Citation:
Kenneth R. Conklin, "The Relevance Problem in Philosophy of Education," Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana, May, 1967, 436 pages. Abstracted in DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS, Section A, Vol. 28, No. 8, Feb.,1968, pp. 3065A - 3066A.
================
THE RELEVANCE PROBLEM IN PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION
(Order No. 68-1726)
Kenneth Robert Conklin, Ph.D.
University of Illinois, 1967
What is the nature of the relationship between philosophy and education? What are the rules for making legitimate connections between the two? Does a given philosophical theory have consequences as prescriptions for education? Does a given educational theory or practice have philosophical presuppositions? If so, what are the correct ways of determining them? Can the same position in education be supported by conflicting philosophies? Can the same philosophy be used to generate conflicting prescriptions for education? Can philosophical theory adequately guide educational practice when action must be taken to deal with a novel problem whose urgency or complexity leaves insufficient time for adequate reflection? Can philosophical theory guide the unforeseen moment-to-moment activities of the educational practitioner (teacher, administrator) even though no conscious thought is given to philosophy? By what mechanisms, if any, does theoretical training affect practical conduct? All these questions are elaborations of a single question: What are the properties of relevance between philosophy and education?
Every philosophy is based on one of two polar theories of relevance. According to the "structure theory," relevance is intrinsic, exists a priori, and is discovered. According to the "game theory," relevance is created by human action and stipulated by convention. This dispute over the nature of relevance is reflected in every type of relevance: logical, causal, correlational, aesthetic, teleological. It is impossible to determine what is relevant to the defense or criticism of any theory, including a theory of relevance, except by intuitive discovery or arbitrary stipulation; thus, the problem of relevance is a
fundamental problem.
The philosophy of education involves studying and solving the problems of education by using philosophical concepts and methods. The relations between philosophy and education are different in various stages of problem-solving. The first stage is to locate a problem in the network of problems and data confronting the investigator: here, four types of educational
problems are identified, and their interrelationships discussed.
Next, the problem must be studied and alternative hypotheses proposed for solving it: empirical, analytic, and normative methods are studied as used in the science of education and the philosophy of education. One must then weigh all factors to decide what should be done; the decision must be carried
out, and all steps must be re-evaluated in view of the consequences of action: the discipline "education" is studied as the record of previous investigations, decisions, actions, consequences, and re-evaluations. The fragmentation of problem-solving into stages does not occur when action must be taken as soon as a problem is noticed or when a problem is dealt
with so skillfully as not to be noticed at all.
Logic is the study of relations among statements. Accordingly, the logical relevance between philosophy and education is the joining of statements in philosophy to statements in education. Prescriptions for education may be deduced from philosophic systems, and educational policies or actions may
[end page 3065A / Begin page 3066A]
be linked to philosophic presuppositions. Although a computerized axiomatic approach does not seem possible, chains of syllogisms are feasible links. Philosophic statements are also used as models, metaphors, operational definitions, and slogans for educational programs.
Non-logical relevance between philosophy and education is important: philosophic statements and educational actions are correlated as verbalizations and manifestations of an individual's personality dispositions or of the culture's ethos. Philosophic purposes are fulfilled by educational actions which cohere with them in aesthetic gestalten.
Mystical intuitionism synthesizes the polar theories of relevance; it also synthesizes and accounts for the logical and non-logical properties of relevance between philosophy and education. Polanyi's theory of tacit knowing, Broudy's theory of the uses of knowledge, and Zen epistemology help formulate the synthesis.
Microfilm $5.65; Xerography $20.05. 444 pages.
** Note by Ken Conklin: Those were the prices in 1966. Probably not today.
[end of abstract]
-----------------------
For three academic years -- Fall 1964 through Spring 1967 -- Kenneth Conklin was a Ph.D. candidate under the direction of Professor Harry S. Broudy at the University of Illinois, Urbana. Professor Broudy was Conklin's dissertation advisor, and also was Conklin's supervisor as graduate teaching assistant and research assistant. Following is a biography of Professor Broudy.
http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1802/Broudy-Harry-S-1905-1998.html
Harry S. Broudy (1905-1998)
education philosophy aesthetic schooling
Relatively late in a career that spanned seven decades of academic writing and public speaking, Harry S. Broudy became in his time a prominent philosopher of education in the United States. He achieved this status in part by writing and speaking to many audiences about popular educational debates of the day, including the purposes and practices of general education, teacher education, aesthetic education, and democratic education in a post–World War II society.
Broudy was born in Filipowa, Poland, in 1905 and in 1912 came to the United States with his family, settling in Milford, Massachusetts. Broudy attended Massachusetts Institute of Technology before graduating from Boston University in 1929 with a bachelor's degree in Germanic literature and philosophy. At Harvard, where he completed his master's and doctorate of philosophy degrees, Broudy read Heidegger and Kierkegaard in German and Bergson in French. Studying with William E. Hocking, C. I. Lewis, Alfred North Whitehead, and John Wild, among others, Broudy completed his Ph.D. dissertation, "The Metaphysical Presuppositions of Existence," in 1935.
After a brief period working in the Massachusetts Commonwealth Department of Education, Broudy began his academic career in 1937, teaching the philosophy of education at North Adams State Teachers College. From there he moved to Framingham State Teachers College in 1949, then on to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1957. Although he had already achieved national stature in philosophy of education circles and had become president of the Philosophy of Education Society in 1953, his move to Illinois marked the beginning of a three-decade period in which Broudy's work was embraced by many audiences with a range of educational concerns.
Though he formally retired from the University of Illinois in 1974, Broudy continued teaching, advising students, serving on university committees, and writing. By the time of his last book, The Uses of Schooling (1988), Broudy had accepted many invitations to speak on various subjects in education, received three honorary doctoral degrees, had become a member of the National Academy of Education and a fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University, and served as advisory board member and senior faculty member of the Getty Institute for Educators on the Visual Arts. In 1992, the Journal of Aesthetic Education devoted an entire issue to Broudy's contributions.
One remarkable feature of this extraordinary record of achievement and prominence is that Broudy accomplished it without aligning himself with successive trends in education or philosophy. When he completed his dissertation on existentialism in 1935, most philosophers of education were engaged in one or another brand of pragmatism. In the 1940s and 1950s, when early-twentieth-century ideas of differentiated curriculum were being solidified into a three-track schooling system that prepared children and youth for different places in American society, Broudy tried to articulate a democratic logic and practice of a common curriculum that was based on a general education for all students. When analytic philosophy began to dominate the fields of philosophy and philosophy of education in the 1960s and 1970s, Broudy's research program remained grounded in a classical realist epistemology and an appeal to what he saw as the logic of democracy.
Democracy demanded, he believed, a common general education for all, based on the academic disciplines, which required different ways of knowing the world and of verifying that knowledge. As Donald Vandenberg put it, "Broudy consistently distinguished between two questions, What is good knowledge? And what is knowledge good for? He relegated the first to specialists in the various disciplines and the second to define his own research program" (p. 7). Broudy's concerns about a common education in a democratic society were reflected throughout his career, beginning with Building a Philosophy of Education (1954) and extending through Democracy and Excellence in American Secondary Education (with B. Othanel Smith and Joe R. Burnett) (1964), The Real World of the Public Schools (1972), Truth and Credibility: The Citizen's Dilemma (1981) and The Uses of Schooling (1988). The Uses of Schooling is a concise, eloquent summation of Broudy's educational thought. It contends that the criteria used in determining and justifying general or liberal studies in schooling are misconceived and misapplied because the full range of the purpose of education in democratic life is not well understood. Understanding the uses of schooling requires attention to not only the usual "replicative" and "applicative" criteria of use, which attend to whether students can replicate and apply what they have learned; but also the "associative" and "interpretive" uses of knowledge as well. These uses require an "allusionary base" of information, understanding, and values, derived from the disciplines that inform experience with ideas that help each person represent predicaments and problems symbolically. Equipping each person with these symbolic tools, Broudy believed, should be an essential aim of schools in a democratic society.
Broudy's regard for the associative and interpretive functions of schooling is also related to other bodies of his considerable authorship. For example, Aesthetic Education in a Technological Society (1962) and Enlightened Cherishing: An Essay in Aesthetic Education (1972) illustrate how aesthetic studies, like general studies, tend to fall into the "nice, but not necessary" category of curriculum policy formation. Broudy pointed out that aesthetic studies provide the student with associative and interpretive experiences and develop the capacities for interpretation and informed criticism, as well as a richer vocabulary for self-expression.
Similarly, beginning with Case Studies for the Foundations of American Education (1960) and ending with "Case Studies–How and Why," Broudy for much of his career infused his extensive writing on teacher education with a vision of the use of cases in professional preparation. The cases Broudy described were designed for stimulating association, interpretation, and criticism, not simply for replication and application. Broudy believed that, compared to other professions, the absence of widely used case studies in teacher preparation was a considerable limitation on the profession.
It is likely that Broudy would be regarded in the early twenty-first century as a "public intellectual": one who sought to inform the social and educational debates of his day from a scholarly perspective, framed in language accessible to the nonspecialist.
See also: ART EDUCATION, subentries on PREPARATION OF TEACHERS, SCHOOL; PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BROUDY, HARRY S. 1961. Building a Philosophy of Education (1954), 2nd edition. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
BROUDY, HARRY S. 1988. The Uses of Schooling. New York: Routledge.
BROUDY, HARRY S.; PARSONS, MICHAEL J.; SNOOK, IVAN A.; and SZOKE, RONALD D. 1967. Philosophy of Education: An Organization of Topics and Selected Sources. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
BROUDY, HARRY S.; SMITH, B. OTHANEL; and BURNETT, JOE R. 1964. Democracy and Excellence in American Secondary Education. Chicago: Rand McNally.
JOURNAL OF AESTHETIC EDUCATION (Special Issue). 1992. "Essays in Honor of Harry S. Broudy." Journal of Aesthetic Education 26 (4).
MARGONIS, FRANK. 1986. "Harry Broudy's Defense of General Education." M.A. thesis, University of Illinois.
SYKES, GARY, and BIRD, TOM. 1992. "Teacher Education and the Case Idea." In Review of Research in Education, ed. Gerald Grant. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
VANDENBERG, DONALD. 1992. "Harry Broudy and Education for a Democratic Society." Journal of Aesthetic Education 26 (4):5-20.
Author of this online biography: STEVE TOZER
==================
Send comments or questions to:
Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com
You may now look for another scholarly article published by Ken Conklin before he came permanently to Hawai'i
https://www.angelfire.com/planet/conklinpubsbeforehaw
OR
VISIT KEN CONKLIN'S VERY LARGE WEBSITE ON THE TOPIC OF HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY
(c) Copyright 2012 for this website, by Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. All rights reserved
