RESEARCH IN PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION A TREND REPORT : C. SESHADRI
INTRODUCTION Any serious attempt at a comprehensive review analysis and appraisal of research trends in a field like the philosophy of education, given its contentious nature, should be guided by certain basic reference criteria: How well do the research studies conducted under the rubric `philosophy of education' represent the domain of this field of inquiry? How adequately do they reflect its spirit and method(s)? And, how far are they socially relevant and useful? Each of these interrogatives will be examined in some detail here. In the process, the state of the art of this field will be expounded and the general trends indicated by the researches conducted thus far analysed. This will be followed by a trend analysis and appraisal of the new research studies included in the present survey, a brief note on recent developments in the field and an exploration of possible research is- sues of contemporary relevance.
THE DOMAIN OF `PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION'
Concerns Reflected in the Research Studies If anyone uninitiated into academic scholarship in philosophy of education scans through the titles of the hundred and odd research studies thus far conducted under this banner he will, in all likelihood, get the impression that all there is to philosophy of education research is to `study' the `educational philosophy' or the educational thoughts and contribution of this or that thinker (generally one venerated in history) or scriptural text, either individually or in a comparative frame. So complete is the domination of this type of research that it has almost come to define this area. More than 7 5 per cent of the research output is accounted for by studies of this kind.
For the purpose of analysis, researches in philosophy of education can be divided into three classes: (i) `critical' or simply `study' of the educational philosophy, educational thoughts/ideas/contributions of individual thinkers, individually or in comparison with others, (ii) exploration of epics, historical periods, religious and philosophical systems for their educational philosophy, ideas etc., and (iii) thematic and conceptual studies. Almost half the researches fall under the first category with the rest divided between the second and third. Looking at the same thing in a different way, hardly 25 per cent of the researches have their focus on problems and issues cutting across philosophical schools and per- sonalities; all the rest concern themselves with the study of the educational philosophy of thinkers and systems, quite a few of them being repetitive. Gandhi, Tagore, Vivekananda, Upanishadic education and Basic Education alone account for as many as 33 studies Others who figure under this category include Nehru, Bhave, Aurobindo, Dayananda, Bhaurao Patil, Azad, Tilak, Waliullah, Tulsi, Shankara, Thiruvalluvar, Besant, Narayana Guru, Kalelkar, J. Krishnamurthy, Ramakrishna and Gopabandhu Das. Amongst the Western philosophers/educational thinkers studied, are Deway, Kilpatrick, Rousseau, Freud, Adler, Jung, Read, Russell, Green, Bosanquet, Whitehead, Bergson. The philosophical and religious systems of the past that have
RESEARCH IN PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION-A TREND REPORT 47
been explored for their educational contributions include vedic, upanishadic, Jain and Buddhistic; the Sankhya-yoga schools; the smritis, Gita, Ramayana, Mahabharata, Koran, and Guru Granth Sahib. While some researches have employed the `ism' framework of idealism, naturalism, existentialism and pragmatism, others have dealt with philosophy of education itself as a single over arching theme like, `Evolution of Philosophy of Education in India', `Fundamentals of Educational Philosophy', `Educational Thoughts of Indian Thinkers', and `Recent Philosophies of Education in India'. As regards the third category, concepts and educational ideas that have become the focal points of research include freedom, ideology, explanation, human nature, personality, national integration, life-long education, distance education, equality of educational opportunity, and educational theory.
How representative is this range of topics of the domain of inquiry, and how adequately does it reflect its characteristic concerns? Answering such questions would obviously entail an inquiry into the very conception of the nature and scope of this field, into the meaning of `philosophy of education' itself.
It is not the intention here to enter into a detailed discussion on the meaning and scope of philosophy of education. Much has been said and written on the issue but differences persist. Nor is it intended to stipulate any `definition' of philosophy of education or prescribe rules of procedure for `doing' it. One is too well aware of the hazards involved in any such attempt and the futility of any search for an objective, universally acceptable definition of philosophy. The purpose of the sketchy discussion on the nature of philosophy which follows is only to indicate broadly the spectrum of issues and problems that have engaged the attention of philosophers, past and present, world-wide. Hopefully, such an exercise would also make one aware of the rich research possibilities of the field.
An approach to such an undertaking that suggests itself is to consider philosophy of education as the application of philosophy to education-its goals, processes, concepts, theories, institutions. `Philosophy' here refers both to its tools and techniques and also the `knowledge' gained through their application. It may be, as the logi- cal analysts maintain, that philosophy does not produce any knowledge of a positive kind that is. But one also cannot deny that philosophical effort does result in some sort of wisdom which is not restricted to conceptual enlightenment alone.
Historically, philosophy has expressed itself in several modes- speculative, normative and critical. On the speculative plane, philosophers have concerned themselves with sweeping general inquiries into what lies beyond immediate human experience-into the nature of the noumenal world, existence of God, relationship between matter and spirit and so on-to present a synoptic view of the universe and man's relationship with it. The resulting world-views, however, had their basis not on uncritical thinking, fantasizing or unanalysed feeling, but were rooted in sustained, disciplined, systematic analysis of experience in its diverse manifestations science, art, literature, religion, politics. In the sphere of education, the metaphysical philosophers have contributed grand visions of education and educational utopias for their realization. The educational ideals and prescriptions of Tagore, Gandhi and Aurobindo, for example, were anchored in their metaphysical views about man, his possibilities and his destiny.
Normative philosophy is concerned with the establishment of norms, standards and guidelines, for the conduct of human affairs. Values, both moral and aesthetic, become the chief concern here. The normative philosopher says what human dispositions are excellences and worthy of cultivation and why they are to be considered as such, adducing metaphysical justification if required. Education essentially being a process of transmission of what is considered as good and worthwhile (knowledge, skills, values, attitudes, behaviour patterns), normative educational philosophy has primarily concerned itself with inquiries into the ethical dimensions of the ends and means of education.
As critical analysis, philosophy of education becomes a meta- level activity of clarification and criticism of concepts, theories, arguments appearing in the primary, on-going activity of `education'. The predominant mode today in philosophy (and in philosophy of education) is the critical, analytical mode. The analytical philosophers engage in formal tasks such as elucidation of educational concepts, appraisal of the logical status of educational statements and validations of educational theories. They conceive their task as one of understanding and illuminating the language and discourse of education,
To equate philosophy with any one mode, therefore, would be dogmatic and a gross misrepresentation of its nature as it has unfolded in history. Nor would it be proper to think that these modes operate exclusively. No philosopher can be described as a `pure' metaphysi-
48 C. SESHADRI
cal, critical or normative philosopher. On the contrary, philosophizing activity is a blend of several modes albeit in different proportions. A normative prescription, for example, may require metaphysical justification. Despite the predominantly critical temper of modem times, it would not be improper, therefore, to assign to philosophy a much wider role than mere language or concept analysis, a role that would include legitimate constructive and normative functions also. Philosophy of education would, in that case, in addition to being a second order activity of analysis, also accommodate integration of such analysis with socio-historical and normative studies of education.
Such a comprehensive view of philosophy of education would indicate a wide range of research problems and issues than mere study of an educational thinker or system in a general, holistic way. Philosophy of education should raise important issues having relevance for education and tackle them philosophically-offering arguments, clarifying concepts, putting forward metaphysical views with intellectual support and offering grounds for normative assertions. It should provide a frame of reference for orienting ourselves, for gaining a sense of direction in education, a set of standards for the validation of our aims and values, justifying our curricular activities in terms of intrinsic and instrumental criteria and enlightening us about concepts like democracy, equality, secularism, freedom and authority as they operate in education.
As meta-level reflection, especially, philosophy of education offers a variety of topics for the researcher. Almost every aspect of education-its conception and meaning, aims, content and process-holds out possibilities for logical and conceptual examination. Apart from these, there are also philosophical insights to be gained about the relationship of education itself with other spheres of human activity, social, political, economic, and religious. Educational discourse is highly complex in nature and cuts across the empirical, a priori and normative forms of inquiry. Clarification of concepts, analysis and appraisal of arguments, statements and theories, synthesis and integration of such understanding with substantive issues of the educational process and practices--curriculum, systems of schooling, the process of learning and teaching, school management, educational institutions and normative guide lines on aims, curriculum, methods, institutions and teachers-can all be legitimate objects of philosophical inquiry in education.
Looking at the nature and kind of research efforts and outputs against the background of this territorial vastness of philosophy of education, it is difficult to withhold the judgement that the area remains largely uncharted.
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY
An Appraisal of Researches from the Methodological Angle Even more important, perhaps, than the subject (topic) of research is the issue of method, although the distinction between the two may not always be clear cut. Philosophy of education essentially is an activity or a method, a disciplined, systematic way of thinking about a problem leading to illumination of conceptual meaning and understanding and appraisal of issues of educational policy and practice. Research should exhibit this spirit of the method and meet its exacting requirements: semantic clarity and meaningfulness, consistency and rigor of thought, consciousness of assumptions and methodological awareness. The question is, how well do our research studies stand up to these requirements.
That research in philosophy of education suffers from lack of methodological rigor and generally poor quality (apart from scanty output) has been pointed out on several occasions by reviewers of research in this area (Premnath 1968, Manual 1974, 1979, Buch 1986, Das 1986). The trend report in the Second Survey in this series noted that
- much of what goes on in the name of philosophical research is actually historical or descriptive research without the norms and rigor expected in these types of researches;
- the researches are mostly at an informational level, stopping short- of employing higher techniques of philosophical inquiry;
- they are mere compilations of ideas not extending beyond a first-level interpretation;
- they are repetitive, without indicating where the new contribution lies or increasing depth of under- standing or adopting any new line of approach;
- the `critical methods' employed in some of the studies appear to take a simple commonsense approach without the rigor befitting philosophical criticism;
RESEARCH IN PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION-A TREND REPORT 49
-some research endeavors in this area appear to have been prompted more out of the desire to escape the stringent methodological requirements of the other research areas.
Since the publication of this report more studies have appeared some of which were included in the Third Survey, but the overall picture that emerges does not warrant any substantial review of the earlier appraisal. `Philosophy of education' researches continue to suffer from methodological anemic and absence of the enterprise necessary to break away from the beaten track.
This is no place to go into the cause of this state of affairs. Yet, no proper evaluation of the quality of researches, especially from the methodological point of view, can be made without an acquaintance, at least, with the general factors that have made `philosophy of education' what it has come to be today.
Philosophy of education, in the first place, is one of the later additions to the field of educational studies and a tradition of research in this field is yet to be established. It is only recently that it has come to acquire academic respectability and to be recognized as a branch of applied philosophy. Historically, its roots the in the unsophisticated amateur philosophizing engaged in by practical educationists whose primary interests were the improvement of educational practices. What is articulated today as philosophy of education (or, more commonly, `educational philosophy') is actually a creature of teachers' training colleges and university departments of education. This view has not gone beyond looking upon philosophy of education as the study of 'isms' and their `educational implications'. On this view, philosophy of education is the application to education of the speculative theses-metaphysical, epistemological, axiological- of the different philosophical schools to derive directives and recommendations on educational alms, curriculum and methodology. As far as its teaching is concerned, it is offered as one of the foundation courses, either by itself or in combination with sociological foundations of education, usually at the M. Ed. level. At the first degree level, the current trend is to subsume some of its content under a general course on education. When it comes to actual curriculum transaction, things become more difficult. Neither the teachers nor the students, for the most part, possess sufficient prerequisite acquaintance. with the methods of philosophical inquiry and logic. The result: all miscellaneous, undifferentiated discourse on educational aims, content and methodology gets peddled as philoso- phy of education. Certainly these are not conditions conducive to the nurturing of academic scholarship in the philosophy of education.
Be that as it may; it has already been pointed out that Study of the Educational Philosophy of type studies dominate research activity in this field. There is no doubt that such study is a worthy philosophical pursuit. But what precisely it means to study the educational philosophy of and what specifically it involves in terms of the intellectual tasks to be performed in such an undertaking, are by no means clear or obvious. The meaning one gives to `study of the educational philosophy of naturally depends on one's conception of the nature and scope of `philosophy of education'. But whatever be the philosophical model one chooses analytic, speculative or normative- mere collection and compilation of ideas and thoughts of a thinker would not amount to doing philosophy in the true sense of the term. To organize the ideas in terms of philosophical principles, to examine their philosophical presuppositions and assumptions and to synthesize the different ideas into a coherent system, are some of the tasks involved in the study of the educational philosophy of an individual or a practice. Whether it is the study of Basic Education or the educational theories of Tagore, essentially the philosopher of education is expected to present a consistent and coherent account of the ideas, their basic assumptions, their validity and appraisal, with reference to a set of norms and values. Such systematic, rigorous philosophical study, unfortunately, is more an exception than the rule. Again, if it is the appraisal of an educational philosophy, the framework or criteria with reference to which the evaluation is carried out should be clearly set out.
It is also disquieting that the researcher sees an educational philosopher in anyone who has had something or other to say about education and hypostatizes an educational philosophy where none exists. A mere collection of stray sayings on education does not make an educational philosophy. It requires much more sustained, systematic thinking on educational matters, the firm foundation of a philosophy of life, knowledge and value, and a conscious, committed articulation of one's position on the means and ends of education.
A welcome trend is the increase in the number of researches with focus on themes-concepts, problems, principles, keeping personalities and institutions only
50 C. SESHADRI
in a perspective. Such endeavors can prove philosophically more satisfying and rewarding too. This is not to say that thematic research would automatically pass the test of quality. Even a theme, say, national integration or life-long education, may be handled only superficially. There is no foolproof stopping of such a possibility. Nevertheless, the challenge of philosophical exploration of ideas and themes should not go unaccepted.
The Nature of Philosophical Inquiry The question of method is a crucial one in philosophy of education, especially for research. It is sometimes asked whether `research' can be applied to philosophical types of studies at all. `Research' no doubt has acquired its particular connotation by being applied to studies of the empirical type. But in the broad sense of disciplined inquiry, there is no reason why it should not be applied to studies of the philosophic type as well. This is purely a semantic question. There should not be any objection to talking about philosophical research as long as one is clear about the logic of the particular form/forms of inquiry through which the research problem is Studied and the kind of `knowledge' that it leads to.