Systems of schooling

Document Sample
Systems of schooling Powered By Docstoc
					                                PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATION OF EDUCATION

        .


        Q1. What is education? Explain the different forms of education.

Education in its broadest, general sense is the means through which the aims and habits of a group of
                                                  [1]
people lives on from one generation to the next. Generally, it occurs through any experience that has a
formative effect on the way one thinks, feels, or acts. In its narrow, technical sense, education is the
formal process by which society deliberately transmits its
accumulated knowledge, skills, customs and values from one generation to another, e.g., instruction in
schools.

A right to education has been created and recognized by some jurisdictions: Since 1952, Article 2 of the
first Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights obliges all signatory parties to guarantee the
right to education. At the global level, the United Nations' International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights of 1966 guarantees this right

Systems of schooling
Systems of schooling involve institutionalized teaching and learning in relation to a curriculum, which itself
is established according to a predetermined purpose of the schools in the system.

[edit]Purpose of schools
Main article: Education_theory#Normative_theories_of_education
                                              [3]
Examples of the purpose of schools include: develop reasoning about perennial questions, master the
methods of scientific inquiry, cultivate the intellect, create positive change agents, develop spirituality, and
model a democratic society.

[edit]Curriculum
In formal education, a curriculum is the set of courses, and their content, offered at a school or university.
As an idea, curriculum stems from the Latin word for race course, referring to the course of deeds and
experiences through which children grow to become mature adults. A curriculum is prescriptive, and is
based on a more general syllabus which merely specifies what topics must be understood and to what
level to achieve a particular grade or standard.

An academic discipline is a branch of knowledge which is formally taught, either at the university, or via
some other such method. Each discipline usually has several sub-disciplines or branches, and
distinguishing lines are often both arbitrary and ambiguous. Examples of broad areas of academic
disciplines include the natural sciences, mathematics, computer science, social
                                              [4]
sciences, humanities and applied sciences.

Educational institutions may incorporate fine arts as part of K-12 grade curriculums or within majors at
colleges and universities as electives. The various types of fine arts are music, dance, and theater.
        Q2. What is meant by Educational Philosophy? Explain.




Philosophy of education can refer to either the academic field of applied philosophy or to one of any
educational philosophies that promote a specific type or vision of education, and/or which examine the
definition, goals and meaning of education.

As an academic field, philosophy of education is "the philosophical study of education and its
                                                                                                [1]
problems...its central subject matter is education, and its methods are those of philosophy". "The
philosophy of education may be either the philosophy of the process of education or the philosophy of the
discipline of education. That is, it may be part of the discipline in the sense of being concerned with the
aims, forms, methods, or results of the process of educating or being educated; or it may be
metadisciplinary in the sense of being concerned with the concepts, aims, and methods of the
            [2]
discipline." As such, it is both part of the field of education and a field of applied philosophy, drawing
from fields of metaphysics, epistemology, axiology and the philosophical approaches (speculative,
prescriptive, and/or analytic) to address questions in and about pedagogy, education policy,
                                                                       [3]
and curriculum, as well as the process of learning, to name a few. For example, it might study what
constitutes upbringing and education, the values and norms revealed through upbringing and educational
practices, the limits and legitimization of education as an academic discipline, and the relation
between educational theory and practice.

Instead of being taught in philosophy departments, philosophy of education is usually housed in
departments or colleges of education, similar to how philosophy of law is generally taught in law
        [1]
schools. The multiple ways of conceiving education coupled with the multiple fields and approaches of
philosophy make philosophy of education not only a very diverse field but also one that is not easily
defined. Although there is overlap, philosophy of education should not be conflated with educational
theory, which is not defined specifically by the application of philosophy to questions in education.
Philosophy of education also should not be confused with philosophy education, the practice of teaching
and learning the subject of philosophy.

Philosophy of education can also be understood not as an academic discipline but as
a normative educational theory that unifies pedagogy, curriculum, learning theory, and the purpose
of educationand is grounded in specific metaphysical, epistemological, and axiological assumptions.
These theories are also called educational philosophies. For example, a teacher might be said to have
aperennialist educational philosophy or to have a perennialist philosophy of education.

Plato's educational philosophy was grounded in his vision of the ideal Republic, wherein
the individual was best served by being subordinated to a just society. He advocated removing children
from their mothers' care and raising them as wards of the state, with great care being taken to
differentiate children suitable to the various castes, the highest receiving the most education, so that they
could act as guardians of the city and care for the less able. Education would be holistic, including facts,
skills, physical discipline, and music and art, which he considered the highest form of endeavor.

Plato believed that talent was distributed non-genetically and thus must be found in children born in
any social class. He builds on this by insisting that those suitably gifted are to be trained by the state so
that they may be qualified to assume the role of a ruling class. What this establishes is essentially a
system of selective public education premised on the assumption that an educated minority of the
population are, by virtue of their education (and inborn educability), sufficient for healthy governance.

Plato's writings contain some of the following ideas: Elementary education would be confined to the
guardian class till the age of 18, followed by two years ofcompulsory military training and then by higher
education for those who qualified. While elementary education made the soul responsive to the
environment, higher education helped the soul to search for truth which illuminated it. Both boys and girls
receive the same kind of education. Elementary education consisted of music and gymnastics, designed
to train and blend gentle and fierce qualities in the individual and create a harmonious person.

At the age of 20, a selection was made. The best one would take an advanced course in mathematics,
geometry, astronomy and harmonics. The first course in the scheme of higher education would last for
ten years. It would be for those who had a flair for science. At the age of 30 there would be another
selection; those who qualified would study dialectics and metaphysics, logic and philosophy for the next
five years. They would study the idea of good and first principles of being.



        Q3.Discuss the Russian's thoughts of Naturalism.


        Historical Background
        The spread of industrialization created extremes of wealth and poverty. Slums areas like
Bowery, New York appeared where poor people lived and where there were crimes, murder,
diseases, violence and all the worst things in the world. Life became a struggle for survival.
        Farmers were still going westward, but frontiers were about the close. People were
doomed to have no more land. They had to depend on the transcontinental railway to transport
their products, therefore, railway became their master. Farmers were caught in the grip of the
railway company.
        The spread of Darwin's theory of evolution changed people's ideology "the theories of
'survival by social selection' and 'survival of the fittest'". Living in an indifferent, cold and
Godless world, man was no longer free. People's outlook toward life became pessimistic.


        American Naturalism
        Naturalism was a new and harsher realism. It developed on the basis of realism but went
a step further than it in portraying social reality.
        Thematically, naturalistic writers
       wrote detailed descriptions of the lives of the downtrodden and of the abnormal
       had frank treatment of human passion and sexuality
      were concerned about how men and women were overwhelmed by the forces of
       environment and by the forces of heredity
       Technically, naturalistic writers
      made detailed documentation of life: nothing but the truth, more naked and wicked than
       realis
      created gloomy and pessimistic atmosphere
       American Naturalism first came into existence in Maggie, a Girl of the Streets by
Stephen Crane, then had its manifesto in McTeague by Frank Norris, and later came to its
maturity in Sister Carrie by Theodore Dreiser.
       Theodore Dreiser (1871-1945)
       He was the ninth child of a family of 13 children, his parents being German immigrants.
Living in great poverty and misery and being humiliated by the misbehavior of his brothers and
sisters, Dreiser fled to Chicago at the age of 15, where he began a series of menial jobs. Finally
he got a job on a newspaper and began a career as a free-lance journalist and a magazine editor.
       Dreiser was left-oriented. He visited Russia and had a strong sympathy for communism,
for those people haunted by poverty, for the weak and the oppressed. He joined the American
Communist Party before he died.
       He believed that "man was merely a mechanism moved by chemical and physical forces
beyond his control", that man was "merely an animal driven by greed and lust in a struggle for
existence".
       Dreiser was the greatest literary naturalist. His works are powerful in the portrayal of the
American life, but the style is crude with inexact expressions and cliches. Nevertheless, it is in
Dreiser's works that American naturalism is said to have come of age.
      His Works:
              o   Sister Carrie (1900), first rejected by publishers for its honesty in depicting
                  American society, but enjoyed fame later on. He was so depressed by the
                  rejection that he walked by the East River, seriously contemplating death.
              o   An American Tragedy (1925), autobiographical
              o   Dreiser Looks at Russia (1928)
              o   "Old Rogaum and His Theresa":
                         theme: generation gap: the severe control and strict demand of the parents
                          vs. the rebellion and asking for freedom of the child
                         social problem: juvenile delinquency, prostitutes and problems concerning
                          foreign immigrants
                         writing technique: detailed descriptions of the streets, shops, houses and so
                          on, together with the psychological analysis
                         In a metropolis like New York, a girl like Theresa is very easy to fall. The
                          forces of environment are in effect here.




        Q4. Explain the kinds, forms and scope of Social Mobility.


A social identity is the portion of an individual's self-concept derived from perceived membership in
                           [1][2]
a relevant social group.          As originally formulated by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s and
     [3]
80s, social identity theory introduced the concept of a social identity as a way in which to explain
                       [4][5]
intergroup behaviour.

Social identity theory is best described as primarily a theory that predicts certain intergroup behaviours on
                                                                                                        [4]
the basis of the perceived status, legitimacy and permeability of the intergroup environment. This
contrasts with occasions where the term social identity theory is used to refer to general theorizing about
                       [6]                                                                          [7][8]
human social selves. Moreover, and although some researchers have treated it as such,                       social
                                                                                           [3]
identity theory was never intended to be a general theory of social categorization. It was awareness of
the limited scope of social identity theory that led John Turner and colleagues to develop a cousin theory
                                           [1][9]
in the form of self-categorization theory,        which built on the insights of social identity theory to produce
                                                           [3]
a more general account of self and group processes. To avoid confusion the term social
identity approach, or social identity perspective, is suggested for describing the joint contributions of both
                                                         [
social identity theory and self-categorization theory.

The interpersonal-intergroup continuum
Social identity theory states that social behaviour will vary along a continuum between interpersonal
                                        [4]
behaviour and intergroup behaviour. Completely interpersonal behaviour would be behaviour
determined by solely by the individual characteristics and interpersonal relationships that exists between
two or more people. Completely intergroup behaviour would be behaviour determined solely by the social
category memberships that apply to two or more people. It is toward this latter end of the spectrum where
an individual’s social identities are predicated to be highly influential.

The authors of social identity theory state that purely interpersonal or purely intergroup behaviour is
                                                     [4][11]
unlikely to be found in realistic social situations.         Rather, behaviour is expected to be driven by a
compromise between the two extremes. The cognitive nature of personal vs. social identities, and the
                                                                                   [12][13][3][14]
relationship between them, is more fully developed in self-categorization theory.            Social identity
theory instead focuses on the social structural factors the will predict which end of the spectrum will most
influence an individual’s behaviour, along with the forms that that behavior may take.

[edit]Positive distinctiveness
A key assumption in social identity theory is that individuals are intrinsically motivated to achieve positive
                                                                           [4]
distinctiveness. That is, individuals “strive for a positive self-concept“. As individuals to varying degrees
may be defined and informed by their respective social identifies (as per the interpersonal-intergroup
continuum) it is further derived in social identity theory that “individuals strive to achieve or to maintain
                          [4]
positive social identity“. It should be noted that the precise nature of this strive for positive self-concept
is a matter of debate (see the self esteem hypothesis).

Both the interpersonal-intergroup continuum and the assumption of positive distinctiveness motivation
                                                              [3]
arose as outcomes of the findings of minimal group studies. In particular, it was found that under certain
conditions individuals would endorse resource distributions that would maximize the positive
                                                                                                   [15]
distinctiveness of an ingroup in contrast to an outgroup at the expense of personal self-interest.

[edit]Positive distinctiveness strategies
Building on the above components, social identity theory details a variety of strategies that may be
                                                     [9]
invoked in order to achieve positive distinctiveness. The individual’s choice of behaviour is posited to be
dictated largely by the perceived intergroup relationship. In particular the choice of strategy is an outcome
of the perceived permeability of group boundaries, as well as the perceived stability and legitimacy of the
intergroup status hierarchy. The self enhancing strategies detailed in social identity theory are detailed
       [4]
below. Importantly, although these are viewed from the perspective of a low status group member,
                                                                                 [9]
comparable behaviours may also be adopted by high status group members.

[edit]Individual mobility
It is predicted that under conditions where the group boundaries are considered permeable (e.g. a group
member may pass from a low status group into a high status group) individuals are more likely to engage
in individual mobility strategies.


        Q5.What is the role of education in Cultural Change?
        Q6.Write down the effective elements of social change and social programs.
        Q7.In Human life, explain the aims and need of globalization.
        Q8. What do you mean by World Peace? Explain Indian efforts for the development of
World Peace?




 World Peace is an ideal of freedom, peace, and happiness among and within all nations and/or people.
        World peace is an idea of planetary non-violenceby which nations willingly cooperate, either
        voluntarily or by virtue of a system of governance that prevents warfare. The term is sometimes
        used to refer to a cessation of all hostility among all individuals. For example, World Peace could
        be crossing boundaries via technology, education, engineering, medicine, diplomats and/or an
        end to all forms of fighting


Various political ideologies
World peace is sometimes claimed to be the inevitable result of a certain political ideology. According to
                                                                                              [5]
former U.S. President George W. Bush: "The march of democracy will lead to world peace." Leon
                                                                                                        [6]
Trotsky, a Marxist theorist, assumed that the world revolution would lead to a communist world peace.

[edit]Democratic peace theory
Proponents of the controversial democratic peace theory claim that strong empirical evidence exists
                                                               [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]
that democracies never or rarely wage war against each other.                                (the only exceptions
being the Cod Wars, the Turbot War and Operation Fork — all of which had no casualties) Jack Levy
(1988) made an oft-quoted assertion that the theory is "as close as anything we have to an empirical law
in international relations".

An increasing number of nations have become democratic since the Industrial Revolution. A world peace
may thus become possible if this trend continues and if the democratic peace theory is correct.

There are, however, several possible exceptions to this theory.

[edit]Capitalism peace theory
In her "capitalism peace theory," Ayn Rand held that the major wars of history were started by the more
controlled economies of the time against the freer ones and that capitalism gave mankind the longest
period of peace in history—a period during which there were no wars involving the entire civilized world—
from the end of the Napoleonic wars in 1815 to the outbreak of World War I in 1914, with the exceptions
of the Franco-Prussian War (1870) and the Spanish-American War (1898).

It must be remembered that the political systems of the 19th century were not pure capitalism, but mixed
economies. The element of capitalism, however, was dominant; it was as close to a century of capitalism
as mankind has come. But the element of statism kept growing throughout the 19th century, and by the
                                                                                                [15][16]
time it blasted the world in 1914, the governments involved were dominated by statist policies.

However, this theory ignores the brutal colonial wars waged by the western nations against countries
outside Europe; as well as the German and Italian Wars of Unification, the Franco-Prussian war,
the Crimean War, and other conflicts in Europe. It also posits a lack of war as the barometer for peace,
when in reality class antagonisms were ever present.

One could argue that the argument is based on a non-sequitur fallacy since it may not have
been capitalism that was the cause but rather the little state authority (also, correlation does not imply
causation), which would make it an argument for anarchism in general, ranging from anarcho-
capitalism to anarcho-communism, not necessarily capitalism.

[edit]Cobdenism
                       [17]
There are proponents of cobdenism who claim that by removing tariffs and creating international free
trade, wars would become impossible, because free trade prevents a nation from becoming self-
sufficient, which is a requirement for long wars. For example, if one country produces firearms and
another produces ammunition, the two could not fight each other, because the former would be unable to
procure ammunition and the latter would be unable to obtain weapons.
      [who?]
Critics     argue that free trade does not prevent a nation from establishing some sort of emergency plan
to become temporarily self-sufficient in case of war or that a nation could simply acquire what it needs
from a different nation. A good example of this, is World War I. Both Britain and Germany managed to
become partially self-sufficient during the war. This is particularly important, due to the fact Germany had
no plan for creating a War economy.
                                  [who?]
More generally, other proponents      argue that free trade—while not making wars impossible—will
make wars, and restrictions on trade caused by wars, very costly for international companies with
production, research, and sales in many different nations. Thus, a powerful lobby—unless there are only
national companies—will argue against wars.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:11/6/2012
language:English
pages:8