Comments about what "Philosophy" means in speaking of Education

I am told that my comments are too centered on philosophy. Well, for me “philosophy of education” means the ideas that decide classroom practices, what actually happens in the classroom. 

Anthony Rebora did a book review in EducationWeek Teacher Update on July 14: http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2011/06/01/focus_bb.html?cmp=ENL-TU-TBC 
The book’s author is Mike Schmoker, and the title is Focus: Elevating the Essentials to Radically Improve Student Learning.

Here is the first paragraph of the review:

"In his new book, Mike Schmoker—a former administrator, English teacher, and football coach—makes a bracing case for a back-to-basics approach to education. He calls on teachers and schools, in no uncertain terms, to abandon ever-changing "fads, programs, and innovations," and zero in on what he calls the "three essential elements" of high-quality schooling: coherent curriculum, effective whole-class instruction, and purposeful reading and writing."

I speak of the purpose of school as transmitting information about the world. According to this reviewer, Mike Schmoker gives what I believe are the means of transmitting this information, his “three essential elements:”

• Coherent curriculum
• Effective whole-class instruction
• Purposeful reading and writing.

To "philosophize" about these three points means asking questions, for example: What is meant by "coherent" in this context? What does such a curriculum cover? What are goals, both short and long term? What is "whole-class instruction?" How is it effective? How is "purposeful" defined in this context? Further questions will show up as the discussion continues.


To "philosophize" about these points means separating oneself from existing perspectives and being ready to examine each "answer" with an open mind. The ultimate goal of such an exercise is to make decisions about what needs to happen in the classroom. The decisions need to be well thought-out, well supported, and they should remain flexible so that, once implemented, it remains possible to make modifications as they become necessary.

Some Remarks Concerning A Content Curriculum: Interest or Foundation?

 By content curriculum I always mean: information about the world. In school this information is generally referred to as “subjects.” Using the word “foundation” refers to the reality that it is not necessary to learn everything about a subject in order to gain an understanding of what that topic is. “Foundation” refers to the further reality that it is necessary to know something about a topic before knowing whether or not that topic could be of interest. Finding a topic interesting does not necessarily mean an eventual professional interest. It means that the topic is part of the world in which we all live and that the world is interesting in and of itself.

The teacher is not a kind of god living on a different plane enabling him or her to discern each child’s talents and potential thus determine what is of interest for each student. The teacher, and here I speak specifically of the elementary level, is there to provide a common curriculum, information that the children have not yet discovered, and to do it in such a way that as children advance in their schooling they develop enough self-knowledge to discern for themselves their potential and specific talents. The teacher teaches, that is, provides the information; the children are responsible for their own education. (Two comments: Teaching is not as simple as that statement makes it sound. Children do need to learn how to be responsible; it is part of the information teachers—and parents—need to provide.)

The “information about the world” that makes up the foundation covers every traditional “subject,” in both the math/science and the humanist realms. They are all part of the world and all people who live in society (as well as society itself) benefit from acquiring the basic information that can be provided to students from age five or six to age eleven or twelve.  This basic schooling is not meant to create specialists or future professionals, but instead generalists who recognize what they know and what they do not know.

There is a point beyond the elementary level at which schooling begins to broaden and deepen the information provided. At this point the curriculum starts to be differentiated; individualization begins once students know enough about all that there is to learn! Only then can individual interests become clearer. (Of course, a few children do have talents that dominate from an early age. They still need to learn about other things that exist in the world. Most, however, benefit from that broad foundation to better discern their leanings.)