Education theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Education theory seeks to know, understand and prescribe educational policy and practice.
Education theory includes many topics, such as pedagogy, andragogy, curriculum, learning, and
education policy, organization and leadership. Educational thought is informed by many
disciplines, such as history, philosophy, sociology, and psychology.

For example, a cultural theory of education considers how education occurs through the totality
of culture, including prisons, households, and religious institutions as well as schools.[1][2] Other
examples are the behaviorist theory of education that comes from educational psychology and
the functionalist theory of education that comes from sociology of education.[3]

The earliest known attempts to understand education in Europe were by classical Greek
philosophers and sophists, but there is also evidence of contemporary (or even preceding)
discussions among Arabic, Indian, and Chinese scholars.[citation needed]

Contents
[hide]

1 Educational thought
2 Normative theories of education
o 2.1 Educational philosophies
o 2.2 Curriculum theory
o 2.3 Feminist Educational Theory
2.3.1 Background
2.3.2 Opposition
2.3.3 Support
3 Descriptive theories of education
o 3.1 Curriculum theory
o 3.2 Instructional theory
o 3.3 The nature of the learner and of learning
o 3.4 Sociology of education
o 3.5 Educational anthropology
4 Educational theorists
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References
8 External links

Educational thought[edit]
See also: Philosophy of education and History of Education

Educational thought is not necessarily concerned with the construction of theories as much as the
"reflective examination of educational issues and problems from the perspective of diverse
disciplines."[4]

Normative theories of education[edit]

Normative theories of education provide the norms, goals, and standards of education.[5]

Educational philosophies[edit]

Main article: Philosophy of education

"Normative philosophies or theories of education may make use of the results of [philosophical
thought] and of factual inquiries about human beings and the psychology of learning, but in any
case they propound views about what education should be, what dispositions it should cultivate,
why it ought to cultivate them, how and in whom it should do so, and what forms it should take.
In a full-fledged philosophical normative theory of education, besides analysis of the sorts
described, there will normally be propositions of the following kinds: 1. Basic normative
premises about what is good or right; 2. Basic factual premises about humanity and the world; 3.
Conclusions, based on these two kinds of premises, about the dispositions education should
foster; 4. Further factual premises about such things as the psychology of learning and methods
of teaching; and 5. Further conclusions about such things as the methods that education should
use."[6]

Examples of the purpose of schools include:[7] to develop reasoning about perennial questions, to
master the methods of scientific inquiry, to cultivate the intellect, to create change agents, to
develop spirituality, and to model a democratic society.[8]

Common educational philosophies include: educational perennialism, educational progressivism,

educational essentialism, critical pedagogy, Montessori education, Waldorf education, and
democratic education.

Curriculum theory[edit]

Main article: Curriculum theory

Normative theories of curriculum aim to "describe, or set norms, for conditions surrounding
many of the concepts and constructs" that define curriculum.[9] These normative propositions
differ from those above in that normative curriculum theory is not necessarily untestable.[9] A
central question asked by normative curriculum theory is: given a particular educational
philosophy, what is worth knowing and why? Some examples are: a deep understanding of the
Great Books, direct experiences driven by student interest, a superficial understanding of a wide
range knowledge (e.g. Core knowledge), social and community problems and issues, knowledge
and understanding specific to cultures and their achievements (e.g. African-Centered Education)
Feminist Educational Theory[edit]

Background[edit]

Scholars such as Robyn Wiegman argue that, academic feminism is perhaps the most successful
institutionalizing project of its generation, with more full-time faculty positions and new doctoral
degree programs emerging each year in the field it inaugurated, Women's Studies.[10] Feminist
educational theory stems from four key tenets, supported by empirical data based on surveys of
feminist educators.[11] The first tenet of feminist educational theory is, Creation of participatory
classroom communities.[11] Participatory classroom communities often are smaller classes built
around discussion and student involvement. The second tenet is, Validation of personal
experience.[11] Classrooms in which validation of personal experience occur often are focused
around students providing their own insights and experiences in group discussion, rather than
relying exclusively on the insight of the educator. The third tenant is, Encouragement of social
understanding and activism.[11] This tenet is generally actualized by classrooms discussing and
reading about social and societal aspects that students may not be aware of, along with breeding
student self-efficacy. The fourth and final tenet of feminist education is, Development of critical
thinking skills/open-mindedness.[11] Classrooms actively engaging in this tenant encourage
students to think for themselves and prompt them to move beyond their comfort zones, working
outside the bounds of the traditional lecture-based classroom. Though these tenets at times
overlap, they combine to provide the basis for modern feminist educational theory, and are
supported by a majority of feminist educators.[11]

Feminist educational theory derives from the feminist movement, particularly that of the early
1970s, which prominent feminist bell hooks describes as, a movement to end sexism, sexist
exploitation, and oppression.[12] Academic feminist Robyn Weigman recalls that, In the early
seventies, feminism in the U.S. academy was less an organized entity than a set of practices: an
ensemble of courses listed on bulletin boards often taught for free by faculty and community
leaders.[10] While feminism traditionally existed outside of the institutionalization of schools
(particularly universities), feminist education has gradually taken hold in the last few decades
and has gained a foothold in institutionalized educational bodies. Once fledgling programs have
become departments, and faculty have been hired and tenured with full-time commitments.[10]

Opposition[edit]

Opposition to feminist educational theory comes from both those who oppose feminism in
general and feminists who oppose feminist educational theory in particular. Critics of feminist
educational theory argue against the four basic tenets of the theory, [contesting] both their
legitimacy and their implementation.[11] Lewis Lehrman particularly describes feminist
educational ideology as, 'therapeutic pedagogy' that substitutes an 'overriding' (and
detrimental) value on participatory interaction for the expertise of the faculty (Hoffman).
Lehrman argues that the feminist educational tenets of participatory experience and validation of
person experience hinder education by limiting and inhibiting the educators ability to share his
or her knowledge, learned through years of education and experience.
Others challenge the legitimacy of feminist educational theory, arguing that it is not unique and
is instead a sect of liberatory education. Even feminist educational scholars such as Frances
Hoffmann and Jayne Stake are forced to concede that, feminist pedagogy shared intellectual and
political roots with the movements comprising the liberatory education agenda of the past 30
years.[11] These liberatory attempts at the democratization of classrooms demonstrate a growth
in liberatory education philosophy that some argue feminist educational theory simply
piggybacks off of.

The harshest critiques of feminist educational theory often come from feminists themselves.
Feminist scholar Robyn Wiegman argues against feminist education in her article Academic
Feminism against Itself, arguing that feminist educational ideology has abandoned the
intersectionality of feminism in many cases, and has also focused exclusively on present content
with a singular perspective. Wiegman refers to feminist scholar James Newman's arguments,
centered around the idea that, When we fail to challenge both students and ourselves to
theorize alterity as an issue of change over time as well as of geographic distance, ethnic
difference, and sexual choice, we repress not only the thickness of historical difference itself,
but also our (self) implication in a narrative of progress whose hero(in)es inhabit only the
present.[10] Newman (and Wiegman) believe that this presentist ideology imbued within modern
academic feminism creates an environment breeding antifeminist ideologies, most importantly
an abandonment of the study of difference, integral to feminist ideology. Wiegman believes that
feminist educational theory does a great disservice to the feminist movement, while failing to
instill the critical thinking and social awareness that feminist educational theory is intended to.

Support[edit]

There are countless supporters of feminist education as well, many of whom are educators or
students. Student-turned-professor Becky Ropers-Huilman recounts one of her positive
experiences with feminist education from the student perspective, explaining that she felt
very in charge of [her] own learning experiences, and was not being graded-or degraded...
[while completing] the majority of the assigned work for the class (and additional work that [she]
thought would add to class discussion), all while [regarding] the teachers feedback on [her]
participation as one perspective, rather than the perspective.[13] Ropers experienced a working
feminist classroom that successfully motivated students to go above and beyond, succeeding in
generating self-efficacy and caring in the classroom. When Ropers became a teacher herself, she
embraced feminist educational theory, noting that, [Teachers] have an obligation as the ones
who are vested with an assumed power, even if that power is easily and regularly disrupted, to
assess and address the effects that it is having in our classrooms.[13] Ropers firmly believes that
educators have a duty to address feminist concepts such as the use and flow of power within the
classroom, and strongly believes in the potential of feminist educational theory to create positive
learning experiences for students and teachers as she has personally experienced.

Becky Ropers-Huilman also celebrates the feminist classrooms inclusivity, noting that in a
feminist classroom, in which power is used to care about, for, and with others educational
participants can shape practices aimed at creating an inclusive society that discovers and utilizes
the potential of its actors.[13] Ropers believes that a feminist classroom carries the ability to
greatly influence the society as a whole, promoting understanding, caring, and inclusivity.
Ropers actively engages in feminist education in her classes, focusing on concepts such as active
learning and critical thinking while attempting to demonstrate and engage in caring behavior and
atypical classroom settings, similar to many other feminist educators.

Leading feminist scholar bell hooks argues for the incorporation of feminism into all aspects of
society, including education, in her book Feminism is for Everybody. hooks notes that,
Everything [people] know about feminism has come into their lives thirdhand.[12] hooks
believes that education offers a counter to the, wongminded notion of feminist movement
which implied it was anti-male.[12] hooks cites feminisms negative connotations as major
inhibitors to the spread and adoption of feminist ideologies. However, feminist education has
seen tremendous growth in adoption in the past few decades, despite the negative connotations of
its parent movement.[10]

Descriptive theories of education[edit]

Descriptive theories of education provide descriptions or explanations of the processes of
education.

Curriculum theory[edit]

Main article: Curriculum theory

Descriptive theories of curriculum explain how curricula "benefit or harm all publics it
touches".[14][15]

The term hidden curriculum describes that which is learned simply by being in a learning
environment. For example, a student in a teacher-led classroom is learning submission. The
hidden curriculum is not necessarily intentional.[16]

Instructional theory[edit]

Main article: Pedagogy

See also: Educational technology

Instructional theories focus on the methods of instruction for teaching curricula. Theories include
the methods of: autonomous learning, coyote teaching, inquiry-based instruction, lecture,
maturationism, socratic method, outcome-based education, taking children seriously,
transformative learning

The nature of the learner and of learning[edit]

Main articles: Philosophical anthropology, Philosophy of education, Educational psychology,

and Educational neuroscience

Philosophical Anthropology
Philosophical anthropology is the philosophical study of human nature. In terms of learning,
examples of descriptive theories of the learner are: a mind, soul, and spirit capable of emulating
the Absolute Mind (Idealism); an orderly, sensing, and rational being capable of understanding
the world of things (Realism), a rational being with a soul modeled after God and who comes to
know God through reason and revelation (Neo-Thomism), an evolving and active being capable
of interacting with the environment (Pragmatism), a fundamentally free and individual being
who is capable of being authentic through the making of and taking responsibility for choices
(Existentialism).[17] Philosophical concepts for the process of education include Bildung and
paideia.

Educational Psychology

Educational psychology is an empirical science that provides descriptive theories of how people
learn. Examples of theories of education in psychology are: constructivism, behaviorism,
cognitivism, and motivational theory

Educational Neuroscience

Educational neuroscience is an emerging field that brings together researchers in diverse

disciplines to explore the interactions between biological processes and education.[18]

Sociology of education[edit]

Main article: Sociology of education

The sociology of education is the study of how public institutions and individual experiences
affect education and its outcomes. It is most concerned with the public schooling systems of
modern industrial societies, including the expansion of higher, further, adult, and continuing
education.[19] Examples of theories of education from sociology include: functionalism, conflict
theory, social efficiency, and social mobility.

Educational anthropology[edit]

Main article: Educational anthropology

Educational anthropology is a sub-field of anthropology and is widely associated with the

pioneering work of George Spindler. As the name would suggest, the focus of educational
anthropology is obviously on education, although an anthropological approach to education tends
to focus on the cultural aspects of education, including informal as well as formal education. As
education involves understandings of who we are, it is not surprising that the single most
recognized dictum of educational anthropology is that the field is centrally concerned with
cultural transmission.[20] Cultural transmission involves the transfer of a sense of identity
between generations, sometimes known as enculturation[21] and also transfer of identity between
cultures, sometimes known as acculturation.[22] Accordingly, thus it is also not surprising that
educational anthropology has become increasingly focussed on ethnic identity and ethnic
change.[23][24]
Educational theorists