I think that it is undeniable that Aristotle, one of the first philosophers, constitutes a great figure even though he physically disappeared thousands of years ago. His ideas comprehend several areas of study like medicine, philosophy, physics, biology, logic, and other areas like agriculture, dance, and theater. It is impressive how multifaceted Aristotle was. So, it must not be strange for anybody that Aristotle's ideas have a certain impact in education nowadays. In the first place, Aristotle was the first to divide human knowledge into disciplines like mathematic, ethics, and biology which are still used today. Nowadays, students take several disciplines at school. Some of these disciplines are mandatory, but others are elective, so students can choose which discipline they want to take following their interests. This elective process is possible because Aristotle first thought about dividing the extensive human knowledge into different disciplines. Also, Aristotle supported reasoning and the use of a scientific method in order to solve problems which was very important for fields of study like mathematics, physics, chemistry, and several others disciplines that are based in facts, laws, and formulas rather than the interpretation of the mind. Aristotle's Great Chain of Beings was an attempt to classify living things from lowest organisms to superior organisms with God as the Superior Being. I think that his idea of differentiating species was important for the development of Biology, Zoology, and Botany. However, the Great Chain of Beings did not accept the evolution of species, so Aristotle and Darwin probably would not have been good friends. The four causes by Aristotle, which were material, formal, efficient, and final causes, are related to Metaphysics, and they attempt to explain the origin of things and how things get to be what they are. The unmoved mover proposed by Aristotle is important in Physics and Metaphysics. In Metaphysics the subject of study is the unmoved mover, which is related to Theology, while the changeable elements are the subject matter of Physics and Mathematics, says Aristotle. Aristotle believed that everything had the potential to change, and this change Aristotle called it motion. For example, a green apple has the potential to become red, and a living being has the potential to perish. According to Aristotle, there is only one unmoved mover that causes everything else to move and change. The unmoved mover was unchangeable, so it was eternal because it did not experience change. This theory of Aristotle about the unmoved mover was widely accepted for hundreds of years in Physics until the theory of inertia came to replace it. Finally, it is my opinion that Aristotle's ideas had a great impact in several areas of human knowledge. His ideas were considered as universal truths for centuries, and all human knowledge spin around Aristotle's authority. Although several of his ideas are now obsolete and no longer applicable to what we know today, there is no doubt that the contribution of Aristotle to the education and formation of the human race was remarkable.
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
Ideas Are the Real World (Reflection#13)
Plato, who was a disciple of Socrates, shared his master's ideas, but at the same time, Plato went deeper than Socrates in his queries about life comprehending not only ethical and social philosophy but also metaphysics and epistemology. Plato even had the chance to fund his own Academy, and he was not afraid to teach the Athenian youth what he knew. I think that the impact of the ideas of Plato in western education could be considered as notable if his academy of Athens was really the first one of its kind in the world; this would mean a huge step toward the formation of the western education system as we know it today. Plato believed that because the physical world and matter were imperfect and changeable, they were fake or surreal. For example, factors like temperature, height, and everything that could be perceived by the physical senses was changeable according to Plato, so they did not constitute the real world. The philosopher believed in the existence of what is called Platonic Forms that were abstract ideas that could not be acquired by any physical or bodily experience. Platonic Forms were perfect, undeniable, and unchangeable. For example, 6 + 6 = 12. This is a mathematic truth, and there is no way to discuss this truth, so it constitutes a Platonic Form. Plato's idealism suggests that ideas are the reality and not mere mental images, so what many people see as the real world, the material world, is not real. According to Plato, ideas are the one who make possible for people to name and identify everything around them. For example, you consider that a chair is small because you have previously think that the chair is small, so ideas have the power to change and define how people see the world around them. It is my point of view that because the theory of Platonic Forms gave great importance to ideas, it contributed to the development of the intellectual and scholastic activity. The theory of reminiscence proposed by Plato stated that the material world cannot be the source of knowledge for human's ideas because everything we perceived by the physical senses is surreal, so the only way to find the real knowledge is by following our instincts or sense impressions. Although human beings acquire most of their knowledge from what the elderly teach them, there are certain situations that require a knowledge that cannot be thought and that comes straight from a Superior Entity, according to Plato. For example, a governor of a city cannot learn how to lead because others tell him how to do it, but he has to trust in his sense impressions. Plato thought that humans knew the truth or the Platonic Forms before they were born. He also believed in the immortality of the souls. Because the body is changeable, imperfect matter, it cannot be real, so only the immortal soul is real together with the Platonic Forms or abstract ideas. Plato is one of the first and most important philosophers, so I think that his contributions to the discipline of Philosophy are remarkable. He also supported the equality for males and females regarding education, and he said that men and women should have the same opportunities in society. Plato also thought that in order to serve the interests of the state, children should be educated by the state rather than their parents, so Plato's thoughts opened the door to new learning opportunities besides homeschooling. I believe that his ideas were an early incentive to the progress of education and the desire of human beings to think about the great mysteries of the Universe, express their ideas, and stop living a simple life to understand and discover the complications of life itself.
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.
Going Up (Reflection#12)
Even though the launching of the Sputnik took place in the Soviet Union in 1957, this event had a big impact in American education because there were several philosophies in education at that time, but specially one was positively influenced by the launching of the Sputnik. This philosophy is Essentialism which encourages students to learn the principal academic subjects, develop a patriot character, and improve their moral character. This is the traditional way that most of American students learn, and it supports the use of the reason and the sharing of a common American culture in schools. Before the Sputnik, there was a big debate concerning another philosophy in education called Progressivism which supported that knowledge is not the cumulative gathering of information by memorization and should be acquired by the use of experiences to help solving present problems. Passive listening to the teacher is not the appropriate method to learn according to progressivists who suggested using students' interests to solve current issues. I think that Progressivism was quite different from Essentialism, the prevailing philosophy in the United States. Some people who were against Progressivism argued that this philosophy was undermining American traditional education system because this method differed from what Essentialism proposed for schools. Essentialism is a teacher-centered philosophy while Progressivism is student-centered. With the launching of the Sputnik, the United States felt threatened, and the Soviet Union became a potential menace in the scientific field. Because the United States could not stay behind, it started a race to form scientists and mathematicians to compete with the Russian country. So, Essentialism, also called back-to-basics, became stronger in schools because of the need to create students better prepared and reinforce the national identity and union within the country going back to the deeper roots of American history. The launching of the Sputnik allowed Essentialism to arise definitely as the prevailing philosophy in education in the United States and stopped the big debate between this philosophy and Progressivism. The launching of the Sputnik started an educational revolution because it boosted the attention in improving students' preparation. Harder tests for teachers and students, more requirements to graduate, and higher standards emerged as a consequence of this revolutionary transformation in American education also called neoessentialism. With the launching of the Sputnik high to the space in 1957, the Soviets also launched the willing of Americans to improve their academic level, stay upfront, and achieve higher patriotic standards.
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it now.
Socrates' Way (Reflection#11)
If Socrates was alive, I think he would be disappointed to see that most of the students in the United States rely on their memory to learn. He would also dislike that the principal way of teaching in the classrooms is through lectures; the professor talks, and the students listen and answer to the professor's questions according with what they heard. Socrates had another learning method called Socratic Method or elenchus. Through Socrates' way, students do not memorize the lesson, but they think about the questions and come up with an answer using their reason and minds. Socratic Method uses discussion instead of lectures to teach. The main role in the traditional teaching method is the teacher's because the teacher is who ask the questions but also has the answers, so the teacher has an absolute power like a gatekeeper. However, the main role in the Socratic Method is the students' because the teacher asks the questions, but it is the students who have to come up with the answers, so they become active participants debating among themselves. Because with the traditional way of teaching students only learn and memorize what others say, they become like travelers walking through already defined paths. However, the elenchus allow students to think by themselves and expose their own ideas, so they can discover new paths. Socrates generally used the elenchus to look for answers to moral dilemmas in life. Socrates thought that people who do not care about improving their lives should be better dead. When people hear about life's improvement, they may think about making a lot of money, having a family, and being successful at work. However, this kind of improvement was not what Socrates had in mind. For Socrates, improving your life morally was more important than being wealthy and healthy. Many students go to school nowadays although they are not truly interested in learning because they want to get a degree, so they can earn a lot of money and improve their lives economically. Socrates would say that these students are missing the true purpose of life: knowledge. In order to improve their lives morally, people have to review through their internal characteristics and their actions using the elenchus method, find their imperfections and fix them moving forward to a more virtuous life. Socrates believed that the only way to achieve virtue was through knowledge. So, those people who do not want to acquire knowledge are not virtuous. Socrates also thought that virtue was the principal component of happiness. So, those people who are not virtuous cannot be happy. Socrates thought about happiness different from the way it is seen today. People nowadays think that they are going to be happy if they get what they want or need. For example, an overweight woman may think that if she loses weight, she is going to be happy. So, she goes under plastic surgery. People spend their money in the gym, surgeries, medicines, and treatments to look young, beautiful, and healthy. However, they change only the exterior, but they are not willing to improve their character. Socrates said that people who improve external factors but not the internal part of themselves may enjoy life at certain moments, but they continue to be miserable because the only way to be happy is by being virtuous. Virtue is not something that is born with the person, but it is obtained with effort and time. How does this apply in education? Well, a student who is not virtuous may feel unhappy and incomplete because there is not a real motivation to learn. Socrates' way to happiness and personal realization was like a chain that initiated with the elenchus. The elenchus was necessary to ask moral questions and look for answers. The more questions people were able to answer the more knowledge people obtain. Consequently, the person became more virtuous, and virtue would bring the person happiness. Socratic ideas are very different from the ideas that people have nowadays, so American schools would have to change their traditional curriculum in order to teach using the Socratic method. I think that it would not be a bad experience to learn like Socrates liked it because students would be better thinkers, better prepared, more virtuous, and at the end more happy with themselves and what they have achieved.
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
Opening Doors to Success (Reflection#10)
When I heard that a teacher is the gatekeeper in a classroom, I did not know what this statement referred to. However, after some reading, I found out that this expression means that the teacher has the control to decide which student talks, when, and for what period extent during the class. Research in this topic has shown that teachers drive the questioning instead of the students most of the time. Teachers also take more time to talk and impart the lesson letting to little time for students to interact. This situation intensifies throughout the students going to higher grades. Gatekeeping could be considered as a dictatorship by some people because of the totalitarian control of the teacher; however, others may think that if the teacher does not have control over the whole situation, class may become anarchy. I think that it is necessary to have a balance and a greater interaction between the roles of the students and their professor inside the classroom. For example, if the professor allows the students more freedom to ask the questions they want, it could improve the students' understanding of a certain subject. Also, if the teacher allows students to ask and express their ideas freely, they would be able to develop an active and participative attitude, and the class would be more entertaining. Without a strict control of the teacher over the whole class, there is room for debate and discussion of the topic among the students. Consequently, if students show an active role, they would surely become more confident about themselves and curious about the discussed topic. On the other hand, gatekeeping mines the students' interest in the class because it is too boring for them to sit in a chair, listen to all the professor has to say like listening to a recorder that it does not stop, and then, go home with the head full of questions. This passive role of the student is the worst consequence of gatekeeping because passive students have to memorize all the professor says instead of thinking by themselves and reflecting about a topic. Gatekeeping promotes memorizing but not learning. I think that it is necessary to have teachers who are willing to leave behind their role as gatekeepers and start a new class experience where everybody has a chance to express their opinion and feel comfortable. I think it would improve the education, and at the end, it would produce more successful students.
It Is Not About When but About How (Reflection#9)
In order for teachers being effective, they have to be prepared and know their profession first of all. I think that teachers nowadays are well prepared because they have to take courses and several tests before they can take control over a classroom. Also, they have to learn about psychology and how to manage different situations inside the classroom today like teaching a diverse class where there are students not from one culture but from several cultures. In addition, with the power of technology which includes computers and audiovisual material, it has become easier for teachers to transmit the learning message to the students. In ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, teachers were a little more diverse than now. There were formal teachers like now who taught students in a school environment, but there were also other less professional teachers who were equally important for the development of those civilizations. For example, parents played an important role as teachers of the culture, religious believes, and moral values to their children. Also, because occupations were mostly hereditary to keep the tradition and guarantee a successor on the family, regular people had to teach their occupations to the next generation. For example, a farmer had to teach his apprentice how to take care of a farm properly, and a craftsman had to teach his apprentice how to produce beautiful ceramic. Because professional teachers did not teach about occupations, the less professional teachers were important in order to maintain the order and the legacy of the culture as well. But, professional or not, what is true about Egyptian and Mesopotamian teachers is that they taught well their students and successors. For example, the workers in the pyramids had to teach others what they knew in order to finish the construction because pyramids took hundreds of years to build, and one generation was not enough to finish it. Teaching children effectively was the only way that those civilizations could keep their traditions over time and earn their great splendor. It is my opinion that teacher effectiveness in a classroom depends on the level of knowledge and preparation that teacher has and the available material to impart the lesson, but it has nothing to do with the period in history the teacher exists. As long as the message is transmitted effectively to the students, the teacher has made his or her purpose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)