JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION最新文献

Through a series of conversations, Fintan McCutcheon and Joanna Haynes explore McCutcheon's reflections on school leadership in the contexts of the Educate Together movement (in the Republic of Ireland) and, specifically, in his aspiration to build an optimally democratic school in Balbriggan. Much of the academic and professional literature on school leadership depicts the role of school leaders as expressing a strong vision for the school, with charismatic communication and strategic skills, and putting explicit emphasis on high educational standards. On the ground, the school leader is required to maintain executive governance standards, is accountable to a range of hierarchies and audiences and is in a custodian role to traditions of school culture and human resource relationships. Taken together, these academic, professional and contractual obligations can corral the school leader into practice of limited scope, obstructed by protocol, risk-averse and curtailed in creativity and, in relation to developing a democratic school, lacking in the necessary room for innovation. The conversation focuses on the rough ground of incident and messiness, identified through critical moments of school life when the aspirations to be democratic, to lead democratically, to teach democracy and to create a sustaining democratic school culture are lived-out. Through this dialogue, the conversants observe a practice of school leadership grounded in practical reason. The dialogue touches on and threads congruence between the on-the-ground risk-taking, rule-breaking, action orientation, nuanced dialogue, passionate engagement and deep reflection that characterise day-to-day school leadership practice. It concludes with ideas concerning the dynamics of forms of democracy that can prevail.

Amidst the lingering prominence of idealist and rationalist traditions in the philosophy of education, the notion of living, sentient body (or soma) seems to have received scant attention by educational philosophers hitherto. These traditions—whose strong influence can be traced back to such philosophers as Plato, Descartes, Leibniz and Wolff—elevate and privilege the import of reasoning and mind over the body, rendering the latter ancillary and even distorting to the pursuit of knowledge and truth. Drawing on the idea of somaestehtic philosophy initially proposed by Richard Shusterman, this article first discusses this philosophical outlook and then expands it by foregrounding the notion of the libidinal body—that is, the potentiality of the performative dimension of the soma in constructing and reconstructing knowledge. It argues that the soma itself is, in fact, the site of desire for knowledge production and reproduction. To buttress this argument, the article provides evidence from Borneo's Dayaknese communities as one of the instances of the somatic society where the practices of the libidinal body for the community's education are most conspicuous. The article ends with some thoughts on the possible research directions the philosophy of education ought to take to push the field forward in its pursuit for virtue and the good life.

Education, which is as old as humanity, has existed in various personal forms in non-western societies, where an osmotic exchange of wisdom, values and life skills within families, tribes and communities was instrumental in the formation and continuation of diverse wisdom traditions all over the world. A personal system of education, called Gurukula (Sanskrit guru, teacher; kula, family) education, thrived in pre-colonial South Asia for centuries before it was replaced by colonial education. This article discusses the philosophy and science behind Gurukula education, where education was a personal process involving an osmotic exchange of essences between teacher and taught, giving wide scope for the celebration of the natural diversity and variability of human behaviour and personality leading to an education that provides equal opportunity in the real sense—as an equal fit between individuals and their environment(s), giving rise to a practical democracy.

In 1940, John and Morag Aitkenhead set up Kilquhanity School in rural Galloway, inspired by the writings of A.S. Neill and the practices at Summerhill School. In 1962, Aitkenhead wrote that he had swallowed ‘hook, line and sinker’ Neill's theories and that ‘but for him and his example, there could never have been this free school in Scotland’. Historians and commentators have tended to share his view, for example, describing Aitkenhead as a ‘disciple’ of Neill and Kilquhanity as an ‘approximate’ of Summerhill with its weekly meeting, informality of relations between adults and children and a valuing of freedom and happiness over academic achievement.

However, this article, drawing on primary research with ex-pupils and staff, uncovers significant differences of philosophy and practice between the two schools, particularly in relation to pupils’ contribution to the Kilquhanity School community through the daily practice of ‘useful work’. These differences raise questions about the positioning of Kilquhanity as simply a less well-known and less radical ‘Summerhill in Scotland’ and expose an often neglected fault line within the progressive and radical movements with which both schools are associated.

This paper studies how Emerson's ‘Self-Reliance’ offers a meaningful account of political and moral self-education in Western democracies. Emerson's moral perfectionism involves an ethical, political and democratic individualism that needs to be reconsidered. This paper explores a perfectionist interpretation of the modern forms of self-education as political and ordinary practices, first with the case of conspiracy theories, which express an individual desire for self-education but appear as the result of a lack of self-reliance and a failure of political self-education, and then through the explicit claim to self-education made by activists in ecological, anti-racial or feminist organisations, which embodies the democratic need for self-reliance. These two examples reveal a new kind of efficient and ordinary political power at the edge of civic commitment. This leads us to define an alternative conception of pedagogy, in which equality in self-reliance matters. This also underlines our moral and ordinary political responsibility and challenges the traditional philosophical opposition between personal and public, subjective and universal. This paper underlines the accuracy of Stanley Cavell's interpretation of Emerson's ‘Self-Reliance’ in order to provide a perfectionist interpretation of activism. It also opens a new crossed perspective between the French and American approaches.

This article is an exploration of a democratic school where the author spent several years researching and engaging with teachers and students while investigating the practice of Philosophy for/with Children (P4C) within Irish Educate Together schools. I offer an account of how teachers in these contexts seek to reconcile and harmonise their P4C practice with their own educational and democratic outlooks. These perspectives were uncovered through a ‘lived enquiry’ study involving deep immersion in the day-to-day life of a school as a researcher and P4C practitioner. Teachers seeking to reconcile their practice with their views in this context resulted in the children in their classrooms learning through democratic processes, where democracy is not merely prescribed, but instead becomes a way of life. By drawing upon excerpts of teacher interview data from my doctoral studies, I suggest that there is a ‘rough ground’ of practice where diverse and unique perspectives can be revealed when lived, deeply immersive and sensitive approaches are taken towards practitioners and their communities. The intertwining of Educate Together and P4C philosophies of education is explored, with particular emphasis on the notion of child-centredness, dialogue and philosophical enquiry with children. Expanding on the democratic educational ideas of Biesta and Fielding, I argue that there is a deeply contextual and philosophically compelling connection between teachers engaging in P4C, the atmosphere or environment in which dialogue with children can occur and a different understanding of democracy through education that may result.

This article proceeds from a consideration of what John Baldacchino calls ‘viable ignorance’, attempting to take leave from the critical and pedagogical obligations of certain elements of Barbara Johnson's ‘positive ignorance’. It considers Friedrich Nietzsche, Jean-François Lyotard and the composer, Karlheinz Stockhausen's reflections on modes of experience, and the cultivation of complementary dispositions, where the knowing, egocentric subject is transformed into, or undermined as, what Nietzsche calls ‘a medium of overpowering forces’. The disposition itself is outlined through close readings of key elements of Nietzsche's notebooks, Lyotard's final chapter of Libidinal Economy (1993), and Stockhausen's lecture, ‘Intuitive Music’ (1971) and developed through supplemental practice-as-research activity in sound. The intention of this paper is to explore the space of aesthetic ignorance as committedly as possible, without reverting constantly to positive ignorance.

Forming and sustaining healthy relationships of any kind requires empathy, thought, communication and effort, all of which are learned skills. Many of these skills can and should be learned in a variety of places, including and especially in schools. One of the most appropriate venues for teaching interpersonal relationship skills in school is through ‘sex ed’ classes. I argue that student-centred, anti-racist, culturally affirming and appropriate, inclusive, egalitarian and relationship-based learning environments are necessary for sex education that benefits all students. The principles of hip-hop-based pedagogies, including Christopher Emdin's Reality Pedagogy, Bettina Love's Abolitionist Pedagogy and Rawls and Robinson's Youth Culture Pedagogy can serve as a useful theoretical framework around which to build sex education curriculum and policy. School-based sex education (SBSE) based on these principles may prove extremely beneficial not only to all students and their individual sense of identity and sexual autonomy but also to the general welfare of the public in the long run.

This is a brief introduction to the second part of a suite of papers on the theme ‘Political Education for Human Transformation’. Sceptical of the familiar and somewhat narrow frameworks for citizenship education, this East-West collaboration looks again at the very idea, and the possible means, of education for democracy. It examines the principle of an equality of voices as crucial to mature democratic citizenship, expanding on this through the idea of the ‘education of one's experience’. This is a matter not of introspection but rather of turning attention outward—towards the language we use, the way others are treated, works of art and popular culture—in order to be more critically awake and to experience more fully how the world comes to light. We introduce papers by Alexis Gibbs and Léa Boman, which respectively consider the reflections of de Tocqueville on democracy in the United States and Emerson's essay ‘Self-Reliance’. Together, these essays contribute to an understanding of the manner in which we are always already implicated in structures of power. They offer a redefinition of political subjectivity.