教育--是多面手的仆人,还是教育本身的目的?处理有关教育目的和工具主义的困惑

IF 0.9 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Orit Schwarz-Franco
{"title":"教育--是多面手的仆人,还是教育本身的目的?处理有关教育目的和工具主义的困惑","authors":"Orit Schwarz-Franco","doi":"10.1007/s11217-023-09916-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Should education serve external goals, or should it be non-instrumental? In this paper, I recognize a tension between these two views with respect to the question of the end and the means in education, and I suggest conceptual and practical ways to handle this tension. The paper comprises two parts: the first part discusses the problem, and the second part offers solutions. To expose the problem, I present a brief overview of the opposing views of purposiveness versus anti-instrumentalism in education, based on old inspirations and new manifestations of each, and I present two examples of current theories that carry this tension as an inner contradiction. Additionally, I argue these theoretical tensions lead to professional confusions and practical dilemmas among teachers. In search of solutions, I lean on current theoretical arguments to reconcile the contradictions and offer ways to integrate the two views into one pedagogical approach. Finally, I draw a conceptual model that turns the tensions and confusions into a more reasonable complexity that educators can handle in their theoretical thinking and accommodate in their practical choices in school. My conclusions lead to a re-justified commitment to education for democracy, and to teachers’ autonomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":47069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Philosophy and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Education - Servant of Many Masters or an End in Itself? Handling Confusions Around Purpose and Instrumentalism in Education\",\"authors\":\"Orit Schwarz-Franco\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11217-023-09916-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Should education serve external goals, or should it be non-instrumental? In this paper, I recognize a tension between these two views with respect to the question of the end and the means in education, and I suggest conceptual and practical ways to handle this tension. The paper comprises two parts: the first part discusses the problem, and the second part offers solutions. To expose the problem, I present a brief overview of the opposing views of purposiveness versus anti-instrumentalism in education, based on old inspirations and new manifestations of each, and I present two examples of current theories that carry this tension as an inner contradiction. Additionally, I argue these theoretical tensions lead to professional confusions and practical dilemmas among teachers. In search of solutions, I lean on current theoretical arguments to reconcile the contradictions and offer ways to integrate the two views into one pedagogical approach. Finally, I draw a conceptual model that turns the tensions and confusions into a more reasonable complexity that educators can handle in their theoretical thinking and accommodate in their practical choices in school. My conclusions lead to a re-justified commitment to education for democracy, and to teachers’ autonomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Philosophy and Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Philosophy and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-023-09916-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Philosophy and Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-023-09916-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

教育应该服务于外部目标,还是应该是非工具性的?在本文中,我认识到在教育的目的和手段问题上,这两种观点之间存在着紧张关系,并提出了处理这种紧张关系的概念和实践方法。本文由两部分组成:第一部分讨论问题,第二部分提出解决方案。为了揭示问题,我简要概述了教育中目的论与反工具论的对立观点,它们基于各自的旧启发和新表现,我还举了两个当前理论的例子,它们都将这种紧张关系作为内在矛盾。此外,我认为这些理论张力导致了教师的专业困惑和实际困境。为了寻求解决方案,我借助当前的理论论据来调和矛盾,并提出了将两种观点整合为一种教学方法的方法。最后,我提出了一个概念模型,将矛盾和困惑转化为更合理的复杂性,使教育工作者在理论思考中能够处理,在学校的实际选择中能够适应。我的结论使我们对民主教育和教师自主权的承诺有了新的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Education - Servant of Many Masters or an End in Itself? Handling Confusions Around Purpose and Instrumentalism in Education

Should education serve external goals, or should it be non-instrumental? In this paper, I recognize a tension between these two views with respect to the question of the end and the means in education, and I suggest conceptual and practical ways to handle this tension. The paper comprises two parts: the first part discusses the problem, and the second part offers solutions. To expose the problem, I present a brief overview of the opposing views of purposiveness versus anti-instrumentalism in education, based on old inspirations and new manifestations of each, and I present two examples of current theories that carry this tension as an inner contradiction. Additionally, I argue these theoretical tensions lead to professional confusions and practical dilemmas among teachers. In search of solutions, I lean on current theoretical arguments to reconcile the contradictions and offer ways to integrate the two views into one pedagogical approach. Finally, I draw a conceptual model that turns the tensions and confusions into a more reasonable complexity that educators can handle in their theoretical thinking and accommodate in their practical choices in school. My conclusions lead to a re-justified commitment to education for democracy, and to teachers’ autonomy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Studies in Philosophy and Education is an international peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the philosophical, theoretical, normative and conceptual problems and issues in educational research, policy and practice. As such, Studies in Philosophy and Education is not the expression of any one philosophical or theoretical school or cultural tradition. Rather, the journal promotes exchange and collaboration among philosophers, philosophers of education, educational and social science researchers, and educational policy makers throughout the world. Contributions that address this wide audience, while clearly presenting a philosophical argument and reflecting standards of academic excellence, are encouraged. Topics may range widely from important methodological issues in educational research as shaped by the philosophy of science to substantive educational policy problems as shaped by moral and social and political philosophy and educational theory. In addition, single issues of the journal are occasionally devoted to the critical discussion of a special topic of educational and philosophical importance. There is also a frequent Reviews and Rejoinders’ section, featuring book review essays with replies from the authors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信