Education in Action: Incorporating Pragmatism and

PBL in the Classrooms of Today

ED 4380 & ED 4391

Wyatt Sehn
July 30th 2017
 One of the most exciting aspects about the field of Education is the diversity that exists

from classroom to classroom. Even within the same grade level, at the same school, there are

teachers incorporating neo-traditional methods in order to create classroom climates that attend

to students unique needs. My personal philosophy of education takes a very similar effect.

Students are constantly being told to celebrate their differences, yet traditional methods of

education brush over instruction using a single stroke. The purpose of this works is to establish a

working philosophy of education based upon the Pragmatic Philosophy in accompaniment with

Project Based Learning (PBL). By evaluating the usefulness of both these practices, in

accompaniment with their potential benefits in the classroom, the goal is to answer the question;

How can Pragmatism coincide with Critical Inquiry to create the most effective learning

environment for the students of the future?

As a philosophy, Pragmatists believe that we learn best through applying our

experiences and thoughts to problems as they arise (Cohen, 1999). Moreover, the value of

education doesnt come from final assignments or grade point averages. Rather, it is the process

of testing existing knowledge against new findings, or experimenting with the unknown to create

new knowledge all together. When one discusses the nature of Pragmatism and education, the

work of John Dewey must be brought to the forefront. With published works in 1929, 1933 and

1938, Deweys contributions have compelled teachers to re-examine their practices in order to

create classrooms that are more learner friendly. Dewey constructed the University of Chicago

Laboratory School, an experimental institution where students of all ages were subject to

cooperative and mutually useful living through the activity method which involves, play,

construction, nature study and self-expression (Gutek, 2008, p. 80). This idea of teaching

proactive life skills to aid with education is a notion similar to those featured in critical inquiry,
and these similarities will be discussed in greater depth in the work to come. Keeping this in

mind, the significance of Deweys practice is how he constructed a framework that catered to the

uniqueness of each childs needs and abilities by developing the whole child through inquiry and

exploration.

The value of Critical Inquiry and PBL is something that is just beginning to gain traction

in classrooms across the globe. Critical Inquiry is made up of several processes that help

breakdown the greater outcomes into user friendly guidelines. For example, there are features of

inquiry which help facilitate the early stages of inquiry. These features include focusing on an

issue, carefully examining the issue, and using this progression to come to a reasoned judgement.

Similarly, Critical Inquiry involves a significant amount of reflection. Participants reflect on

what they know, what they have learned through research and experimentation, and how this

information either conflicts or coincides to create new meaning. This is significant because

unlike Realists and Rationalists, Pragmatists believe that reality is constantly changing.

Therefore, by incorporating reflection through PBL, the two practices mesh well together to

create ultimate meaning for all those involved. The ultimate goal behind PBL is to encourage

student learning via hands on interaction, rather than through disengaged regurgitation. By using

PBL to facilitate the inquiry process, students are taught lifelong qualities such as cooperation

and fair-mindedness. These features, found in the spirit of inquiry, are similar to those Dewey

attempted to instill in his students at the University of Chicago Laboratory School. While the

importance of Critical Thinking develops through doing, it is also is important to discuss the

theological nuances that ensure the process works as designed. For example, concepts such as

Conformation Bias, and Ideological Fixity can stand in the way of the spirit of inquiry, therefore

rendering PBL ineffective. Moreover, an interesting connection between Pragmatism and PBL
can be established. Pragmatists believe that to determine the validity of an idea, its

consequences need to be empirical verifiable in human experience (Gutek, 2008, p. 75). This

is valuable for our purposes because we can see how Pragmatism and PBL go hand in hand. In

order to determine the validity and accuracy of an idea, the inquiry process facilitates an

investigative function that will result in a reason judgement one that satisfies the motivation

behind Pragmatism and PBL.

In order to strengthen the parallels between Pragmatism and Critical Inquiry, it is

important to evaluate the several major components of education. Arguably the most important

aspect for our consideration is the teaching and learning methods. Traditional hierarchal

structures of knowledge holder and receiver would have little effectiveness when attempting to

implement Pragmatism and PBL. Rather, the teacher fulfills the role of a facilitator, while the

student accepts the responsibility of active participant. It is a common misinterpretation to view

Pragmatism and Critical Inquiry as a student-led approach, when rather it is still largely teacher

expedited. To clarify, the teacher needs to create an environment that supports inquiry. After

discussing the several components that make PBL effective, it is then the teachers role to

understand the needs and passions of each individual student, and create a learning space most

suitable for such. Therefore, while Pragmatism and PBL largely depends on students being

actively engaged, if the teacher has not set the classroom up for success, then the desired

outcomes cannot be achieved. On a similar note, the student-teacher relationship is one of the

most important components to using a Pragmatic Philosophy to incorporate PBL. This

relationship is based upon mutual understanding and cooperation. The teachers needs to take an

active role in understanding each student in order to assess the classrooms multiple intelligences

and how to best accompany this. Most importantly, the student-teacher relationship is founded
on a democratic mutualism. To clarify, the needs of one party cannot take precedence over

another. If implemented properly, a Pragmatic classroom that incorporated PBL will have

responsible students who are accountable for their actions, yet disciplined enough to abide by

teacher expectations. Likewise, teachers have the confidence to let students work freely in order

to truly make meaning through experience, while still meeting the desired curricular outcomes.

When it comes to knowledge and curriculum, both Pragmatism and PBL take a unique

approach in order to assure the students are learning the desired content. However, this again

relates back to the importance of student-teacher relationships because there needs to be open

and honest communication between the two. When this channel of communication has been

established, the needs of each can be expressed freely in order to reach a reasonable judgement

most appropriate for all involved. For example, if the students are assigned a research project the

student may begin by using books as their main source of information. However, after several

weeks, the student is struggling to formulate their ideas and create meaningful engagement. This

would be the time where communication can reset scenario to benefit all involved. Perhaps the

student would be better apt by engaging with historical videos thereby appeasing their auditory

and visual senses. If this were the case, the teacher should be more than willing to accompany

their request. However, the students will also have to understand they will face stricter deadlines

as the teacher needs to communicate that they require evidence of understanding on behalf of the

student in order to meet contractual obligations. With this in mind, the approach to knowledge

and curriculum should be viewed as a consolidated effort between Pragmatism and PBL. One

that allows for individual exploration and creating meaning in unique ways, yet is also subject to

some obligatory constraints such as standardized testing and other mediums that attempt to bring

together major topics and concepts.

 Arguably the most subjective component of this thesis is the concept of assessment when

it comes to implementing PBL with a guiding Pragmatic Philosophy. The concept of evaluating

students based off their experiences is quite subjective and would take time and effort to

implement. However, if done successfully, it could be largely beneficial for a few reasons. For

starters, it would shine a whole new light on the purpose of assessment. Rather than asking

students to prove their knowledge, we would be asking them to take initiative and learn new

material not for the sake of letter grades, but because they want to become more engaged with

the world around them. Additionally, assessment under a PBL model doesnt fault students who

use creative methods to come to a reasonable judgement. Rather, it promotes inquiry,

understanding all sides of the argument, and evaluating the pros and cons that each side has to

offer. In my opinion, this form of assessment would be far more beneficial to promoting lifelong

learners. The entire mindset for students would change, once again relating back to the student-

teacher relationship. Rather than viewing them as strenuous and mandatory, assessment can be a

chance for the students to show how they have created meaning through guided interaction and

facilitated learning.

In conclusion, the purpose of this works was to attempt to answer the question; How can

Pragmatism coincide with Critical Inquiry to create the most effective learning environment for

the students of the future? It is important to note that while this appears to be an ideal scenario

for both learners and teachers, the success rate is bound to differ from classroom to classroom.

Not all teachers will feel comfortable engaging in this practice, and not all students will excel the

same way others might. Likewise, just as teaching is an imperfect science, this is only a working

copy of my philosophy of education. There are bound to be students and experiences in the

future that alter and influence my current perspective. For the time being, however, I believe that
a Pragmatic approach to education that incorporates PBL and Critical Inquiry is the most

effective way to teach not only the minds, but the hearts of all students.
 References

Cohen, L.M., (1999). Section III: Philosophical Perspectives in Education. OSU School

of Education. Retrieved from: https://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP2.html

Gutek, G.L. (2008). New Perspectives on Philosophy and Education. New York, NY:

Pearson.