Philosophy of education and educational psychology

[thorbiorn]

The understanding we have of the world we live, including what knowledge is, what existence and consciousness is, how the human mind functions, as well as views on what is right and wrong, and therefore what should be done and what not, has consequences for what we think of education, including what is considered worthwhile teaching to whom, when, where, how and even by whom or in an age of increasingly depersonalized teaching by what. These subjects are within the scope of the philosophy of education and educational psychology.

The motivation for beginning this thread was that there does not seem to be a thread with this angle, but also the subjects interests me, and it did not fit into any of these thread either: Homeschooling, home education, school education and the upbringing of children or Transcripts related to children. In this post there are excerpts from the Wiki and reference work. Questions will come later.

Education and educational. The Online Etymology Dictionary has

education (n.)
1530s, "child-rearing," also "the training of animals," from French education (14c.) and directly from Latin educationem (nominative educatio) "a rearing, training," noun of action from past-participle stem of educare (see educate). Originally of instruction in social codes and manners; meaning "systematic schooling and training for work" is from 1610s.




educate (v.)

mid-15c., educaten, "bring up (children), to train," from Latin educatus, past participle of educare "bring up, rear, educate" (source also of Italian educare, Spanish educar, French éduquer), which is a frequentative of or otherwise related to educere "bring out, lead forth," from ex- "out" (see ex-) + ducere "to lead," from PIE root *deuk- "to lead." Meaning "provide schooling" is first attested 1580s. Related: Educated; educating.

According to "Century Dictionary," educere, of a child, is "usually with reference to bodily nurture or support, while educare refers more frequently to the mind," and, "There is no authority for the common statement that the primary sense of education is to 'draw out or unfold the powers of the mind.'"

co-education (n.)

also coeducation, "joint education," specifically of young men and young women in the same institution, 1852, from co- + education.

Next the philosophy of education. In the first paragraph on the Stanford resource on philosophy, there is:

Philosophy of Education
First published Mon Jun 2, 2008; substantive revision Sun Oct 7, 2018
Philosophy of education is the branch of applied or practical philosophy concerned with the nature and aims of education and the philosophical problems arising from educational theory and practice. Because that practice is ubiquitous in and across human societies, its social and individual manifestations so varied, and its influence so profound, the subject is wide-ranging, involving issues in ethics and social/political philosophy, epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of mind and language, and other areas of philosophy. Because it looks both inward to the parent discipline and outward to educational practice and the social, legal, and institutional contexts in which it takes place, philosophy of education concerns itself with both sides of the traditional theory/practice divide. Its subject matter includes both basic philosophical issues (e.g., the nature of the knowledge worth teaching, the character of educational equality and justice, etc.) and problems concerning specific educational policies and practices (e.g., the desirability of standardized curricula and testing, the social, economic, legal and moral dimensions of specific funding arrangements, the justification of curriculum decisions, etc.). In all this the philosopher of education prizes conceptual clarity, argumentative rigor, the fair-minded consideration of the interests of all involved in or affected by educational efforts and arrangements, and informed and well-reasoned valuation of educational aims and interventions.

There is quite a variety of content on the Wikipedia from different countries. Below are examples, which also has translations of the concept to other languages. There are more Wikis, but I took the longer ones.

Arabic: فلسفة لتربية (If you translated this entry, there is a long list of philosophers)
Chinese: 教育哲學 (Includes also Chinese philosophers)
Danish: Pædagogisk filosofi
Dutch: Filosofie van de opvoeding
English: Philosophy of Education
Finnish: Kasvatusfilosofia (Short, but has links to authors considered influential.)
French: Philosophie de l'éducation
German: Bildungstheorie
Hebrew: פילוסופיה של החינוך (Covers a wide range of philosophies and approaches.)
Norwegian: Pedagogisk filosofi
Portuguese: Filosofia da educação
Russian: Философия образования
Spanish: Filosofia de la educación
Swedish: Pedagogikens filosofi

In the English Wiki on the Philosophy of Education, there are the following names with those bolded also appearing in Educational Psychology.

• 5History
  • 5.1Ancient
    • 5.1.1Plato
    • 5.1.2Aristotle
  • 5.2Medieval
    • 5.2.1Ibn Sina
    • 5.2.2Ibn Tufail
  • 5.3Modern
    • 5.3.1Michel de Montaigne
    • 5.3.2John Locke
    • 5.3.3Jean-Jacques Rousseau
    • 5.3.4Immanuel Kant
    • 5.3.5Charlotte Mason
  • 5.420th and 21st century
    • 5.4.1Rudolf Steiner (Waldorf education)
    • 5.4.2John Dewey
    • 5.4.3Maria Montessori
    • 5.4.4William Heard Kilpatrick
    • 5.4.5William Chandler Bagley
    • 5.4.6A. S. Neill
    • 5.4.7Martin Heidegger
    • 5.4.8Jean Piaget
    • 5.4.9Mortimer Jerome Adler
    • 5.4.10Harry S. Broudy
    • 5.4.11Jerome Bruner
    • 5.4.12Paulo Freire
    • 5.4.13John Holt
    • 5.4.14Nel Noddings

The Wiki on Educational psychology

Educational psychology is the branch of psychology concerned with the scientific study of human learning. The study of learning processes, from both cognitive and behavioral perspectives, allows researchers to understand individual differences in intelligence, cognitive development, affect, motivation, self-regulation, and self-concept, as well as their role in learning. The field of educational psychology relies heavily on quantitative methods, including testing and measurement, to enhance educational activities related to instructional design, classroom management, and assessment, which serve to facilitate learning processes in various educational settings across the lifespan.[1]

Educational psychology can in part be understood through its relationship with other disciplines. It is informed primarily by psychology, bearing a relationship to that discipline analogous to the relationship between medicine and biology. It is also informed by neuroscience. Educational psychology in turn informs a wide range of specialities within educational studies, including instructional design, educational technology, curriculum development, organizational learning, special education, classroom management, and student motivation. Educational psychology both draws from and contributes to cognitive science and the learning sciences. In universities, departments of educational psychology are usually housed within faculties of education, possibly accounting for the lack of representation of educational psychology content in introductory psychology textbooks.[2]

The field of educational psychology involves the study of memory, conceptual processes, and individual differences (via cognitive psychology) in conceptualizing new strategies for learning processes in humans. Educational psychology has been built upon theories of operant conditioning, functionalism, structuralism, constructivism, humanistic psychology, Gestalt psychology, and information processing.[1]

Educational psychology has seen rapid growth and development as a profession in the last twenty years.[3] School psychology began with the concept of intelligence testing leading to provisions for special education students, who could not follow the regular classroom curriculum in the early part of the 20th century.[3] However, "school psychology" itself has built a fairly new profession based upon the practices and theories of several psychologists among many different fields. Educational psychologists are working side by side with psychiatrists, social workers, teachers, speech and language therapists, and counselors in an attempt to understand the questions being raised when combining behavioral, cognitive, and social psychology in the classroom setting.[3]

Names in the English Wiki on Educational Psychology include:

• 1History
  • 1.1Antiquity (Plato and Aristotle)
  • 1.2Early Modern era (John Locke)
  • 1.3Before 1890
    • 1.3.1Juan Vives
    • 1.3.2Johann Pestalozzi
    • 1.3.3Johann Herbart
  • 1.41890–1920
    • 1.4.1William James (1842–1910)
    • 1.4.2Alfred Binet
    • 1.4.3Edward Thorndike
    • 1.4.4John Dewey
    • 1.4.5Jean Piaget
  • 1.51920–present
    • 1.5.1Jerome Bruner
    • 1.5.2Benjamin Bloom
    • 1.5.3Nathaniel Gage
• 2Perspectives
  • 2.1Behavioral
  • 2.2Cognitive
    • 2.2.1Cognitive view of intelligence
  • 2.3Developmental
  • 2.4Constructivist
    • 2.4.1Jean Piaget's Cognitive Development
• 3Conditioning and learning
  • 3.1Motivation
• 4Technology
• 5Applications
  • 5.1Teaching
  • 5.2Counseling
    • 5.2.1Training
    • 5.2.2Employment outlook
• 6Methods of research

Other topics that may relate are education, preschool, kindergarten, primary education, school, secondary school, homeschooling, college, university and many more. So much for introduction.

 

[thorbiorn]

Below are three themes that could influence how one approaches education.
Spirit, soul and materialism: In much of modern education, the predominant view is materialistic. It does not recognize spirit as having existence, or considers the possibility of any hyperdimensional reality.
Knowledge, truth, objectivity vs lies and falsehood: While knowledge, truth and objectivity were sought after, it now seems that political correctness or politically expedient "truths" even if they are false, deceptive or lies are credited with value even if they contradict knowledge, truth and objectivity.
Good and evil. In a society ruled by political correctness, the concept of good will be thoughts and behaviour that accord with what is considered politically correct.

An educational approach where materialism is accepted as a maxim, where lies and falsehoods are approved, and where evil is encouraged can hardly be healthy.

In reality, however, all is not black and white. Even in a world ruled by materialism and politically correctness, there are likely to be gaps here and there that indicate the work of spirit, knowledge and truth as well as genuine helpfulness. Similarly, just because someone professes to spirit, knowledge, and a distinction between good and evil, does not mean that all is ideal. It would not be possible in our world.

 

[Yupo]

There's a wonderful book on the subject called Begin Here; The Forgotten Conditions of Teaching and Learning by Jacques Barzun. I can't recommend it enough.

 

[thorbiorn]

There's a wonderful book on the subject called Begin Here; The Forgotten Conditions of Teaching and Learning by Jacques Barzun. I can't recommend it enough.

Thank you, @Yupo, I'll take a look.

 

[thorbiorn]

In the last three hundred years, at least, there have been discussions about whether a child is born good, evil or something else. I will still share this find from the German Wiki on progressive education, called Reformpädagogik where one finds:

The Enlightenment was ambivalent with regard to the anthropological question of whether the child initially had a naturally good soul (Rousseau) or was always “radical evil” (Kant). Many later reform pedagogues leaned towards Rousseau that a child only has to be able to develop themselves, and emphasized the important role of cooperation in order to receive the good through social give and take.

The concept Kant used, radical evil, is in German, "radikal Böse". The Wiki has:

Radical evil (German: das radikal Böse) is a phrase used by German philosopher Immanuel Kant, one representing the Christian term, radix malorum. Kant believed that human beings naturally have a tendency to be evil. He explains radical evil as corruption that entirely takes over a human being and leads to desire's acting against the universal moral law. The outcome of one's natural tendency, or innate propensity, towards evil are actions or "deeds" that subordinate the moral law. According to Kant, these actions oppose the universally moral maxims and displayed from self-love and self conceit.[1][2] By many authors, Kant's concept of radical evil is seen as a paradox and inconsistent through his development of moral theories.[3][4]

And going one step further the Christian term, radix malorum may refer to Radix malorum est cupiditas:

Radix malorum est cupiditas or Radix omnium malorum est cupiditas is a Biblical quotation in Latin that literally means "the root of evil is greed", or "the root of evil is want".

This Latin phrase is a translation of the original Greek manuscripts of the Bible. The Greek text reads "ῥίζα γὰρ πάντων τῶν κακῶν ἐστιν ἡ φιλαργυρία" (1Ti 6:10 BGT) - literally translated into English as "A root of all the evils is the fond love of money". Daniel Wallace states that ῥίζα (root) is qualitative, since it lacks an article.[1]
[...]

It is translated as "the love of money is the root of all evil" in King James Version).[2] It has frequently been rendered as "money is the root of all evil".[3]

Or did Kant have in mind something like the Christian original sin, because one could ask where from the love of money comes?
The verse that is referred to is from 1. Timothy, and Timothy is not usually considered one of the authentic letters by Paul, as this passage from the Galatians 5:16-26 in the Zondervan AMP version:

16 But I say, walk habitually in the [Holy] Spirit [seek Him and be responsive to His guidance], and then you will certainly not carry out the desire of the 1sinful nature [which responds impulsively without regard for God and His precepts]. 17 For the sinful nature has its desire which is opposed to the Spirit, and the [desire of the] Spirit opposes the 2sinful nature; for these [two, the sinful nature and the Spirit] are in direct opposition to each other [continually in conflict], so that you [as believers] do not [always] do whatever [good things] you want to do. 18 But if you are guided and led by the Spirit, you are not subject to the Law. 19 Now the practices of the 3sinful nature are clearly evident: they are sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality (total irresponsibility, lack of self-control), 20 4idolatry, 5sorcery, hostility, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions [that promote heresies], 21 envy, drunkenness, riotous behavior, and other things like these. I warn you beforehand, just as I did previously, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit [the result of His presence within us] is love [unselfish concern for others], joy, [inner] peace, patience [not the ability to wait, but how we act while waiting], kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the 6sinful nature together with its passions and appetites.

25 If we [claim to] live by the [Holy] Spirit, we must also walk by the Spirit [with personal integrity, godly character, and moral courage—our conduct empowered by the Holy Spirit]. 26 We must not become conceited, challenging or provoking one another, envying one another.

1 Galatians 5:16 Lit flesh.
2 Galatians 5:17 Lit flesh.
3 Galatians 5:19 Lit flesh.
4 Galatians 5:20 Including prostitution, which was often part of pagan ritual.
5 Galatians 5:20 Including such things as occult practices, witchcraft, worship of evil powers, drug-induced trances.
6 Galatians 5:24 Lit flesh.

What Paul talks of also connect to hyperdimensional realities and STO/STO. In the future, these themes may enter education, or hints might be dropped for those interesting in discovering more.