As someone entering the teaching profession, it is important to understand my own personal pedagogy. Through research and introspection, I have defined my own ontology, epistemology, and axiology. I have struggled to situate myself philosophically for two main reasons. The first being that my views have shifted drastically over the course of a few months, and the second is that I agree with some small aspect of almost every philosophy I have encountered, but at the same time disagree with a significant portion. These partially accepted doctrines include Conservatism, Constructivism, Humanism, and Behaviourism. I rely more heavily upon Existentialism and Perennialism, and find my self particularly drawn to Montessori and Reggio-inspired philosophies.

Ontology – Learning Helps us Survive and Thrive

Learning is fundamentally important because it facilitates the improvement of a person’s life. To the individual, learning is a requirement from the moment of birth for the basic aspects of survival; however, optional learning, such as that in the academic fields, is also beneficial because it improves the circumstances of one’s life. For the collective, learning signifies progress and improved social circumstances. Additionally, joint benefit may be derived from the intellectual development of one person, whether their work is considered significant at the time or not, as their knowledge will likely create an advantage for themselves or others in some way. It is also likely that the learning will contribute to a field of knowledge, and contribution to the field adds to the collective body of knowledge that humanity possesses. This addition of ideas then informs the education of new innovators and thinkers that will inevitably discover even greater advancements, which consequently increases the overall knowledge of humanity again.  This seemingly perpetual escalation of collective knowledge emphasizes the extended impact that each person may produce and why the learning of every individual is important to the collective. Additionally, the potentially exponential generation of knowledge is important because society constantly faces new problems, which require inventive solutions. Without fresh ideas and innovations, the human species would stagnate and eventually succumb to the many obstacles that threaten our existence. Therefore, learning is necessary for survival and advancement not just for the individual, but also the collective.

Epistemology – Learning is Process and Subject

In any situation, it is probably more important that a person learns how to expand their own intellect and further their own education than any specific subject material. Essentially, a person must understand that learning is an ongoing, lifelong prospect and should be engaged in regularly, even after school is finished. While inspiring “a life-long love of learning” (Key Elements 2017) is a worthy goal, producing a competent individual who is confident that they are able to find and learn the information and skills that they need to succeed seems more important and realistic. For example, even though learning from a specified, rigid curriculum may enhance success in one area, today’s economy and job field is changing rapidly and a potential employee needs to be adaptable. Therefore, being able to learn in any area is more important than extensive learning in one field. As a result, becoming proficient in the process of learning itself is indispensable.

Axiology – Every Person and Their Place

Every learner and the people in their support network, including parents, family members, teachers, and support staff should have a say in the learning. With advancements in the field of psychology, the growing understanding of the components that create positive self-image, innovations of the ‘new’ curriculum, and emphasis on teaching the whole child, there are few relevant arguments against every student being able to view themselves positively in the content and process of their learning. Learners and parents should be confident that they will see their cultures represented, as well. It is particularly important that Aboriginal cultures are emphasized in their place of origin because that place is directly connected to the cultural, and therefore personal, identity of First Nations groups and individuals. The Aboriginal culture of an area should be present, if not prevalent, in the education of that area.

For this reason, place should be represented in the learning, too. For example, in Canada, there should be significant First Nations aspects in the education system, arguably more than Standard 9 and the First People’s Principles of Learning dictate. I understand that there are people who would be vehemently opposed to this idea, but I feel like generations of over-emphasis of colonized worldviews contribute to most of these arguments and by their nature make themselves obsolete. Ideally, place would not need representation in education because it would already be represented in the place and society where it should exist in abundance, but because in so many cases (like Canada) it does not, place should be represented in education. I think that my proposed representation of learning would show and promote the values of inclusivity with individualism, diversity with a sense of belonging, and kindness with accountability. Additionally, academic subjects should be combined whenever possible, so that many learning outcomes can be met with less actual work from the student. Some may argue that this promotes laziness; however, in actuality, the practice would show value for efficiency and innovation, particularly if the student is allowed to design the assignment. The way that courses are delivered should be changed significantly to reflect what will be valued once a student leaves school.

Philosophy – A Process of Thought on Education

In an ideal world, I would be a conservatist, because I would love to focus on education without all the other aspects of life getting in the way. I think there is a certain value in what a person knows, and people should have a strong understanding of historical and classic knowledge on which to build a foundation for an intellectual career. Schools should function to provide students with an academic education, as they were originally intended, because other forms of education would ideally be acquired elsewhere (Lynch 2016). As I understand it, Conservatism, in its ideal form, would be a simplification of education. However, we live in a far from ideal world, and it is inescapable that emotional, financial, societal, and other issues will interfere, so out of necessity these issues must then become part of the education, and the curriculum must reflect that changing nature of society. Additionally, not everyone has the luxury of choosing an intellectual career, so education should prepare all students for the future, not just the ones who will obtain university degrees.

I agree with Constructivism in that throughout all aspects of life “the learner actively constructs his or her own understandings of reality through interaction with objects, events, and people in the environment, and reflecting on these interactions” (LeoNora 1999). Indeed, constructive learning seems to take place from birth, building on instinct, and being influenced by familial and parental influences. Where learning progressions are somewhat linear, a learner’s previous education can to a great extent determine what they are capable of learning next (LeoNora 1999). An example of this would be a child learning to stand before they walk. However, where the learning trajectory can be more horizontal, or even multi-dimensional, previous experience could have little impact on what a student is capable of learning. An example of this is seen as children develop fine and gross motor skills at different rates and in different orders.

I also endorse the main Humanist idea that all people are essentially good, but disagree with the idea that they become tainted over time (Zucca-Scott 2010). I believe that all people are good and want to be recognized and valued as such during all stages of their lives. However, this philosophy feels a little like a trap in that if a teacher is struggling with student behaviours, the fault can be easily laid with the teacher, for not preserving the goodness of the students. Similarly, Behaviourism might be an easy way to get students to do what a teacher wants, but it seems like a bit of a fairy tale solution. I wonder at the actual effectiveness of a philosophy that purports that “behaviour is determined by others, rather than by our own free will” (LeoNora 1999). Personally, I believe that everyone has a choice in every situation, so even though I like the idea of positive reinforcement to promote desired behaviours (LeoNora 1999), I still think that everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions.

For this reason, I advocate almost wholeheartedly for Existentialism, which states that the “nature of reality 
 is subjective, and lies within the individual” (LeoNora 1999). This makes sense to me because each person perceives and remembers differently, and those different cognitions effectively create different realities, each specific to the person who experiences them. However, the idea that the “physical world has no inherent meaning outside of human existence” (LeoNora 1999) seems decidedly selfish. There are other beings in the physical world, many living without human interaction even though they contribute to the global ecosystem, from which all benefit. Personal choice and standards are extremely significant, and arguably more important and influential than control and external pressures (LeoNora 1999). Additionally the focus “on human potential and the quest for personal meaning” and “values clarification [as] an outgrowth” ((LeoNora 1999) resonates with me as someone who wants to teach secondary years because I feel that part of the teenage experience is often finding and developing a personal sense of identity and finding a ‘reason to live’ or ‘meaning of life.’

While I agree with Perenniealism that “Humans are rational beings,” I take issue with the idea that “their minds need to be developed” (LeoNora 1999). Rather, I would say that humans naturally develop their own minds, from the time of infancy, through curiosity, trial and error, and other methods. Therefore, learning is innate, and the development and direction of that learning is the task of the parent, teacher and extended community. Thus, it is that I find myself most comfortable with the Montessori and Reggio-inspired perspectives. Both philosophical approaches “focus on the education of the whole child” (Key Elements 2017), and this seems particularly relevant regarding trauma informed practices. It is important to recognize that learning may be different for different students, and that every accomplishment should be appreciated.

For Montessori, the focus is “helping each child attain self-mastery and independence” and emphasizing “that students be given autonomy to engage freely with their learning environment” (Koh and Frick 2010). It makes sense that allowing students to make choices in a controlled environment will enhance their ability to make sound judgement calls in the wider world, as well as developing their confidence in doing so and sense of personal responsibility about the impact of those choices. It is also understandable that students who get to choose topics that interest them, choose to collaborate or not, and choose how they will show their learning will be more invested in the learning and therefore more willing to do the work in the first place. The experience of agency is inherently rewarding.

In contrast to Montessori, Reggio-inspired learning is not a linear or predetermined curricular progression (Key Elements 2017). As I understand it, this allows for even more freedom in the pace and content of learning. While the emphasis for group work seems over-bearing, encouraging learners to collaborate in as many aspects of their education as possible to form relationships with educators and peers is commendable.

I am particularly fascinated by the idea of Multiple Intelligences, where “Gardner defined intelligence as ‘the ability to solve problems or create products that are valued within one or more cultural settings’” (Vardin 2003).  This shows that being smart is not about knowing certain information, or even being able to convey that information, but rather the ability to use one’s knowledge in a way that is beneficial. The statement is surprising in its similarity to part of my epistemology, and I feel like I need to explore this theory more. Additionally, the concept of The Hundred Languages of Children, by Loris Malaguzzi, where “children are natural communicators, and thus should be encouraged to communicate through whatever means they can” (Key Elements 2017) resonates with me.

Children love to communicate when they are young, but this tendency seems to decrease with time, making them less sure of themselves, and less able to connect with people. However, I have seen high school students brighten and seem to ‘come alive’ when someone listens to them.  I think there is always hope and a philosophy that recognizes the potential and value of what students can contribute is worth further inquiry. There are so many more philosophies that I have yet to explore, and I know that my thoughts will change as I encounter new ideas, but they will all help me to form an understanding of how I can best serve the learners in my classroom.

 

 

References:

“Key Elements of the Reggio Emilia Approach.” The Compass School, 27 Dec. 2019, www.thecompassschool.com/blog/key-elements-reggio-emilia-approach/.

Koh, Joyce H L, and Theodore W Frick. “Implementing Autonomy Support: Insights from a Montessori Classroom.” International Journal of Education, vol. 2, no. 2, ser. 3, 2010. 3, pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4fb7/aeb95a1c642a3f022631a0caa364f7ef1641.pdf.

LeoNora, Cohen M. “Philosophical Perspectives in Education.” PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVES IN EDUCATION, Oregon State University, 1999, oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP3.html.

Lynch, Matthew. “What You Need to Know: 5 Ideologies of Educational Philosophy.” The Edvocate, Pedagogue, 2016, www.theedadvocate.org/need-know-5-ideologies-educational-philosophy/.

Vardin, Patricia A. “Montessori and Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences.” Montessori LIFE, 2003, search.proquest.com/openview/f362a68561aef80f3739575c1d72fcde/1.pdf?p q-origsite=gscholar&cbl=33245.

Zucca-Scott, Laura. “Know Thyself: The Importance of Humanism in Education.” International Education, vol. 40, no. 1, 2010, pp. 32–38., trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1183&context=internationaleducation.