Exploring Within: My Educational Philosophy

© 1999 LeoNora M. Cohen, OSU - School of Education

The Philosophies 
To begin my exploration into my own educational philosophy and psychological orientation, I utilized the Oregon State Educational Philosophies Self-Assessment and Scoring Guide. After evaluating forty statements to determine whether I agree or disagree, the tool indicated my inclination for Progressivism and Cognitivism/Constructivism over other philosophies. After reading more about what these philosophies entail, I agree that these accurately describe my thinking with some influence from Critical Theory and Humanist philosophies as well.                   

Progressivists believe that in education, the child is more important than the content. Teachers must make connections between their teaching and students' interests and daily lives. Students should solve real world problems by "thinking, feeling, and doing" and then reflect upon their solutions to develop values. 

Similarly, constructivists or cognitivists feel that teachers should establish the environmental conditions that allow students to freely construct or develop their own knowledge. Students are provided with a challenging question or idea which they must make sense of using the inquiry process, interacting with peers, and drawing on prior experiences.

Philosophies Simplified: 
I feel that the purpose of education mirrors directly the primary purpose of the social studies curriculum defined by the National Council for the Social Studies: "help[ing] young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world." Thus, the purpose of social studies and education is not for students to memorize and repeat facts. While it is critical that students gain knowledge, it is more important to develop students' capabilities of applying the knowledge after attainment. Instead of assessing with the traditional selected-response paper-and-pencil tests whether a student successfully memorized important names, dates, and other facts, to me it is more important to assess what students can do with the information. For instance, after observing a demonstration or listening to contradictory viewpoints on an issue, are they capable of asking pertinent questions that were not covered explicitly? Do they know how to find the answers to those questions? Most importantly, are students able to form generalizations based on that knowledge that are meaningful to future situations? I am more interested in evaluating these abilities, and consequently planning instruction that increases students' success on authentic assessments (when knowledge is applied in different real-world contexts), because these are the abilities that students will need in the real world.     
       

 Knowing that I will maximize the use of authentic assessment in my classroom to prepare students for the high levels of thinking the real world requires, I can prepare my students to be successful by matching the authenticity of the assessment to the authenticity of instruction. To facilitate students' development of the higher-order thinking skills of Bloom's Taxonomy, I will regularly employ inquiry-based lessons that capture students' interest and lead to formulations of generalizations. Similarly, believing that students learn through interacting with peers and knowing that students retain ninety-percent of what they teach to others, I want to infuse methods within the social interaction model of instruction into my lessons as well. As opposed to direct instruction, in which students passively receive facts, I believe the frequent and quality use of inquiry-based and cooperative learning lessons will equate to more powerful instruction. 

By powerful instruction, I mean instruction that is meaningful, integrative, value-based, challenging, and active. In my view, the only instruction in which teachers and students should engage. Instruction is meaningful when: Students make connections between their personal lives and the content they are learning; emphasis is placed upon deep understanding of important topics as opposed to fragile knowledge of too many topics; and teachers remain reflective and flexible in adjusting lessons based on assessment data and students' needs. I believe inquiry-based and cooperative learning methods are meaningful as students are encouraged to recall prior experiences and knowledge when forming hypotheses and become experts on specific topics when researching them and teaching their peers. Next, instruction is integrative when: Connections are made between topics; technology is incorporated; and multiple disciplines and/or content areas are intertwined to expand understanding and skill formation. Inquiry-based and cooperative learning methods can be easily structured to meet the needs of all disciplines and content areas. In fact, I feel students should explore social studies topics from multiple different entry-points. For example, each member of a cooperative learning group can investigate the role of a social studies discipline on a given issue. Furthermore, web projects make for excellent exploration tools in inquiry lessons and group projects in cooperative learning lessons. Thirdly, instruction is value-based when students: Confront controversial issues; make ethical determinations; evaluate the pros and cons that come with a course of action; and accept differences in opinion. Cooperative learning projects ensure discussion among group members, and activities such as six hats allow for critical evaluation of arguments without hostility. Fourthly, instruction is challenging when: Students strive to meet goals individually and as group members; well-reasoned arguments are required; and a commitment to deep thinking is necessary to meet goals. Cooperative learning and inquiry-based lessons place the responsibility of learning on the students while still allowing flexibility for students to incorporate their strengths and preferences. This helps to ensure an intrinsic motivation for being successful, while still facilitating an expansion in skill attainment. Similarly, the inquiry process scaffolds students through forming arguments, as conclusions are based upon specific data collected and analyzed. Lastly, instruction is active when: Students are independent and self-regulated; instruction and assessment emphasize real-world applications; and students construct knowledge using discourse and reflection.         

Thus, I argue that the purpose of education is to create well-rounded people capable of thinking deeply, making reasoned decisions, and socializing across cultural divides, in an increasingly complicated world. I feel the best way to ensure that students have these skills throughout their lives is to develop them in the classroom with authentic assessments in which students solve real-world problems. Then, to prepare for these types of assessments, corresponding instruction must rely on powerful teaching methods like inquiry and cooperative learning lessons in which students are central. 

References

Cohen, L. (1999, January 1). Educational Philosophies Self-Assessment and Scoring Guide. Retrieved May 4, 2015, from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/selfassessment.html

National Council for the Social Studies. “Executive Summary.” Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies

National Council for the Social Studies. “Principles of Teaching and Learning.” Expectations of excellence: curriculum standards for social studies.