may not be the same for the people living in the same place after a
century. With the change in educational goals, a lot of other things like
approaches to teaching, demands on the teacher, prescribed curricular knowledge
and skills, etc also change.
1.1
Education in India: Goals and Teacher Roles at Different Stages
The Vedic education system advocated ‘liberation’ as
the ultimate goal (Altekar, 1948; Scharfe, 2002; Singh, 2008). In this
connection, Scharfe (2002) points out that ancient Indian education emphasized
on “grammar, religious literature and logic, whereas physics, chemistry,
biology and geography were largely neglected - except in the teachings of the
Jainas”. The educational values were highly religious and favoured a certain
class of people. Since the curriculum designers and policy makers were Brahmans, a curriculum solely
concentrating on the components pointed out by Scharfe was found relevant and
useful. Moreover, the teacher was one of the most revered persons in the
society and had equal status as gods (Altekar, 1948). He was compulsorily
required to be a Brahman, proficient
in Sanskrit and Vedas and of very high moral character (Sharma and Sharma,
1996).
In contrast, Buddhist education system which had the
ultimate aim of “alleviation of all suffering” (Nithiyanandam, 2004: p. 12) was
for the mass. It was a rival to the Brahmanic system of education in many ways
in the sense that the medium of instruction was not Sanskrit, the language of
the upper classes; and it was less rigorous and more convenient than that of
the Vedic system. However, it was totally managed and controlled by monks. A
monk could only become a teacher. The teacher was expected to have high moral
character and be free from all worldly attachments. It was also very important
for the teacher to be well-versed in disciplinary knowledge. It was believed
that the teacher was the one who could lead his students to realization of nirvana.
When compared to the Vedic and Buddhist philosophies
of education and the teacher roles in the respective systems, the modern
education system in India does not overtly support values of any particular
religion and promote the education of people of one caste or class over others.
At least, the policy documents try to maintain a democratic tone. The teacher
needs to have a B. Ed. or M. Ed. degree and meet some other standards set by
the National Council of Teacher Education (NCTE). Moral character of teachers
is not an essential qualification, and asceticism is not a requirement. A
teacher in today’s education system is like any other citizen of the country. A
teacher can be a male or a female.
1.2
Western Education System: Plato’s Days and Modern Times
The above discussion suggests that teacher roles have
changed with change in the basic philosophy of education, and thus, teachers
have played dissimilar roles at different stages in the history of humanity. The
case is not very different when it comes to Western systems of education. The aim
of education according to Plato was to prepare ideal citizens for an ideal
society like the one described in The
Republic. He advocated extreme ways of educating children to get them ready
for an idealistic and futuristic society. A teacher, according to Plato, must
have the power to teach his pupils; and make them use their potential to the
extent that they could explore knowledge on their own. Following Socrates as
the ideal teacher, Plato believed that teachers are not mere “instructors who
instill knowledge but rather as “midwives” whose job is simply to help give
birth to those ideas that are already within us” (New World Encyclopedia).
By today’s standards, Plato’s philosophy of education
could be termed as undemocratic, impractical, elitist, divisive, etc though his
views about the roles of teacher could still be identified with the modern view
of teachers as facilitators. But it should be remembered that Plato’s views
could have been suitable for the society he lived in and the modern view is
appropriate for today’s society.
2.
Dilemmas and Paradoxes for the Teacher
In this age of aggressive marketization and
globalization, the teacher is faced with a number of dilemmas in relation to the
ultimate aim/s of education, the legitimate and acceptable version of
knowledge, the prescribed approaches to teaching, etc. Like any other human
being, a teacher is socially situated and has a set of beliefs about education,
pedagogy, knowledge, etc. But when one acquires the role of a teacher, he/she also
has to think about the societal educational goals, the beliefs of
socio-politically dominant group about education, and the moral and ethical
duties of a teacher in preparing students so that they can become responsible
members of a democratic society and maintain its sanctity through their social
practices. So the teacher lands in a situation in which he/she may have to choose
between options; accept or reject certain ideas; and compromise with or confirm
to certain other ways. It is a paradoxical crossroad where there may be a clash
among what the teacher “wants to do”, what he/she “should do” and what he/she
“does”. The control exercised by political parties in power, hidden agenda, etc
on educational curriculum further adds to their difficulties.
The scenario described above may sound bleak and
hopeless to an extent but the possibility that teachers can overcome these
hindrances is always there. However, they need professional support to defeat
these odds and impart effective education. In this connection, the importance
of pre- and in-service teacher education programmes is enormous. In these
programmes teachers can be trained in philosophy of education for some valid
reasons. The very fact that education is fast becoming a serious public matter
that remains under constant scrutiny of stakeholders is strong enough a reason
to equip teachers with skills and knowledge that can help them handle the
demands of parents and experts about how to guide children and handle their
education-related problems. The knowledge-base may include what Peters (1977)
calls “the rudiments of disciplined philosophical thought and with those parts
of psychology and the social sciences which are of particular relevance to his
complex task” (p. 87). Teachers can make use of this knowledge to reflect
philosophically on what they do in their respective classrooms; convince the
stakeholders involved in the process of education about their decisions; and
promote critical yet liberal and democratic education.
3.
Philosophy of Education in Teacher Education Programmes
The dilemmas and paradoxes for the teacher as
discussed in the previous section are related equally to both theory and
practice. It has also been argued that teachers need to have good understanding
of what education is; the theoretical foundations on which it has been based;
its aims; and the role of a teacher. Teacher education being a vital part of
any modern formal education system should therefore help teachers acquire and
internalize the aforesaid necessary components.
There are arguments that teaching is a craft and
requires very little or no theoretical knowledge about education. But even such
a view cannot deny the interplay of factors like personal experience,
observation, reflection, self-realization, etc in a teaching-learning context. It
is also true that these factors are on an individual plane and may get operated
in idiosyncratic ways. It implies that education as a field is incomplete
without theoretical knowledge which is philosophical in nature. However,
philosophical foundations are always subject to constant debate and their place
and importance in the educational curriculum are decided by the decision making
bodies of the government. For example in India, philosophy of education, as
Sheshadri (2008) puts it, refers at times to the “undifferentiated discourse (sometimes
empirical, sometimes historical and generally hortatory) about aims, curriculum,
methodology and other aspects of education” and at other times to the “application
of the speculative thesis (metaphysical, epistemological, axiological) of
general philosophy”. This kind of mindset has affected Indian education system
and as a result, philosophy of education gets unjustly inadequate attention in
the teacher education programmes in the country. Therefore, there should be
more research and discussion on to establish that philosophy of education is an
obligatory “conceptual toolbox for thinking about educational problems” (Winch,
2012).
3.1
Eclectic and Applied Philosophy of Education
Education involves acquisition of knowledge, skills,
values, etc. It is the duty of the teacher to ensure that students learn these
components and apply the same in their real life situations. But one of the
highest goals of education, i.e. preparing learners to be independent in their
thinking and be able to apply their thinking skills to questioning and
analyzing social practices cannot be achieved if the teacher makes students follow
a certain pattern of thinking. If trained in only a certain way of thinking
believed and practiced by the teacher, the student may not make use of his/her
critical faculty and true potential. The teacher, however, cannot be blamed for
his/her actions in such situations because the way a teacher thinks and acts is
dependent on his/her socio-cultural background and the formal pre- and
in-service education or training. Though the sociocultural background cannot be
changed, a teacher can be educated to think critically and independently and be
eclectic in his/her approach and promote the same in his/her in his/her
students during teacher education programmes. Even if it is agreed that
philosophy of education is an indispensable component for teachers and
therefore should be a part of the foundation courses in teacher education
programmes, there will be still questions like “what kind of philosophy of
education”, “how to make teachers realize about its utilities and
applications”, etc to be answered. These questions should be dealt with
carefully and wisely as there are no simple answers to these.
Starting from educational planning and policy making
to research and teaching, everything is based on a broad perspective of
education which is philosophical in nature and represents interests and beliefs
of most of the stakeholders. The national educational documents in India like
National Curriculum Framework, National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education,
National Knowledge Commission, etc are based on concepts like “social
deliberation”, “knowledge construction”, “fertile and robust education”, “pluralism”,
“equity”, “equality”, “reduction of disparity”, etc. So at all levels, it is
expected that education should serve the purpose of the democratic polity of
the country, improve the living standard both qualitatively and materially,
empower children to think critically and act responsibly in their respective
future personal and professional endeavors, and so on. Though these aims are
not exactly concrete in nature and do not have an immediate material dimension
to their bearings, still they are very essential for improving lifestyles of
citizens of the country and preserving their democratic rights. So to ensure
that children are trained in the aforesaid areas and directions, teachers need
to be prepared accordingly. They need to understand the educational ideologies
proposed by famous philosophers so that they have a variety of tools of
thinking and reflection in their armory. They may not have to rigidly follow
any one philosophy and impose the same on their students. An eclectic approach
in which the teacher can select from a variety of philosophies of education and
develop a philosophical base for handling challenges and problems in the
classroom and the educational institute can be a reliable option. It is the
responsibility of teacher educators to train and sensitize teachers about this.
The next question is how to convince and sensitize
teachers about the use of philosophy of education. As there is already evidence
that teachers who have a strong foundation in philosophical vision for teaching
during pre-service teacher education find it easy to cope with challenges of
teaching in the initial years than others who do not have (Kosnik and Beck,
2009), the focus should be on what should go into their training in philosophy
of education. A Deweyan approach with a constructivist dimension to training in
which teachers are provided real life classroom problems related to
methodology, teaching materials, learner and learning, organizational
difficulties, policy issues, fairness and bias in curricular decisions, etc and
asked to come up with solutions using ideas from different philosophies of
education. This could prove to be an excellent exercise through which teachers
can be made to realize the importance and utility of philosophy of education.
They will also be in a position to analyze their own beliefs about teaching and
learning, societal educational needs, operation of ideology and agenda in
education and formation of identity against their philosophical knowledge-base.
4.
Possibilities and Hopes
Though ‘Philosophy’ as a discipline has been quite
popular, it has been kept at a distance from educational issues. This has also
been reflected in educational research which has been dominated by measurable
and observation empirical research. The problem is, however, not about heading
on empirical directions. It is about forgetting and neglecting the very
foundation of education. Philosophy of education holds the identity of the
field and has been accepted by many great philosophers in the history as the basis
of educational thinking, planning and execution. It should be given its
deserving place in the teacher education curriculum so that teachers can
prepare critical, responsible and knowledgeable future citizens who will help
in building a truly democratic society. However, these lofty goals can be
achieved if philosophy of education is presented as an application-oriented subject
in teacher education programmes and a problem-solving approach is followed to
train teachers in the same.
References
Altekar, A. S. (1948). Education in Ancient India. Banares: Nand Kishore & Bros.
Kosnik, C. and
Beck, C. (2009). Priorities in teacher
education: The 7 key elements of preservice preparation.
New York: Routledge.
National Council
of Educational Research and Training. (2005). National curriculum framework 2005. New Delhi: NCERT.
National Council
of Teacher Education, (2010). National
Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education, 2010. New
Delhi: NCTE
National Knowledge
Commission (2007). National Knowledge
Commission: Recommendations on School Education. New
Delhi: NKC.
Nithiyanandam, V.
(2004). Buddhist System of Education. Delhi:
Global Vision Publishing House.
Peters, R. S.
(1977). Education and the Education of
Teachers. London; Henley; Boston: Routledge
Plato. New World Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/plato.
Scharfe, H. (2002). Education in Ancient India. Leiden; Boston; Koln : Brill
Schulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in
teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4-14.
Sharma, R. N. and
Sharma, R. K. (1996). History of
Education in India. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers & Distributors.
Sheshadri, C.
(2008). Philosophy of Education as a Knowledge Field. NEUPA. Retrieved from www.nuepa.org/Download/Eminent_Seshadri_22042008_Report.pdf.
Singh, Y. K.
(2008). Philosophical Foundation of
Education. New Delhi: A. P. H. Publishing Corporation.
Winch, C. (2012). For
philosophy of education in teacher education. Oxford Review of Education, 38:3,
305-322.
No comments:
Post a Comment