EDUCATIONAL THEORY最新文献

It is not unusual to hear philosophers of education today describe the field as global. But in what sense is philosophy of education global? In this article, I analyze how and to what extent philosophy of education can be understood as a global field. The article argues that how we conceptualize philosophy of education as a global field (or not) makes a difference for how we conduct and evaluate scholarship, engage and collaborate with others, and consider the strengths and possibilities of the field, as well as its challenges. Overall, I justify a critically reflective approach to thinking about philosophy of education as a global field. I identify opportunities to strengthen global engagement, awareness, and diversity in relation to scholarly norms and values, while also examining pitfalls, obstacles, and risks, and some strategies for tackling challenges faced. I contend here that there are many senses in which philosophy of education is (or can be) global. But not all of these senses are entirely positive. And, in some instances, the globalization of philosophy of education requires scrutiny rather than celebration.

This article argues that the traditional view of philosophy of education as a derivative branch of philosophy has it backwards: that for many canonical philosophers, reflections on education were basic to their philosophy. More than this, attention to the educational dimensions of philosophical claims generally makes them better grounded and more viable. Philosophy of education is, in this sense, basic to philosophy.

When weighing how much aid we should give, policymakers also wonder: how should the state distribute that aid? Issues of implementation and feasibility are, after all, an essential component of policy decision-making and effectiveness. Yet, when philosophers of education consider the ethical trade-offs between these postsecondary policies, few have incorporated these considerations into their accounts. In this article, I seek to advance the larger project that questions of implementation and feasibility pose discrete problems of justice that are therefore worth considering when philosophers weigh the trade-offs between pursuing different postsecondary options. I do this through introducing one such problem within this much wider anticipated genre: the problem of what I call “the distribution double bind” when pursuing means-tested financial aid in the United States. I argue that the distribution double bind arises when the available options to distribute a given benefit — in this case, financial aid via the FAFSA — are either meaningfully coarse or meaningfully fine. I contend this new dilemma generates distinct ethical concerns that are relevant to our philosophical considerations of how the state should fund higher education.

The modern day is known as the “post-truth” era, characterized by the widespread dissemination of false information, as well as personal opinions and emotions taking precedence over established facts in public decision-making. For students, as future democratically engaged citizens, to make well-informed science-based decisions on matters of personal health and public policy, they require the knowledge and skills to identify false from accurate scientific information online. In this article, I argue that current school science curriculum are outdated in the context of modern social media and internet-centric media environment, requiring changes in education to successfully prepare students for some of the more pernicious features of the post-truth era. An increased focus on forms of social and digital media literacy, as well as knowledge about how science produces reliable information, are essential content for addressing this issue. It is important to emphasize that focusing on content-based changes alone is not sufficient. Methodological shifts are needed to ensure that the socially embedded aspects of scientific knowledge production and the application of knowledge in socio-political contexts are taught and communicated in ways that allows students to effectively employ their content-based education.

In this article, I critically examine the concept of ableism within educational contexts, highlighting its normative dimensions and implications for learning in schools. Drawing on neo-institutionalist theories of education, I explore how normative expectations around ability shape educational practices and contribute to the marginalization of students with disabilities. I argue that ableism is not merely a matter of individual prejudice but is embedded in institutional structures and cultural norms. In this article, I critique the conceptual ambiguity in current ableism discourse—particularly the conflation of normativity and normality—and call for a more precise analytical framework. By distinguishing between educational goals and the means to achieve them, I advocate for a multifactorial approach to combating ableism that addresses individual attitudes, institutional practices, and societal norms.

In this article, we examine the transformative influence of Anthropocene-driven semantics on the education system through Luhmann's social systems theory. We analyze how the historical and current concepts of “Human” and individuality have shaped educational semantics and influenced the system's self-description. Critical perspectives from pedagogy, poststructuralism, decolonial, intersectional theories, and “Anthropocene” discussions are reviewed, highlighting a semantic shift from individual development to systemic interdependencies among humans, social structures, and ecological contexts. While fostering intellectual reflection, this shift paradoxically reasserts the normative focus on individual improvement, as education systems aim to teach individual betterment while rejecting the concept itself. We suggest that Anthropocene discourse might catalyze a new normative identity integrating human improvement and non-human interactions, potentially reshaping education's guiding values — though no outcomes are guaranteed. This analysis offers sociologically grounded insights into education's evolving role in shaping human development amid systemic and ecological complexities.

This article offers a theoretical investigation of the educational value of gratitude. We make the case that it is possible to learn from and through gratitude experiences. More specifically, gratitude experiences include understandings regarding and a reflective awareness of the value, contingency and vulnerability of certain goods as well as one's dependency in relation to these goods. We argue that such experiences can transform one's outlook on life in a sense that is educationally relevant and valuable in relation to one's flourishing. Building on this, we claim that gratitude can contribute to the development of wisdom. However, since the interpretations of the world inherent in gratitude can be epistemically inaccurate and/or morally inappropriate, gratitude experiences must also be guided by wisdom. Instead of blindly accepting the perceptions implicit in gratitude experiences, people must reflect on these with genuine care for the truth and for justice. We suggest that educators can bring their wisdom and concern for justice to bear in stimulating and guiding others' gratitude experiences in a desirable manner, especially in the case of young people, whose reflective capacities are still developing. We conclude that gratitude experiences should be recognized as a potential source of educationally valuable forms of awareness and insights.

In this article, I explore the philosophical foundations of critical realism and its application in mixed methods research. Critical realism, a robust ontological framework, is pivotal for understanding complex phenomena that span across disciplinary boundaries. It introduces a stratified ontology that recognizes distinct layers of reality, each with unique mechanisms and causal powers. By advocating for a dialectical method, critical realism has the potential to provide a contribution to mixed method research, enhances interdisciplinary collaboration and encourages examining the interactions between different reality layers. This approach not only facilitates a holistic understanding of complex issues but also underscores the role of “tendencies rather than deterministic laws. This critical realist perspective significantly contributes to mixed methods research by promoting a democratic, pluralistic approach and enriching our grasp of the multifaceted nature of reality.