John Dewey writes that education does not begin or end in the classroom. In his Democracy and Education, he declares that “there is nothing to which growth is relative except more growth; there is nothing to which education is related except more education”(1923, p.60). Dewey offers the general principle of growth as the primary criteria to assess the educational value of experiences. Rather, “every experience should do something to prepare a person for later experiences of a deeper and more expansive quality” (p. 47). Such “growth,” or “reconstruction of experience” contributes both to personal fulfillment, and in a collective sense, toward democracy wherein “free social inquiry is indissolubly wedded to the art of full and free communication” (Dewey, 1927, p. 134).
According to Dewey, (1916), “in directing the activities of the young, society determines its own future in determining that of the young” (p.41). So growth is increasing movements of action toward a later result. Dewey wants to shift the dominant view in order to bring to light a more beneficial understanding of immaturity, which is primary condition of growth. Dewey characterizes immaturity as dependence and plasticity. The positive and constructive aspect of possibility gives the key to understanding these two chief traits of immaturity. This means power to modify actions on the basis of the results of prior experiences, the power to develop dispositions. Dependence being the immature’s need for others and plasticity being the immature’s capacity to learn from their experience. The specific adaptability of an immature creature for growth constitutes his plasticity. It is not a capacity to take on change of form in accord with external pressure. It lies near the pliable elasticity by which some persons take on the color of their surroundings while retaining their own bent. But it is something deeper than this. It is essentially the ability to learn from experience; These aspects endow the immature with a disposition ripe for growth. In other words, an interconnectedness with those around us and a willingness to bend to your surroundings enables the individual to grow absolutely, instead of comparatively, immaturity designates a positive force or ability, the pouter to grow.
Immaturity is a wonderful quality of mind, as Dewey emphasizes, for it is the capacity for further growth; but it’s also characterized by the lack of ability to effectively direct the route of future experiences in ways that do not delimit possibilities for further growth. Constructive autonomous choices result from the quality of early childhood experiences, which shows that those experiences need to encompass participation in the suitable types of associations provided by the society. There are types of participation that impose age, schooling, or certification requirements, at the same time as there are different kinds inside which everyone may also take part, in step with their interests. The standard of growth, as applied to the previous associations calls for that participants be such that their potential for similarly growth, or the capability of that of others, isn’t always harmed or delimited by their participation in those activities. The legitimate authorization for, or restriction from, participation in a society’s activities is ultimately judged with the aid of the standard of potential growth. Dewey (1916) concludes that education should not cease when one leaves school. In fact, according to Dewey (1916) the purpose of school education is to ensure the continuance of education even after school. This is done by organizing the powers that insure growth. Boisvert(1998) points out that Dewey views education as a process of “constant reorganizing or reconstruction of experience’ that is tied to human life and human growth(p.105)
In the following sections, a comprehensive analysis and discussion about Deweys philosophy of education as growth is presented.
According to Johnston, the term ‘growth’ for Dewey has three possible meanings. First, it is a biological or ‘organismic’ capacity that humans and other living things have for developing and adapting to their environment. Second, growth indicates the emerging evaluative or ‘judgmental’ skills that humans display in solving problems. Third, it is ‘experiential’ in the sense that humans can learn from experiences and change their behavior accordingly, thereby cultivating intelligent habits [IE, 106-107). Obviously, these three senses of growth are not mutually exclusive. They overlap considerably, especially under circumstances where humans grow through learning.
For Saito, Deweyan growth has three senses, some of which differ from Johnston’s three meanings. In one sense, growth is development ‘without fixed ends’ or, in the educational context, ‘continuous reorganization of a child’s experience in his or her interaction with the adult world’ [GL, 5). In the second sense, growth is ‘a contingent and endlessly evolving natural process’ [GL15), an account that shares some ground with Johnston’s initial meaning. In Saito’s third and final sense, growth for Dewey involves the intergenerational transmission of ideas, ‘an ongoing interaction between the innovation of the younger generation, on the one hand, and the wisdom and cultural heritage of the older, on the other’ (GL, 5).
What Dewey means is development toward a more desirable state through the realization of the full potentiality of each experience in a consecutive stage of development toward a particular ends-in-view. For that reason “it is imperative that every energy should be bent to making the present experience as rich and as significant as possible” (p. 56). Specifically, growth is essentially the ability to learn from experience; the power to retain from one experience something which is of avail in coping with the difficulties of a later situation.
I accept Dewey’s perception of “Growth” as his arguments are supported by logical and rational evidence. Dewey biographer Alan Ryan also affirms the importance of establishing a standard of growth in order to shift from old to new, aristocratic to democratic, education. What was needed was a criterion of growth-promoting experience, and Dewey found it in the concept of democracy. Increasing complexity of social life requires a longer period of infancy in which to acquire the needed powers; this prolongation of dependence means prolongation of plasticity, or power of acquiring variable and novel modes of control. Hence it provides a further push to social progress. This prolongation is significant from the standpoint of the adult members of the group as well as from that of the young. The presence of dependent and learning beings is a stimulus to nurture and affection. The need for constant continued care was probably a chief means in transforming temporary cohabitations into permanent unions. It certainly was a chief influence in forming habits of affectionate and sympathetic watchfulness; that constructive interest in the well-being of others which is essential to associated life. Intellectually, this moral development meant the introduction of many new objects of attention; it stimulated foresight and planning for the future. Thus there is a reciprocal influence. Increasing complexity of social life requires a longer period of infancy in which to acquire the needed powers; this prolongation of dependence means prolongation of plasticity, or power of acquiring variable and novel modes of control. Hence it provides a further push to social progress.
A particularly central part of Dewey’s theory of action is the idea of habit. Habits are fixed.
Fixing of habits means that something has a fixed hold upon us, instead of our having a fixed hold upon things. Accordingly, learning occurs through the accretion of intelligent habits that reflexively guide human action and inquiry, and thereby enrich the experience.
“A habit means an ability to use natural conditions as means to ends. It is an active control of the environment through control of the organs of action.” (Dewey,1916-48)
Dewey (1916) also refers to habit as habituation. A savage tribe manages to live on a desert plain. It adapts itself. But its adaptation involves a maximum of accepting, tolerating, putting up with things as they are, a maximum of passive acquiescence, and a minimum of active control, of subjection to use. A civilized people enters upon the scene. It also adapts itself. It introduces irrigation; it searches the world for plants and animals that will flourish under such conditions; it improves, by careful selection, those which are growing there. As a consequence, the wilderness blossoms as a rose. (Dewey, 1916, p. 47-48).
Habits means formation of intellectual and emotional dispositions. Any habit marks an inclination-an active preference and choice for the conditions involved in its exercise.
Where there is a habit, there is acquaintance with materials and equipment to which action is applied. There is a definite way of understanding the situation in which the habit operates. Modes of thought, of observation and reflection enter as forms of skill and of desire into the habits that make a man an engineer, an architect. Dewey, 1916, p.48)
Dewey’s discussion of habit and action is particularly sensitive to the relationship between the constraints and practices of the body and human patterns of action. Given a bad habit and the ‘ will ‘ or mental direction to get a good result, and the actual happening is a reverse or looking-glass manifestation of the usual fault-a compensatory twist in the opposite direction.
The acquiring of habits is due to an original plasticity of our natures-to our ability to vary responses till we find an appropriate and effective way of acting.
Habits means the formation of intellectual and emotional dispositions, as one makes can active performance and chance to modify surroundings and habits means conforming to surroundings. Dewey talks about how education results in growth and this is acquired through habits. Education is seen as a means to an end. Yet Dewey does not consider the importance for students to challenge the status quo. Students actually conform to things all the time – many argue that school is a means of disciplining children and creating an obedient workforce
In this way children learn to comply with social norms – they conform – therefore, children are taught to get used to their surroundings (habituation), and in this way there is no growth. (Cook, 2008).
An American historian and public intellectual, who whilst his target was progressive education, criticized Dewey for the role that his thinking played in that movement.
For Hofstadter, the main defect in Dewey’s educational thought is making growth the very essence and only end of education.Growth, according to Hofstadter, is an inappropriate metaphor for education. Growth is a natural, genetic, and most importantly, automatic process; people do not have control over the way that they grow. In this, Hofstadter claims that Dewey ignores his own imperative that education is a social and reconstructed process.(Hildreth, 2011, p. 4)
Dewey (1916) takes on another viewpoint and sees immaturity as meaning ‘possibility of growth’ – the ability to develop. Taken absolutely, instead of comparatively, immaturity creates a positive force – the power to grow.“Dewey famously argues that the end of education is growth” (Hildreth, 2011, p.1).
This basic idea is widely criticized by many different perspectives.
“Taken together, critics argue thatDewey’s educational vision is confused and confusing. Growth, they argue, provides little guidance on how to construct educational goals or structure a curriculum”(Hildreth, 2011, p.1).Hofstadter also argues that,Establishing growth as the only end of education makes it impossible to construct a coherent curriculum.In sum, Hofstadter raises important concerns about Dewey’s educational thought. In particular, he questions whether Dewey provides definite ends, useful criteria, and substantive curricula.(Hildreth, 2011, p. 4-5)
In my opinion,Dewey gives the ideal situation.I do believe that what he is saying does happen.One grows and mature by depending on others for guidance and by adapting from one situation to another by taking from one experience that can help us taking another.Dewey does not discuss matters from a social standpoint.these concerns came to mind.
I argue that Dewey’s criteria for assessing growth,On a basic level, can be applied to any educational practice or program or informal learning. It is challenging but not impossible, to apply the criterion of growth in a school setting.Indeed, most efforts at assessment seek to “measure” learning. Measuring growth, however, requires both careful attention to individual students and attention to their learning over time. It also expands our view from only looking at particular activities or subjects—reading for instance—to how these activities or subjects affect broader domains of individuals’ lives. For Dewey, continued debate—and democratic control—over curriculum will always be better than posing any final standards or rigid developmental logic. Th is stance, however, does not mean that there are no ends for curriculum. Th e criteria of growth, democratic control and interaction simply ask for more careful design, flexibility, monitoring, adjustment, and judgment in developing and implementing curriculum at every level.
Effectiveness in Todays Classroom
The capacity for growth is the object of education, of learning, and of life experience itself.The function of education in this system is to act as “the enterprise of supplying the conditions which insure growth, or adequacy of life, irrespective of age.” The crucial role of education for growth underscores the enormous social significance for education by making it inherent to our humanity. In this way, education, for Dewey, is not merely a means to knowledge or work but it is a direct means to the purpose of life.In fact, in this way Dewey turns away from the Hegelian teleology and turns toward ‘becoming’ or growth as the only end-in-itself.To put it simply, Dewey is one of those “the journey is the destination” types. Only for Dewey, there is no real destination, no absolutes to gravitate towards — just continued growth.Dewey’s principle of growth is interestingly reminiscent of the principle of becoming that is put to use in various existential philosophies that were being formulated in the same period.
This connection becomes further apparent in thinking about Dewey growth on a communal level , a collective consciousness and his rejection of Cartesian dualism.
I strongly agree with Deweys philosophy of growth which represents learning experiences that open up opportunities for further growth. If a person gains a better sense of the meaning of experience and gains a greater sense of control over future experiences, they are better prepared to apply what they have learned flexibly in future situations. In other words, growth represents a form of learning that enables individuals to continue learning throughout their lives. This basic understanding of growth forms the basis for some key distinctions.
I argue that Dewey’s criteria for assessing growth,On a basic level, can be applied to any educational practice or program or informal learning. It is challenging but not impossible, to apply the criterion of growth in a school setting.Indeed, most efforts at assessment seek to “measure” learning. Measuring growth, however, requires both careful attention to individual students and attention to their learning over time. It also expands our view from only looking at particular activities or subjects -reading for instance to how these activities or subjects
affect broader domains of individuals’ lives. For Dewey, continued debate and democratic control over curriculum will always be better than posing any final standards or rigid developmental logic. Th is stance, however, does not mean that there are no ends for curriculum. Th e criteria of growth, democratic control and interaction simply ask for more careful design, flexibility, monitoring, adjustment, and judgment in developing and implementing curriculum at every level.
Moreover, he stresses criteria—of growth, democratic control, and social interaction—that citizens might collectively use to evaluate and construct educational practices and goals that are both connected to local circumstances and directed towards broader social aims. Most importantly, for Dewey, neither philosophers, nor policy experts alone, can determine the ends of education.The question of ends—however complex and difficult remains a question for the diverse stakeholders at each level of education practice, from classrooms to state departments of education. Only through continued conversation about possible ends and careful attention to consequences can we approximate Dewey’s idea of democratic education
References
- Boisvert,R.(Ed).(1998).Educating .In John Dewey:Rethinking our time.(Chapter 5, pp.95).
- Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.
- Dewey, J. (1916a). Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press.
- Dewey, J. (1928). “A critique of American civilization.” In Hickman, L.A. and Alexander, T.A. (Eds.) (1998). The essential Dewey Volume 1: Pragmatism, education, democracy. Bloomington & Indiana: Indiana University Press, pp. 316-322.
