My Philosophy of Education

Statement of Philosophy

Personal Philosophy of Education

Written By:
Magda Al Sebai Madkour

Adopting a personal philosophy was not a static process and it has taken about 30 years to shape and reshape it. My philosophy of education is based on providing authentic learning experience so that the inner being develops and the outer character is shaped. I believe that each learner deserves intrinsically rewarding experiences that contribute to personal growth. My instructional strategies aim at using oral communication, enhancing multimedia technology, and providing a variety of presentation and stimulating intrinsic motivation.

Climbing the Educational Ladder

As a teacher and a curriculum coordinator, building up a personal philosophy of education has been a journey of search and discovery. It has been also a journey of personal and educational growth. The growth experienced intellectually and socially has been phenomenal. The challenges still stimulate new demands to become a better educator.

Flexibility

Being flexible about adopting new approaches of educational goals and modifying teaching methods help in acquiring appropriate strategies for each learning environment. Because there are various ways through which people learn, there have been different philosophies for handling each educational setting. Each philosophy offered guiding principles and directing action plans. Some philosophies deal with humans’ interactions and with their external environments, and some others explain humans’ understanding of their inner minds.

Emphasizing the role of the mental process in human development and learning has been an important principle in my teaching philosophy. This requires developing cognitive abilities through observing, questioning, analyzing, criticizing, and evaluating while responding to internal or external events. Developing this mentalist view of learning started at college while studying the linguistic theory of Noam Chomsky (1928- ). Chomsky’s (1968) theory provided spectacular potentials for the human mind. Through various mental processes, the relationship between thought and language, innate and acquired learning was revealed.

The theoretical side of my personal philosophy has developed in a very rapid way over the past two decades. Connection to the sciences of psychology, sociology and anthropology added new dimensions to understanding the relevance of education in society. New conceptions on learning and teaching in relation to psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics and deconstruction were developed. Combining social and cognitive learning theories of Albert Bandura (1925- ), Lev Vygotsky (1896- 1934), and Jean Lave (1968) made it easy to understand the social context of schooling.

Building up a personal philosophy of education; however, requires an explicit vision of educational goals and effective methods for achieving them. This task also entails deep understanding of the purpose of education. This purpose can be analyzed on many levels. On an epistemological level, philosophy describes how knowledge is conceptualized. Epistemology provides the structure for methods of teaching and learning. On an axiological level, philosophy provides the basis for teaching ethics and aesthetics. On a metaphysical level, conceptions about learning experiences, activities, and skills can be shaped in a curriculum that determines how schools perceive reality. On a historical level, philosophy attempts to reveal universal truths. Philosophies such as Idealism and Realism, for instance, claim an authority of universal knowledge. Some philosophers assert human experiences and others believe that root knowledge lies in the intuitive perception of psychological nature (Gutek, 1997).

Dewey’s (1916) emphasis on human association with the common, communication, and community opened new channels for human growth. According to Dewey, the common represents shared objects, instruments, and values that may arise in the context of collective experience. Communication occurs when shared experiences are framed in symbolic patterns and a common language. Combining Dewey’s philosophy with social theories helped in developing social skills. Identifying the premises of social theories affects this teacher’s views in regard to managing ability or disability groups, designing differentiated instructions, and using appropriate assessment tools. Social theorists also explain how cultures are transmitted and what tools are needed to evaluate them. I also sought new approaches to motivate students to use critical thinking and creativity. Acquiring team skills, for instance, assisted in building up learning communities. “A learning organization is one that continuously adapts to a changing and interdependent environment” (Kofman & Senge, 1993 p. 5).

The integration of these social theories occurred at a Montessori’s school. Dr. Montessori (1870-1952) believed that a school should be like home, designed to provide a comfortable environment for children where they could learn with confidence. At school, self-determination and self- realization should be emphasized so that children can develop physically, mentally, socially and spiritually. “The teacher’s role in a Montessori’s school is to observe and keep the environment safe for children to grow naturally and spontaneously” (Kramer, 1978, p.1).

Social theories of Interpretivists, whether they are phenomenologists (Giorgio, 1985; Husserd, 1831; Moustakas, 1994: Van Manen, 1990), symbolic interactionists (Blumer, 1969), or enthnomethodologists (Cicourel, 1964; Garfinkel, 1967), helped in explaining how social structures can be integrated with an analysis of human interactions. Through examining the impact of the teacher-student interactions on differential treatment of students, interpretive theories “shifted the emphasis on the microlevel qualitative analysis of the learning environments at schools” (Keddie, 1971, p.1).

I have also deepened my views on the models of teaching and learning through studying some of the contemporary cognitive and social learning theories such as Cognitive Flexibility, Constructivism, and Hypertext (Coulson, Feltovich, and Anderson, 1988; Spiro & Jehng, 1990); Functional Context (Sticht, 1987), and Situated Learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991).These theories emphasize the constructive nature of understanding the failure of the patterns of learning. Constructivism presented knowledge in an authentic context and a collaborative social interaction. Blending these learning theories with Dewey’s perspectives and current research on technology and learning opened for me new channels to create healthier and more effective learning environments.

References

Bandura, A. (1977).Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.

Burner, J. (1977). The process of education. New York: Wiley.

Chomsky, N. (1968). Language and mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovic.

deMarais, K. & LeCompte, M. (1999). The way schools work: A sociological analysis of

education. (3^rd ed). New York: Longman Inc.

Dewey, J. (1896).The laboratory school. University Record, 1(23), 417-422. Retrieved

from School and Society (1923). Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Dewey, J. (1915). The Child and the curriculum. New Print (1991) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. UK: Macmillan Company.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Reprint (1997) New York: Touchstone.

Gutek, G. L. (1997). Philosophical and ideological perspectives on education (2^nd. ed.).

New York: Allyn & Bacon.

Keddie, N. (1971). Classroom knowledge. In M.F.D. Young (ed.) Knowledge and

control . London: Collir-Macmillan.

Kofman, F. & Senge, P. M. (1993).Communities of commitment: the heart of learning

organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 19 (22) 5. Retrieved from Proquest database.

Kramer, R. (1978) Maria Montessori. Oxford: Blackwell