PHILOSOPHISING ABOUT EDUCATION (A PROLEGOMENON)

i

PHILOSOPHISINGABOUTEDUCATION(A PROLEGOMENON)

ii

iii

PHILOSOPHISINGABOUTEDUCATION(A PROLEGOMENON)

PATRICK O. AKINSANYAB.A. (Hons) Ib, M.A. (Ib), MBA (A.A.U.), MNIM, P.G.D.E. (A.A.U),

M.Ed. (O.O.U), Ph.D. (Ib)Department of Educational Foundations, University of Lagos

iv

Copyright © Akinsanya, Patrick O. 2015.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in anyform or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of theauthor.

ISBN: 978-978-53615-8-2

Published and Printed

By

University of Lagos Press and Bookshop LtdWorks and Physical Planning Complex

Unilag P.O. Box 132,University of Lagos,Akoka, Yaba - Lagos,

Nigeria.

e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]: 01-4539984

v

This effort is dedicated to Almighty GodTo my wife, Lady Cecilia Omoyemi Akinsanya

And to my children – Daniella Moyoninuoluwa, DanielMoyosooreoluwa and Patrick Olubamise AKINSANYA

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSForemost, I acknowledge the providence of AlmightyGod and His manifestations in my life.

In a special way, I thank Dr. ‘Kola Babarinde forproposing a foreword to this book. He has been a teacherof high repute and a shining example in a field that somescholars regard as a ‘no-go-area’. I am full of adulationsto my other teachers in the University of Ibadan(Faculties of Arts and Education), Olabisi OnabanjoUniversity, Ago-Iwoye, Ambrose Alli University,Ekpoma and Tai Solarin University of Education,Ijeagun.

I appreciate the management of UNILAG for providingan environment that constantly challenges our comfortzones so that we can reach any professional heightattainable. I thank my Dean, Prof. Supo Jegede, my HOD,Prof Ngozi Osarenren, my senior colleagues andcolleagues in the Department of EducationalFoundations, University of Lagos.

Special mention should be made of Dr. ‘Soji Oni, Prof.Tony Aladejana, Prof. Mopelola Omoegun and Prof. R.A.Alani for being wonderful vessels of honour used by Godhimself in my life.

Some names must be mentioned for recognition – LateProf. Olusegun Oladipo of blessed memory, Dr. AmaechiUdefi, Prof. Olatunji Oyeshile, Dr. Francis Offor, Prof.Niyi Benedict, Prof. Kayode Ijaduola, Dr. Abiodun Ojo,Prof. Abeke Adesanya, Prof. Olajide, Prof. Ujomu, Prof.

vii

Edun, Dr. Y.A. Oguntimehin and Prof. OluremiBamisaiye. These personalities have made me who I amtoday.

I need to thank my teeming number of students in theFaculty of Education, University of Lagos whochallenged me to come up with another text on thisdreaded but wonderful course.

My parents: Lawute & Olori J. A. Akinsanya, and mysiblings are deeply appreciated.

My wife, my daughter and my two sons are the bigmasquerades. I love you.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTSDedication vAcknowledgements viTable of Contents viiiForeword xiiPreface xivChapter One: What is Philosophy? 1

1.1 Introduction 11.2 Philosophy and Meaning 11.3 Epochs in Philosophy 81.4 Benefits of Philosophy 161.5 Summary 191.6 Questions for Evaluation 191.7 Possible Answers 20

References 21Chapter Two: What is Philosophy of Education? 232.1 Introduction 232.2 Philosophy of Education 232.3 Common Approaches to Philosophising

about Education 312.4 Modes of Philosophy of Education 332.5 Philosophy of Education as an Academic

Activity 372.6 Philosophy of Education in Nigeria 392.7 Summary 402.8 Questions for Evaluation 412.9 Possible Answers 41

References 44Chapter Three: Branches of Philosophy and Education 453.1 Introduction 453.2 Metaphysics and Education 463.3 Epistemology and Education 493.4 Axiology and Education 513.5 Logic and Education 543.6 Summary 56

ix

3.7 Questions for Evaluation 573.8 Possible Answers 57

References 58Chapter Four: Schools of Thought in Education 594.1 Introduction 594.2 Idealism in Education 604.3 Realism in Education 624.4 Naturalism in Education 644.5 Existentialism in Education 654.6 Pragmatism in Education 674.7 Progressivism in Education 694.8 Eclecticism in Education 704.9 Summary 724.10 Questions for Evaluation 724.10 Possible Answers 73

References 75Chapter Five: Notable Western Philosophers ofEducation 775.1 Introduction 775.2 Socrates 775.3 Plato 795.4 Aristotle 845.5 Rousseau 865.6 Pestalozzi 905.7 Froebel 945.8 Dewey 985.9 Montessori 1035.10 Summary 1065.11 Questions for Evaluation 1075.12 Possible Answers 107

References 109Chapter Six: Notable African Philosophers ofEducation 1116.1 Introduction 1116.2 Nyerere 1116.3 Solarin 116

x

6.4 Awolowo 1196.5 Akinpelu 1216.6 Summary 1236.7 Questions for Evaluation 1236.8 Possible Answers 124

References 125Chapter Seven: Philosophical Examination of SomeIssues in Education 1277.1 Introduction 1277.2 Education and Mistaken Concepts 1277.3 Education and Goals 1337.4 Equal Opportunity in Education 1357.5 Education and Democracy 1367.6 Education as Initiation 1397.7 Moral Education and Religious Instruction 1417.8 Teaching as a Profession in Nigeria 1447.9 Summary 1487. 9 Questions for Evaluation 1497.10 Possible Answers 150

References 151Chapter Eight: Philosophy, Policy and EducationSystem in Nigeria 1538.1 Introduction 1538.2 Philosophy and Education Policy 1538.3 Nigerian Education System and the

Philosophy Underlying it 1578.4 Summary 1738.5 Questions for Evaluation 1748.6 Possible Answers 175

References 178Chapter Nine: Philosophy of Education, TeacherEducation Programme and theModern Teacher 1819.1 Introduction 1819.2 Philosophy and Teacher Education

Programme 181

xi

9.3 Philosophy and Relevance to ModernTeachers 183

9.4 Summary 1899.5 Questions for Evaluation 1909.6 Possible Answers 190

References 192Chapter Ten: Making Philosophy More Relevant inToday’s Education 19310.1 Introduction 19310.2 The Crisis of Contemporary Philosophy 19310.3 Reconstructing Philosophy 19710.4 Some Recommendation 20210.5 Summary 20310.6 Questions for Evaluation 20410.5 Possible Answers 205

References 206Bibliography 207Index 215

xii

FOREWORDTo be so honoured with the request to write a forewordto a comprehensive and audacious work on philosophyand philosophy of education should be considered aspecial privilege. More so when this comes from abudding scholar in whose academic and careeremergence one has been privileged to be so intricatelyconnected. Although I was so busy, the author waspersistent. I was also not going to write until I go throughthe work and this caused some delay. On the whole, thepatience has been worth the efforts for both sides. Butthen, persistence is one of the hallmarks of students ofphilosophy.

First, when I saw the title, Philosophising AboutEducation (A Prolegomenon), a familiarity wasimmediately struck. My academic father and mentor, lateEmeritus Jones Akinpelu leapt to my consciousness. Hehas an article by that title and so this further aroused myinterest. In this case, what is contained? Dr. Akinsanyahas taken a tour through the major concerns ofphilosophy of education. He has examined topics onmeaning, scope, schools, concepts and issues as well asprominent thinkers in Europe and Africa. The analyseshave been comprehensive, incisive and well written ineasy and accessible language.

The other interesting addition is his programmaticapplication of the discipline, by which I mean, theapplication of philosophy as a programme of action. Hehas examined policy issues as well as confronted thequestion of relevance. Is philosophy and philosophy of

xiii

education actually necessary for effective policy andmeaningful implementation? Who actually requiresphilosophy and philosophy of education? The teacher,educational administrators, parents or every individualcommitted to enlightenment? This work addresses thesequestions in the usual methodological combination ofspeculation, analysis, and prescription with criticalinterrogation as a constant. Another added value is theinclusion of study questions for practice which makes thebook a very useful material for students across levels.Although we often say that philosophy does not solveproblems but rather dissolves them, he has taken a boldstep in suggesting possible answers to the practicequestions at the end of each chapter.

This is a very commendable effort and I recommend thebook to students and other practitioners in the palace ofphilosophy and philosophy of education.Kola Babarinde, Ph.DPhilosophy and Sociology of EducationFirst Vice–President, Philosophy of EducationAssociation of Nigeria (PEAN)Director, Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning,University of Ibadan, NigeriaCompleted this day, 11th November, 2015 in Bakersfield,California, USA.

xiv

PREFACEEducation is seemingly run today with little or no regardfor philosophy. Some people feel that philosophy hasoffered its best and it is no longer of much consequencein the contemporary world. Some others opine that itsarea of enterprise is remotely far, separated anddislocated from the world of practice. To some others,philosophy’s demands are utopic and exceedinglythorough for the simple-hearted, such that itspreoccupations should be avoided if possible. The merepresence of a critic who is terribly difficult to convinceand satisfy is the headache of others. Hence, thereappears to be a vindictive connivance against ‘thethinker’ and his tools. But the running of educationwithout philosophy is a futile, if not impossible task.Gentile (in Singh, 2007) asserts that the belief that menmay educate without concerning themselves withphilosophy is a failure to understand the precise natureof education; and that the process of education can nevergo on right lines without the help of philosophy.Philosophy and Education are so connected like theSiamese twins, such that to separate them is to separatethe spirit from the body. No wonder Dewey (1916)considers the two subjects as two sides of the same coin.Following his tradition, I was moved to title one of mymajor books published in 2013 as – Philosophy asEducation. In this publication, I submitted that educationis intimately connected with philosophy for when weeducate, what we are simply doing is choosing aphilosophy of life, and when we philosophise, we aresimply educating ourselves on issues of life. I wentfurther to contend that the necessity of philosophymandates every nation to adopt a philosophy as the

xv

underlying principle for her education policy andsystem.

The benefits of philosophy in education are innumerable.Basically, philosophy helps educators with her modeswhich include speculation, analysis, prescription, critiqueand synthesis, among others. Speculation helps by takingthe educator from the world of actuality to possibility;from what is presently done to what is doable; fromknown to unknown; from familiar to unfamiliar. Armedwith axiological values, the philosopher is able toprescribe the ‘oughts’ as contrasted with the ‘iss’. Hegives the direction to follow, and his counsels are alwayswise. Philosophy makes explicit the implicit assumptionsin education and inspects the compatibility, consistencyand adequacy of such assumptions in the light of thegrowing body of knowledge. Besides, philosophy helpsto constructively criticise the standpoints in education,and thus, offer alternative approaches to educationalmodes. These and other activities have preoccupiedSocrates, Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel,Dewey, Montessori, inter alia down to the presentgeneration which parades important names such as Reid,Peters, Hirst, Dearden, Lucas, Rorty, Nyerere, Solarin,Akinpelu and this list continues ad infinitum. With thesenames, such inventions as schooling, kindergarten,methods of teaching (e.g. Socratic/dialectic, lecture, playway, project, etc), patterns of curriculum, among others,have brought the child and his environment to thezenith.

Philosophising About Education thus serves the purposeof initiation. It introduces the readers to the ‘world of

xvi

deep, reflective and critical thinkers’, where theprinciples underlying education are let loose. The book isdivided into ten chapters which were purposelypackaged to reflect the meaning and benefits ofphilosophy of education. While chapters one and twoconsider the meaning, modes, approaches to philosophyand philosophy of education, chapter three focusesattention on the compartment approach to philosophy ofeducation. Here, I consider the core branches ofphilosophy and their implications to education. Inchapter four, the systems’ approach to philosophy ofeducation is given attention. Ideas, teaching methods andcurricula proposed by some schools of thought werebrought to fore. Chapters five and six handled the thirdapproach to philosophy of education, which is great-minds approach. Contributions of notable scholarschosen from Europe and Africa were presented. Chaptersseven and eight are exercises typifying the last approach,problems approach. Some issues in education werephilosophically examined. Most important was theexamination of the nature of the philosophyunderpinning the policy and system of education inNigeria. The place and benefits of philosophy forteachers and the programme which produces them werediscussed in chapter nine. The last chapter of the bookbeams a speculative and prescriptive attention on how tomake philosophy better appreciated and relevant in thecontemporary world. This book is, panoramically, anintroduction to the meaning, the place, preoccupations,approaches and modes, contributions and considerations,patterns, inventions and advantages of philosophy ofeducation. I therefore encourage the reader to readthrough the chapters with utmost concentration.

What is Philosophy?

1

Chapter OneWHAT IS PHILOSOPHY?1.1 IntroductionThis chapter presents a foundational knowledge for therest of the chapters. This means that a goodunderstanding of the entire book, especially chapter two,is dependent on a good grasp of this chapter. The readershould take note of the meanings, preoccupations, modesand benefits of philosophy; such shall be carried over tosubsequent discussions.1.2 Philosophy and MeaningThe question raised in this chapter appears trivial, butthe answer is by no means simple. It is a question whichhas brought a great divide among philosophers from theancient epoch to the present. This was what made Udefi(1994) to say that people tend to think of philosophy indifferent ways because of differences in perception, timeand background. While some prefer to conceivephilosophy as just a personal attitude to life and theuniverse; some take it as a method of reflective thinkingand reasoned inquiry; some take it as a speculativeattempt to gain a view of the whole; some others feel it isa group of problems as well as theories about thesolution to these problems; there are some others whotake philosophy as nothing but the logical analysis oflanguage and the clarification of the meaning of concepts.

Philosophising about Education

2

All these various attempts have led to intense debates,commendation and condemnation, approbation anddisapprobation, which have sometimes resulted intometaphilosophy, that is, philosophising aboutphilosophy itself (Akinsanya, 2013).

For the sake of newcomers, it appears wise to yield to theadvice of Broad, cited in Oladipo (2008), that inpresenting a picture of philosophy, we should begin byconsidering what kind of activities have been pursued bymen whom everyone would regard as great philosopherswhen engaged in what everyone would regard as theircharacteristically professional work.

This means that philosophy could be introducedprudently to newcomers by taking recourse into historyto identify what philosophers have been preoccupyingthemselves with. In this vein, then, may I say thatphilosophers have preoccupied themselves with twomajor things, viz; first order philosophical activities whichentail pursuit of wisdom, speculations, critical reflectionsand critique of ideologies, prescriptions, conceptualclarifications and analyses; and second order philosophywhich involves the interrogation of the foundations ofvarious disciplines. These preoccupations need someelucidations.

Foremost, philosophers have been preoccupied withpursuit of wisdom. It is important to quickly state herethat wisdom is different from knowledge, to avoid themistake of trivialising this pursuit for other pursuits inother disciplines. It is possible to have a man who is

What is Philosophy?

3

knowledgeable about many things, but not wise; while itis equally possible to be wise and not deeplyknowledgeable. Hook (1969) says that wisdom is a specieof knowledge – it is knowledge of the origin, careers,interrelations, and reliabilities of human values in ourexperience. It is knowledge of knowledge. Wisdom is anaffair of values, and of value judgements; it is knowledgeof what is of utmost worth in our experience, of the endswhich we can justifiably pursue, of the good, the better,and the best, the bad, the worse, and the worst in thoseconcrete situations in which, confronted by alternativesof policy or action, we ask “what shall I do?” We thussee that there is a difference between possessing someknowledge about things, and applying such knowledgein a systematic way as a guide and a beacon in one’sactivities. Herein lies the difference. Thus, thephilosopher has been characterised as a lover of wisdombecause he places premium on the application of theintellect at both the practical and theoretical levels. He istypified in Hook’s illustration as a man who knows themethods and techniques by which the process ofreflection is carried out. He has vision of possibilities. Heis not only a critic but a seer. His vision is often expressedas a glimpse into what can make our society better forour time, what can most enrich our life and give itabiding worth, an insight into human possibilities andhow to realise them. The characterisation of thephilosopher by Hook corroborates Santayana’sdescription of the philosopher as a man who is oftensilent for long periods; a man who watches “stars thatmove slowly and in courses that it is possible though


4

difficult to see; and he is crushing all things in his heartas in a winepress, until his life and their secrets flow outtogether” (Santayana in Lucas, 1969).

Speculation is another preoccupation of the philosopher.It is the capacity of a mind to embrace creativity orinnovation. It stems from the Latin word – speculare -meaning “investigate”, “find out”, “project” or “travel”.Speculation is essentially a method of adumbration,hypothesising, conjecturing, rational guessing andsuppositioning. Through its processes, the philosopher isable to forecast or make solid predictions about futuristicevents and even past ones. It aids him in framing acoherent, logical, necessary system of general ideas interms which every element of our experience could beinterpreted. With speculation, a philosopher could makeexact predictions on the events that may take place at so,so, so time and in what manner. Its posers are sometimes:What if? What if not? Can we consider the possibility ofsay, a golden mountain? Can we imagine a worldwithout order or law? Can we imagine a world (place)where all sinners from the beginning of the world wouldbe? Speculation is the capacity of a mind embracingcreativity or innovation. Through this process, we areable to forecast or make solid predictions about futuristicevents and even past events. Speculation aidsphilosophers to visit the past and bring it to the present,and also to travel into the future and bring it into thepresent.

Very related to the above preoccupation, is theprescriptive role philosophy assumes. Consciously and

What is Philosophy?

5

sometimes unconsciously, philosophers have held up amirror in which the society ‘ought to’ conform. Rorty(1979) presents a picture of this tendency in his book,Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Through this way,philosophers have shown signs of their discipline being amethod or process, as well as a body of knowledge.Examples range from Socrates to Plato, to Kant and to allmoral philosophers of disparate epochs.

Another important engagement of the philosopherconsists in reflective inquiry. Although reflective/criticalinquiries are not exclusive preserves of philosophy, theyare more inclusive, synoptic and comprehensive in it.Deep reflections involve careful and accurate thinking; itis an attempt to think through one’s problems and to faceall the facts involved. Titus (1969) noted that theaccumulation of more knowledge does not by itself leadto understanding since it does not necessarily teach themind to make a critical evaluation of facts or enable aperson to live his life according to consistent principles,but with critical and reflective thinking, as noted byOladipo (2006), man’s understanding of himself as ahuman being is deepened, and new descriptions of manwhich would enable him to see things in a new light orfrom a new perspective is offered. This is why Sellars(2007) unequivocally defines philosophy as “a persistentattempt to give insight into the nature of the world andof ourselves by means of systematic reflections”.

But philosophy has another important engagement. It iscritique of ideologies. Ideologies are allegiances to ideals


6

which we are prepared to live for, to fight for, and evendie for. Some of these are inherited through a large massof unquestioned traditional or customary beliefs. Theseideals, however, determine all our actions as they flowinto our basic commitments. If such actions areunfortunately premised on wrong ideologies, one couldeasily imagine the fate of the committer. To safeguardagainst wrong choices and wrong modes of life,philosophy takes its time to critique our presuppositionsand assumptions in order to be able to separate goodfrom bad ideals, right from wrong beliefs andmodernism from anachronism.

Again, philosophers have been engaged in logicalanalysis of language and clarification of the meaning ofwords. Two concepts are important here - analysis andclarification. By analysis, I mean the anatomisation,dissection, resolution or breaking down of complexesinto simple components. It means to unloose, untie or todissolve a complex proposition or concept into simplerones in order to gain clearer or simpler comprehension ofthe original proposition. This helps in resolving complexpropositions into simple and meaningful ones, and itexposes confusion and nonsense. Clarification, on theother hand, makes clear and delimits sharply thethoughts which otherwise are, as it were, opaque, blurredand confusing. With analysis and clarifications, therefore,the philosopher is able to distinguish between statementsof fact and disguised definitions, between hypotheseswhich may be true or false, and resolutions which areadequate or inadequate. Hook (1969) presents someillustrations in his book which could make the usefulness

What is Philosophy?

7

of analysis and clarification explicit. Permit me to re-present one of the illustrations for better understanding.There is a slogan, according to him, which has been oftenrepeated that;

There are no alternatives to peace! How many whomouth this sentence are aware that it commits themto unconditional surrender if an enemy threatensattack? What those who utter this sentence mean tosay is that peace is desirable. The meaning of whatthey actually said is that peace at any price, even atthe cost of freedom, is desirable. People who speakthis way don’t say what they really mean. Moreimportant – and this is not the same thing – theydon’t mean what they really say (Hook, 1969).

By and large, through speculations, pursuit of wisdom,reflections, critique, prescriptions, analysis and otherpreoccupations, philosophy at different points has beenable to present man with explanations on his identity, onlife and other realities. This is what has come to beknown as first order philosophy and modes ofphilosophy.

As a second order activity, philosophy ponders on firstorder philosophy by exploring its elements, questioningits answers and systematising its thinking into astructured whole, while it organizes its experience intobecoming a discipline in which people are trained andwithin which philosophers exercise the task of secondorder philosophy (Dalfovo, 2002). In other words,philosophy extends its first order engagements tointerrogate the foundations of various disciplines, thus,


8

becoming a discipline on its own. As such, the attempt touse philosophy to query the operations, presuppositionsand foundations of other disciplines producesphilosophy of education, of religion, of language, of law,of technology, of science, to mention but a few.Philosophy gets involved in these disciplines by askingconceptual questions which are regarded as second-order. Udefi (1994) sheds light on the foregoing when hesays;

…philosophy looks at the substructure and raisesfoundational questions. It is for this reason that suchquestions are termed second-order or conceptualquestions, for they require from us an account of theproper thing to say and think about the facts or anaccount of how we should conceive of them.1.3 Epochs in Philosophy

The above mentioned preoccupations, which can as wellbe regarded as modes of philosophy, have been themajor business of the philosopher for ages. These agesare classified into four:1. Ancient2. Medieval3. Modern4. ContemporaryAncient PhilosophyThe ancient period was a period which featuredmysticism at its apogee. It was a period when peopleresorted to formulating mythical stories as responses tosome fundamental questions on the universe. Hence, wehad stories of Zeus, Osiris, Horis, Obatala, etc, as

What is Philosophy?

9

consolatory creation stories for the simple-minded. Suchstories were narrated with authority, firmness anddogmatism.

However, around 4th century B.C. to 8th century B.C.,some deep thinkers came to the scene. These thinkerswere able to break up from the tradition of mysticism,dogmatism, anachronism and blindedness. They wouldnot subscribe to acceptance of fables on the basicquestions on the universe. The questions they asked andtried to answer were not different from the ones theirprecursors grappled with. Such questions were: What isreality? What is the essential nature of things? What isthe underlying reality which is revealed in the thingsaround us? Basically, their preoccupation was: ex quamateria constituit mundi? – What is the fundamental stuffwith which reality and everything in it made up?

Various attempts to grapple with these questions saw theemergence of the Ionian Philosophers (Thales,Anaximander, Anaximenes), Heraclitus, Pythagoras,Xenophanes, Parmenides, Anaxagoras, Protagoras,Leucippus, Zeno, Georgia, Sophists, Socrates,Democritus, Plato, Aristotle, Diogenes, Epicurus andmany others. The difference between these people andtheir precursors was that they were able to step-up fromthe level of mythologies to the realm of elementary,critical and systematic reflections. On the question of thefundamental stuff of the universe, for instance;1. Thales who lived from the last part of the 7th

century to the middle of the 6th century B.C.,


10

credited with several occupations like engineering,astronomy, politics and financiering, was said tohave opined that the original principle of all thingswas water. He had reasons for saying this. By water,Thales had meant the moist state. The rationalebehind this was that no existing thing in theuniverse – animals, plants, spirits, etc., can dowithout water. Take water out of the universe andeverything ceases to exist; even the earth as a planetfloats on water. This explanation may not be correct,but it is to some extent reasonable. It is differentfrom a myth which may not render itself toexplication.

2. Another thinker, Anaximander, who made someinventions in mathematics and astronomy, andwho was credited with drawing the first map of theworld, answered that the source of the world wasapeiron. ‘Apeiron’ means ‘infinite’ –limitlessness/indeterminateness. We canunderstand this word as something aweful,grandiose and unlimited in its magnificence. It isthe source of all things. Some things come to be,others cease to be, but the source endures because itis independent of, and superior to these changes.

3. Anaximenes, who was a disciple of Anaximander,did not go along with his master. For him, air wasthe source of all things. He said this because allthings are formed from air in a specific way byrarefaction and condensation. When air is heavilycondensed, it becomes cloud, water, land, rocks and

What is Philosophy?

11

so on, depending on the degree of density; no mancan even live longer than an hour without air. Andat the end of the day, everything still returns to airthrough rarefaction. Thus, nothing but air is thesource. The constant generation and destruction inthe world can be plotted on a single dimension –some things change out of air, and others go backinto air.

Heraclitus, Parmenides, Plato, Aristotle and the rest, allhave their own fairly tenable and reasonable versions onthis question (fundamental stuff) and on other questionsabout reality which cannot be relayed here because of thescope of this work. But the significant thing about theancient philosophers is that for the first time in history,men began to reflect and critically question everythingthat exists so as to provide critical explanations (notmythologies) on what nature really means.Medieval PhilosophyThe medieval period (middle age) spanned between4th/5th century and 14th/15th century A.D. It is thelongest period of philosophical history, right from the fallof the Roman empire until the beginning of the moderntimes. The period was dominated by Christian andArabic philosophers. These philosophers were, ThomasAquinas, Augustine, Anselm, Bonaventure, PeterAbelard, Peter Lumbard, Boethius, Williem Ockam,Erigenna, John the Scot, Avicenna, Algazali, Maimonides,Don Scotus, Giles, Al farahbi, Alkindi, Ibn-Rusd,Averroes, Saadia, etc.


12

This period witnessed a hi-jack of philosophy bytheologians. Philosophy at this period became ancillaetheologia – (maid of theology). This means thatphilosophy was used as a means of elucidating andconsolidating the supreme authority of religiousscriptures, doctrines and dogma. What the medievalthinkers did was to explain the natural humanphenomena by reference to the tenets of faith such asGod, creation, incarnation, redemption, etc., with the useof philosophical arguments (for instance, Aquinas basedhis Christian philosophy on the works of Aristotle, whileAugustine gave legitimacy to his work by adapting it tothe philosophy of Plato). Consequently, reasoningbecame solely dependent on faith; it serves asjustificatory criterion for the acceptance of any form ofreasoning. This means that there was a yardstick bywhich the validity of an argument was to be judged - thiswas faith.

The thinkers of middle ages depended so much on theprinciples that came from the gospel. This was howeverdone with a heavy corroboration with some elements inGreek philosophy. Augustine, for instance, had openlysubmitted that he believed in Plato’s submission thatphilosophy is the love of wisdom. If philosophy is thelove of wisdom, and God is wisdom according to thescriptures, then for Augustine, philosophy is the love ofGod. So, philosophy should centre around God and faithin God.

By and large, this period marked the triumph of theReligious faith. Christian and Islamic philosophies

What is Philosophy?

13

developed notably at this point. But the question is: canfaith really permit rightful and needed philosophicaldispositions to fundamental questions;? Can l know and beliefat the same time?; is faith not a refutation of the very object ofphilosophy, which thrives in questions and undogmaticanswers concerning the foundation of all that exist?; can a manpossess faith and still retain his interrogative capacities?; doeshis faith not absolve him from rigours of philosophicalrestlessness? These are questions, and I humbly say, withthe possibility of being corrected, that the difficulty ofmending faith with philosophy was one of the factorswhich led to the next stage – modern age – wherephilosophy was given its freedom from being ancillaetheologia to being its own master.Modern PhilosophyThe modern period in philosophy was a period ofawakening from slumbering to radical investigations;investigations which mostly derive their authenticationand authorisation from science. It is a period thatwitnessed the gradual and radical separation ofphilosophy from theology. It started around 15th centuryA.D. Some trace its beginning to Rene Descartes (1596 –1650) in whom all major themes of the age weredemonstrated, especially with his scientific anddistinctive style of investigation.

The changes which took place during this period are: thoroughreasoning and observation overthrowing authority and dogmatism;radical change in the explanation of natural phenomena; and therearose a pursuit of mathematical exactitude and logical rigors,intellectual certainty and moral purity.


14

The philosophers of this era were: Rene Descartes, JohnLocke, Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Georg Berkeley,Benedict Spinoza, Gottfried Leibniz, Catharine Cockburn,Thomas Hobbes, Niccolo Machiavelli, J.J. Rousseau,Adam Smith, J.S. Mill, G.W.F. Hegel, Ogotomeli, Du BoisPadmore, Cheikh Anta Diop, Iven Sertima, NaiwuOsabon, Martin Bernal, Ben Joachanan, Obenge, etc.

The main themes of the modern period centered aroundSkepticism, Rationalism, Empiricism, Foundationalism,Coherentism, Contextualism, Mind-Body Problem(Interactionism), Contractualism, Capitalism,Utilitarianism, Communism/Socialism, Absolutism anda host of others.Contemporary PhilosophyThe contemporary era in philosophy could be said tocommence around the 20th century A.D. The beginningof this period saw a hot contention on therejection/acceptance of metaphysical abstractions. It is aperiod characterised mainly by the practice of analysis –the anatomisation, dissection, resolution or breakingdown of complexes into simple components.Philosophers of this epoch opine that the problem whichhitherto faced philosophy was lack of clarity in the use oflanguage. Thus, the task of philosophy should henceforthbe the analysis of language and nothing more.Wittgeinstein and Moore posited, for instance, thatphilosophy consists in the logical clarification ofthoughts; that it is not a body of doctrines, but an activitywhich consists essentially of elucidation. This means thatphilosophy should preoccupy itself with making clear

What is Philosophy?

15

and delimiting sharply the thoughts which wereotherwise opaque, confusing and blurred.

The distinctive tenets of this period are:1. Analyticity2. Value-neutrality3. Anti-metaphysical posture (it considers issues like

accidentals, substances, God, spirits, angels, heaven& hell and other abstract entities as meaningless;and meaninglessness is useless in the field ofphilosophy).

4. Logical clarifications of thoughts.5. Anti-authority/Non-dogmatism.6. It also embraces constructivity and criticality.

Its theories range from logical atomism to logicalpositivism, solipsism, verificationism, falsificationism,conventionalism, existentialism, pragmatism,instrumentalism, neo-scholasticism, neo-kantianism andphenomenology. This important epoch in philosophyfeatures prominently the following geniuses – MartinHeidegger, A.J. Ayer, B. Russell, G.E. Moore, L.Wittgeinstein, J.P. Satre, W.V.O. Quine, Gottlob Frege, J.Dewey, P. Hountondji, K. Wiredu, O. Oruka, J.S. Mbiti,Placid Temples, Nkurumah Nyerere, Senghor Leopold,P. Bodunrin, O. Oladipo, G. Sogolo and so many others.It is important to note that our generation falls under thecontemporary period of philosophy. This means that a lotof thinking, rationalisations and themes are still passingunder the bridge; and a lot of names shall still be addedto the list hitherto mentioned. The name of the present


16

reader could be part of the list. It is however importantfor the reader to note that in all the aforementioned anddiscussed epochs, philosophers have been employingmodes such as deep reflections, speculations,prescriptions, critique and analyzing, in doing theirwork.1.4 Benefits of PhilosophyPhilosophy is, essentially, a pursuit of wisdom and thesearch for a true guide to life. It is truly a search - a searchfor wisdom, reality, truth, and the ideal life. It prods thespirit of questioning which arises out of wonders in orderto create deep reflections on human experience.Philosophy not only helps man to understand the world,but also to adopt the best attitude towards it.

Philosophy is an interesting field for it satisfies man’snatural curiosity and intelligence. The existence of man;of other beings around; earth and everything in it; otherplanetry bodies; life and death; life beyond death; andothers too numerous to mention, propel man to think,wonder and raise questions. It is a natural urge in man,and this urge is what we label as philosophy.

Philosophy, through metaphysics, helps us to discern thebipartite nature of the universe; that universe is made upof the physical and spiritual. This discernment thusenables us to devise the best mode of handling issues inour day-to-day engagements with other entities and non-entities.

What is Philosophy?

17

Through epistemology, philosophy drives deception offour doorsteps. With its insistence on querying all forms,nature, sources and validity of ‘knowledge claims’, weare able to separate facts from mirages, knowledge frompseudo-knowledge and appearances from reality.

Philosophy develops, through logic - an ability to spotlogical difficulties in what others write or say and toavoid these pitfalls in our own thinking. It also helpscritical and clear thinking. Students of philosophy learnto think, read, write and speak more critically,consistently, coherently, carefully and cogently. In otherwords, philosophy helps us to be very mindful, tactful,careful, efficient and efficacious in our use of language. Itdevelops our consciousness of the ambiguous nature ofwords, premises, definitions, claims and arguments.

Through axiology, philosophy helps us to distinguishbetween values and vices and to identify what is mostappropriate at any given (moral) situation.

The major lesson from philosophical schools of thought isthat ‘variety is the spice of life’. There is of course no oneway of perceiving reality. Philosophy opens or widensour horizons. It takes us off dogmatism and shallow-mindedness. No wonder Oladipo (2006) says succinctlythat:

Philosophy is the elevation of mankind in terms ofenlightenment, open-mindedness, broadening ofsensibilities and sensitivity to humanprinciples/ideas. It helps in the generation anddevelopment of conceptual or theoretical


18

frameworks for perceiving, feeling and transformingreality…

The study of philosophy reveals the variouscontributions of past and present thinkers. One becomesaware of the ideas shaping the forces of life, and of theinnovations and creativities around. This awareness thusprods in us the peculiar ingenuity needed to takehumanity from where the previous thinkers left it to ahigher level on the ladder of progress. Philosophy wakesup the giant hitherto buried in our unconsciousness.

Philosophy trains us to think deeply, reflectively,critically and independently. Sodipo (cited in Akinsanya,2013) submits that philosophy is a “reflective and criticalthinking about the concepts and principles which we useto organize our experience in morals, religion, in socialand political life, in law, in history and the naturalsciences”.

In philosophy, we have a synthesis of knowledge. In itsprivileged position as the mother of all disciplines,philosophy presents humanity with a comprehensive orholistic view of knowledge. While botany studies asection of life, that is, plants and their structures, zoologystudies animals and their behaviours, psychology studieshuman mind and how it functions, sociology studiesnature, development of society and social behaviour;philosophy is all-embracing. Philosophy presents acomprehensive/holistic view of knowledge. It isanalogous to a mansion with various rooms, where allthe rooms can be likened to various departments/fields.

What is Philosophy?

19

As the landlord, philosophy monitors/inspects whatgoes on in every room such that engagements in oneroom conform on the long run with other engagements inthe mansion. This was what was referred to earlier in thischapter as second order philosophy.1.5 SummaryPhilosophy is a discipline which promotes holisticcomprehension of human condition and enhances thehuman capacity to cope with the challenges of life. Whilethere is no generally accepted definition on this subject,there is no doubt that philosophy, as being practiced byprofessionals, is a frantic pursuit of wisdom; a critique ofideologies; a reflective and critical engagement; aspeculative enterprise; a prescriptive venture and a houseof analysis. Philosophy is as old as mankind and haslived with man from the beginning to this moment. Itshistorical reckoning dates from ancient/classical tomedieval, to modern and to the contemporary. Itsbenefits are enormous.1.6 Questions for EvaluationAt the end of this chapter, the reader should be able toprovide answers to the following questions:1. Attempt a universally accepted definition of

philosophy.2. What are the major preoccupations of philosophy?3. What are the common modes of philosophy?4. How many epochs can be identified in the study of

philosophy?5. Highlight any four benefits of philosophy.


20

1.7 Possible AnswersThe following are likely to be the answers to the abovequestions:1. There is no universally accepted definition of

philosophy. Each attempt is premised on one’sdisposition, orientation, exposure, education,time/epoch and background.

2. There are so many preoccupations of thephilosopher. The common ones, as discussed in thischapter, are pursuit of wisdom, deep reflections,speculations, prescriptions, critique and analysis.

3. Modes of philosophy are not different frompreoccupations of philosophy. Common modes are:Critique, Analysis, Prescription and Speculation.These modes develop into forms of philosophyknown as Critical Philosophy, Analytic Philosophy,Prescriptive Philosophy and Speculative Philosophyrespectively.

4. Four epochs are identifiable. They are: Ancientphilosophy, Medieval philosophy, Modernphilosophy and Contemporary philosophy.

5. Benefits derivable from philosophy are numerous.Philosophy helps man to understand the world andto adopt the best attitude towards it; it helps us tobe mindful, tactful, careful, efficient and efficaciousin our use of language; it widens our horizons andtakes us off dogmatism and shallow-mindedness;philosophy trains us to think deeply, reflectively,critically and independently.

What is Philosophy?

21

ReferencesAkinsanya, P.O. (2013). Philosophy as education. 3rd ed.

Ijebu-Ode: Patt PublicationsDalfovo, A.T. (2002). “The rise and fall of development: a

challenge to culture” in C. Sumner & S.W.Yohanness. Perspectives in African philosophy: ananthology of problems of an African philosophy: twentyyears after (1976-1996). Addis-Ababa: Addis-AbabaUniversity Press.

Hook, S. (1969). “Does philosophy have a future?” in C. J.Lucas. What is philosophy of education? London:Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

Oladipo, O. (2006). “What is philosophy?” in O. Oladipoand P. Akinsanya (eds). Philosophy and logic: Anintroduction. Ibadan: Hope Publications.

Oladipo, O. (2008). Thinking about philosophy. Ibadan:Hope Publications.

Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. NewJersey: Princeton University Press

Sellars, R.W. quoted in Y. K. Singh.(2007). Philosophicalfoundation of education. (New Delhi: APHPublishing Corporation.

Titus, H.H., (1969). “Philosophy and the contemporaryscene in C. J. Lucas. What is philosophy of education?London: Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

Udefi, C. A. (1994). Philosophy as a foundationaldiscipline” in R. D. Abubakre, M. A. Akanji & R.A. Akanmidu. eds. Reading in General Studies inNigeria. Ilorin: University of Ilorin Library &Publications Committee.


22

What is Philosophy of Education?

23

Chapter TwoWHAT IS PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION?2.1 IntroductionPhilosophy of education is one of the various appliedphilosophies. Other applied philosophies are philosophyof science, philosophy of law, philosophy of religion,philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, socialphilosophy, political philosophy, etc. From being amember of applied philosophies, one can assume thedefinition of philosophy of education, that it is theapplication of philosophy to educational issues. But likephilosophy itself, this definition, although very popular,may not be generally accepted. There are howevercertain conceptions by educators which can never qualifyas a good definition of philosophy of education. Thischapter thus considers some of these misconceptions andthereafter adopts a professionally acceptable conception.The chapter also considers the preoccupations,approaches, modes, activities of philosophy of educationand its practitioners.2.2 Defining Philosophy of EducationSo many things go with the label of philosophy ofeducation. For the purpose of clarification, let us brieflyreflect on how philosophy of education has beenconsidered, so as to separate the wheat from the chaffs.


24

Some of the most common definitions may be classifiedas follow;1. defining philosophy of education as a point of view2. defining philosophy of education as an educational

policy3. defining philosophy of education as the anchor

sheet on which other parts of an educational systemhang.

4. defining philosophy as the generalised theory ofeducation.

5. defining philosophy of education as the applicationof philosophy to education.Philosophy of Education as a Point of View

This consideration of philosophy of education, and evenphilosophy itself, is common among those who lackindepth knowledge of the discipline. Such people holdarbitrary positions on issues, whereas such positionsshift as occasions demand, and they label the outcomephilosophy. It is not uncommon to hear people say – myphilosophy of life is ‘just be happy’; my philosophy offashion is ‘modesty’; my philosophy of business is ‘profitmaximisation’. Newsome (1969) quotes a school principalwho expressed her philosophy of education by singing alittle song called “let’s all get together”. With these andsimilar expressions, what the speakers mean to convey istheir decision or momentary view about issues. It ishowever wrong to equate philosophy with any decisionor momentary view on a particular issue which may besubject to whimsical moderations. Philosophy is deeperthan that.


25

Philosophy of Education as a Policy on EducationPeople often confuse educational policies as philosophiesof education. It is common place, to hear educationalpractitioners quoting sections or subsections, as the casemay be, “as contained in the new philosophy of educationpublished in 1977/1981/1998/2004/2007/2013”. They usethe phrases (philosophy of education and policy oneducation) interchangeably as if they are synonymous.Fayemi (2008) in his article Philosophy of Education and theNigerian Educational System blames some Nigerians, forparading the confusion and ignorance for a long time.According to him;

Policy statements and documents by governmentshave been erroneously taken as Nigerianeducational philosophy. Whether clearly formulatedor not, the popular impression by many is that ideasand educational objectives that have governed anation’s educational practice down the ages are thephilosophy of education (Fayemi, 2008).

Educational policies, rather than being philosophies, areguides reflecting the goals/objectives and strategiesemployed to achieve such goals. Philosophies ofeducation, however, serve as the base on which thepolicy with its goals/objectives and strategies are laid.Such philosophies are contained in the policy-documentson education. So, there is a big difference between apolicy and a philosophy.Philosophy of Education as AnchorSome people take philosophy of education as liaisonofficer which connects all the different parts of education


26

system. Three things are usually meant by this – firstly,philosophy of education is considered as thecoordination of the social, economic, political, moral andcultural dimensions of education in order to produce acomprehensive and cohesive system. Secondly,philosophy of education is considered as thesynchronisation of all the different stages of the schoolsystem, to avoid overlapping, repetition and wastage.And thirdly, although not radically different from otherconceptions, is philosophy of education as a web whichconnects all the inputs in an education policy. In thesethree senses, philosophy of education is taken as thepivot or the ‘centre of gravity’ on which all othereducational efforts are laid. This conception is reasonableand needs no justification. In its role as the mother of alldisciplines, it is easy for philosophy to play such asynthetic function, coordinating all the various unitsmaking up the system of education.Philosophy of Education as the Theory of EducationThis conception is championed by Dewey (1916), Axtelle(1956), Newsome (1969), Black (1956) and the rest. Theyconsider education as an enterprise which could bebifurcated into practice and theory. While the practicalaspect of education is handled by sociology, psychology,history of education, etc., the ‘theory of education’ ishandled by philosophy. Dewey states that if we have noproblem conceiving education as a process of formingfundamental and analytical dispositions towards natureand fellow men, then, we have no choice than to readilyregard philosophy as a general theory of education. Infact, philosophy is education in Dewey’s work. This


27

conception of philosophy, as described by Axtelle andNewsome, is one of the most profound insights in thehistory of thought. The insight conceives education as aconsideration and formation of the required dispositionsof man to himself and his environment, while philosophyis concerned with the principles behind suchdispositions. This means that education is tied up withphilosophy, and they are inseparably linked. The failureto recognise the inseparability of the link constitutes apeculiar sort of professional myopia on the part of allconcerned (Bertocci and Millard, 1969).Philosophy of Education as an Application ofPhilosophy to EducationThis conception appears to be the most tenable andacceptable. It takes philosophy of education as theapplication of philosophical standpoints to the field ofeducation. Such applications could take differentdimensions – it could be by applying the answers givenby philosophers to various questions that might be ofconcern to education; philosophy could also be appliedto education by utilising the methods, tools andtechniques of philosophy in investigating educationalproblems; philosophy could again be applied toeducation by utilising the systems of philosophy toexplain or interpret educational issues. One could yetapply philosophy to education by deducing educationalimplications from systematic philosophies respect totheir metaphysical, epistemological and ethicalassumptions. These dimensions entail marshalling outhow a realist, idealist, existentialist or a pragmatist


28

would formulate educational goals (and what kind ofgoals); how he/she would form curricula; how he/shewould handle teaching and learning activities; howhe/she would manage discipline in the class; and howhe/she would handle all other variables as they relate toeducation. These kinds of attempt have been consideredand vigorously pursued by some experts, for instance,we have Idealism in Education; Existentialism in Education;Realism in Education, among others.

The third, fourth and fifth definitions, however, could bemerged as they portend some strength. Indeed,philosophy serves as a web connecting all the componentparts that make up the education system. It provides theumbrella under which all bits in education arecoherently, consistently and systematically knitted. Theonly way through which philosophy could serve thisfunction, however, is by tilting towards the fifthdefinition, and that is, by allowing philosophy to beapplied to education. Again, the thorough application ofphilosophy to education would eventually collapse into adiffusion of philosophy into education – philosophy aseducation (the fourth definition).

Historically, the relationship between philosophy andeducation, whether in the third or fourth or fifthconception, dates back to antiquity. Socrates precededand set the stage with his method of intellectualmidwifery (dialectics). Imbued with his characteristicstyle of teaching and learning, he went about engagingdiscussants on their conceptions of justice, equality, right,and so on. The problems of knowledge, value, what


29

constitutes the good life, the kind of world we live in andwhat we can do about it, were all given priorities in theengagements. Socrates was then able to draw out andmake explicit presuppositions and meanings, anddevelop tools for critically evaluating thepresuppositions and meaning, in relation to eachother/one another and all available areas of experience.It is commonsensical, then, to infer that Socrates’ missionwas to go out and philosophise, but in the process, heended up educating himself and his discussants. This iswhy Millard and Bertocci (1969) opine that educationprovides some of the most important data areas ofphilosophic investigations on the one hand, andphilosophic investigation becomes a prerequisite tocritical and directed as opposed to non-reflective andaccidental education and educational planning on theother.

It was again, not an accident that Plato’s foremost work –The Republic – was a response to the challenge tophilosophise about education for the good society andthe good life. We have other efforts in Aristotole’sPolitics, Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding;Rousseau’s Emile; Adam Smith’s Inquiry into the Natureand Causes of Wealth of Nations; and several other worksfrom Augustine, Aquinas, Hume, Kant, Whitehead,Maritain, Russell, Dewey, Pestalozzi, Herbert, Froebel,Comenius, Morris, Kilpatrick, Hirst, Dearden, Peters, andso on. These crops of thinkers were engaged in raisingphilosophical questions, which on the long run, werefound to be educational in nature. In their involvements


30

in philosophy, they were able to speculate, critique,critically analyse and conceptually clarify, prescribe andprovide alternative courses of action in the world ofeducation. They were involved in making explicit theimplicit assumptions in education and detecting thecompatibility, consistency and adequacy of suchassumptions in the light of the growing body ofknowledge. Besides, they were able to constructivelycriticize the standpoints in education, and thus, offeredalternative approaches to educational modes. Therationale behind these engagements is captured inOttaway (1962) who had asked that if philosophy is theclarification of thought, can we not use it to clarify ourthoughts about education?... or if philosophy is a criticalactivity, can we not examine the methods of education,and criticise their presuppositions and assumptions?Answers to these questions are in the affirmative.Methods of teaching and learning; curriculum planningand development; organisation of learning experienceswith subject contents – all have principles. Childdevelopment; motivational strategies; tests of intelligenceand achievements – are equally anchored on theories.Such principles and theories could be examined,analysed, criticised and evaluated to discover theirlogical validity, reliability and fitness of purpose. Theonus of examination, analysis, critique and evaluation ofeducational methods and practices, lies with philosophyof education.


31

2.3 Common Approaches to Philosophing aboutEducationThere are different approaches to philosophising abouteducation. Sometimes these approaches have led to whatwe call metaphilosophy of education, that is,philosophising about philosophy of education. To servethe purpose of this text, focus will be on four commonapproaches which are Great Minds’ approach; Systems’approach; Compartments’ approach and Problems’approach.

In the first approach, attention is beamed on theworks/contributions of progenitors in the field. Suchscholars like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau,Pestalozzi, Froebel, Montessori, Comenius, Dewey,Peters, and other authorities are considered. Apersonality like John Dewey, the most outstandingAmerican pragmatic philosopher, wrote extensively onthe practical and functional consequence of educationalideas in various books like Democracy and Education,School and Society, My Pedagogic Creed, The Schools ofTomorrow, The Child and the Curriculum, Moral Principles inEducation, Experience and Education, and so on. If theseworks are studied and implications for the presentpractice of education are brought out, such exercise couldbe taken as philosophy of education. This kind ofexercise has led to theses such as Dewey’s educationalphilosophy and Nigeria’s education system, Illich’sphilosophy and Nigeria’s education, Aristotle’snichomachean ethics and moral education in Nigeria, etc.


32

The second, systems’ approach, adopts an application ofphilosophy to education by deducing educationalimplications from systematic philosophies or positionssuch as idealism, realism, existentialism, pragmatism andothers which constitute distinct schools as a result oftheir disparities with respect to their assumptions orpresuppositions. Deducing educational implicationsfrom philosophies entails marshalling out how a realistor a pragmatist would formulate educational goals;design curricula; and discharge teaching and learningactivities. Such attempts, as pointed out earlier, haveproduced great works such as Naturalism in Education,Perennialism in Education, Thomism in Education, etc.

Compartments’ approach is a reflection on theimplications of the traditional branches of philosophy toeducation. Here, we consider the import of metaphysics,epistemology, axiology and logic (although there arecontentions on the place of logic as a separate branch ofphilosophy) on education. As such, some scholars havedissipated energies on Metaphysics and Education,Epistemology and Education, Axiology (Ethics & Aesthetics)and Education.

The last approach is the most popular and perhaps mostfeasible in today’s education. While other approaches arefraught with numerous challenges, this approach offersus less challenges, and it is strongly recommended forcontemporary thinkers who desire to make practicalimpacts on educational practice. It is Problems’ approach.In this approach, we simply take philosophy toeducation, that is, we philosophise as we educate, and


33

educate as we philosophise. This means that we do notgo into education with prior theories or establishedthoughts, and then begin to interprete the problems ofeducation from such premonitions. The philosopherenters education and begins to work with his tools. Thiswas what Socrates did in the ancient street of Athenswith dialectics. We have similar efforts in Dewey whoconsidered philosophy as nothing but education, andeducation as nothing but philosophy. The problems’approach adopts the various modes and preoccupationsof philosophy to solve problems in education. The nextsubsection will make further expatiations on thisapproach with the modes.2.4 Modes of Philosophy of EducationIt was pointed out in chapter one that philosophers of allepochs, have used such common modes as speculation,analysis, prescription and critique in doing their work.These modes which on the long run generate Speculativephilosophy, Analytic philosophy, Prescriptivephilosophy and Critical philosophy respectively arebrought into the world of education. Philosophers aremainly in education to speculate, to prescribe, to critique, toconceptually clarify and analyse (Akinsanya, 2013).

Speculation in education entails taking the educator fromthe world of actuality to possibility; from what ispresently done to what is doable; from known tounknown; from familiar to unfamiliar. The world ofpossibility is the world of creativity and inventions; onlya few ingenious people are capable of this world. From


34

this world, we have new orientations about education;new methods of teaching spring up; new imaginations oneducational processes and new theories, perspectives,presuppositions emerge. Through the speculativeadventure in education, the idea of schooling itself wasbirthed by Plato; the Sophists invented peripathy;Socrates originated dialectics; Aristotle becamehypothesised and later became the precursor ofexperimental researches (in education); Pestalozzidiscouraged rote learning and produced instructionalmaterials; Froebel delivered Kindergarten and playmethod of teaching; Dewey projected apragmatic/functional education and project method;Montessori invented a method of teaching which propelsthe child towards self-reliance; and so many otherimaginative possibilities are currently going on.

Analysis in education breaks down concepts andcomplexes into simple components. It unties anddissolves complexities into simplicity for clearunderstanding. This is to say that analysis in educationresolves complex education concepts into simple andmeaningful ones, as it exposes confusion and separatessense from nonsense. Certain concepts which are hithertomuddled up are given clearer and refined meaning. Oneof those concepts in today’s discourse on education iseducation itself. Education has been bastardised andconfused with so many other terms. Some use theconcept interchangeably with schooling, indoctrination,dogmatisation, instruction and even training. Analysisexposes this confusion and saves us some headaches of atleast not been able to say what we mean, and mean what


35

we say. Besides, there are so many slogans and clichésused in education today which do not really make sense,but because people lack analytical skills, such slogans areorchestrated here and there, and on the long run, timeand money are sunk and wasted in the bid to achieve amere slogan which ab initio are unachievable. Forinstance, how many who tout the idea of ‘free education’have really examined the practicability of educationbeing free and at the same time being qualitative? Howmany care to find out what happened when Nigeriapracticed the idea in the old western and eastern regions?How many care to find out how it is been operated in theadvanced countries? We are only interested in echoingthe slogan alongside our politicians whose clandestineidea is “give poor education to poor people to keep themperpetually poor”, but tell them that it is free. There aresome other slogans in need of analysis – equality ineducation, paternalism in education, mandatoryeducation, education for democracy, education for self-reliance, education for independence, autonomy ineducation, etc. With analysis in education, what makessense is brought to limelight, while nonsense is kept inthe abyss.

Prescription in education is another key function ofeducational philosopher. If it is true that educationwithout values is like a cup of tea garnished with poison,then, the place of philosopher in the world of educationis highly pertinent. The philosopher, imbued withknowledge of values, is at a vantage position to instructthe educator on the path to tread. On the axiological


36

plane, the philosopher is able to provide a guide throughhis studies on morality – ethics/moral philosophy andaesthetics. The results of his investigations are useful tothe educator who incidentally is involved with the samemanner of moral investigations. For instance, theeducator is most time concerned with formation ofvalues in the school. He makes efforts to shape thebehaviour of the school children; chastises them whenthey molest one another; punishes the undisciplined;frowns at the unruly; and rewards positive actions in theclass, etc. He is all the time involved in values and moraleducation. But how can he do all these rightly andsuccessfully if he does not romance with the moralphilosopher who could guide him on the principlesunderlying moral dispositions and actions in the society?Such a guide is highly necessary.

Critique in education is simply an exercise in criticalreflections on education and its activities. Philosophers,like gadflies, are never satisfied with the status quo. Theyare always asking questions with the possibility ofgenerating better and more viable alternatives. They thuscontinually examine and criticise assumptions andmethods used in education. Methods of teaching andlearning; curriculum planning and development;organisation of learning experiences; theories ofmotivation and of child development; principles of testsof intelligence and achievements; assessments’instruments; teacher-student rapport, and a host of othervariables are all examined and criticised with the view todiscovering their logical validity, reliability, relevanceand fitness of purpose. On education, for instance, the


37

philosopher could pose such critical questions as - whoshould educate and who should be educated?; whatshould we educate for?; why should we educate?; howshould we educate?; where should education take place?;and when should we start/stop educating? The diagrambelow makes our posers clearer:EducationWho What Why When Where HowThese questions are trivial to the simple-minded, buttheir answers are not simple just as they mean so muchand could affect so much in the world of education.There are other questions on the efficacy of moraleducation or religious instruction in the upbringing ofthe child; corporal punishment and the use of cane in theclassroom, and many others. Through critical reflectionsand engagements, the philosopher of education is able toresolve the contentions.2.5 Philosophy of Education as an Academic ActivityThe genesis of philosophy of education could be traced tothe Greeks (Plato, Aristotle, etc.). However, thebeginning of philosophy of education as an academicdiscipline and a separate department of knowledge couldbe traced to Britain and U.S.A. In Britain, philosophy ofeducation was introduced into Teacher Education


38

programme as a way of raising the falling standard ofeducation. As such, a Department of Philosophy ofEducation was established in the Institute of Education atthe University of London. This department was firstheaded by a Professor of philosophy, Professor Reid in1962, who later brought in Professor R.S. Peters, andlater, Profs Paul Hirst and Dearden, all from PhilosophyDepartment. Their efforts were geared towards applyingtheir philosophical training and proficiencies toeducational matters. Series of writing in curriculum andeducation evolved. Their efforts made philosophy ofeducation to have a formidable way into Teachers’Education in Britain. Journals and Associations ofPhilosophy of Education came to the scene.

In the same vein, Dewey and his colleagues putphilosophy of education on a strong footing in America.Dewey, a full-fledged philosopher, crossed over frombeing an HOD of Philosophy Department in 1894 in theUniversity of Chicago to being a director of the School ofEducation in the same University. In 1896, he set up alaboratory school in connection with the University. Theschool was set up for the purpose of research andexperiments in new ideas and methods in education. Thelandmarks that Dewey made in the field of educationremain unleveled by any educator both in America andacross board. From these efforts, philosophy of educationhas moved and gained acceptance in reputableUniversities in Europe and other continents.


39

2.6 Philosophy of Education in NigeriaIn Nigeria, philosophy of education is relatively new,and is mostly considered a ‘no-go area’. Very fewscholars parade themselves in the corridors ofphilosophy of education, such as Prof. Omatseye, the firstpresident of PEAN (Philosophy and EducationAssociation of Nigeria), Prof. J. Akinpelu, Prof. O.Ayodele-Bamisaye, Prof. O. Oroka, Prof. O. Enoh, Prof.A.M Wokocha, Prof. A. Adesanya, Prof. C. Onwuka,Prof. T. Aladejana, Dr. Kola Babarinde and very fewothers. The presence of few scholars have sadly madephilosophy of education appear irrelevant in Nigerianeducation system (we have cases whereFaculties/Institutes of Education and even Universitiesof Education cannot lay claims to having experts inphilosophy of education). This is a sad case! Thissituation paves way to those who do not have deepphilosophical training to teach philosophy. The questionsare: how effective will they teach it? Can a blind-manlead other blind folks? Is this practice not a contradictionof the definition of philosophy of education as theapplication of philosophical dexterity to education? Is itnot the case of nemo dat quod non habet? One can go onand on to ask many other questions, but the point is thatwhen philosophy of education is given to the untrainedin philosophy, such may end up confusing instead ofhelping the learners on the subject, method and processof philosophisng, and thus, render the coursemeaningless to the learners. The great educatorscelebrated today are those who came from the field ofphilosophy and adapted their training to educational


40

issues. In our world today, we need groundedphilosophers who are imbued with speculative, critical,prescriptive, synthetic and analytic spirit, and who canbeam such spirit on the problems of education whichthey are acquainted with via their training in bothphilosophy and education. Such experts are a perfectblend, and this is what our world, and indeed, Nigerianeducation system needs - philosophers of education (inqualification, training and habits).2.7 SummaryPhilosophy of education, like philosophy itself, isdifficult to define without being criticised. But it appearsthat its definition as an application of philosophy toissues in education receives popular attention. Thisapplication is of many dimensions, some of which aregreat minds’ approach, systems’ approach,compartments’ approach and problems’ approach. Suchapproaches could be by applying the answers given byphilosophers to various questions that might be ofconcern to education; by utilising the methods, tools andtechniques of philosophy in investigating educationalproblems; by utilising the systems of philosophy toexplain or interpret educational issues; or by deducingeducational implications from philosophies; or still bystrolling into education with the modes of philosophy,such that one philosophises as one educates, andeducates as one philosophises. Basically, philosophy ofeducation, through its modes, is a critique of educationalideologies; an analysis of issues in education andclarification of concepts used in education; prescription


41

of alternatives to approaches in education; andprojections in education.2.8 Questions for Evaluation1. Attempt a univocal definition of philosophy of

education.2. Identify any four ways in which philosophy could

be applied to education.3. List the four approaches to doing philosophy of

education as discussed in this chapter.4. Enumerate any four common modes of philosophy

of education.5. What is the difference between a policy on

education and philosophy of education?2.9 Possible Answers1. There is no univocal definition of philosophy of

education. However, the more popular definition isthat philosophy of education is the application ofphilosophy to education.

2. Philosophy could be applied to education by; taking the answers provided by philosophers

to various questions that might be of concernto education;

utilising the methods and techniques ofphilosophy in investigating educationalproblems;

utilising the systems of philosophy to explainor interpret educational issues;

deducing educational implications frommetaphysics, epistemology and ethics; or by


42

simply taking the tools/modes of philosophyinto education to solve its problems.

3. Great Minds’ approach; Systems’ approach;Compartments’ approach and Problems’ approach.

4. Speculation - Speculative philosophyAnalysis - Analytic philosophyPrescription - Prescriptive philosophyCritique - Critical philosophy

5. A policy on education is an educational guidewhich contains educational objectives and strategiesmeant to achieve such objectives. Philosophy ofeducation, on the other hand, is the base on whichthe policy with its objectives and strategies are laid.Philosophy determines and anchors the policy.


43

ReferencesAkinsanya, P.O. (2013). Philosophy as education. 3rd ed.

Ijebu-Ode: Patt PublicationsAxtelle, G. E. (1956). “Philosophy in American

education”. Harvard Educational Review, Vol 26,Spring.

Bertocci, P. A. (1969). “Unless educators be philosophers,and philosophers be educators…” in C.J. Lucas.What is philosophy of education? London: Collier-Macmillan

Black, M. (1956). “A note on philosophy of education”.Harvard Educational Review, Vol 26, Spring

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. MacmillanFayemi, A. K. (2008). “Philosophy of education and the

Nigerian educational system”. A paper presentedat the 26th Annual Conference of the Philosophy ofEducation Association of Nigeria (PEAN), held atOlabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye. October

Millard, R.M. Jr and Bertocci, P. A. (1969).“Philosophyand philosophy of education” in C. J. Lucas. Whatis philosophy of education? London: Collier-Macmillan

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National policy oneducation. 4th ed. Lagos: NERDC Publications

Newsome, G. L. Jr. (1969). “Educational philosophy andthe educational philosopher” in C. J. Lucas. Whatis philosophy of education? London: Collier-Macmillan

Ottaway, A.K.C. (1962). Education and society: an introductionto sociology of education. London: Routledge & KeganPaul


44

Branches of Philosophy and Education

45

Chapter ThreeBRANCHES OF PHILOSOPHY ANDEDUCATION3.1 IntroductionAside from the applied branches of philosophymentioned in chapter two, philosophy is traditionallycompartmentalised into four core branches, which are –Metaphysics, Epistemology, Axiology (Ethics andAesthetics) and Logic. This compartmentalisation,however, enjoys some interwovenness. This is to say thatthere is none of the branches which can stand on its ownwithout overlapping with other branches. It is hardlypossible to discuss one without discussing the other. Forexample, there is metaphysics in epistemology and evenin axiology; there is logic in metaphysics, epistemologyand axiology; there is also epistemology in metaphysicsand axiology. Questions on determinism, freewill,conscience are metaphysical, but they also come up inethics. The age-long ado of mind-body interaction ispurely metaphysical. But when we begin to pose suchquestions like: Is man made up of body and mind? If it is,what is the point of interaction? How do we know thereis mind? etc., we simply enter into the world ofepistemology and philosophy of mind by extension.Hence, all the branches of philosophy are interwovenand none can stand on its own. Premised on this, then,one could say that the compartmentalisation inphilosophy is just a matter of convenience, and so,


46

philosophy should be fathomed in its entirety(Akinsanya, 2006).

Be that as it may, this chapter focuses on to introducingthe reader to the engagements of the traditional branchesof philosophy, their connections with education, andimplications for education. The reader should note thatthis chapter is an exercise in one of the approaches tophilosophising about education - compartmentsapproach.3.2 MetaphysicsEtymologically, metaphysics is a derivation from twoGreek words - meta and physikos – meaning after/beyondthe physical realities. It is a word originating fromAndronicus of Rhodes, Aristotle’s pupil. While arrangingAristotle’s works in the philosophical school ofAlexandria, Andronicus placed the work that Aristotlecalled First Philosophy after the ones on physics andcalled it metaphysics – after physics.

Metaphysics is a systematic study of being in its deepestaspects. It is an ordered investigation into the inner sideof existence; a critical study of the real nature of things;the crave for knowledge of things via their ultimatecauses – scientia rerum per ultima causa. For Plato, it is theknowledge of the suprasensible; while Descartes takes itas the knowledge of things which lie beyond senseexperience. In Aquinas’ view, it is the ultimateexplanation of the mystery of being visible and invisiblein the Ultimate being. It is, however, the transcendentalanalysis of the contents of the human mind, for Kant.


47

Metaphysics, also called first philosophy, investigatesbeing as being; being in its real state; being in its apogee.It is the aspect of philosophy which is concerned withquestions such as: what is being? What are itsfundamental features and properties? Is there order inthe cosmos independent of what the mind puts there?What is mind? Where is it located in the body? Do peoplehave freewill or are they pieces of pre-determinedmachines/robots? Is the world real or a mere shadow ofthe real world somewhere? etc.

When metaphysical questions on beings as beings intheir general properties, primary divisions and universalproperties are posed, they are termed as ontology. Whenmetaphysics studies the infinitive being, the primordialcause of all things and other supra-sensible realities (e.g.pure spirits), it is called theodicy or natural theology, andat times broadly called philosophy of religion. Thisparticular consideration, according to Aristotle, makesmetaphysics the most perfect and elevated of all sciences.When metaphysics studies finite being, if animate, it iseitherpsychology (philosophy of the human mind) orphilosophy/cultural anthropology (the study of thehuman person in his paleotological origins and in hiscultural traits). The inanimate aspect of the study of finitebeing in metaphysics is philosophical biology orcosmology which has three areas of coverage – biology,somatology and philosophy of science and technology.


48

Metaphysics and EducationFor the educator and the child to have a comprehensiveeducation, they need the knowledge of metaphysics.Through metaphysics, they would gain an insight intothe composition of the human person - body and soul.Metaphysics will help them resolve the spiritual andphysical dualism. It will help to understand the realnature of man who is the focus of education. Metaphysicsis thus central to education.

Answers given to such metaphysical questions as: dopeople have freewill or are they pieces of pre-determinedmachines/robots? Is the world real or a mere shadow ofthe real world somewhere? - have some implications foreducation. If the world is for instance a shadow ofanother world where man will finally find himself afterhis journey here on earth, then, the goals of education,the subjects in the curriculum and methods used to teachthe child will be appropriately oriented towards the finaldestination of man. If otherwise, then, the mentionedvariables will equally take a paradigm turn. Anotherinstance is the question of freedom and determinism. Ifthe child’s actions are predetermined, can we blame himwhen he fails in the class? Are we justified to punish himwhen he fights, bullies others or covet other peoples’properties? If however he is a free agent, should we notgive him the liberty to decide whether to be educated ornot? When and how to come to school? These arequestions being grappled with in metaphysics.Metaphysical theories and explanations thus have someconsequences for educational processes.


49

3.3 EpistemologyEpistemology, also called Gnoseology, is coined fromtwo Greek words – episteme and logos where epistememeans knowledge and logos is theory. The combinationof the words will generate - the theory of knowledge.Epistemology is basically an enquiry into the meaning,nature, source, scope, limits and justification forknowledge claims. If you say, for instance, that “I knowthat I am presently reading a text on philosophy ofeducation”, certain questions could be asked – one maybe interested in finding out what this particularstatement means – what does it mean to claim to know;one may also be interested in finding out the source andthe basis for your knowledge claim; the limits of thisclaim may arouse one’s interest; and the justification forthis claim may be another question. In all these, I mayneed a guarantee that you are not just fantasising orbeing deceived to know that which you claim to know.

Epistemology is essentially centred around the issue ofknowledge justification (in forms of foundationalism,coherentism, contextualism, etc.), and the raison d’être forthis is that epistemologists opine that the possibility ofepistemology can be established only when the skeptics’challenge has been successfully met. The skeptics hadpostulated the impossibility of knowledge-acquisition. Somany events around life had pushed them to submit thatman cannot know anything with certitude. For instance,we presently claim to know the shape of the earth todayas spherical. We claim to know that the sun is at thecentre of the universe, having all other planetary bodies


50

including the earth, revolving around it. We claim also toknow that there are now more than eleven planets in theuniverse. But some years back, our claims to knowledgeon these particular things differed. Our forebears claimedto be sure that the earth was flat and that it was at thecentre of the universe; and that there were only nineplanets. They were so sure of these claims that Galileowho challenged such claims was guillotined forcontravening an established truth. So, these kinds ofinstances would force the skeptic to think knowledge isnot possible, because for him, even our presentknowledge claims about the planets and other claimscould still turn around as something else in the hands offuture researchers. But, is it really true that man cannotlay claims to knowledge? This is the challenge ofskepticism, and incidentally, the preoccupation ofepistemology. Initially, going down the memory lane,knowledge was taken as a belief; later, it was moderatedto a true belief. Subsequently, epistemologists set beforethemselves the task of looking for what to add to truebelief so that it could turn to proper knowledge. This isbecause if one knows a proposition, one must not onlybelieve that proposition to be true, it must in fact be true;one must have good reasons to believe that theproposition is true, that is, one’s true belief must bejustified (JTB – Justified True Belief). Gettier (1967),however, with his fourth condition of knowledge,pointed out that JTB is not a necessary or sufficientcondition for knowledge, because it is possible for aperson to be justified in believing a proposition that is infact true, yet does not know it. Despite the Gettier’seffort, epistemologists still believe that justification is


51

required in order that a true belief becomes knowledge,and the argument goes on and on.

Summarily, epistemology is the search for the foundationof knowledge. This search, however, which hasgenerated theories like rationalism and empiricism, is anattempt to refute skepticism as the denial of thepossibility of knowledge.Epistemology and EducationEpistemology is highly connected with education. This isbecause the two subjects primarily focus on one commonthing – knowledge. While education is primarilyconcerned with acquisition of knowledge, epistemologyconsiders the meaning, nature, sources and thejustification of the knowledge meant for acquisition. Forthe child to have the right kind of knowledge needed tocope with the enormous challenges of life, the educatorwill need some epistemological thoroughness whichhelps to dig into the validity, reliability, authenticity andthe basis for the knowledge he intends to disseminate.3.4 AxiologyAxiology is coined from two Greek words – axia (values)and logos (theory) - meaning the theory of values. It is thebranch of philosophy which concerns itself with themeaning, categories and hierarchies of values. Here,attention is focused on finding out whether values haveobjective or subjective status; permanent or in the state offlux; intrinsic or extrinsic; and whether there are


52

hierarchies of values or not. Axiology is divided into two:ethics and aesthetics.

Ethics, otherwise called moral philosophy, is coined outfrom a Greek word – ethikos – meaning proper habit,custom or character. It could be defined as thephilosophical study of moral judgements, what isvirtuous or vicious, just or unjust, morally right orwrong, morally good or bad, morally proper orimproper. Ethics can also be defined as the systematicstudy of the fundamental principles underlying ourmorality or as the normative science of human conduct. Itis a study of moral facts – moral evaluations,commandments, norms, virtuous acts, manifestations ofconscience, and voluntary human actions with thepurpose of discovering what types of activity are good,right, bad, wrong, what actions to be done or avoided,judgements of approval and disapproval, virtue or vice,dispositions. And so, we meet such posers as: Is there amoral law? Are there really such things as good and bad,right or wrong? And if there are, what is it that makesone thing right and another wrong? Or in another words,what is the ultimate justification of moral standards?What are moral judgements? What makes a moraljudgement a moral judgement? How are suchjudgements different from other value judgements,factual assertions and pieces of practical advice? Whatdistinguishes reasoning about moral issues fromreasoning about other things? What are the yardsticks orcriteria for evaluating actions and for deciding thatcertain actions are good and others bad?


53

Aesthetics, on the other hand, is derived from a Greekword – aesthetikos, which means perception. Aesthetics isthe philosophical study of art and of value judgmentsabout art and of beauty. It is an aspect of philosophywhich studies the works of art; the process of producingand experiencing art. It also considers certain aspects ofnature outside the field of art, especially those which canbe considered in terms of beauty or ugliness in form orquality.Ethics and EducationEthics concerns itself with moral judgements and moralactions. Education teaches moral values which aboundeverywhere in education. From the pre-primary to thelast tier of education, the child is taught how to dress,walk eat, think and live like a responsible person. He istaught not to associate with bad gangs; not to be lazy; tobe studious; respectful, patriotic and godly. His tutors areultimately concerned with the formations of values.Efforts are always being made to shape his behaviour.How can the educator do this job successfully without aromance with the subject whose focus is on moralvaluations? His job definitely requires some proficiencyin moral philosophy. He needs ethics to decipher how,when and what values to emphasise in the classroom.Aesthetics and EducationAesthetical judgements are most often subjective, relativeand personal. This is why it is sometimes said that beautylies in the beholder. The knowledge of aesthetics,however, helps the educator to bring out the child’s


54

creativity and make him assess works of art moreintelligibly.3.5 LogicLogic, coined from the Greek word – logos – meaning‘reasoned discourse’, can be defined as the art of correctreasoning because it directs the mind in the attainment oftruth. Wallace (1977) defines it as the art of sounddiscourse; the science of good reasoning and the scienceof the laws of thought. Marcel (in Onyeocha, 1966)describes it as an intellectual habit or virtue thatstrengthens the mind for its characteristically humanoperation – that is, reasoning or understanding andjudgement. Logic is a study which enhances clarity ofthoughts and systematisation of principles needed forphilosophical reasoning. It is a study that analyses thenature of correct reasoning in accordance withunderlying logical maxims.

In conversations, one finds some people making claimswithout good support. Philosophers, on the other hand,strive to make their opinions well-stated, clear, well-articulated and properly backed up, rational, consistent,coherent, precise and cogent. Philosophers support theirviews to make it convincing and persuasive. Logic, theart of reasoning, ensures and facilitates the attainment ofthese goals. When someone supports a belief by giving areason for accepting the belief, he or she has given anargument. Setting forth arguments is the most basicphilosophical activity and is one of the activities whichdistinguish philosophy from merely having opinions. Forinstance, if l say –


55

Education graduates are pedagogically trainedDopemu is an education graduateHence, Dopemu is pedagogically trained

Here, l have not only stated a case (an argument), but lhave given reasons for my case. It is Logic that isprimarily concerned with the relation between the beliefswe express and the reasons we give as evidence for them.Since not all reasons are good, logic determines if thereasons we give are good enough to sustain our beliefs.Logic is thus concerned with the relation betweenevidence and conclusion.Logic and EducationIn discussing the relationship between the core branchesof philosophy and education, most scholars do not skiplogic. The major reason, I guess, is not because theyrelegate the place of logic, but because they consider it asalready embedded in other branches of philosophy.There is of course the presence of logic in metaphysics, inepistemology and in axiology. This explains the reasonfor its consideration as the tool of philosophy. However,the place of logic in education deserves a separate andspecial treatment. The reason for this is not far-fetched. Abranch of study which investigates human reasoning;considers what arguments are sound or unsound, validor invalid; pontificates on what statements, positions,theories and assumptions possess or lack consistence andcoherence; determines actions which are nonsensical andfallaciousdefinitely has a great deal of work in the worldof education. Logic will help educators to make their


56

opinions well-stated, well-articulated and properlybacked up, clear, rational, consistent, coherent, preciseand cogent. It will also help them in the correctassessment/evaluation of students and of the system.3.6 SummaryThis chapter considered the relationship between thecore branches of philosophy and education. I pointed outthat each of the branches has one or two implications foreducational processes. Metaphysics which concerns itselfwith reality after/beyond the physical helps both theeducand and educators to have insights into thecomposition of human person and to reconcile thespiritual with the physical. Epistemology concerns itselfwith the meaning, nature, source and justification ofknowledge. The educator needs epistemologicalknowledge to inculcate the right knowledge which thechild needs to cope with the challenges of life. Ethicsconcerns itself with values and human conducts.Education needs the theory of values since it is intimatelyconnected with valuations. Aesthetics studies values inrelation to beauty and appreciation. It helps educators todevelop the child’s aesthetical sensibility and creativity.Lastly, but never the least, logic is the art of soundreasoning. It helps in making valid arguments,consistent, coherent and non-contradictory propositions.It helps educators to avoid pitfalls in evaluations/assessments, in policy-making/implementation and theentire management of education. So, in all, philosophyvia its branches, helps education to determine what canbe known – metaphysics; how we know what we claimto know and its justification – epistemology; the


57

knowledge worth knowing – axiology; and theprocesses/sequences to knowing what we claim to know– logic.3.7 Questions for Evaluation1. What is the relevance of metaphysics to the teacher?2. What is the relevance of epistemology to the

teacher?3. What is the relevance of ethics to the teacher?4. What is the relevance of aesthetics to the teacher?5. What is the relevance of logic to the teacher?3.8 Possible Answers1. Metaphysics helps the teacher to have insights into

the composition of human person and to reconcilethe spiritual with the physical.

2. Epistemology, which investigates the meaning,nature, source and justification of knowledge, helpsthe teacher to inculcate the right knowledge whichthe child needs to cope with the challenges of life.

3. Ethics, which concerns itself with moral values,helps the teacher to decipher how, when and whatvalues to emphasise in the classroom.

4. Aesthetics, which studies values in relation tobeauty and appreciation, helps the teacher todevelop the child’s aesthetical sensibility andcreativity.

5. Logic, which is the art of sound reasoning, helps theteacher to avoid pitfalls and make valid, consistent,coherent assessments/evaluations of the students inhis class.


58

ReferencesAkinsanya, P.O. (2006). Branches of philosophy. In O.

Oladipo & P.O Akinsanya(eds.) Philosophy andlogic: An introduction. Ibadan: Hope Publications.

Gettier, E.L. (1967). “Is Justified True Belief knowledge?”in Griffiths, A.P(ed.). Knowledge and belief.London: Oxford University Press.

Onyeocha, I.M. (1996). Introfil. U.S.A.: Washington D.C.William, A. Wallace (1977). Elements of philosophy. New

York: Alba House.

Schools of Thought in Education

59

Chapter FourSCHOOLS OF THOUGHT IN EDUCATION4.1 IntroductionIt may amuse the reader to know that there seems to beonly one agreement in philosophy – “an agreement toalways disagree”. This means that philosophers agree todisagree on issues. Such agreement is not with the intentof raising confusions or commotions, but to establish thefact that there is no limit to knowledge; there is nocompendium or encyclopedia of knowledge; and there isno person or group of persons who possess(es) the finalsay on any bit of knowledge – knowledge is unlimited andunrestricted. Thus, if Mr. A opines that the world is good,with some cogent and convincing points, Mr. B mightequally possess some cogent, coherent and consistentreasons for holding that the world is evil/bad. If Aquinassays God exists and he is the creator of the universe(theism), Solarin may say God does not exist (atheism),Nietzsche may decide to declare the obituary of God(nihilism), while Soyinka may urge us to be lessconcerned about the existence or non-existence of God,and be more concerned with the welfare of humanity(humanism). It is all about different schools/camps ofthought. It is about different perspectives, outlooks,considerations, orientations or different worldviews. It isnoteworthy to however say that these differentorientations are not in all cases incompatible systems, for


60

the principle of incorporation or interwovenness of ideasoperates in the system. In which case, ideas that aresupposed to be antithetical to each other do findthemselves complemented or contained in the other. Thismeans that different schools of thought are merely twosides of the same coin. They give meaning to each/oneanother; without the first, the other may not beunderstood or appreciated, just like a tallness cannot beappreciated when there is no shortness, and goodness isnot significant in the absence of evil (Akinsanya, 2013).

This chapter considers the different perspectives onvarious issues surrounding the education of the child.Such perspectives are focused on the meaning ofeducation, its goals, the curriculum and the policy,methods of teaching and the teacher him/herself, natureand forms of discipline in the classroom, theories oflearning, theories of motivation and educationaladministration, and so on.4.2 Idealism in EducationIdealism is a school of thought which holds that ideas arethe only existing things (that the world and everything init exists as the mind interprets it to be). The wordidealism is from the concept - “idea-ism” - representingideas as the only true reality. It explains existence interms of the workings of the mind. The mind here meansthe mental or the spiritual element of a man which is theessence, the beingness, in fact, the man himself. Thismind gives expression to all existing things in theuniverse.


61

If the above is the case, then, education would have tobeam its light on the mind (the man himself). Education,for the idealist will thus be regarded as a process ofdeveloping the person to bring out those innate ideasalready embedded in him. The major aim of education isto attain spiritual excellence. Consequently, thecurriculum should be structured in away to improve thelearner’s intelligence and spiritual maturity. Plato, thefather of idealism, had opined that there is a deposit ofwonderful ideas in every man. These ideas were gainedwhile in the “world of forms/ideas” – the ideal world.On getting to this other world – world of shadows, manonly begins to get knowledge through a process ofrecollection. When a man sees a tree in the world ofshadows, for instance, he immediately remembers theperfect tree he had seen in the real/ideal world, and thus,gains knowledge (ditto other things on earth). Thefunction of education, thus for Plato, will be to focus onthe mind with a target to helping him recollect the lostknowledge which he had earlier gained in the world offorms. Principally, the objectives of education will begeared towards providing the enabling milieu withproper direction for the growth and development of themind so as to rekindle his knowledge in the cultivation ofskills, morality and aesthetical appreciation; and helpingthe man to situate his knowledge into an integral contextof a much large whole. To achieve these, the educationalcurriculum must be patterned in a way that will sharpenhis understanding, his intelligence and enable him tobring out his moral and spiritual potentialities. The taskof the teacher in this scenario will be to act as a catalyst


62

for self-learning activities of the child, as the teacher triesto make a positive influence on the child. With anunderstanding of idealism, the teacher could employteaching methods such as: socratic/dialecticalengagement; model (imitation of ideal persons which theteachers must be); works of excellence through which thechild can grow the spirit of creativity and imagination;and perhaps, the ‘problem method’ of Dewey. Whateverthe method used, teaching should be geared towardsdrawing out what is already innate or inherent in thechild.

A lot of criticisms had been levelled against the idealist’sperception of man and education. These criticisms led tothe evolution of theories like realism and later,existentialism, pragmatism, and so many others.However, the emphasis on the training of the individual[academic and more importantly moral] has continued tobe the focus of every contemporary educator.4.3 Realism in EducationRealism, as indicated earlier, pitches its tent directlyopposite idealism. It states that physical things existindependent of the mind. This means that the world aswe have it exist itself and it is independent of human’sknowledge of it or not. It is a philosophical dispositionwhich could be traced to Plato’s disciple – Aristotle.Aristotle postulated that the process of arriving atknowledge is that of the mind being responsive toimpressions made upon it from experiential categories.Human senses, for him, are the sources of knowledge,


63

and our assertions on knowledge can only be true whenit is in conformity with ‘naked’ facts.

Realism, generally, operates on three principles:- First, that matters exist independently of our

knowledge. This is known as the principle ofindependence of matter.

- Second, that in spite of the seemingly disorderlinessin the universe, there is prevalence of law andorder, structure and stability.

- Third, that the world is real and not arepresentation or a shadow or reflection of some‘imagined’ things in some ‘imagined’ world. Andthat we can come to the knowledge of realitythrough our senses and experiences.

But what is the implication of all these to education? Theimplication is that educators should know that the childpossesses an empty mind at birth (the empiricist’s ‘tabularasa’) but that this mind is ever ready to acquireknowledge. Education should thus be a process ofdeveloping the potentialities and capacities of a child toenable him grasp the truth as it is. Education willenhance the knowledge of nature and the workings ofnature in such a way that the child learns how to adjusthimself to his environment. This connotes that the goal ofeducation will be to develop the child’s ability for furtherintellectual learning to dominate/control hisenvironment, and to transmit cultural values, mores,etiquettes and conducts. To achieve these, then, thecurriculum will have to feature the principles of science;


64

literacy and numeracy; aesthetical appreciation; literatureand vocational training. The teacher’s method here ismajorly lecture – giving out.4.4 Naturalism in EducationNaturalism is a school of thought built on nature; itseparates the universe from any supernaturalinterference. The universe, according to naturalism, isself existent, self explanatory, self operating and selfdirecting, (Aladejana, 2009). It does not need anythingbeyond itself. Naturalism attempts to explain everythingthrough causes and laws of nature. Philosophers in thiscamp contend that the child in his unblemished nature ispure, good and innocent. If however, one encounters acorrupt child, it is the environment/society that isresponsible for the corruption. Jean Jacque Rousseau, forinstance, as we shall see later on in chapter five, arguesthat all the evils experienced in the world were broughtby man through civilisation. For him, at the state ofnature, where there was neither government norcivilisation, man was innocent, good, happy, healthy andfree. With the advent of governance and civiliation, manbecame corrupt. But Rousseau believes that man could beaided out of the calamity he found himself. The remedy,for Rousseau, is a paradigm turn to nature – a state ofsimplicity, goodness and happiness. To return man tothis state, Rousseau considers education as a veritabletool. The ultimate aim of education for him, then, shouldbe to propel man towards nature and natural self; toredirect his attention from the complexities andenslavement that come along with civilisation.


65

The implications of naturalism are basically noticeable intheir recommendations on the objectives and duty ofeducation, in method of teaching and in the compositionof the curriculum. Because the naturalists are interestedin the child in his natural composition, they emphasisethe importance of the natural environment of the child.For them, nature is the best teacher, and so, the systemshould allow the child to learn from nature.

The aim of education for the naturalists should be thedevelopment of the child according to his nature. Itshould also include self realisation and the developmentof the uniqueness of the individual in line with hisenvironment. Educational curriculum, according to them,should comprise of practical oriented subjects which willrequire that the child has a direct contact with hisenvironment. Methods of teaching such as play-way andproject method which will motivate the child to make useof his initiatives and explore his capacities arerecommended.4.5 Existentialism in EducationExistentialist’s catch phrase is existence precedes essence.This means that, first of all, man exists, turns up, appearson the scene and only afterwards, defines himself.Existentialism lays emphasis on the ‘existence’ of man. Itpurports to form a ‘just’ concept of man; rejecting anyform of underestimation or overestimation of man’snature. Satre, a proponent of existentialism, has this tosay:


66

Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. Suchis the first principle of existentialism. It is also what iscalled subjectivity; the name we are labelled with whencharges are brought against us. But what do we mean bythis, if not that man has a greater dignity than a stone ortable? That is, that man, first of all, is the being who hurlshimself towards a future and who is conscious toimaging himself as being in the future. Man is at the starta plan which is aware of itself, rather than a cauliflower;nothing exists prior to this plan; there is nothing inheaven; man will be what he will have planned to be(Satre in Presbey, 2000).

The above means that man is characterised by/withfreedom, and that this free individual is also creative.That is, he creates his own nature/personality/identityby interpreting his environment, and in this way, he isresponsible. Hence, existence involves freedom,creativity and responsibility.

This philosophy, thus, holds that education is to enhancethe child’s ability to realise his freedom in order tochoose correctly, be creative and be responsible for hischoice. Education should aid the child in developing hisinitiatives to search for and discover his person, and tocultivate the spirit of self-reliance.

To achieve these laudable goals, the curriculum ofeducation would have to be individualised since manleaves with the principle of subjectivity. Such curriculumwould have to consist of literature, humanities, socialsciences, sciences and technology. In this vein, the


67

teaching methods for carrying out the curriculumcontents would be dialectics, drama, role planning andany other method that fosters individuality and freedom.The teacher here would have to accept every child as aunique and different individual who has potentialities insome direction. The task of the teacher would then be tomake the child realise those potentialities embedded inthe child, and help him/her discover what these are andhow to achieve them. In this case, the teacher has to be apsychologist, a counselor and a guide.4.6 Pragmatism in EducationThe word ‘pragmatism’ was coined from the works ofCharles Sander Pierce [1839 – 1914] – ‘pragma’ whichmeans workability. Pragmatism is a way of life meant toachieve a practical application of received knowledge. Itis a rule for determining the meaning of ideas. Pierceposits that “in order to ascertain the meaning of anintellectual conception, one should consider whatpractical consequences might conceivably result bynecessity from the truth of that conception, and the sumof these consequences will constitute the entire meaningof the conception” (Moore & Bruder, 2002).

Aside from Pierce, we have William James and JohnDewey who pushed pragmatism to an instrumentalist’scorner. The latter demonstrated in his instrumentaltheory of truth, that all knowledge is for the sole purposeof adaptation to new situations, and that the truth/falsifyof any human enquiry rests on its workability orfunctionality. Pragmatism is American major


68

contribution to philosophy in the contemporary world(Akinsanya, 2010). In the field of education, John Deweyintroduced this philosophical genre in his desire to bringabout a reconstruction of ideas, aims and objectives, andof strategies to be employed in contemporary educationalsystem. The factors that influenced such introductionwere:1. Darwin’s biological theory of evolution which

portrayed man as an evolving organism that growsvia developmental processes from a simplecellular structure to a complex one, and continues adinfinitum.

2. The development of empirical psychology.3. The socio-political situation in America at the time

of Dewey where there was immense developmentin technology, industry and commerce.

With the coming of pragmatism to education, the aimsand goals, the curriculum and the method of educationare reconstructed. Education becomes a continuous re-organisation or reconstruction of experience which addsto the meaning of experience and which increases theability to direct the course of subsequent experiences.Education will then aim at developing the child’s abilityto deal with present and future problems (which is thedevelopment of the child’s social intelligence to solveproblems). To achieve this, the curriculum must reflectthe social life of the community, simplified andtranslated into the classroom experience. Such acurriculum would be a broad-field type featuring thesciences, humanities and those other subjects that areselected based on sociological, logical and psychological


69

underpinnings. The ideal method of teaching, in thiscase, is problem/project method. Whatever method theteacher however uses must be child-centred, whichinvolves learning-by-doing-it-oneself, using the senses inthe process of knowledge acquisition. Since pragmatismis basically interested in the practical usefulness orrelevance of education, it is expected that the educationgiven to a child will equip him/her with problem solvingskills so as to cope with the constant challenges ofhis/her environment.4.7 Progressivism in EducationFew comments will be highlighted on this school ofthought because it is an offshoot of the last discussedschool of thought - pragmatism. It is a tradition whichemerged from the pragmatists’ clamour for a completelynew orientation in education. The progressivists wereconcerned with education in order to make it become:a. a discipline like the sciences; having a laboratory

where emotional ideas and theories are formulated,reformulated, tested and experimented.

b. a child-centred curriculum and not teacher orcurricular-centered.

c. an instrument for promoting and maintainingdemocratic culture in the society, and

d. a means of social reconstruction.

It needs be said, however, that progressivism, asrepresented by W. Kilpatrick and others, later went toofar from pragmatism in its recommendations to


70

education and its processes, such that it may be wrongfor anybody to closely associate the two traditions.4.8 Eclecticism in EducationEclecticism is a new philosophy when compared to afore-discussed schools of thought. It is a camp whichaccommodates all comers. By all comers, I mean thateclecticism is a selection and merge of insightful ideasfrom idealism, realism, naturalism, existentialism,pragmatism, etc., into one coherent camp. This impliesthe pulling together of viewpoints from different schoolsof thoughts into one comprehensive whole. It simplymeans not adhering to any specific school of philosophyas it enables individuals or nations to adjust in the midstof disparate ideologies. It has to do with a careful fusionof what is useful from various philosophical traditions(Akinsanya, 2008).

The basis of eclecticism is from the conviction that thereis no school of thought that can stand out exclusivelywithout some dependencies on other philosophies. Thisis to say that no philosophy can stand on its own andnone can anchor an education system single-handedlywithout some complimentary support from otherschools. This means that all the existing systems ofthought perform complementary roles rather thancontradictory (Akinsanya, 2012). The dominantcharacteristics of each of the philosophies are not to betaken separately but rather combined to give rise to afunctional, viable, practical and workable theory whichwill improve education. If no philosophy can becomprehensively complete and correct in every way, it


71

would then be impracticable to think of a system ofeducation anchored on a single philosophy. In the wordsof Ross (in Taneja, 2001) “educational systems draw theirsustenance from more than one school of philosophicalthought; they are to a greater or less degree, eclectic”.Taneja (2001) echoes this same position in the followingwords;

…sticking to any particular school of philosophicalthought – idealism, naturalism, realism, etc. – isneither possible nor even desirable. We are living ina fast-changing world. Education, if dynamic, has toconform to the changing norms and nuances of life.Instead of being rigid to certain beliefs andideologies, we have to get inspiration from allphilosophies, borrow from each what we feel isfunctional in the prevailing circumstances and fusethem into a new philosophy suiting the highervalues of life (Taneja, 2001).

Nations that have purportedly adopted one school or theother as the basis of their education have resorted at onetime or the other, to picking certain elements which arecomplementary from other philosophies, in their chosenschool of thought. No wonder Akinpelu submits that “agenuine system of education is essentially eclecticembracing the doctrines of two or more schools ofthought” (Akinpelu, 2005). When various elements fromdisparate philosophies are pulled together in a way thatdispels inconsistence and incoherence, the outcome is acomprehensive education which is highly rich, functionaland dynamic. The implications of the foregoing on aimsof education, curriculum, methods of teaching, etc., areevidently clear.


72

4.9 SummaryThe list of philosophical traditions in education cannot beexhaustive. Major traditions which educators have foundmore appealing and insightful have been carefullytreated. Many other traditions that have not beenconsidered have their origin and lots of similarity withthose considered. In the chapter, we learnt that schools ofthought in education have various dispositions orperceptions of philosophers on education. They areperceptions on the goals of education; curricular contentsand patterns; nature of class discipline; teachingmethods; teachers-learners’ relationships; and on allother variables that concern educational processes. Weequally learnt that the variations on the variablesdiscussed are demonstrations of the fact that nobody,camp, or school of thought has the monopoly of ideas;and besides, variety is the spice of life.4.11 Questions for Evaluation1. How many schools of thought are there in

education?2. What implications does realism portend for

education?3. Highlight the objective(s) of education in idealism.4. Identify one key name representing each school of

thought discussed in this chapter.5. What school of thought do you find suitable for the

Nigerian system of education given her adoptedsocial ideology?


73

4.10 Possible Answers1. Many, but the common ones are – idealism, realism,

naturalism, existentialism, pragmatism,progressivism, eclecticism.

2. The major implication of realism is that educatorsshould know that though the mind of the child isempty, but this mind is ever ready to receiveknowledge. In this case, education should aim atdeveloping the capacities of the child to enable himgrasp ‘the truth’. It should help the child learn howto adjust and control his environment.

3. The objective of education, for idealism, is todevelop the spiritual/mental aspect of theindividual. This objective of education is gearedtowards providing the enabling milieu with properdirection for the growth and development of themind so as to rekindle his knowledge in thecultivation of skills, morality and aestheticalappreciation; and helping the mind to situate hisknowledge into an integral context of a much largerwhole.

4. Idealism - PlatoRealism - AristotleNaturalism - RousseauExistentialism - SatrePragmatism - DeweyProgressivism - KilpatrickEclecticism - Akinsanya


74

5. The social ideology officially adopted in Nigeria asreflected in the 1999 Constitution and in the 2013edition of the National Policy on Education is - thebuilding of a Democratic and Egalitarian society.This is an ideology which embraces all forms ofpeople despite their ideological bent, and sequel tothis, eclectic philosophy of education is probably themost suited for the country (confer my works citedin the references).


75

ReferencesAkinpelu, J.A. (2005). Essays in Philosophy and Education.

Ibadan: Stirling-Horden Publishers Nig. Ltd.Akinsanya, P.O. (2008). Eclecticism in the national policy on

education: Towards a philosophy for Nigerianeducational system. At the 28th Annual Conferenceof the Philosophy of Education Association ofNigeria (PEAN), held at Olabisi OnabanjoUniversity, Ago-Iwoye, October.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2012). Does Nigeria have a philosophy ofeducation worthy of the name?”. Prime Research onEducation, 2(5), 269 – 274.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2013). Philosophy as education. 3rd ed. Ijebu-Ode: Patt Publications

Akinsanya, P. O. (2010). Philosophical schools in education.In W. Adunfe & P.O. Akinsanya (eds.) Introduction tosociological and philosophical foundations of education.Ijebu-Ode: Home of Grace Publications.

Aladejana, T.I. (2009). Philosophical foundations of education.Ile-Ife: Yomite Printers.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National policy oneducation. 6th ed. Lagos: NERDC Publications

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2011). 1999 Constitution of theFederal Republic of Nigeria with amendments 2011.NERDC

Satre, J.P. (2000). There is no human nature In Presbey, GailM. The philosophical quest: a cross-cultural reader. 2nded. USA: McGraw Hill.

Taneja, V.R. (2001). Educational thought and practice. India:Sterling Publishers Private Ltd.


76

Notable Western Philosopher of Education

77

Chapter FiveNOTABLE WESTERN PHILOSOPHERS OFEDUCATION5.1 IntroductionThis chapter reflects on some contributions made ineducation by a selected few thinkers based in Europe. Weshall consider educational ideas and inventions ofSocrates, Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel,Dewey and Montessori. These considerations areintended to achieve two major things – first, to offer usthe chance of a careful rumination over other thinkers’ideas on educational practice, and second, to possiblychallenge and motivate us into turning inwards to bringout our unique set of ideas which are needed toresuscitate our nation’s education system.5.2 SocratesSocrates is most times referred to as the ground-master ofphilosophy. This is not because he was the first officiallyacclaimed philosopher, (at least we have had the likes ofThales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Pythagoras;Heraclitus; Zeno; Parmenides; Empedocles; Anaxagoras;Leucippus; Democritus and the Sophists before him), butthrough him, philosophy took another dimension. Hewas practically different from the Sophists who paradedtheir rhetorical and sophistic abilities in proving theseemingly unprovable, making their fellow men appear


78

idiotic, and siphoning money from their pockets in returnfor the foolery. Socrates was not interested in sophistry.His interest was in the discovery of the essential nature ofknowledge, justice, beauty, goodness, etc. He had thefeeling that the understanding of these concepts wasalready implicitly known by every man, but that mostmen were not consciously aware of such knowledge. Thejob he gave himself was that of an intellectual midwifewhose function is to help men safely deliver theirpregnancy, that is, knowledge. The method he used wascalled ‘dialectics’ or the ‘Socratic method’.

Much is not known about Socrates’ educational ideasbecause he wrote nothing himself. Much of what weknow about this colossus is sieved from Plato’s famousdialogues. Some 19th century scholars, like A. E. Taylor& J. Burnet, have even opined that Socrates was afabricated personality in Plato. These scholars perceivedPlato as an excellent dramatic artist who used thecharacter of Socrates as a convenient mouthpiece for theexpression of Plato’s own beliefs. We, however, do notagree with this line of thought because Plato’s laterthoughts outstripped anything that could be justifiablyattributed to the person of Socrates, and even in Plato’slater dialogues, Socrates either took a more subordinaterole or did not appear at all. The stories surrounding histrial and even his death, may not readily allow us toagree with Taylor and Burnet. The important thing tonote in Socrates’ contribution to education is that he wasable to nurture and mentor a disciple whosecontributions to both philosophy and education hascontinued to be the beginning and the focal point of


79

discussions – Plato. Besides, the Socratic method ofteaching (dialectics) was his idea, and the conception thatevery man has an inbuilt mechanism of knowledge isalso traceable to Socrates. Moreover, we can fairly ascribetwo important things to Socrates – inductive argumentsand universal definitions, both of which are connectedwith the starting-point of science.5.3 Plato (Aristocles)Plato was a nickname given to Socrates’ disciple whosereal name was Aristocles. The nickname meant ‘broadshoulders’. He was an excellent Greek thinker. Hefounded the Academy in 387 B.C. which is regarded asthe world’s first University. His works varied from theRepublic, Laws, Phaedrus, Apology, Meno, Geogias, Phaedo,Symposium, Cratylus, Thaetetus, Timaes, etc.

Plato’s educational theory was intimately connected withhis view about the nature of the state and the end whichevery citizen (Greek) should strive to attain. An idealstate, for him, was a state that reflected the essentialcomponents of the soul. What are these elements? In theRepublic, he stated that the soul is made up of therational, the spirited and the appetitive. These threeelements are guided and nurtured by three of the fourcardinal virtues – wisdom, courage and temperance,respectively (justice which is the fourth and mostimportant virtue, unites and harmonises all other virtuesfor the benefit of the soul). These stated elements makeup an ideal soul. The state, which happens to be aconglomerate of souls, should necessarily reflect these


80

three elements. Thus, for Plato, an ideal state is dividedinto three classes: proper guardians (rulers) – these aremen of experience and wisdom who have provedthemselves fit to rule; second, younger guardians whoseduty it is to ward off enemies and ensure law and orderin the society; and the lowest are men of independentmeans (wage earners) who could be shopkeepers,merchants, professional men, employers/employees oflabour, etc. These three classes correspond to the threeelements of the soul -The Soul Virtues The StateRational Wisdom Rulers(proper guardians)Spirited Courage Militants (younger guardians)Appetitive Temperance Commoners

The above illustration is pregnated with some meaningswhich shall be made explicit later on. The aim ofeducation in this framework, involves the redirection ofthe whole personality. This entails the discovery of howto provide the individual with the most suitable kind oftraining and environment needed to maintain individualclasses in the state. Education, for Plato, was equivalentto conversion – the turning of the eyes of the soultowards the light which hitherto had been unperceived.This view is better captured in Plato’s Republic, 518b, ascited in Curtis & Boultwood (1975):

Our present argument shows us that there is a facultyresiding in the soul of each person, and an instrumentenabling each of us to learn; and that just as we mightsuppose it to be impossible to turn the eye round fromdarkness to light without turning the whole body, so


81

must this faculty or this instrument, be wheeled, round,in company from the perishing world, until it be enabledto endure the contemplation of the real world, and thebrightest part thereof, which according to us, is the formof the good.

Plato went further to adumbrate aims of stages ofeducation. At the early stage, according to Plato, the aimof education would be to stimulate the love of thebeautiful in all its varied appearances. At a later stage,when the reasoning powers have developed, educationwill have as its object the love and acquisition of truth. Atthe highest stage, the aim of education would be to bringthe soul to knowledge of the good.Plato’s Method of TeachingTo realise the above stated aims of education, Platoopined that the style of teaching must be dialogical(dialectics). He believed so much in dialogue and he wasconvinced that the truth about things would come as aresult of thoughts and discussions. He opined that oneneeded to begin with opinions which appeared rationaland acceptable, but when subjected to criticisms byothers, the inadequacy of such opinions might becomeapparent, and it would be necessary to restate, re-consider and modify them.Plato’s CurriculumAgain, in realisation of Plato’s aims of education, everychild has to begin with some worthwhile myths andfables at the mother’s knees, after which the child


82

proceeds on elementary education. This begins withtraining in music, poetry, literature, numbers andcalculations, and other forms of art. Later, the child isintroduced to gymnastics – this happens when the youthwould have to take his/her place as a member of thearmed forces of the state. Let us note here that music wasexpected to train the child’s soul, while gymnastichandled the body (A combination of Spartan andAthenian systems of education).

What we have described so far has to do with elementaryeducation. This is insufficient for the proper guardianwho is expected to combine philosophic insight withpractical experience. From age 20-30, a youngguardian/militant will receive a secondary educationwhich is scientific in character (arithmetic, geometry,astronomy, etc). After this, higher education will followfor another fifteen years. Those who succeed at theselevels, with experiences in dealing with day-to-dayproblems of administration, are chosen to become rulers– philosopher kings. They are subjected to close scrutinyand rigorous tests, to discover any defect in character orintelligence which could make them unfit for the work ofa proper guardian (ruler). This means, then, that it is onlythe Philosopher-King who can rule the state, because it isonly him (through training and experience) who knowswhat is good for the community for he has learnt to lovethe community and to guide it with all the powers ofbody and mind. With him, public interest comes firstbefore private aggrandisement. Summarily, the ruler ofthe state, for Plato, must be a philosopher by nature andtraining, and -


83

unless it happens either that philosophers acquire thekingly power in states, or that those who are nowcalled kings and potentates, be imbued with asufficient measure of genuine philosophy, that is tosay, unless political power and philosophy be unitedin the same person – there will be no deliverance forcities, nor yet, I believe, for the human race (Curtis &Boultwood, 1975).Plato’s Contributions

The contributions of Plato to the development ofeducation are too numerous to enumerate. First, byfounding the Academy, Plato had invented the firstuniversity and the first organised system of schooling.Second, the secondary school educational system beganwith Plato because hitherto, people were justpredisposed to elementary forms of learning. Third,setting of educational aims and curricular patterns foreach level of education also began with Plato. Moreover,the interplay between education and state’s governance(politics) was brought to lime-light in Plato’s educationalphilosophy. He opined that a good education was aviable instrument for heralding peace, cooperation,growth, development and stability in the society. TheN.Y.S.C. scheme which predisposes a NigerianUniversity/Polytechnic graduate to some form of para-military training meant to create resilience, perseverance,endurance, physical training, national integration andorientation, could be traced to Plato’s ingeniouscontributions to education.


84

We may, however, have to understand Plato’sphilosophical stand in the context of his environment andtime, after all, every thinker is to a great extent,conditioned by the age in which he lives.5.4 AristotleAristotle was the most distinguished pupil of Plato, whohad a tremendous influence on the former. Aristotlebecame Plato’s disciple at the age of 18, and he studiedunder him for a period of 20yrs. He later became aprivate tutor to Alexander the Great who conqueredmost of the then civilised worlds. Aside being a tutor,Aristotle founded a school in Athens in 335. The schoolwas named Lyceum. Following his usual practice oflecturing at the Lyceum – peripatos, Aristotle’s followersbecame known as the peripatetics (the walkers).

Aristotle was interested in every subject, especially ethicsand politics. Other interests were in biology, psychology,zoology, physics, astronomy, aesthetics, metaphysics,logic, etc. His works were more systematic than Plato’s,providing evidence of his more painstaking attention tonature. Such works include Oganum; Rhetoric; Poetics;Physics; De Anima; Nicomachean Ethics; Eudermian Ethics;Politics; and Metaphysics (works done after physics, aslabelled by Andronicus – one of Aristotle’s pupils).

Aristotle’s theory of education was essentially deriveddirectly from Plato’s. His views about education werevariously contained in his books on Ethics and Politics. InEthics, Aristotle considered the good of man as anindividual; while in Politics, his concern was with the


85

practical problem of how the state could be organised torealise that good. The aim of education, in thisframework, would be to produce men and women whohad the right kind of intelligence and ability and the righttype of character. To ensure this, education was to be putunder the control of the state, and not in private hands,so that it could reach every desirable person in the state,and thus, bring about men of character and intelligence.

The pattern of the curriculum he proposed was:a. Early years – (from 0-5yrs). Aristotle believed that

those who belong to this age should receive no setof lesson instructions, but be fully occupied withhealthy play. He was in agreement with Plato thateducation should aim at promoting physical healththrough exercise and at ennobling the mind throughliterature, art and music.

b. At the age of 7, the child could begin elementaryeducation.

c. The curriculum for the adolescent features reading,writing, gymnastic, music and drawing.Aristotle’s main contribution was his emphasis on the

importance of direct observation of nature and his beliefthat one must obtain factual data before any theorisation(especially on education). He equally maintained thatany knowledge of things should require description,classification and causal explanation. This is, of course,the modern scientific view, and educational researcheshave greatly benefited from this position.


86

5.5 Jean Jacques RousseauThis French philosopher had a very rough/terriblebeginning. He was born in Geneva, and raised by onlyhis father, for his mother died at his birth. His father’sirresponsibility had great effects on Rousseau as DavidHume described him as the most atrocious villainbeyond comparison. Despite these reservations,Rousseau’s influence in political philosophy, politics,literature, music and education was/is greatlysubstantial. Some of his works were – The New Heloise(1761); The Social Contract (1762); The Confessions andEmile (1762) – his treatise on Education. Aside from thesemain works, Rousseau had some essays in his resume.He was said to have won first prize in a contestsponsored by the Academy of Dijon in 1749, for his essayon the question – “Has the progress of the sciences and artscontributed to the corruption or to the improvement of humanconduct?” His response was an attack on the corruptinginfluence of the sciences and arts of civilisation). He hadanother essay, which he later published in 1755 –“Discourse on the origin and foundation of inequality amongmen”. Here, he argued that all the evils experienced in theworld were brought by man through civilisation. Thesearguments startled the sensibilities of the Frenchauthorities, but it made Rousseau popular.

The central idea of Rousseau’s philosophy was thedoctrine of naturalism. Alongside Thomas Hobbes andJohn Locke (contract theorists), he proposed a theory ofthe original state of nature. His own state of nature wasessentially different from Hobbes who postulated thatman was brutish, nasty, wicked, rapacious, violent and at


87

war with other men at the state of nature. Rousseau’sown conception favoured an optimistic sense of man. Forhim, at the state of nature, where there was neither statenor civilisation, man was innocent, good, happy, healthy,and free. The advent of private property brought an endto this state. The moment a particular man enclosed apiece of land, and said to himself and others - ‘this ismine’, and found others believing him, marked thebeginning of the civil society, which brought about thedestruction of natural liberty and which for theadvantage of a few ambitious persons, subjectedhumanity to perpetual labour, slavery and wretchedness.He, hence, had a great distrust for civilisation as theenemy of man and nature. This was particularlydemonstrated in his essay at the Academy of Dijon. He,however, believed that man could still be helped out ofthe calamity he had put himself via developments insciences and arts. The remedy, for Rousseau would be areturn to the state of nature – a state of simplicity,goodness, happiness, freedom and peace - naturalism.

To return man to this state of nature, Rousseauconsidered education as a veritable tool. The ultimateaim of education for him, then, should be to propel mantowards nature; to redirect his attention from thecomplexities and enslavement which come along withcivilisation, scientisation or technologisation; and returnman’s mind toward his natural self. To herald this,Rousseau found himself pitching a tent against Plato onthe idea of state’s control of education. For Rousseau,education of the young ones should not be left in the


88

hands of the state which already suffered corruption. Tolive education in the state’s hand, was to transfer itsdebased/corrupt nature to the innocent and naturalyoungsters, and thus continue the endemic process ofanti-naturalism. Rousseau got convinced that socialinstitutions were artificial and corrupt, thus, the only trueform of education was that which a child received inisolation from social influences.

Rousseau was the first to emphasise focus on the child asthe centre of learning – ‘child-centredness’. He opinedthat the prime factor for consideration was the child andhis present nature as a child. For him, nature wantschildren to be children before they are men. If wedeliberately pervert this order, we shall get prematurefruits which are neither ripe nor well flavoured andwhich soon decays… Childhood has ways of seeing,thinking, and feeling, peculiar to itself nothing can bemore foolish than to substitute our ways for them (Curtisand Boultwood, 1975).Rousseau’s CurriculumEducation, for Rousseau, is a continuous process whichbegins at birth and which could be divided into fourconsecutive stages –1. Infancy – This could be tagged the animal level

according to Rousseau. It is the age when the infantdisplays his natural itself. It is the age when hedevelops through free activity and employment ofsenses. Thus, all premature attempts at a formaleducation should be discouraged and avoided. Thechild should be allowed to exercise his limbs, senses


89

and strength. He should be allowed to learn fromnature through play.

2. Childhood – Immediately after infancy, childhoodis the next stage of development. Rousseaucompared the child at this level with the ‘primitive’man. Here, the teacher should instruct the childonly through practical experiences.

3. Pre-adolescence – This is the period ofboyhood/girlhood. It is a period of self sufficiency;a period of anxiety and curiosity. The boy/girlbegins to ask different questions like why, what,how, etc. The child estimates the worth of anythingin terms of its utility. We could teach him/herscience just to give him a taste of the sciences andmethods of learning them when this taste is morematured. Such sciences could be geography,astronomy, psychics, practical craft, etc. He should,however, be allowed to discover these scienceshimself.

4. Adolescence – Adolescence is a critical period whensex impulses get ripened, and social behaviourbecomes possible. At this stage, sex instructionscould be given to the adolescent. We could alsomake available to him/her explanations of themoral relations among men. He could be taughthistory to provide him with the knowledge of waysof men. The adolescent period is the time tostimulate social sentiments. It is also time to learn


90

how to control the new passions which are surgingwithin the adolescent.Rousseau’s Contribution

Rousseau championed a revolution in the world ofeducation - a revolution which saw a paradigm shiftfrom the teacher or the curriculum to the child as theprincipal focus/target of education. With this, he madesubstantial influences on subsequent philosophers likePestalozzi, Froebel and even Dewey, from whom theyderived the concept of ‘child-centred curriculum’.5.6 Jean Heinrich PestalozziPestalozzi was a Zurich thinker born to a surgeon andoculist. He was a simple man from humble but happybeginning. Not a bookworm, but was greatly influencedby Rousseau’s naturalism, as expressed in Emile. Hewrote some books which were Leonard and Gertrude (4volumes) 1781-1785; Christopher and Elizabeth (1782); TheEvening Hours of a Hermit (1781). Investigations into theCourse of Nature in the Development of the Human Race(1797); How Gertrude Teaches her Children (1801); Help forTeaching, Spelling and Reading (1801); Swansong (1826) andsome articles. A fairly educated man at the University ofZurich in 1775; Pestalozzi adjudged the training given tohim as elevating and inspiring, but ineffective, for itomitted the solid and sufficient training of practicalcapacities. To rectify this, he began by developing hiseducational concepts through his experience in observingand training his first son. Thus, he learnt that a childunderstands concepts faster when they are visualised(through instructional materials), otherwise, concepts


91

would be learnt merely by rote/memorisation which areentirely meaningless and uninteresting to the child. Thismeans that a child learns faster by activity, imitating,collecting and observing nature.

Pestalozzi progressed from his son’s observations andexperiment to organise a little school of a capacity oftwenty pupils, with some support from Bern Council ofCommerce and Bern Agricultural society. He taughtreading, writing, arithmetic, religion, new farmingmethods to the boys, and useful household skills to thegirls. Pestalozzi’s lack of practical efficiency in businessissues, alongside poor patronage, saw to the closure ofthe school. After picking up some teaching appointmentswith the government, he again opened another school in1799, which happened to be a centre for research, teachertraining and pupils’ preparation for the future.

The period of experimentation in these schools madePestolozzi to opine that the first task of educationalresearch should be discovery by observation of thechild’s unfolding powers and changing needs, and thearrangement of the whole range of human knowledge inan order adapted to those powers and needs. Thus, theaim of education should be to prepare the child for hisfuture place in life so that he will be able to findsatisfaction in his life (job and domestic). Educationshould aim at providing variety of activities so as todiscover the hidden talents of individuals for maximumdevelopment.


92

One essential input of Pestalozzi to education was hisemphasis on the importance of proper home education.The home, for him, was the foundation of the child’seducation. The quality of the home milieu would go along way in determining the eventual personalitydevelopment of the child. In the Gertrude, he presentedthe parents (especially the mother) as the first teacher(s)of children, training them through their senses, guidingtheir observation of nature and drawing them into work-activities, contributing to the family’s welfare and thesociety. So, every home must implant positive traitswhich will help the child as he grows up in thedevelopmental stage.

Another striking feature of Pestalozzianism was theinsistence on the interplay between the school and thefamily setting. The school, for him, should reflect the bestof the family atmosphere, typical of the social structure inwhich the child is situated. The child should be exposedto a general education closely related in duties,responsibilities and activities, to a good home training,based on association with the social conditions. This willmake a child become a fully developed, balanced anddisciplined adult who will easily do well in the societyhe/she finds him/herself. To get everybody welladapted and fitted into the society, Pestalozzi proposedan equality of opportunity to education by thegovernment. For him, it is the duty of the government todevelop each child’s abilities to the full by providinggood schools, high moral standards and sound teachingmethods. This proposal was in tandem with Plato’s view,


93

but in sharp contrast to Pestalozzi’s influencer – J.J.Rousseau.

The curriculum Pestalozzi recommended featuredsubjects like religion, moral education, physicaleducation, history, drawing, writing, spelling singing,model making, field trips, classical and modernlanguages, physical sciences, mathematics andgeography. The richness of these subjects was sufficientlyremarkable to merit the term ‘reformed curriculum’, forit was all-inclusive. Pestalozzi suggested that thesecourses should be handled in participation with thelearners, as against learning by rote/memorisation orpassive observation. He also recommended thatinstructions should proceed from familiar tonew/unfamiliar; known to unknown; practical toabstract. The learner, for him, could safely move on to thenext development stage only if he has mastered the tasksof the earlier/previous stage(s).Pestalozzi’s TeacherPestalozzi believed that the teachers’ duty was not toforce/impose knowledge on his pupil, but to tend him asa ‘gardener’ would tend a plant, remove stubborngrasses from the garden, and supply healthy, fertile soiland the right portion of sun, water and other necessaryinputs for proper growth. The pupil, in turn, woulddevelop through self-activity, guided by the teacher.Pestalozzi believed that teacher have to be taught how todevelop the child. He opined that the act of goodteaching cannot be learnt from books, but from practice.


94

Pestalozzi, hence, encouraged teachers to attend theircolleagues’ lessons/classes (especially the moreexperienced ones) as a means of remedying anydeficiency in knowledge and methods. It is worthwhileto quickly add, here, that Pestalozzi was opposed to theuse of cane, especially when it becomes excessive orcontinuous. His position was based on the fact thatpupils do not learn by force/compulsion, but accordingto nature.Pestalozzi’s ContributionsPestalozzi’s contributions to education were greatlyingenious. First, through him, we saw a gradualdiscouragement of learning by rote and mereaccumulation of facts. The learner became an activeparticipant in the process of knowledge discovery.Besides, Pestalozzi’s teaching method from simple tocomplex; familiar to unfamiliar; concrete to abstract wasa noble invention in education. This was the beginning ofteachers’ consideration of learners’ previous knowledgeor what we now know as entry behaviour. Moreover,Pestalozzi had immense influence on later thinkersamong who was Froebel who taught in his (Pestalozzi)school from 1806 to 1810. Pestalozzian effect could beindirectly felt through the great contributions of thisprotégé and others.5.7 Friedrich FroebelFroebel was a German philosopher who was highlyinfluenced by Pestalozzi’s courage, perseverance andideas. He had a lonely beginning and lived at the periodwhen Germany was leading the world in philosophical


95

thought. He was the originator of ‘kindergarten’(children’s garden) which was initially called ‘A school forpsychological education’. Through this school, Froebel wasable to experiment his theory on the organisation ofmaterials and activities through which children mightexpress their natural abilities as they cultivate theirobservation and understanding powers. This school didnot thrive much until after his death, partly because of itsdemocratic tendencies, and partly because of theconfusion of identity with Froebel’s nephew, Julius, whowas championing socialism as a replacement for thestatus quo. After Froebel’s death, the school flourished allover Germany, Britain, America, France, Italy,Netherlands and other places.

Froebel’s educational theory was developed from acombination of observational method and the study ofthe ideas of other educators and philosophers. Histheories were woven around the theory and knowledgeof evolution in nature. Education in this scenario then,becomes a process through which man possesses thepower and understanding to manipulate his everchanging vicinity and nature for his own welfare. The olddefinitions, conceptions, aims, objectives and methods ofeducation thus become archaic and irrelevant for othergenerations. This means that every designed learningexperience for the learner has to be wide and flexible.

The aim of education, for Froebel, was the developmentof the child’s personality via disparate play activities. Heprofessed an educational system which would produce


96

people who were forward looking and aware of theirresponsibilities, duties and expectations, and who werepropelled to contribute to the development of humanity.Like Pestalozzi, he preached a firm link between thehome and school. He wrote in a particular letter in 1834that;

No community can progress in its developmentwhile the individual who is a member of it remainsbehind. The individual, who is a member of thewhole body, cannot progress in his developmentwhile the individual who is a member of it remainsbehind. The individual, who is a member of thewhole body, cannot progress in his developmentwhile the community remains behind (Curits &Boultwood, 1975).

This means that man, as an active organism, needs toengage in opposing activities – on one hand areindividual interests and activities, on the other areactivities with others taken as part of group efforts forgroup purpose. It is the function of education to reconcilethese opposing interests. An educated man is the onewho has been able to achieve harmony or reconciliationof these oppositions. Hence, Froebel encouraged learningthrough cooperative work and play; living together andengaging in group and individual activities based oncontact with nature and the environment.Froebel’s Curriculum and Teaching MethodThe curriculum, for Froebel, should be designed in awide and flexible way, such that children would expressideas, feelings and purpose in activities which at thesame time imbue them with knowledge and experience


97

in play acting, writing, dancing, storytelling, singing,drawing, moulding clay, calculating, painting, and in anumber of games individually and collectively.

For older children, activities such as gardening, buildingboats and other objects, exploring, reading and the needfor individual and group learning/participation shouldbe encouraged. However, the methods and materialsdevised by the teacher should not be imposed on thelearner, but be made available for his use under properguidance.

Froebel expounded the use of play in education whichought to be progressive and guided, in which case, theteacher’s duty will be to organise and guide the free andcontinuous development of the child through play. Thisprocess of development of self-activity should begradual, natural and not forced. The teacher is expectedto encourage the awakening of senses, help the child tolocate words in the expression of ideas and mentalimages, and ensure the retention of these bits ofknowledge by play-way method. Play, for Froebel, comesnaturally to the child and it is the most fruitful andconvenient way for him to learn. It is the highest level ofthe child development. By and large, the method ofteaching, in Froebel’s view, should be geared towardsself-discovery.Froebel’s ContributionsThrough his books on Education of Man (1826); A FamilyBook for Developing the Self-activity of Children (1845), and


98

several experiments, Froebel became the originator of theplay-way method for the early childhood education. His‘kindergarten’ school has spread all over the world withchildren benefiting immensely from Froebel’s vision. Healso made recommendations on the education ofadolescents that the designed curriculum for them mustbe integrated in order to generate integratedpersonalities, and that the teaching method must often betargeted at self-discovery.5.8 John DeweyDewey was a pragmatic philosopher from America. Hehad a fast education – at the age of 20 (1879), he wasalready a graduate at the University of Vermont, and ataround the age of 25, he had obtained a Ph.D degree inphilosophy in John Hopkins University. He became aprofessor first at the University of Minnesota, later atUniversity of Michigan, and then at University ofColumbia. Dewey received qualitative instructions fromauthorities like C.S. Pierce and G.S. Morris who taughthim philosophy; G. Stanley Hall who taught himpsychology; and Herbert B. Adams, history. Thus, hebecame a giant to the extent that he was described inParis as ‘the most profound and complete expression ofAmerican genius’.

Indeed, he was a genius for his revolutionarythoughts/works dominated philosophy and educationthroughout the first part of the 20th century. He was andremains America’s most famous philosopher. Before hisdeath, he had written over forty books and sevenhundred articles. Some of these books are: The school and


99

the Society (1899). My Pedagogic Creed (1897); The Child andthe Curriculum (1903); How we Think (1933); Interest andEffort in Education (1913); Moral Principles in Education(1909); Democracy and Education (1916); Experience andEducation (1938); Arts and Education (1929); Schools ofTomorrow (1915); The Elementary School Record (1900); andseveral other books that cut across philosophy, politics,ethics, psychology, biology, theology, and virtually, allaspects of life. He was simply a colossus!

Dewey thought of an education that emphasisescommunity, communication, intelligent inquiry and areconstructive attitude that can best serve the citizens ofan ever-evolving world. In the process of realising this;philosophy plays a central role. As a matter of fact,philosophy and education drew closer and eventuallymerged in Dewey. Both studies came to signify theexperimental study of man and his world – Philosophyas Education. Educational aim, for Dewey, was todiscover probable ways of breaking down barriersbetween school and community life, and also to findways of including a richer, more varied subject matter inpupil’s studies without adding to the burden of rote-learning/memorisation and symbol interpretation. Thismeans that educators should aim at searching for ways ofeducating the young so that they become theregenerating forces of the society, since they have thepotentialities for development beyond the level of theirpredecessors. Little wonder why Dewey held theforegoing as the aim, when one realises that the whole ofDewey’s philosophy was influenced by Charles Darwin’s


100

theory of evolution via T.H. Huxley. This influenceeventually led Dewey to embrace an experimentalnaturalism wherein human nature is perceived as part ofnature. It was then he first acquired the notion that ahuman being or community is like a highly complexnatural organism that must continually evolve/changeand must function within his ever-changingenvironment. This led him to propose that the goal ofeducation was to aid every individual in achievinghis/her unique potentials that he/she needs to makehis/her unique contribution(s) to the society. This meansthat there should be a strong interplay betweeneducation and the society. This is even confirmed inDewey when he says that education is a social function,and that until we know what sort of society is best, we donot know what sort of education is best.

Dewey’s position, aim/goals, methods and educationalcurricula were not produced via mere abstractions. Hewas more interested in experimentation beforetheorisation. As a matter of fact, he set up a Universitylaboratory school in Chicago in 1896, for the purpose ofresearch and experimentations in new ideas and methodsof education. The principles guiding the school weresimilar in effect to Froebel’s idea, which are summarisedbelow-- that the primary business of the school is to train

children in co-operative and mutually helpfulliving.

- that the primary root of all educative activity is inthe activities of the child and not in the presentationand application of external materials.


101

- that individual tendencies and activities areorganised and directed through the uses made ofthem in keeping up the co-operative living; and thatit is through production and creative use thatvaluable knowledge is secured and clinched (Curtis& Boultwood, 1975).Dewey’s Curriculum

Dewey proposed a “child-centered” curriculum whichgives the teacher a heavier responsibility and greateropportunity for guiding the young not only in the habitof democratic cooperation, but also towards the highestintellectual pursuits and the fullest aesthetic experiences.His method (called problem method, but re-interpretedto project method by Kilpatrick) was to:- offer challenges to pupils to engage in deep

thoughts and experimentations.- provide individual tasks in the accomplishment of

group purposes.- train the senses and allow incidental acquisition of

basic skills in Reading, Riting and ‘Rithmetic (3Rs),etc.

- offer links with the whole realm of knowledge.Dewey’s TeacherFor Dewey, a child is filled with differentpotentialities/capacities which ought to be exploredthrough the guidance of the teacher. The teacher’s role isto observe individual’s desires and behaviours and to usethese peculiarities to strengthen the process of growth.His functions are –


102

- to guide the young through the complexities of lifeand give them opportunities to learn in their naturalway.

- to assist the child in coping adequately withcontemporary realities.

- to act as a guide, guard, influencer and an adviser,while the child learns to tackle problems, especiallyin company of other learners.

These mean that the teacher has to be sound inphilosophy and psychology. These fields will help him tofathom how to best handle his pupils. It will also helphim to realise that his superiority in experience and ‘maybe’ in knowledge over his pupils is temporal; he cannotset limits to the pupils’ development, who are expectedto take civilisation to a higher stage in the evolutionaryscale on the long run.

Dewey’s contributions to education, as said earlier, havenot been paralleled with any other contribution,especially in the last century and even at the beginning ofthis 21st century. His basic creed in education could besummarised as:- the pursuance of psychological order in the

curriculum;- the evolution of problem method (now known as

project method);- the collapse of the bridge between the school and

society; bringing the gown close to the town;- enthroning the principles of democracy in education

such that education becomes democratised;


103

- fostering a pragmatic, functional and usefuleducation which connects the head with the hand(vocations in education and education in vocations),and

- orchestrating philosophy as education andeducation as philosophy.5.9 Maria Montessori

Born in Italy, Maria came to education through herinterest in physics and her concern for the physicallychallenged and underprivileged. One might wonder howa woman of pure scientific background (a medical doctorby training) could come into the field of educationwithout hitches. Maria, however, got qualified incarrying out experiments in teaching with her universitycourse in experimental psychology and anthropologicalpedagogy. These gained her the qualification which laterearned her the post of organiser of infant schools inRome.

Maria’s first experience with children was as an assistantin the psychiatric clinic of University of Rome. She waslater to become a director of a special school for thechallenged children – an experience which gained herinterest in the development of teaching methods. Hermajor works/books were – The Montessori Method (1912)and the Advanced Montessori Method (1917).

Maria’s method was basically in three parts – motor,sensory and intellectual. Motor education includedexercises such as walking, breathing, good posture,


104

proper speech habits, rhythmic games, and gymnastics.These were done to achieve a high degree of efficiencyand coordination in the child’s movements. Sensoryeducation dealt with the senses. Educational materialswere provided to give the learner the opportunity totouch, feel and manipulate with a chance for repeatedexercises. And of course, the intellectual education wasdone through the creation of an ideal and suitableenvironment for learning. The use of didactic materialswhich were challenging, enticing and captivating enoughto engage the interest and concentration of the child wasconsidered worthwhile.

Montessori’s method required a careful organisation ofthe child’s environment, regulation of his freedom andthe provision of special didactic materials for the child’suse, designed to give him practice in such activitieswhich might be seldomly encountered in theenvironment. Through these, children would gain skillsof manipulation and judgement through the sense,physical and intellectual development. The montessorianmethod encouraged development at an individual pace,without any rivalry or competition of any sort. It entailedlearning via interested activities, without the attachmentof rewards or some kind of punishments.

Education, for Maria, was a means of awareness of loveand the independence of the child. She agreed withDewey that the problem of the child lies in gettingadapted and adjusted to his immediate environment, inwhich the teacher should act as a guide and an organiser.


105

In another dimension, Montessorian system had manysimilarities, but indeed differences, with Frobelianism.While the Froebelian kindergarten told stories, acted as agroup leader and an organiser of short-period activities,the Montessorian acted as an observer of children whoselected their own activities and freely decided when tochange. This made the Montessorian need more play-apparatus than the Froebelian.The Montessorian Teacher and CurriculumFor Montessori, the task of a ‘trained’ teacher is toobserve and supervise the child’s development ofconfidence, competence, self-discipline and readiness tolearn and explore. This has to be done with all theliberties needed so as to make discoveries of the child’senvironment.

Like Rousseau and Pestalozzi, the curriculum for theMontessorian school is child-centred, geared towards theultimate needs of the child. Initially, Maria’s curriculumwas targeted at the less-privileged and physicallychallenged children (people with disabilities), but it wasextended later. She became the first scholar to equatenormally developing intelligence with subnormallydeveloping intelligence. Her strategy was to show thatthe less endowed children could perform even betterthan the endowed children if exposed to favourablevariables. Thus, after proper grooming, Montessoriregistered her pupils with the normal kids for the samepublic examination in writing and reading. Theunderprivileged and challenged children turned out to


106

perform better than the privileged and non-challengedkids. Maria was able to achieve this through love andcloseness with the kids and gradual change of badattitudes and maintenance of freedom in play. This resultdrew the attention of the whole world to her, and onewonders if such attention could be shifted.Montessori’s ContributionsMaria introduced the Montessorian method in 1907which stressed the development of initiatives and self-reliance by allowing children to choose for themselvesthe activities that catch their interests. This method hasspread all over the world.

Researches have shown that the Montessorian methodhas enabled children to learn to read on their own, andwrite much faster with greater efficacy than has hithertobeen possible. She was able to reinforce the child-centredness of every curriculum package. TheMontessorian method has made us to realise that thephysically challenged (people with disabilities) and theless privileged in the society, could become self-supportive/self-reliant if they desire to, rather than beingdependent, predators or burdens to the society.5.10 SummaryPhilosophers are men of great reflections whose thoughtshave greatly influenced the meaning, tprocess, goals,patterns and entire management of education from thebeginning till date. This chapter considered theinfluences of western scholars on education. Throughthese scholars, we have such inventions as the entire


107

schooling system; kindergarten; methods of teachingsuch dialectics, lecture, project, play-way, montessorian;curricular packages and patterns; school discipline, useof instructional materials and many other inventions.5.11 Questions for Evaluation1. Identify any five philosophers of education from the

West and state one notable invention brought toeducation from each of the identified thinkers.

2. Dialectics is another name for……………method ofteaching.

3. Aristocles was the real name of………………….whofounded………………known as the first organisedschool in the history of mankind.

4. The originator of kindergarten was a disciple of……………………….from Zurich.

5. Highlight any five important books written by themost famous pragmatic philosopher of educationfrom America.5.13 Possible Answers

1. Socrates - Dialectics and question/answermethod of teaching.

Plato - First organised school namedAcademy and comprehensivecurriculum which predisposes thechild to cognitive, psychomotor andaffective experiences.

Aristotle - Organised school named Lyceumand propagation of empiricalresearches in education.


108

Rousseau - Naturalism in education and childcentred curriculum.

Pestalozzi - Instructional materials and entrybehaviour (initially known asprevious knowledge).

Froebel - Kindergarten and play method ofteaching.

Dewey - Pragmatic education and projectmethod of teaching.

Montessori - Education for self-reliance andmontessorian method of teaching.

2. Socratic.

3. Plato; Academy

4. Pestalozzi

5. Some of the books written by John Dewey were:The School and the Society (1899);My Pedagogic Creed (1897);The Elementary School Record (1900);The Child and the Curriculum (1903);Moral Principles in Education (1909);Interest and Effort in Education (1913);Schools of Tomorrow (1915);Democracy and Eeducation (1916);Arts and Education (1929);How we Think (1933);Experience and Education (1938); etc.


109

ReferencesAkinsanya, P. O. (2013). Philosophy as education. 3rd ed.

Ijebu-Ode: Patt PublicationsAkinsanya, P. O. (2010). Some philosophers of education.

In W. Adunfe & P.O. Akinsanya (eds.) Introductionto sociological and philosophical foundations ofeducation. Ijebu-Ode: Home of Grace Publications.

Curtis, S. J. & Boultwood, M.E.A. eds (1975). A shorthistory of educational ideas. 4th ed. Britain:University Tutorial Press.


110

Notable African Philosopher of Education

111

Chapter SixNOTABLE AFRICAN PHILOSOPHERS OFEDUCATION6.1 IntroductionThis chapter is a follow up to chapter five. If we havediscussed contributions of thinkers from western world,we should equally discuss the contributions of thinkersfrom our world. While Socrates, Dewey, Montessori,Lucas and the rest were/are busy philosophising abouteducation in Europe, some thinkers were/are doing samein Africa. Thus, we have a host of Julius Nyerere, TaiSolarin, Obafemi Awolowo, Nnamdi Azikwe, JubrilAminu, Ahmadu Bello, Jones Akinpelu, etc. In thischapter, I shall briefly consider four of these thinkers forwant of page. In later revisions of this book, I shall domore digging and extensive work on the revolutionaryideas of a good number of thinkers from Africa. Theconsiderations of Nyerere, Solarin, Awolowo andAkinpelu for now, is intended to create an awareness oneducational thoughts of African scholars and perhapsprod us into turning inwards to bring out our unique setof ideas which will further aid education in our presentworld.6.2 NyerereJulius Kambarage Nyerere was a Tanzanian presidentwho served from 1960 to 1985. Born in 1922 in Butiama,


112

Tanzania and died in 1999, Nyerere had his education inMakerere University and University of Edinburgh. Hewas known as Mwalimu (teacher) for he had a vision ofeducation that was rich with possibility. His intelligencewas recognised by Catholic Reverend Fathers who taughthim in this secondary school days. He went on, with theirhelp, to train as a teacher at Makerere University inKampala. On the completion of his studies, he taught forthree years and then went on a scholarship to studyhistory and political economy for his master degree at theUniversity of Edinburgh. In Edinburgh, Nyerere began todevelop his goal of connecting socialism with Africancommunal living. As President, Nyerere had to steer adifficult course for Tanzania; one of the world’s poorestcountries at the period – 1960’s. She suffered from a hugeforeign debt burden and low foreign assistance.Nyerere’s panacea which was intensive agriculture andnationalisation was a mix of socialism and communallife. He focused on rural development given theTanzanian situation at that time. People were encouragedto live and work on a co-operative basis in rural settings.The idea was to extend traditional values andresponsibilities around kinship.

Nyerere knew what it meant to philosophise abouteducation. In his attempt to fashion a philosophy ofeducation for the emerging Tanzanian society, he askedone of the basic questions a professional philosopherwould normally ask – education for what? This questionraises three implicit queries, viz; what manner ofeducation does Tanzania need? What manner of societalideology would the said education help Tanzania to


113

build? And what values would such education instill onthe consciousness of the Tanzanian citizenry? Nyererebegan by providing an answer to the most fundamentalquestion, which borders on social ideology, for he opinedthat it is “only when we are clear about the kind ofsociety we are trying to build that we can design oureducational service to serve our goals” (Nyerere, 1967).Thus, debates were held and a declaration was made atArusha that Tanzania should be “a socialist societywhich is based on three principles: equality and respectfor human dignity; sharing of the resources which areproduced by our efforts; work by everyone andexploitation by none” (Nyerere, 1967). This is what hascome to be known as Arusha declaration, and it iscontained in the National Ethic and other nationaldocuments in Tanzania.

Having settled the question of ideology, Nyerere thenprogressed into unfolding the education that would helpin realising the adopted social ideology, and the valueswhich such education would inculcate. He began by firstcriticising the system of education handed over by thecolonial masters. The inherited education, for him, hadthe following defects:i. It was meant to reinforce the spirit of subservience

in the African child; submission to the racialsuperiority of the ‘white man’;

ii. To justify and perpetrate colonialism and to furtherentrench capitalism in exchange for Africancommunal living;


114

iii. It encouraged individualism as against thecooperative spirit of the African man;

iv. The education did not help in transmittingTanzanian values;

v. It was elitist;vi. It assumed that worthwhile knowledge was ONLY

from books;vii. The education was white-collar or job-seeking

oriented;viii. It divorced the school/education from the society.

For these shortcomings, Nyerere concluded thatTanzania had inherited “a system of education whichwas in many respects both inadequate and inappropriatefor the new state” (Nyerere, 1967). To come out of themess, Nyerere suggested a solution. The solution was inthe philosophy of education he proposed, which was ananswer to the question posed earlier – education forwhat? Education for self-reliance was the philosophywhose purpose was to foster communal goals of livingtogether and working together for the common good.Such education would ensure that the Tanzanian childwas educated to be self-dependent and make a living inthe Tanzanian community. To achieve this, Nyerereproposed a change in school curricula and in the wayschools were run. He insisted that schools must becomecommunities -communities which practice the preceptsof self-reliance. There must be the same kind ofrelationship between pupils and teachers within theschool community as there is between children andparents. Each school would have, as an integral part of it,a farm or workshop which would provide the food eaten


115

by the community, and make some contributions to thetotal national income. Every school would also be a farm– the school community would consist of people whowere both teachers and farmers, and pupils and farmers.Schools would also train the child to prepare his food,wash his plates, clean his rooms and other chores, andmost importantly, make graduates to fit into and servethe communities from which they come (Nyerere, 1967).

In concluding his wonderful book titled Education for Self-reliance, Nyerere unrepentantly said:

The education provided by Tanzania for thestudents of Tanzania must serve the purposes ofTanzania. It must encourage the growth of thesocialist values we aspire to. It must encourage thedevelopment of a proud, independent and freecitizenry which relies upon itself for its owndevelopment, and which knows the advantages andthe problems of cooperation. It must ensure that theeducated know themselves to be an integral part ofthe nation and recognise the responsibility to givegreater service the greater the opportunities theyhave had (Nyerere 1967:25).

One may want to criticise Nyerere for reducing self-reliance to agriculture, but the socio-economic life ofTanzania at the period he served as the presidentnecessitated the approach. He was simply realistic,taking Tanzania from poverty to the next stage. Onething is clear: that Tanzanian education under Nyererehad a clear focus. This focus which was built on the social


116

ideology adopted in Tanzania, was know by all andsundry, and was implemented to the latter.6.3 SolarinTai Solarin, born in 1916 in Ikenne - Remo, Nigeria anddied in1994, was a radical and non-conformist. Hebagged a Bachelor of Arts degree in history andgeography from Manchester University and a diploma ineducation from the University of London. Althoughfondly called Dr. Solarin, he did not further his educationto doctorate level; he was only awarded honourarydoctor of letters by Alma College, Michigan State. But hewas no doubt a deep, logical, critical and constructivethinker.

Solarin and Nyerere would appear to have the sametraining and philosophic disposition, for their proposalson the system and educational philosophy were to alarge extent identical. Education-for-reliance reverberatesthrough the nooks and crannies of their books andexperiments. While Nyerere simply used his position asthe president of Tanzania to experiment his educationaltheories and assumptions, Solarin had no platform abinitio. When he was made the principal of Molusi Collegein Ijebu-Igbo in 1952, he tried introducing someinnovations, but such were met with stiff oppositionsfrom board of directors of the school and parents. It washis daring move to establish his own school which latergave him a unique opportunity to set his educationalideas on the altar of experimentation.


117

Mayflower was thus established in 1956 to confront thelegacies left behind by the colonial masters in the realmof education. Solarin saw colonial education as a toolused by the British to subjugate the psyche of theNigerian child into believing that nothing was valuablein his people’s food, clothes, ceremonies, language andthe entire way of life. He was bold enough to challengereligion and the propagators (missionaries) who for him,conspired with the British colonial government to reducethe African experience to naught. He droppedChristianity for Humanism. He said his religion wasservice to man, and as charity begins at home, service toNigerian man, woman and child was the only steppingstone to service to all humanity. He was quoted to havesaid:

I would be flattering myself if I declare I am the onlyhumanist in Nigeria. What I could honestly say isthat I am the only Nigerian who declares from rooftops that he is a humanist (Okanlawon, 2000:15).

Solarin’s major problem with the inherited educationgiven to Nigerian citizenry at his time was itsdisconnection of academics from vocational acquisition.Products from such systems were indoctrinated tobelieve that vocations were reserved for the lessendowed, the result of which generated white-collar-job-seekers with little or no success after graduation. Solarinthus revolted against Grammar schools and theircurricula. He opined that academic/intellectual skillsshould be mixed with vocational skills in schools. Hisphilosophy, according to Okanlawon (2000) was that a


118

healthy educational development should be founded ona concrete blend of intellectual with physical handworkreinforced with very strict discipline. To realise thisphilosophy, Solarin ensured that students in his schoolwere made to belong to one society or the other, in orderto complement the efforts of the teachers in theclassroom. As such, there were Young Farmers’ Club,Piggery Society, Goat-keeping Society, Citrus-makingSociety, Cocoa-making Society, Dodo-didin Society,Cultural Society, Garri-making Society, Oil-palm Society,Junior Engineers and Technicians Society (JETS),Electrical Society, Plumbing Society, Bricklaying Society,and so many others. Aside from these societies, studentswere trained to wash their clothes and plates, clean theirenvironment, cook their food, cut grasses and do all otherhome chores. In fact, the strategy was principally do-it-yourself, which eventually produced school graduatesthat were self-reliant and self-dependent.

The mayflower school was an educational experimentwhich confirmed and cemented certain educational ideasbeing adopted in today’s Nigerian education system. Thelessons from this experiment, as summarised byOkanlawon (2000) are:- Academics can be combined with productive work

in the school.- Young people can be brought up in school to be

disciplined, orderly and successful without beingdrowned in religious sacerdotalism.

- The school can nurture children who could betolerant of other people’s religious, social and ethnicbackgrounds.


119

- The doctrine of hard work and service to fellowmenwas the slogan.

- The lesson of self-reliance which is conspicuouslystated in Nigeria’s policy on education was realisedat Mayflower.

The legacies of Solarin are forceful and they live on.These legacies are presently put to practice in someNigerian schools with wonderful results. Examples ofsuch schools are the University and College of Educationin Ogun State - Tai Solarin University of Education,Ijagun and Tai Solarin College of Education, Omu. Theinstitutions, as I indicated in my doctoral thesis, arefollowing the footsteps of Solarin in making it mandatoryfor every student who passes through the gates of theuniversity/college, for one programme or the other, topick a vocation and run it side-by-side classroomactivities. Such vocations are made compulsory to theextent that if a student does not have a pass mark in atleast a vocation, no matter how ingenious the student isin the classroom, he/she will not graduate from theuniversity/college. This approach thus produces asituation where all who graduate from theuniversity/college, have one vacation or the other, and assuch, will not need to wait for a ‘white-collar’ or ‘blue-collar’ job before living meaningfully and graciously inthe society (Akinsanya, 2012).6.4 AwolowoObafemi Jeremiah Awolowo, born in 1909 in Ikenne anddied in 1987, was a statesman who played a key role in


120

Nigeria's independence movement. He was first premierof the Western Region. Awolowo attended variousschools, and thereafter became a teacher in Abeokuta.Following his education at Wesley College, Ibadan in1927, he enrolled at the University of London as anexternal student and graduated with the degree ofBachelor of Commerce. He studied law at the sameUniversity in 1944 and was called to the Bar by theHonourable Society of the Inner Temple in 1946.

When he won the first election to the Western House ofAssembly in 1952, he immediately made it known that hewas going to give top priority to education. This decisionwas based on his conviction that “only an educatedperson can play a full and meaningful role in the affairsof society”. In an address to the youth of Nigeria on the25th anniversary of the introduction of free primaryeducation in Western Nigeria, Awolowo said “we areoffering free education so that every man and womancan stand up for himself or herself and find the way forthe good of society” (Awolowo, 1981). For the benefitsthat are accruable to individuals and the larger society,Awolowo opined that the state should channel a largepercentage of her resources into education. As soon as hecame back from the Cambridge’s Conference onEducation in the company of his Minister of Education;Hon. S.O. Awokoya, he introduced the concept of free,universal primary education for all in Western Nigeria,and later in the entire country when he became theFederal Minister of Finance. This made him to be fondlyregarded as the Father of Free Education in Nigeria.


121

Awolowo’s critical mindedness, foresights andspeculative acumen made him to use education to leaveother regions behind in terms of development (social,political, economic and even religious), which is stillmuch evident in contemporary times. The gap hasbecome so wide that it will take an unprecedentedmiracle to undo.6.5 AkinpeluJones Adelayo Akinpelu, born in 1935 in Ibadan and diedin 2010, had a bachelor degree in Latin and master of artsdegree in Classics from London University. His Ph.D inphilosophy of education was from Columbia University,New York City. This means that Akinpelu was morelettered than any of the scholars we had considered inthis book, except for John Dewey. His career as auniversity don began in the University of Ibadan fromwhere he rose through the ranks to the level of aProfessor of Philosophy and Adult Education in 1980. Hewas head of department, dean of faculty of education,provost of university’s college of education and directorof Centre for Continuing Education in Botswana. He wasa member of the National committee that drafted the firstindigenous policy on education in Nigeria – 1977, and thechairman of its implementation in Oyo State.

Akinpelu researched and published widely inphilosophy of education (over two hundredpublications). Some of his popular books are: Introductionto Philosophy of Education; Essays in Philosophy andEducation; Themes in Philosophy of Education for Teachers;


122

several articles and several public lectures were deliveredby this enigmatic philosopher of education. Through thewritings, Akinpelu was able to guide educators on howphilosophy could be used to illuminate issues of concernin the teaching profession and thereby deepen theirprofessionalism. In this regard, one can say without fearof being contradicted, that Akinpelu belonged to theanalytical camp in philosophy (of education). This isbecause most of his writings bordered on breaking downconcepts and clarifying issues in the world of education.Articles such as: School Discipline from an EducationalPerspective, Equality of Education Opportunity inNigeria: The Myth and the Reality; Democracy andExcellence in Education; Teachers and Education for Self-reliance; Some Current Conceptions of Philosophy ofEducation; Is there a Philosophical Research Method inEducation?; inter alia, are works which are consideredrich, clarifying and illuminating to thoughts ineducational philosophy.

Akinpelu joined some other scholars in philosophy ofeducation to establish the only forum that brings allphilosophers of education in Nigeria together –Philosophers of Education Association of Nigeria(PEAN). Through this umbrella, he was able to establishthe pathway for discourses on educational philosophy inNigeria in particular, and Africa by extension. He equallyused the forum to nurture and mentor a host of scholarsin the field who have become eminent, erudite andoutstanding. He became the president of the associationand today, he is fondly regarded as the Father ofPhilosophy of Education in Africa.


123

6.6 SummaryPhilosophers, as pointed out in previous chapters, aremen of great reflections whose thoughts have greatlyinfluenced the meaning, the process, goals, patterns andentire management of education. This chapter reflectedon the influences of some African thinkers on education.Scholars such as Nyerere, Solarin, Awolowo andAkinpelu were able to use their rich education, exposure,experiences and positions to revitalise education inAfrica. Through their various works, values of self-reliance, vocational acquisition, discipline, freeeducation, professionalism and many others wereintroduced into the system of education in Africa, andperhaps beyond.6.7 Questions for Evaluation1. What philosophy of education was adopted in

Tanzania?2. Tanzanian philosophy of education was based on

what social ideology?3. Identify any two lessons that could be learnt from

Dr. Solarin’s mayflower experience.4. Who is fondly regarded as the Father of Free

Education in Nigeria?5. Which of the following scholars bagged a doctoral

degree in philosophy of education and was fondlyregarded as the Father of Philosophy of Educationin Africa - Nyerere, Solarin, Awolowo, Akinpelu,Azikwe, Aminu, Bello?


124

6.8 Possible Answers1. Education for self-reliance2. Socialism3. Academic skills can be inculcated alongside

vocational skills in the school; that tolerance can benurtured in the school setting; that the school canteach young men to be hardworking and to be ofservice to fellowmen; that young men can benurtured to be self-reliant, etc.

4. Obafemi Awolowo5. Akinpelu


125

ReferencesAkinpelu J. A. (1990). An introduction to philosophy of

education. London: Macmillan.Akinpelu, J. A. (2005). Essays in philosophy and education.

Ibadan: Stirling-Horden Publishers.Akinpelu, J.A. (2005). Themes in philosophy of education for

teachers. Ibadan: Tafak PublicationsAkinsanya, P.O. (2012). Dewey’s pragmatism and Nigeria’s

education policy. Unpublished doctoral thesis,University of Ibadan, Ibadan.

Awolowo, O. (1981). Voice of wisdom: Selected speeches ofChief Obafemi Awolowo. Vol.3. Akure: FagbamigbePublishers.

Fafunwa, A.B. (1974). History of education in Nigeria.Ibadan: NPS Educational Publishers Ltd

Nyerere, J.K. (1967). Education for self-reliance. Tanzania:Dar es Salaam.

Okanlawon, A. B. & Fasanmi, O. T. eds. (2000). Tai Solarin– The making of a humanist. Ijebu-Ode: AdmassPublishing Co. Ltd.

Solarin, T. (1970). Mayflower – The story of a school. Lagos:John Publications Ltd.


126

Philosophical Examination of some issue…

127

Chapter SevenPHILOSOPHICAL EXAMINATION OF SOMEISSUES IN EDUCATION7.1 IntroductionThis chapter examines some issues in education. Itborrows from philosophical traditions of criticalreflections and analysis which is bent on anatomisation,dissection, resolution and breaking down of complexesinto simple components. These entail deep thinking andclarifying ideas/concepts which are opaque, blurred,bastardised and confused. Incidentally, the field ofeducation is replete with so many terms and sloganswhich had been muddled up, confused and bastadised.Some of these concepts and issues are education itself(severally mistaken for teaching, learning, schooling,instruction, indoctrination, etc.), education as initiation,democracy and education, equal educationalopportunity, moral education and religious instruction,teaching as a profession, among others. Examining theseissues is immensely beneficial to educators; it sets a guidefor practice and prevents wastages in the system.7.2 Education and Mistaken ConceptsOne may begin the process of analysing the concept ofeducation by first stating in categorical terms whateducation is mistaken for. Education is sometimesmistaken for schooling, literacy, numeracy and


128

graphicacy. It is also mistaken for teaching, learning,indoctrination and instruction. Education is beyond all ofthese. Although it has no univocal definition, scholarshave considered it from different angles. First, thedefinition of education could be traced to its etymology.Coined out of two Latin words: educere and educare whichmeans to ‘draw out’ or ‘lead out’ and ‘to nourish’ or‘bring up’ or ‘raise up’ respectively (Akinsanya, 2013). Indrawing or leading out, education helps to cull out theinnate tendencies, capacities and capabilities of a childfor his benefit and the environment around him.Osokoya (2010) confirms this when he says thateducation is the “leading out of the in-born powers andpotentialities of the individuals in the society and theacquisition of skills, aptitudes and competenciesnecessary for self-reliance and for coping with life’sproblems”. This is why Socrates insists that the role ofany educator is to help give to birth the innate ideas ofthe child, like the midwives help a pregnant mother putto birth. He thus calls this method - dialectics orintellectual midwifery. In nourishing or bringing up,education assists the child to grow to the fullest stage ofhis/her capability. It is a continuous process of an all-round/wholistic moulding of the child where emphasisis laid on three domains – the Cognitive (the training ofthe Head); the Affective (the training of the Heart); andthe Psychomotor (the training of the Hand).

Education is also considered as a social process whichtakes place in the society for the benefit of the society. Itis an instrument used by the society to guarantee itssurvival. It is a process through which man acquires the


129

norms, values, etiquettes and ideology of a society. Theemphasis here is on the relationship between educationand culture. While culture determines what is learnt,how it is learnt, where it is learnt and when it is learnt;education helps in transmission and transformation ofculture (we shall address this relationship later on in thischapter). There are three types of education accepted byscholars – Informal, Non-formal and Formal Education.Informal Education: Informal education is a type ofeducation which a learner receives in an informal setting,mostly in indirect mode. Such settings are homes(parents, siblings, cousins, nephews, nieces and otherrelations), peer-grouping, clubbing, religious houses, etc.The child learns the following attributes in informalsettings:- how to greet and respect elders,- how to talk to people,- how to sleep and walk,- the etiquettes guiding eating,- maintaining decorum in the public,- manners of dressing,- ways of interacting/socialising,- understanding of family/societal norms, values,

goals and general way of life, etc.

The essential point to note here is that this type ofeducation may or may not need a direct teacher; and ituses no form of curriculum.


130

Non-formal Education: This is a form of education that isneither formal nor informal. It is a system that followssome plans, but received in form of workshops, seminars,public lectures, etc. It is an education given to those whocannot attend full or regular school programmes due toage, job requirements and some other factors.Formal Education: Formal education, on the other hand,is a type of education a child receives in the schoolsetting. It is schooling. It is a process whereby a child’sbehaviour is gradually modified through an experiencedperson, guided by a curriculum.

What the reader needs to note in all of these is thateducation is all-embracing. It encompasses so manythings. Let us quickly examine the concepts which havebeen confused for education.TeachingTeaching is an art done to disseminate bits of knowledgeon the consciousness of learners. It implies aknowledgeable and experienced individual transferringin a systemic way, the knowledge arranged in thecurriculum to another individual who predisposeshimself to learning. Teaching is a deliberate activitywhose function is to assist or guide people in skills, rightattitudes, ideals, and propensities needed to fit in into thesociety.

Teaching cannot, however, be equated with education.This is because every teaching is intentional, deliberateand consciously done, and takes place within the four


131

walls of a class. Education, on the other hand, takes placein the school - formal education - and outside the school -informal or non-formal - and sometimes without aparticular teacher and a curriculum. This means thateducation is a broader concept than teaching.LearningLearning is simply the effect of teaching. Like teaching;learning is a deliberate, intentional and conscious activityby the learner in order to bring about modification orchange in behaviour (cognitive, affective andpsychomotor). Its relationship with teaching is akin tothe relationship between cause and effect; birth anddeath; or selling and buying. This is because withoutteaching, learning may not take place, and vice versa.Given the relationship between learning and teaching, itis clear that education cannot and should not be confusedwith learning. While learning is conscious and deliberate,education is wider - it could be consciously orunconsciously acquired.InstructionThe relationship existing between learning and teachingis akin to the relationship between training andinstruction. The two are intertwined - training needsrepeated instructions, and every man that is instructed, isundergoing some form of training. Instruction means theart of ordering, directing or commanding. It is giving ofinformation in line with the order of a recognised systemof belief which is embodied in human activities. Mosttimes, instruction involves drilling which is a repeated


132

ordering geared towards the formation of a particularhabit. Such drillings could be mental, physical, militarianor otherwise. It is needless to begin to argue that there isdifference between education and mere direction(command or order).SchoolingSchooling could be described as an organised way ofimparting knowledge, which involves three importantthings, viz - teacher, learner and a curriculum – a body oflearning experiences. Schooling is essentially a type ofeducation labelled ‘formal education’. In Nigeria,schooling dates back to 1842 via the coming of the WesleyMethodist mission and other missions who camesubsequently through Badagry. History records it thatthe first school in the world was established 3,500 yearsago in Athens. The point I am making here is thatschooling cannot be equated with education. Whileschooling could be traced to a time in history, educationis as old as mankind. Besides, schooling is just one aspectof education; education has other aspects which makes itbroader. So, it is wrong to equate education withschooling.IndoctrinationIndoctrination is a form of teaching at its lowest level. Itis associated with dogma or doctrines which connote anunquestionable body of beliefs meant to be swallowedand digested hook line and sinker. Indoctrination doesnot make itself available to any kind of challenge, review,consideration or panel-beating. It is characterised withcoercion, threats or even harassment in so far as ideas or


133

opinions are forced down the throat of the supposedlearner. The teacher who uses it engages his students insome form of memorisation or learning by rote. This isthe shallowest way of learning, if it is learning at all. Thisis because it inhibits participation, contribution, analysisand willingness on the part of the supposed learner.

Education can in no way, be confused withindoctrination. Rather than forcing down dogmaticbeliefs on the student, education simple involves theteacher and learner in a symbiotic interaction for thebenefits of the parties involved.7.3 Education and GoalsGoals, generally, are directions which are set and used topilot affairs to prevent irrelevancies and redundancies. Ineducation, goals could be considered as an end whicheducation is set out to achieve. It could also mean theresult or objective which education is meant toaccomplish.

Scholars have debated on what goals of education shouldbe; on whether goals of education should be same for allnations; and whether educational goals should beflexible/dynamic or static/constant. For Dewey,education has no goal outside itself. He professes in MyPedagogic Creed that;

I believe that to set up any end outside of education,as furnishing its goal and standard, is to deprive theeducational process of much of its meaning andtends to make us rely upon false and externalstimuli in dealing with the child (Dewey, 1897).


134

The meaning of the above is that the goal of education iseducation itself. Education, in this vein, connotes life. So,a child is said to be educated when he is properlyintegrated to life experiences. This is the reason whyDewey professes that education is not a preparation forlife but life itself. In Democracy and Education (1916), hesays; “since growth is the characteristic of life, educationis all one with growing; it has no end beyond itself”. Butsome other scholars feel otherwise (confer Peters, 1973).

On whether educational aim should be dynamic orconstant, I feel it makes sense to subject aims ofeducation to the principle of dynamism. If education islife as argued earlier, and life is not static, then educationand its aims should constantly change. This is a simplelogical deduction. Aims of education should changeaccording to time, situation, and in accordance withenvironment or place/location. There should be no fixedand constant aims of education because things aredifferent in different nations and localities, at differenttimes. An educational objective which holds in one placefor one group of people at one time may not hold foranother place at another time (Garrison, 1999). Considerthat the aims of education at the time of Plato are thesame aims being pursued in the present generation;imagine the generational injustice and problems thatwould have ensued. Consider again that the aims ofeducation adopted in America are being replicated herein Nigeria; imagine the cultural and social bastardisationthat would have ensued. Educational goals must as amatter of necessity, differ according to location or time.


135

7.4 Equality of Educational OpportunityEquality is a concept thrown around withoutexamination. Nigeria’s Policy on Education (FRN, 2013)reflects ‘equality of educational opportunity’ as one ofthe cardinal goals to be achieved in the country since itwishes to build a just and egalitarian society wherepeople will be treated equally irrespective of sex, age,educational accomplishment, social status and so on. So,let us briefly consider the feasibility of the concept ofequality – Are people equal? Is it possible to treat peopleequally? Are people endowed in the same way? Arepeople of equal natural privileges? Does nature createand treat people equally? Our responses to thesequestions will be of tremendous help as we consider theconcept of equality of educational opportunity.

Really, it is not easy if not impracticable to treat peopleequally. People are accorded respect based on their statusin the society, education accomplishment, age, sex and soon. Presidents of countries are given special treatmentbecause of the positions they occupy. People areendowed differently; even Siamese twins do not have thesame potentials and natural inclinations. People do nothave same opportunities available to them forenvironment (parentage, climatic conditions, ideologies,etc.) plays a tremendous role in determining theopportunities people enjoy. In most advanced countriesof the world, the opportunities citizens enjoy aredetermined by what the citizens can do, their potentials,their educational accomplishments, etc. All of thesefactors will not make equality a possibility. If that is the


136

case, what happens to the common slogan: equality ofeducational opportunity? Efforts have been made byNigerian governments, following the policy-documenton education, to equalise educational opportunities. Atleast, one can mention the preferential funding ofeducation with extra budgetary allocations to somedesignated educational backward/disadvantaged states,to correct seeming ‘national educational imbalance’; thequota system of admission in favour of disadvantagedstates; normadic, special and almajiri’s education forsome areas; etc. But these efforts have only generatedwhat some have called ‘reverse discrimination’, and thisis why Akinpelu (2005) concludes that “any attempt toequalise opportunities, in a state of previousdisequilibrium, must inevitably create some freshinequalities”. Even if the concept of equality ofeducational opportunity is by hook or crook madepossible, how would we take care of the issue ofstudent’s interest, his abilities, and the use of theopportunity to achieve maximum accomplishment?

Going by afore discussed, I think equality of educationalopportunity, though sound and appealing as a slogan, isnot really feasible. The criterion of justice and fairness andrational and adequate consideration for other people’s interestsuggested by Akinpelu (2005) appears more feasible.7.5 Education and DemocracyEducation and democracy are two concepts with dividedscholarly opinions on the level of relationship that shouldexist between the duo. Some cannot imagine theachievement of democracy through education, and


137

equally imagine a democratised education, that is,democracy in education and education in democracy. Butas it is now common knowledge that democracy hasbecome the best form of governance in the recent days,which is so for so many reasons: first, because democracyis fundamentally rooted in freedom, equality, justice andfair play; second, it is a decentralised network of socialorganisation derived in communities bound together bya common belief and similar but not uniform in practice;it has a structure that seeks to create more just societiesbased on the consent of the people, with respect to thefundamental and inalienable rights of human persons,and engaging in equitable distribution of collectivewealth and social services; it is a system that practicesaccountability of leadership and transparency, honesty,freedom, equality and equal opportunity, participation,free and fair elections (Akinsanya, 2008). All of thesemake it a preferable choice of social ideology comparedto other ideologies. However, whatever conception wehave of democracy, it needs education. Education, in theopinion of Crittenden (1973), contributes to the necessaryforms of understanding which assist the public in theattempt to learn to perceive, think, feel, imagine, desire,choose and act in a way that is fully and distinctivelyhuman, which are the forms of understanding needed forthe survival of a democracy. If these forms ofunderstanding can only be supplied by education (formalor informal), then one could conclude with Omotoso andAladejana (2003) that “education is a sine qua non in ademocracy”. Achieving a democratic society needs aneducation, and it is an education that is democratised.


138

This means that education and democracy have to beinfused into each other. Kneller, quoted in Omotoso andAladejana (2003), pointed out that the conduct ofeducation in a democracy is guided by a number ofgenerally accepted principles. The principles areregarded as the cornerstones of education anddemocracy; they are:i. Since the people elect their government, they should

be educated to do so responsibly.ii. Men must be educated to be free.iv. Education should develop the habit of productive

cooperation as well as healthy competition.vi. Wherever possible, we should adopt democratic

practices in school behaviour.

Consequently, Akinsanya (2012) opined that aneducation is democratised when the following happens;- When education is operated as a right and not a

privilege, and consequently made available,accessible and highly affordable, if not free.

- When curriculum features subjects which arecapable of fostering the spirit of democracy in thechild.

- When learners are encouraged to practicedemocracy in their various students’ associations;and when they are given opportunities to go onfield trips visiting places where democraticinstitutions are solidly entrenched.

- When all stakeholders in education have ‘a say’ and‘a way’ in the planning and execution of education.

- When educational administrators are encouraged todrop the habits of being autocratic or despotic, and


139

instead, embrace the spirit of democracy ineducational affairs.

The point made so far is that education needs democracyjust like democracy needs education.7.6 Education as InitiationI have pointed out somewhere else that there is adistinction between human beings and other livingbeings. This distinction is not in the fact that humansstand on two legs and clothe themselves, but in the factthat they control their environment (Akinsanya, 2012).Control, in this sense, means that man controls theenergies that would otherwise suppress him. He uses thesurrounding energies to his benefit - he uses light, air,moisture, soil and every other thing in the universe asmeans of his own conservation. The other living beings,on the other hand, are less able to use these energies fortheir conservation. When an environment becomes tootough and inconvenient for a bird, for instance, she couldmove away from such environment or bear the risks.Humans, however, would tame such environment. Thismeans that man dominates other organisms. By so doing,man is able to retain and maintain continuity of lifewhich means the “continual readaptation of theenvironment to the needs of living organisms” (Dewey,1916). Life, in this context, covers customs, beliefs,institutions, victories and defeats, recreation andoccupations, ideals, hopes, happiness, miseries andgeneral practices. These experiences, incidentally, arecarried on and passed down from one generation to the


140

other. For instance, when a baby is born, he is without alanguage, belief, idea or social standard. But as he grows,he shares the experiences of his society, and in turnpasses this to other in-coming members. Without thissharing, a society will suffer and fade away. Continuityof life would not however, have been made possible ifnot for education. Education is the means of continuity oflife. Dewey (1916) considers education so necessary forthe role it plays in spanning the gap between theimmaturity of the new-born members of a group and thematurity of the adult members who possess theknowledge and customs of the group. He believes asociety exists through a process of transmission quite asmuch as biological life. This transmission occurs bymeans of communication of habits of doing, thinking,and feeling from the older to the younger. Without thiscommunication of ideals, hopes, expectations, standards,opinions, from those members of society who are passingout of the group, life to those who are coming into it,social life could not survive. If the members whocompose a society lived on continuously, they mighteducate the new-born members, but it would be a taskdirected by personal interest rather than social need. Thismeans that a society ceases to maintain and retain itscharacteristic life if the process of initiation is inhibited orprohibited. This process of initiation ensures that peopleare introduced into the interests, purposes, information,skills and practices of the matured members of thesociety. Education is thus the process of initiationwherein the young shares or partakes in the mode of lifeof the matured.


141

7.7 Moral Education and Religious InstructionIt is an established fact that character formation isimportant and essential at different stages ofdevelopment of children, hence, morality cannot bedetached from education – education devoid of moralityis like tea with no sugar. But while it is possible to taketea without sugar, the survival of the society does notpermit education without morality – to be educatedimplies not only standards of performance in initiates,but also standards of behaviour and comportment whichgive meaning to existence. Morality is thus anindispensable condiment of life. The question whichstakeholders continue to ask, however, is: which of thetwo subjects – moral education or religious instruction -should be given the mandate to do the job of characterformation in the schools. While some favour the first,some others queue behind the second, and for someothers, the first is already subsumed in the second, again,for the rest, the subjects are antithetical. While one doesnot intend to support any of the views, one can raisesome questions – if moral education is based on man’sfundamental moral nature, what is religious instructionbased on? The answer to this question might be thatreligious instruction is based on God. But if that is thecase, is man’s understanding of God and hiscommandments and values similar across board? If theyare similar, why do we have some believers proclaimingforgiveness, while some others allow vengeance in asmuch one does not avenge beyond initial wrong? If notsimilar, how do we use religious instruction to formcharacter of children from different religious


142

backgrounds in the same four walls of the classroom?The idea that religious instruction is capable of value-dissemination may be grossly problematic.

Religious instruction, by its very nature, is the art oftraining in line with the order of a recognizsd system ofbelief which is embodied in activities such asworshipping and performance of rites to God {or gods}.It is training peculiar to a group of people, whosemembers are identified by a mode of worship and act offaith (Sulaiman, 2004). The problem here is that in themidst of disparate religious sects, with parallel belief-systems and value orientations, it is difficult to surrenderthe values appreciated by the general population tovarious religious denominations. Again, there is asterling difference between instruction and education,between religious instruction and moral education; theyare of different functions (confer Akinsanya, 2007). ForAkinpelu, (2005), religious instruction and religiousbodies are more concerned with restoring doctrinalpurity as if religious fundamentalism or fanaticism {tocall it its real name} is a substitute for good moraleducation. If it was a substitute, then those who receiveda high dose of it during the missionary era down to theperiod of regionalisation, should have shown themselvesas embodiments of morality (Akinpelu, 2005).

Nduka has a perfect description of them;

What is not so certain is that the often excessivereligious indoctrination, especially with varyingdenominational emphasis, is a guarantee of eventualmoral probity on the part of the products of the


143

system. In fact the Nigeria case seems to belie anysuch claim. On the contrary, the very leaders andpeople, whose social and political activitiesmanifested themselves in the form of moral miasmaof the first and second republic, including theintervening civil war, were mainly those who hadreceived high doses of religious indoctrination andmoral instruction in either Christian mission schoolsor the parallel Muslim educational institution(Nduka, 2006).

Nduka’s irritation makes him to suggest that thegovernment should take necessary steps to ensure thatreligious instruction is removed from the school systemand made a subject for private and denominationalconcern rather than that of the state. While one thinksthat the position of Nduka is too radical, one is convincedthat character formation in schools is within the purviewof moral education which sadly, has no place in Nigeria’spolicy on education. Cookey, who was one of the chieforganizers of the conference that produced the policy,later laments the exclusion of moral education from thepolicy, in the following words;

I have been anxious about the present nationalattitude to moral education in our schools. It mayinterest us to know that the school curriculumpublished in 1977 by the Federal Government didnot include moral education at all (Cookey inAkinkugbe, 1994).


144

He goes further;

It is surprising to learn that among the mostvociferous opponents of the inclusion of moraleducation in the curriculum are some of ourreligious leaders, who insist that religious educationalone would take care of moral education. However,some of us know that religious education, as carriedout in most schools, tends to emphasiserequirements by examining bodies like West AfricanExamination Council, to the neglect of thedevelopment of good character. The schools tend toconcentrate on the passages from the scripturesselected for each year examination (Cookey inAkinkugbe, 1994).

The foregoing alludes to the fact that moral educationshould be introduced by the government as acompulsory subject from the pre-primary level throughtertiary. The reason for this continuum is that man bynature, needs a continuous moral formation to a certainmaturity stage, to prevent him from relapsing intoanimalism. It is a continuous formation, and it should beon-going.7.8 Teaching as a Profession in NigeriaDespite the efforts of Teachers Registration Council ofNigeria (TRCN) which was established in 1993 totransform the teaching profession to the higheststandards possible, with particular respect to the qualityof teacher education programmes, registration, licensing,professional development, professional demeanors, andoverall social status of teachers at all levels of theeducation system, the profession still leaves much to be


145

desired, especially when compared with professions suchas medicine, law, engineering, surveying, to mention buta few. The features which distinguish professions fromoccupations are still conspicuously missing in teaching.There are still records of unqualified and unprofessionalteachers (cheaters to call them by their names) inclassrooms in large numbers, and most of the qualifiedteachers are not yet registered or licensed. Little re-training for professional development is going onespecially at the primary and secondary tiers of thesystem; so much infiltrations and external influences;remunerations albeit better than before, but not yetcommensurate with efforts dissipated; poor workingenvironment; low self-esteem; weakened esprit de corps;and a host of other teething challenges. So, one canjustifiably ask: is teaching really a profession in Nigeria? Toattempt an answer to this question, it will be beneficial ifwe quickly consider some established traits of aprofession vis-à-vis teaching in Nigeria. Some of thesetraits are - life-long; provision of basic services to thepublic; internship; formal registration; autonomy ofprofession; code of ethics/conduct, etc. (Akinsanya,2008).Is Teaching Life-long in Nigeria?Teaching is not entirely taken as a career by mostpractitioners. The reasons for this are based on the poorremuneration and bad conditions of service given toteachers. These situations make Nigerian teachers (eventhe highly trained ones) to take teaching as merestepping stone to greater height or as the last resort. So,


146

once there is a better offer in the banks, in politics, in thecorporate milieu or even in the ministry, one begins tosee some teachers dusting their certificates.Does Teaching provide basic services to the public?Yes, it does. Through teaching, certain values, norms,etiquettes, conducts and the general tradition of theNigerian society is passed from one generation to thenext. Aside from this, teaching also helps prepare theyounger generations for the task of taking the Nigeriansociety to a higher level in the evolutionary ladder.Is there certification before practice?Not all those who parade themselves at the corridors ofteaching in Nigeria are certified as teachers. There arecases of graduates of other disciplines outside education,who out of no job security or job availability, come intoteaching. Such have not been tutored in the art ofpedagogy or andragogy, but they are in Nigerian schools.Is there internship before practice?For the education graduates, they are always made topass through teaching practice where they are expectedto put into practice the theoretical bits which have beendeposited on their consciousness in schools. Althoughsuch practice may not be enough when compared to aninternship of one or two years as it is done in medicine,law, etc. For non-education graduates, there is neitherteaching practice nor internship.


147

Is there any Formal Registration?There is registration of teachers. But who does it? It isnot the (Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) or AcademicStaff Union of Universities (ASUU) or Academic StaffUnion of Polytechnics (ASUP) or Colleges OF EducationAcademic Staff Union (COAESU), but is solely done byTeachers Registration Council of Nigeria (TRCN) whichis a body under the government. Other professionssubject new graduates to test/examination, after whichthey could be registered and inducted by the professionalbodies themselves. Such registration could be withdrawnby the bodies if the registered member is found to havecommitted some misdemeanours. This is not the casewith teaching. One finds much interference by thegovernment in teachers’ affairs.“esprit de corps”?Yes, to a little extent, there is a feeling of oneness andtogetherness. One cannot, however, underplay the factthat teaching in Nigeria is a mix bag – a mix ofpedagogically-trained minds and non-pedagogically-trained minds; interested and uninterested fellows; by-the-way person (miss road) and on-the-way person. Insuch a situation, the spirit of oneness/togethernesswould be weakened; the chorus here is: ‘to your tent ohIsrael’. This makes it easy for ‘enemies’ to come in withintrusion, interruption and disturbances which oftenmake teacher unions to suffer meaningful going-concern.


148

Is there autonomy of profession in teaching?From what we have said so far, autonomy would be alost word in the dictionary, as far as teaching isconcerned. It is a field which has suffered and continuesto suffer much interference from the government. This isone of the strong reasons why teaching is frequentlyregarded in some quarters as a mere occupation/job, andnot a profession. Every profession must be able to controlall matters which involve its practitioners in relation withthe clients/customers. This is not so with teaching inNigeria.Is there a Code of Ethics/Conduct?Teaching has a code of conducts. But interestingly, thiscode appears to be a code of secrecy; for it is not readilyavailable to all practitioners in the field. This leaves roomfor claims of ignorance on the expectations and duties ofteachers and those acts which constitute an offence cumthe sanctions in teaching.

From the foregoing, it will not be hard to conclude thatteaching in Nigeria does not yet possess a good numberof the traits of a profession, and thus, cannot really besaid to be fully professionalised. But teaching isessentially a profession; it is so in other climes. Thismeans that there are some problems which militateagainst the full professionalisation of teaching in Nigeria(confer Akinsanya’s Issues in Nigerian Education Systemfor an extensive discussion on the problems). It is hopedthat if the loopholes are taken seriously by all concernedstakeholders in education, teachers would finally be


149

rated as real professionals just like their colleagues in thefields of medicine, law, engineering, surveying, etc.7.9 SummaryThis chapter employed the use of critical reflections andanalysis to examine some few issues and concepts usedin education (There are so many of them that pageconstraints would not permit me to consider). The modesof critical reflections and analysis are useful in avoidingmuddling of concepts which could instigatemisunderstanding or confusions as the case may be.Hence, I examined the concept of education as distinctfrom supposed synonymous concepts (e.g. teaching,indoctrination, instruction, schooling); democracy andeducation; teaching as a profession; education as life;education and goals; education as initiation; educationand equal opportunity, and moral education/religiousinstruction controversy. This examination made usrealise, among other things that – education is anencompassing concept which is wider than teaching,schooling, training, etc; and that equality, which is theremoval of any form of discrimination, is a difficultconcept to adopt in education.7.10 Questions for Evaluation1. Identify any two benefits of philosophical

examination of educational issues and concepts.2. What relationship exists between education and

schooling?3. Name the three aspects of education.4. What are the three domains of education?5. Highlight any five characteristics of a profession.


150

7.11 Possible Answers1. - It sets a guide for practice and forestalls

muddling of concepts which could causeconfusion.

- It prevents wastages in the system.2. Schooling is an aspect of education. It is the formal

aspect of education. The relationship betweeneducation and schooling is akin to the relationshipbetween mother and child.

3. Formal, Informal and Non-formal.4. Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor.5. - Life-long (career)

- Certification and Registration before practice,- Internship before practice,- Autonomy of profession,- Code of Ethics/Conduct, etc.


151

ReferencesAkinkugbe, O.O. (1994). Nigeria and education: The

challenges ahead. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd.Akinpelu, J. A. (2005). Themes in philosophy of education for

teachers. Ibadan: Tafak Publications.Akinsanya, P. O. (2007). Moral education, curriculum

and crime rate in contemporary Nigerian society.Journal of Educational Research and Policies, 2(3), 47-52.

Akinsanya, P. O. (2008). Issues in Nigerian education system(Vol. 1). Ijebu-Ode: Patt Publications.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2008) Maximization of democracy inAfrica. African Journal of Development and PolicyIssues, September Issue, 115 – 126.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2012). Dewey’s pragmatism and Nigeria’seducation policy. Unpublished doctoral thesis,University of Ibadan, Ibadan.

Akinsanya, P. O. (2010). Philosophical analysis of someconcepts used in education. In W. Adunfe & P.O.Akinsanya (eds.) Introduction to sociological andphilosophical foundations of education. Ijebu-Ode:Home of Grace Publications.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2013). Philosophy as education. Ijebu-Ode:Patt Publications.

Crittenden, B. (1973). Education and social ideals: A study inphilosophy of education. Canada: Longman Ltd

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.

Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. New York: Holt.


152

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National policy oneducation. 6th ed. Lagos: NERDC Press.

Garrison, J. (1999). John Dewey. Encyclopedia ofphilosophy of education.

Nduka, O. (2006). The roots of African underdevelopmentand other essays. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd.

Omoteso, B.A. & Aladejana, A.I. (2003). “Politics anddemocracy in the Nigerian philosophy ofeducation” in Journal on African Philosophy. Issue 2.

Osokoya, I.O. (2010). History and policy of education inworld perspectives. Ibadan: AMD Publishers.

Peters, R.S. (1973). The Philosophy of education. London:Oxford University Press.

Sulaiman, F. R. (2004). Religious and moral instruction forschools. Ibadan: McGeorge Publishing Company.

Philosophy, Policy and System of Education…

153

Chapter EightPHILOSOPHY, POLICY AND SYSTEM OFEDUCATION IN NIGERIA8.1 IntroductionOur concern in this chapter is to consider two things,namely; the relationship between philosophy andeducation policies, and second, Nigerian system ofeducation and the philosophy underpinning it. We shallattempt to establish the relevance of philosophy informulation of education policies, and thereafter, provideanswers to a golden question which continues to attractthe attention of scholars in education, that is, whether thesystem of education in Nigeria have a philosophyunderpinning it.8.2 Philosophy and Education PolicyThere is no omnibus definition of a policy. Variousscholars have defined it variously, albeit their definitionson the long run, point to a fact, and that is, that policy is adeliberate and planned position taken in the interest ofan organisation or a society. By position, it means that apolicy is a composite of wishes, goals, objectives andimplementation strategies set forth for theaccomplishment of plans. This is what Aghenta (2000)implied when he states that a policy is “a highly diverseset of activities or decisions which are meant to guidespecific programmes or activities”. It is a projected


154

programme of goals, values and practices. Amaele’s(2005) submission agrees with Aghenta’s position in hisdescription of policies as visions translated intodocuments which are in turn translated into realitythrough disparate strategies.

In the world of education, a policy is simply a guide or aplan of action which dictates the line of action in thesystem. The policy as a guide is, however, informed,patterned and anchored by a base – educationalphilosophy. The relationship between educationalphilosophy and educational policy is two-dimensional,albeit exclusively interwoven: first, the application of themajor preoccupations of philosophy of education inpolicies on education; and secondly, the integration ofthe extensions of philosophical preoccupations into thenitty-gritty of the process of policy-making. The firstdimension entails the following;1. critique of ideas and assumptions contained in

educational policies;2. analysis of terms used in educational policies;3. clarification of problems involved in the policy

making;4. prescribing alternatives to approaches.

These areas need no further expatiation, for much of thathad been done in chapters one and two. The seconddimension, on the other hand which emanates from thefirst, deserves some elucidations. In the first place, everyeducational philosophy is worthy of the name when it iscapable of capturing the socio-political ideology of thesociety for which it is designed. It thus acts, in this


155

capacity, as a reliable foundation on which the guide –the policy, should be laid. That is to say, the function ofan educational philosophy is to connect a policy oneducation with societal ideology. Examples of this type ofconnection abound, especially in Dewey’s works (TheSchool and Society; Democracy and Education; Experience andEducation), where he uses his philosophy to construct andmaintain a strong nexus between what is done in theschool environment and the nature of the society inwhich the school is situated. The educational philosophythus proffers or prescribes the course of action for thepolicy as a guide.

Philosophy does not only connect the societal ideologywith the goals and objectives adoptable in education, itgoes further to intermittently critique ideologies toensure that such ideologies are worthwhile and fitting forthe society, and more importantly, to ensure that thechanges which constantly occur in every human society,are adequately reflected and entrenched in ideologiesand consequently in the policies. Perhaps this is whatBrameld (1969) has in mind when he says that “thephilosopher of education should be directly involved inevery attempt to clarify and crystallise educationalpolicies commensurate with the revolutionary age inwhich he lives”. It thus behooves on educationalphilosophy to necessitate flexibility and adaptation ofeducational policies in conformity with constant changesthat affect the human society and its ideology.


156

As an anchor, educational philosophy coordinates thevarious inputs into the policy. It is a common knowledgethat the business of education is never achievable by agroup of experts. Contributions are always needed frompsychologists, sociologists, historians, economists, andothers. This is what Ottaway (1962) calls ‘a combinedapproach’. With the inflow of various inputs fromvarious fields, the philosopher of education makes hiscontributions by coordinating the various inputs into acomplementary whole. Without such efforts, the wholeof education and the policy process will remain “a jig-saw puzzle whose bits and pieces hang together in acrazy quilt” (Akinpelu, 2005). It will reveal, in Akinpelu’s(2005) terms, “a considerable degree of discontinuity,jarring inconsistency and disharmony” which is classifiedin Freeman-Butts (1969) as “educational disjunctivitis”.

In connection with the above, philosophy of educationharnesses the goals and objectives in an educationalpolicy with the strategies needed to successfully achievesuch goals. The mismatch between setting of goals andachievement of set goals has been the reason behind therecorded failures of some national educational policies.In order, then, to dispel such mismatches, an educationalphilosophy ensures and maintains a perfect harmonybetween goals and objectives and their implementation.

Lastly, and quite pertinent, it is the duty of philosophy ofeducation to ensure the infusion of logic into policies.This logical infusion consists majorly in fostering therigours of consistence, coherence, comprehensivenessand compatibility into educational guides. These


157

paradigms are very consequential, and they as a matterfact, render the whole business of educationimpracticable when found missing. This is whyAkinkuotu (2007) considers an education without acoherent statement of aims as impossible, while Akinpelu(2005) insists that a “nation’s educational system can beconsidered to be adequate only and only if it iscomprehensive, coherent, and mutually consistent…”.The scholar is even more forceful in his view ofphilosophy of education as that which “analyses,examines and evaluates to what extent the educationalprogrammes are consistent, integrated andcomprehensive” (Akinpelu, 2005). Consistence,coherence and compatibility team up to produce ameaningful, sound and workable educational policy.8.3 Nigerian Education System and the PhilosophyUnderlying itIn an article published by an international journal in2012, I raised a salient question which appearsunresolved in the minds of some stakeholders ineducation, and the question was: does Nigeria have aphilosophy of education worthy of the name? This questionwas/is answered divergently. I presented a picture ofsome of us who believe Nigeria has what could be calleda philosophy of education, although weak, and thepicture of critics who profess otherwise. Let me attempt arecapitulation of the debate.

Those who challenged the existence of a Nigerianeducational philosophy are grouped into four, albeit with


158

some notable convergences in the broad grouping. Thesegroups of scholars outrightly deny the possibility of thecountry possessing what could be called a realphilosophy of education at the moment. The reasons forthe denial are multi-faceted. The first critic recognises theusual relationship which ought to exist between aneducational philosophy and a nation’s educationalpolicy/system. This recognition makes him expect thatthe philosophy guiding the Nigeria’s education systemought to be explicitly stated in a conspicuous section ofthe policy on education. Disappointingly, nowhere in thepolicy is it stated what the philosophy guiding theeducation system is. (There are allusions, for instance, tothe philosophy adopted in the policy, but nowhere is theexact philosophy stated). To make the criticism clearer –the overall philosophy of Nigeria; the five national goals ofNigeria; the national educational goals; the values to beinculcated and the various measures for implementation - areall clearly stated in the first section of the policy; but inreference to the philosophy, what we have are elusivestatements such as: “In Nigeria’s philosophy ofeducation, we believe that…”; “Nigeria’s philosophy ofeducation therefore is based on the development of theindividual into a sound and effective citizen; the fullintegration of the individual into the community; and theprovision of equal access to educational opportunities forall citizens…”; “For this philosophy to be in harmonywith Nigeria’s goals, education has to be geared towardsself realisation, better human relationship…”, et cetera(NPE, 2013). And so, the critic begins to wonder whereand what exactly is that philosophy which is alluded toby the above kind of statements. Not finding a direct


159

answer to his question, the critic immediately concludesthat we “cannot boast of a philosophy of education. Whatwe parade today as Nigerian philosophy of education ismere educational policy” (Fayemi, 2008).

The second type of critic denies the possibility of Nigeriahaving a philosophy of education premised on the factthat the country at present does not have a socialideology. Evidently, the ideology imbibed by a nation isthe foundation for the kind of educational philosophyand the consequential educational system that appearson board. The philosophy of education is oftenstructured in a way that allows for the realisation of theset ideology. If there is a disconnect, then suchphilosophy would not deserve the name in the firstinstance. This is what Dewey (1916) means when hestresses that education is a social function, and that untilwe know what sort of society is best desirable, we do notknow what sort of education is best. The function ofeducation, basically, is to help in the achievement orrealisation of ideology agreed upon by men in thesociety. This connotes that without such ideology,education would have no use in the first place. Foreducation and its philosophy to justify their existenceand purpose, they need to be aligned with the societalideology. The logic thus becomes clear - no socialideology, no philosophy of education, and no meaningfulsystem of education. This logic explains the position ofthe second critic. He believes that if Nigeria as a nationdoes not yet have a social ideology, how then can


160

anybody mute the idea of a philosophy of education? InFadahunsi’s opinion;

It is worrisome to note that Nigeria, despite herforty-eight years of national history, has notconcretely spelt-out her philosophy of education.All there is as of today, is the National Policy onEducation which is just a volume show-casinggovernment’s way of achieving parts of our nationalobjectives through education. The absence of aNigerian philosophy of education is not a productof dearth of philosophers of education in thecountry. Rather, it is a function of lacuna of nationalideology. Nigeria, unlike America and otherdeveloped nations of the world, has no precise andarticulate ideology of her own (Fadahunsi, 2008).

He goes further;

Not until Nigeria fashioned for herself a stable andsound ideology, which other sectors of the nationallife will be patterned after, the future probability ofsustainable educational development in Nigeriamay be dwindled (Fadahunsi, 2008).

There is yet another critic. This critic professes thatNigeria indeed, has a social ideology which is reflectedon page one of the sixth edition of the National Policy onEducation. The point of total departure from the lastcritic, however, is that the ideology put in actual practiceby Nigerian leaders is radically different from that whichis stated in theory in the policy. Put differently, “what wewant to be” finds contradiction in “what we are presently”.This means that the ideology we imbibe at present differsfrom the ideology we aspire to imbibe. This situation


161

creates confusion in the mindset of the critic. Thisseeming confusion precipitates the impossibility ofhaving a workable philosophy of education in Nigeria.Nduka, for instance, makes his position clear with thefollowing words;

As far as I am concerned, what now passes as aphilosophy for Nigerian education is a non-starterin the philosophical stakes. At best, it is a mythologyof aims, goals and objectives lacking clarity,coherence and consistency. The basic problem arisesfrom the fact that as a philosophy of education for aparticular society, it does not address itself squarelyto the basic question: what type of society are wesetting ourselves to build? Is it a semi-religiousoligarchy or a secular state, tradition-bound orscientifically oriented, capitalist or socialist, just orunjust, elitist or egalitarian, and so on? The lack ofclarity and coherence over such basic issues leadspredictably to inconsistencies in thought andpractice (Nduka, 2006).

The above submission might seem to portray Nduka’signorance of the stated ideology Nigeria wishes toimbibe, as contained in the policy; but indeed, Nduka isin no way ignorant of such ideology; his criticism is thatthe ideology put in theory contrasts entirely the ideologyset in practice. He says;

…The point I am making is that we are in thiscountry busy running an elitist, inegalitarian andunjust socioeconomic system....This socio-economicsystem has never lacked ideological support. Incolonial times, it was defended in the namesometimes of free trade (including of course, the


162

slave trade), sometimes of monopoly capital andprivate property, at other times, in terms of thecivilisation and development of backward people.Colonial people and their defenders denounced thesystem as imperialism. The socioeconomic systemwe are referring to is, to call it its proper name,capitalism (Nduka, 2006).

And that, of course, is the very antithesis of building ajust and egalitarian society. He thus concludes that wemust make up our mind whether we wish our country tobe a capitalist or socialist state, a semi-religious oligarchyor a secular state, tradition-bound or scientificallyoriented, just or unjust, democratic or despotic, elitist oregalitarian. Until this is done, we may never be able toachieve a consistent and coherent philosophy ofeducation worthy of the name. Nduka’s criticismincidentally, lends support to Akinpelu’s submission. InAkinpelu’s opinion;

Nigeria, like many other African nations, is stillgroping towards a statement of what type of societyshe wants. Never mind the five national objectivesenunciated at the beginning of the 4-yeardevelopment plan. It is in the nature of such plansto be preceded by high sounding statements ofobjectives, the sincerity of which is immediatelybetrayed as soon as the pages containing theallocation of money are opened. The current 4-yearplan is no exception (Akinpelu, 2005).

Akinpelu makes reference to Aluko, who in referring tothe national policy, points out that the planners could notin one breath speak of aiming at an egalitarian societyand in the same breath condemn half or three-quarters of


163

the nation’s children to a life of ignorance, poverty andilliteracy, through a denial of universal primaryeducation. He sums up his position thus;

All we have been saying so far is that Nigeria cannotyet boast of a blueprint of the society which it holdsas the ideal. And yet, this task of defining an idealsociety is essential if we are to get a clear statementof the objectives which our education must pursue(Akinpelu, 2005).

Again, there is a fourth-type of critic. He bases hisjudgement on the fact that the National Policy onEducation is not based on a clear-cut philosophy, but oneclecticism. The policy is eclectic in the sense that it is notrigidly committed to a particular philosophical outlook.It borrows variously from different schools of thoughtsuch as idealism, realism, existentialism, pragmatism,among others. Amaele sounds forceful with his opinionthat Nigeria is yet to have a philosophy for educationgiven the eclectic nature of the policy. According to him;

Presently, multifarious philosophies influence andinform the so-called Nigerian philosophy ofeducation. These philosophies have foreignfoundations and could be described as a hybrid ofEuro-American thinking about reality, knowledgeand values. Without doubt, this eclectic nature ofthe philosophy of Nigerian education cannot butgenerate contradictions, illusions and frustration forteachers and students alike (Amaele, 2005).

Amaele seems convinced that the eclectic nature of ourphilosophy is the reason for the inconsistencies and


164

incoherencies witnessed in Nigerian education system;and since it is not in the character of a sound philosophyto generate contradictions, then, it is logical to sayNigeria does not yet have a philosophy of education.Perhaps, Amaele is a disciple of Paul Hirst who had beenan unrepentant champion of clear-cut philosophies. Inone of his articles, he had asked if it was not obvious that;if people differ about the nature of ultimate reality, theymust differ in judging what is important in the schoolcurriculum? Must not a religious person think religiouseducation absolutely essential and an atheist think itthoroughly undesirable? Must not a Western liberaldemocrat, because he holds different ethical doctrines,necessarily disagree with a communist on at least someissues in moral education? And must it not therefore betrue that philosophical beliefs do determine cleareducational principles which must be put into practice ifobvious inconsistencies are to be avoided? (Hirst, 1963).

In the opinion of Lucas, supporters of eclecticism arethose who find themselves unable to give their allegianceto any single school of thought, hence, they pick andchoose bits and pieces from one position, now fromanother. He affirms that such dispositions towardseclecticism cannot help but be superficial; inevitably, itdoes serious damage to whatever cohesive unity andinternal logic a position may possess. The submission ofour fourth-type of critic, then, is that the National Policyon Education would have to be patterned after onephilosophy, say idealism, realism or existentialism beforewe could conveniently assert that Nigeria indeed has aphilosophy of education.


165

Let us, at this juncture, evaluate the positions of thecritics. To the first critic who does not think Nigeria has aphilosophy of education on the basis that such is notneatly written-out in the policy adopted for the system:This position appears too simplistic and elementary. Itsimply berates the level of sophistication which a policyof this nature should be identified with. Put differently,to expect that the philosophy underlying the policy ofeducation should have been bogously written out as….,is to presume that such document was designed for somechildren in some kindergartens, due to their level ofmaturity and simplicity. If, for instance, I meet a manwho does not believe in pre-determined and fixed aimsof life, but opine that they are in the making through aprocess of change. If I later find out that the same manpreaches that power or capacity of a human being isvaluable and important which enables him to adjust tothe environment or makes him able to change hisenvironment according to his needs and requirements;and again, the man’s view about realities, especiallyeducation, is that they are only useful and purposeful ifthey contribute to human welfare and progress orperhaps, if they are instrumental and experimental,would I need by these facts, to be told by a soothsayer ora special announcement by the man himself that he is apragmatist, or that he belongs to Dewey’s camp ofpragmatism? His life and thought-pattern should ofcourse, portray or betray him as such. One may evenwonder if any thorough-going philosopher down theages tried announcing himself as such before peoples’discovery of his/her inclinations. Socrates, for instance,


166

was just going about the city of Athens, acting like anintellectual-midwife to his fellow compatriots. Little didhe start, before people detected the philosophicaldexterity in him. The policy on education could not havebeen written in that elementary form proposed by ourcritic. If the critic cares much about the philosophicalcontent of the policy, then, he may wish to go throughthe national goals of Nigeria; the several objectives ofeducation; submissions and assumptions of the policymakers; basis of the policy; direction of the policy; valuesexpected for inculcation as stated in the policy; purposeof education at all tiers of the education system; and thevarious measures for the implementation of the policy –all are contained in the document. These parameters arethe channels through which one could discover the kindof philosophy underlying the policy on education inNigeria.

To the second critic who says Nigeria has no philosophyof education because she does not have a social ideologyyet. The critic’s logic is fascinating: no ideology, nophilosophy of education and no meaningful education. Itis a logical position that is neither debatable norcontestable by anybody who knows his/her worth in therealm of education. However, the critic’s denial of anaccepted social ideology provokes a surprise; a surpriseat the level of unawareness of the ideology Nigeriawishes to adopt. The Constitution of the Federal Republic ofNigeria, the National Development Plans and the NationalPolicy on Education leave no one in doubt on the choice ofsocial ideology which Nigeria wishes to imbibe.Specifically, in the NPE (2013), it is stated that Nigeria


167

wishes to build ‘a democratic and egalitarian society’.This commitment is re-echoed in other policies in otherfacets of Nigeria’s life (e.g. economics, politics, etc.).Where then does the opinion that Nigeria has no socialideology emanate from? This was an opinionorchestrated in the 70s and 80s when the early editions ofthe policy were not clear enough on the choice of a socialideology. With other revisions, and especially, the fourth,fifth and sixth editions of the policy, a denial of anideology in Nigeria would only be tantamount to a re-packaging of an outdated opinion that enjoys no currentevidential back-up.

The third-type of critic is fully aware that Nigeria aims atachieving a democratic and egalitarian society. Thechallenge, for him however, is that what Nigeria imbibesin actual practice is entirely different from what sheprofesses. That is, the ideology set in place in Nigeria iscontradistinctory to democracy and egalitarianism whichNigeria holds in theory. This situation, thus, reflects anindecision on what choice of ideology she wishes toadopt. In the light of this seeming indecision, it would bewrong for Nigeria to boast of a workable philosophy ofeducation. This is the opinion expressed by Nduka,Akinpelu, Aluko and others. Nduka tries to remind usthat Nigeria, through the colonial experiences, has turnedout to be a capitalist and elitist society, trying in so manyways to live up to Western capitalist structure, and thatright from the colonial period until this very day,Nigerian development has been proceeding along acapitalist-elitist path, rather than egalitarian. He


168

buttresses his point by quoting Udoji commission’sobservation that the entire educational system of thenation seems to be designed to uphold and reinforce theelitist philosophy. It was thus evident, in Nduka’sopinion, that “the experts who drew up the second andthird national development plans were ignorant of thedevelopment strategy they were adopting” (Nduka,2006). One thing is certainly obvious in the critic’sposition: it is that capitalism/elitism is the ideologypresently practiced in Nigeria, but that this ideology isbad and anti-developmental, given the numerousinstances and examples enunciated in his position. He iswilling to accept that there is no other ideologicalalternative better than the adoption of an egalitarianmodel of development; what he is left to understand ishow to match Nigerian profession of egalitarianism withpractical commitments. Perhaps what the critic needs tofirst realise is that the practice of capitalism/elitisminstead of egalitarianism is not a product of confusion onthe ideology wished for. It is just a reflection of the desireto do something, but lack of will-power to effect thedesire. Put differently, Nigeria does not appear confusedon what ideology she wants to adopt; she only findsherself incapacitated on the modalities for effecting herdesire. If the critic is willing to accept this proposition,then, we may reframe his troubles to be: how can weachieve a democratic and an egalitarian society given thepresent capitalist circumstances?; what kind of structures areneeded to help install egalitarianism?; what planning andimplementation strategies need be effected to herald democracyand egalitarianism in Nigeria? is the philosophy of education,underlying the present policy on education, capable of


169

generating a democratic and egalitarian society? The answersto these questions will definitely shift our attention fromthe critics’ earlier trouble.

But then, before re-directing our critics’ attention, there isyet another critic that has not been responded to. Thiscritic argues that any system of education founded oneclecticism is devoid of a real philosophy of education. Inhis view, it is systematic and concise to have a policypatterned on a single philosophy like idealism, realism,existentialism, and so on. But to have an assemblage oftwo, three or more of these philosophies inextricablydegenerates into confusion, inconsistencies andincoherencies. It is this approach that has led to themismatches that are currently experienced in oureducational system. To arise from these problems, for thecritic, Nigeria would now have to choose one philosophyof education. To respond to this pattern of thought, oneonly needs to say that the adoption of one singlephilosophy as the base of Nigerian education isunrealistic and superficial. The understanding here isthat it is very difficult, if not impracticable, to locate anystandard system of education which corresponds one-to-one with just a philosophical school. Nations that havepurportedly adopted one school or the other as the basisfor their policies, have resorted at one time or the other,in picking certain elements which are complementaryfrom other philosophies, to their chosen school ofthought. The thought of being purely a realist, or anidealist, or so, is even practically unrealistic. The recordsof professional philosophers stand to confirm this; they


170

have had to dangle around two to three complementaryschools of thought in their perceptions of issues. Thosewho have stubbornly stuck to a school of thought havebeen found to be grossly inconsistent on the long run.Thus, what a clear-cut philosophy achieves in beingsimple, concise and systematic, it loses in beingunrealistic. More than being really superficial, it becomesa fallacy from a strict logical angle, to ever think thatthere could be a direct deduction of an educationalsystem cum policy, from just a single philosophical schoolof thought. This is why Akinpelu submits that “a genuinesystem of education is essentially eclectic embracing thedoctrines of two or more of these schools of thought”(Akinpelu, 2005). But we may quickly warn here that thechoice of eclecticism in two or more schools of thought,without proper considerations for complementarism,portends the capability of generating inconsistencies andincoherencies. This is to say that whenever schools ofthought are bounded together without bothering on howsimilar or related such schools are, the resultant effectmight be devastating. In as much as it takes eclecticism toproduce a realistic, authentic, viable and workableeducational policy, such eclecticism must be based on achoice of complementary schools of thought. It thenbecomes easy for this choice to engender clarity,consistence, and more importantly, coherence among theobjectives set up in a policy and the strategies adoptedfor immediate implementation. The attempt to base anentire nation’s educational system on just one brand ofphilosophy is an impossible and impracticable task. Suchattempt, as argued by Taneja (2001), will even underminethe several positions, perceptions and contributions of


171

others who do not belong to the chosen school ofthought; and in our peculiar case, such attempt will beanti-democratic (against Nigeria’s chosen socialideology). Perhaps the fourth critic just like other critics,need not query if the Nigerian educational system has aneducational philosophy underlying it; at best, thequestion which the fourth critic could meaningfully askis: how comprehensive is the eclectic brand ofphilosophy adopted in the National Policy on Education?Put differently, does Nigeria’s choice of eclecticism in thesystem of education give room for compatibilities? If ourlast critic agrees to confine himself to this type ofquestion, then, one begins to see some similarities withthe third critic’s question. All the questions then boildown to consistence, coherence and compatibility. Thismeans that we should be interested in raising andanswering questions on what level of relationship existsbetween Nigeria’s social ideology and her educationalsystem. In this wise, one would be interested in findingout the kind of role philosophy has played in therelationship between Nigeria’s ideology and hereducational system. Consequently, the pressing issue willbe the determination of the quality of the philosophicalcomponent of the Nigerian educational enterprise. Thecompelling question, then, is: how philosophical isNigerian philosophy of education?

The above question necessarily implies one thing: thatNigeria indeed has a philosophy underlying her systemof education. The question only raises instigation on howrigorous, consistent, coherent and comprehensive the said


172

philosophy of education is. As such, we can convenientlyreplace the adjective – philosophical with any of the abovecriteria in our question. In any case, no matter how thequestion is recast, the concern remains the same, and thatis, investigating the level of philosophy infused into theeducational policy. To discover this, we will first of allneed to find out the nature and level of relationship thatpresently exists among all the units involved in thenation’s educational system. The units being referred toare: Nigeria’s social ideology; educational philosophyand educational policy/system. The relationship amongthese units will automatically be an answer to ourquestion. Cursorily, reflections on the policy/system ofeducation reveal an eclectic philosophical approach.However, there is something terribly lacking in ourpeculiar brand of eclecticism. What appears missing isthe ability to perfectly blend the various inputs into whatmakes up the present Nigerian philosophy of education.This implies that the mélange of schools of thoughtfeatured in the policy document were nipped togetherwithout much care for consistence, coherence andcompatibility, and this thus, presents us with noparticular direction. Various scholars have opined thatNigeria’s policy on education suggests a pragmaticapproach; an existential approach; an idealistic approach;a realistic approach, and some other approaches. Butthey were quick to add that the fundamental principlesof these approaches are not practiced anywhere in ourpublic school system. No wonder Freeman-Butts hadcharacterised the whole scenario as educationaldisjunctivitis with a considerable degree of discontinuityjarring inconsistencies and disharmony (Butts, 1969).


173

Indeed, it is a cut-and-paste display (to borrow fromcomputer jargons).The mismatches experienced inNigeria’s educational system are precipitated by aneducational philosophy that does not have much roomfor complements. If, however, there is a perfect knittingof the various inputs, with much care for consistence,coherence and compatibility, the adopted philosophywould be a golden instrument for the achievement ofNigeria’s social ideology. The level of incoordinationwitnessed in the chosen philosophy informs thedisconnections emanating in the policy formulation, andconsequently, in the practice of education in Nigeria, anduntil something is done to eradicate the mismatches, wewill continue to give room for scholars’ doubt on theexistence of a philosophy of education in Nigeria.8.4 SummaryThis chapter began by reflecting on the place ofphilosophy in the formulation of education policies. Itsubmitted that it is only when philosophy is allowed tocarry out its peculiar and unique task in educationpolicy-formation that the system of education whichemanates from such policy could be rid of contradictions,inconsistencies and incoherencies, and consequently ridof non-functionality and non-viability. The chapter alsoconsidered the question of the existence of a philosophyof education worthy of the name in Nigeria. It presentedthe arguments of some scholars who opine that thepresent education system would not have emergedwithout a particular philosophy underpinning it, even ifthis philosophy is weak; and others who contend that


174

with the way education has been run in this nation, onehas no choice than to cast doubts on the existence of sucha philosophy. The chapter thus submits that the debateshould not be centred on whether Nigeria has aphilosophy of education or not, but on the level ofphilosophical veracity of the already existing educationalphilosophy. It hence concludes that while it could be saidthat Nigeria possesses an eclectic educationalphilosophy, which is the right philosophy needed forevery nation with cultural multiplicity and diversity suchas Nigeria, this philosophy however will be made betterif it is structured to give room for consistencies,coherencies and comprehensiveness in its blend of inputsfrom various genres of philosophies so that it becomespossible for the emerged brand of eclectic philosophy togenerate a precise direction in Nigeria’s system ofeducation.8.5 Questions for Evaluation1. Attempt a definition of educational policy.2. What specific roles does philosophy play in

education policy formulation?3. What is the current philosophy of education

adopted in Nigeria?4. What is the social ideology adopted in Nigeria as

enshrined in the Constitution and the NationalPolicy on Education?

5. Identify the major critics of the philosophyunderpinning the present education system inNigeria.


175

8.6 Possible Answers1. Educational policy is variously defined. One can

define it as a guide or a plan of action whichdetermines every line of action in education system.It can also be taken as a compass for direction in thesystem.

2. The following specific roles are played byphilosophy in education policy formulation:- critique of ideas and assumptions contained in

educational policies.- analysis of terms used in educational policies.- clarification of problems involved in the policy

making.- prescribing alternatives to approaches.- connects policies on education with societal

ideologies.- necessitates flexibility and adaptation of

educational policies in conformity with constantchanges that affect the human society and itsideology.

- coordinates the various inputs in the policy intoa complementary whole.

- harnesses the goals and objectives in educationalpolicies with the strategies needed tosuccessfully achieve such goals; it ensures andmaintains a perfect harmony betweengoals/objectives and their implementation.

- ensures the infusion of logic into policies; itfosters the rigours of consistence, coherence,comprehensiveness and compatibility intoeducational guides.


176

3. Eclectic philosophy of education. This is a fusion ofstrains from different schools of thought such asidealism, realism, pragmatism, existentialism andnaturalism.

4. Nigeria wishes to build ‘a democratic andegalitarian society’.

5. The critics could be grouped into four:

The first group of critics, represented by Fayemi,expects the philosophy to be explicitly stated in aconspicuous section of the policy on education. Notseeing this made them to conclude that Nigeriacannot boast of an educational philosophy.

The second group of critics, represented byFadahunsi, denies the possibility of Nigeria havinga philosophy of education premised on the fact thatthe country does not have a social ideology.

The third group of critics, represented by Ndukaand Akinpelu, challenges the ideology put in actualpractice by Nigerian leaders which is radicallydifferent from that which is stated in theory in thepolicy. They opine that until we make up our mindon the social ideology we want, we cannot claim tohave a philosophy.

The fourth group, represented by Amaele, bases herjudgement on the fact that the present policy isbased on eclecticism. They are convinced that theeclectic nature of our philosophy is the reason forthe inconsistencies and incoherencies witnessed in


177

Nigerian education system; and since it is not in thecharacter of a sound philosophy to generatecontradictions, then, it is logical to say Nigeria doesnot yet have a philosophy of education.


178

ReferencesAghenta, J. A. (2000). Organization and management of UBE

in Nigeria. Benin City: Academy Press.Akinkuotu, Y. A. (2007).“Historical and philosophical

considerations and educational reform” inNigerian Journal of Educational Philosophy. Vol 20(3), 58-62.


Akinsanya, P.O. (2013). Philosophy as education. 3rd ed.Ijebu-Ode: Patt Publications.

Akinpelu, J.A. (2005). Essays in philosophy and education.Ibadan: Stirling-Horden Pub. Nig. Ltd.

Amaele, S. (2005). Understanding the philosophy ofeducation. 2nd ed. Ibadan: Bounty Press Ltd.

Brameld, T. (1969). “The education philosopher as“Liason Officer” in C. J. Lucas. What is philosophy ofeducation? London: Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

Butts, R.F. (1969). “Teacher education andmodernization” in G. Bereday (ed). Essays on worldeducation: the crisis of supply and demand. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan.Fadahunsi, A. (2008). “A Conspectus of education and

leadership in Nigeria”. A lead paper presented atthe 26th Annual Conference of PEAN at OlabisiOnabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye. October.

Fayemi, A. K. (2008). “Philosophy of education and theNigerian educational System”. A paper presentedat the 26th Annual Conference of the Philosophy


179

of Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN) atOlabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye. October.

Federal Republic of Nigeria. (2013). National Policy onEducation 6th ed. Lagos: NERDC Printers.

Hirst, P. H. (1963). “Philosophy and Educational Theory”in British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol. 12, 51.

Nduka, O. (2006). The Roots of African underdevelopmentand other Essays. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd.

Ottaway, A. K. C. (1962). Education and Society: AnIntroduction to Sociology of Education. London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Taneja, V. R. (2001). Educational Thought and Practice.India: Sterling Publishers Private Ltd.

*This chapter is a modification of two of my articles – thefirst one was published in (2010). “The Relevanceof Educational Philosophy in Policy formulation”in Nigerian Journal of Educational Philosophy, 1 (1),48-53 and (2012). “Does Nigeria have a Philosophyof Education Worthy of the Name?”in PrimeResearch on Education, 2(5), 269 – 274. The Thesecond work is available online athttp://primejournal.org/PRE/contents/2012/june.htm(http://primejournal.org/PRE/abstracts/2012/june/Patrick.htm)


180

Philosophy of Education, Teacher Education…

181

Chapter NinePHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION, TEACHEREDUCATION PROGRAMME AND THEMODERN TEACHER9.1 IntroductionThis chapter considers the relevance of philosophicalenterprise in teacher education programme. It remindsthe reader of the place and the role of the teacher in theentire educational process which cannot be brushed asideor treated with levity, after all, no nation’s educationsystem can rise above the quality of its teachers (NPE,2013). This means that all inputs must be made to ensurea qualitative and efficient training for the teacher, andone major way to achieve this is by allowing philosophyto carry out its peculiar role in the programme.9.2 Philosophy and Teacher Education ProgrammeThe role of the teacher in the development of a nation isno longer contestable. The teacher is recognised as the“spark that fixes the whole development process; the keyman in the drive to progress” (Akinyemi, 1972). Hisprofession, in the words of Fafunwa (1972) touches thelife of practically every citizen either as students, parents,guardians, administrators or planners. The positionoccupied by teaching profession underscores therationale behind heavy investments put by seriousnations on the education and training of their teachers,


182

for they have realised that “a poorly trained and unsureteacher will likely reproduce a poor doctor, engineer,architect, fellow teacher and the like” (Fafunwa, 1972).

In the process of educating the teacher, however, certaincourses have been found essential, viz, teaching subjects,teaching practice and foundational studies (Akinpelu,2005). In the realm of foundations, there are studies likesociology of education, psychology of education, historyof education, management of education, philosophy ofeducation, inter alia. These studies consider issues thatare highly fundamental to the proper education of ateacher. For instance, while sociology of educationprovides the nexus between education and societal aims,values and norms; psychology of education focuses onhow an individual reacts, changes, responds anddevelops as a person and how educative experiences arearranged for the benefit of persons; history of educationtakes care of the record of disparate changes in educationsystem, structure, policies and management. Philosophyof education, on the other hand, handles a veryimportant aspect of educational foundations. It handlesthe theory of education, which provides the frameworkfor the contextualisation of educational practice (conferAkinsanya, 2013). Aside from being the theory ofeducation, philosophy makes available its various modesso as to improve the undertakings in education. Thesemodes, already discussed in chapters one and two, areused to enrich the system of education.

It need be reiterated here that to achieve a qualitative andefficient programme which will churn out qualitative and


183

efficient teachers, such programme must play along withthe modes of philosophy. Historical antecedents haveconfirmed this. At the time when the British educationsystem, for instance, was ailing, philosophy of educationhad to be introduced into her Teacher EducationProgramme as a way of raising the falling standard ofeducation. Series of writing in curriculum and educationwere hence evolved from scholars brought fromphilosophy. In the same vein, Dewey resuscitatedAmerican education system with his colleagues. They setup a laboratory school for the purpose of research andexperiments in new ideas and methods in education. Thelandmarks which Dewey made in education remainunlevelled by any educator both in America and beyond(Akinsanya, 2009).

The next subsection presents the benefits which teachereducation programme and modern day teachers couldtap from philosophy of education.9.3 Philosophy and Relevance to Modern TeacherSometimes, one finds teachers who (pretend to) teachwithout knowing the purpose for which they teach. Somethink it is enough to have a good understanding of saymathematics, and then go simply to the classroom toinstruct the students on the subject. Such teachers willnever be able to assist the students in connecting thatwhich they are being taught with the rationale forteaching it. Every education has a purpose, a goal andend. Philosophy acts as a guide to education. It gives thedirection. This is the reason for every system of education


184

in any nation having a philosophical base. Without thisbase, education will become disjointed. So, theknowledge of philosophy of education helps the teacherto understand the underlying tones of the subjects whichthey teach. It guides them and gives the direction tofollow when they teach in classrooms.

The study of philosophy of education reveals the variouscontributions of past and present philosophers ofeducation. The teacher is thus made aware of the ideasshaping education. For instance, how many teachers whouse the montessorian method of teaching today know itsgenesis? Knowing the genesis may help the teacherdiscover the particular need which warranted theinnovation, and this could go on to help decipher howbest to use the method in today’s class. One other thingwhich this historical trace does is that it challenges thesleeping giant in the teacher. It makes him/her realisethat Montessori and others were human beings after all.If they could settle down to think and the products oftheir reflections brought out innovations in education,then, there is nothing preventing the modern day teacherfrom doing the same, if not better.

Philosophy of education familiarises the teacher with theconnection between education system and philosophies.More importantly, it acquaints the teacher with theadopted philosophy underpinning the education systemwhere he/she operates (how many Nigerian teachersknow the educational philosophy adopted in Nigeria forexample?). This acquaintance does enable the teacher todecipher the forces behind the policy and system of


185

education, and to connect such with the subject(s) he/sheteaches. It also empowers him/her to make his/hercontributions to policy formulation and overallmanagement of education.

Philosophy acts as a gadfly in education, although mostpeople do not like the job of a gadfly (a critic) for they areconsidered as troublemakers or troubleshooters in thesystem. Perhaps this is the reason for the bad labels givento philosophers wherever they turn to. People do oftenappreciate praise singers and sycophants. But it is hard tohave a good system without the critic’s torments. Suchtorments ensure that the system does not relax, relapseand rest on its oars. More importantly, critique helpseducation system and teachers to avoid falling intopitfalls. Philosophy of education helps the teacher topossess the acumen needed to evaluate educationalassumptions, theories, policies and management. Itincreases the ability of the teacher in makingconstructive critique of educational systems and policies.The teacher is thus able to proffer alternative courses ofaction. These abilities empower the teacher to have someinfluences on the operation of the system in whichhe/she works, and thus make a meaningful contributionto the society.

Because philosophy trains one to think deeply,reflectively and independently, the teacher will possessthe capacity to handle both practical and abstract issues.He/she is able to sort out confusions which personalwhims and prejudices usually introduce into education.


186

Philosophy takes the teacher from the world of actualitiesto the world of possibilities. In today’s world, there areloads of academic robots or stereotyped teachers. Withthis manner of people, creativities and innovations arealien. Their presence instills “at it was in beginning, so isnow and ever shall be” syndrome. Through speculations,philosophy encourages the teacher to travel into thefuture and bring the future into the present. Variousteaching methods used today are products ofspeculations. Ditto various modes of learning, disciplineand motivation in the classroom. But some of thesemethods, theories, modes and practices may not besuitable for today’s idiosyncracies and peculiarities. Thismeans that today’s teachers have a great deal ofspeculative works to do in order to ensure that today’schild is educated to face today’s challenges. Speculativephilosophy is of great help in this circumstance.

Philosophy, through metaphysics, helps the teacher todiscern dual nature of the universe - physical andspiritual. This discernment thus enables the teacher todetermine the appropriate objectives of education, thesubjects to teach the child and right method to use inteaching. For instance, if the universe is not spiritual, asubject like religious education may be needless in thecurriculum. If reality is only spiritual, then a subject likegeography in the curriculum would be futile.

Through epistemology, philosophy takes the teacher offdeception. With its insistence on querying all forms,nature, sources and validity of ‘knowledge claims’, theteacher is able to separate facts from mirages, falsity from


187

truth. This separation is highly necessary because if theteacher feeds the learner with falsity, the consequencesmight be catastrophic.

From an ethical angle, philosophy provides the teacherwith an insight which aids him/her in distinguishingvalues from vices, and to identify for himself/ herselfwhat is best and most appropriate. And of course, oncethe teacher is fully imbued with such knowledge, to passit across to his/her pupils would be easy. But if theteacher lacks moral knowledge, what would he/she passdown? Your guess is as good as mine. The golden rule is- nemo dat quod non habet - you cannot give outwhat you do not have.

Essentially, education is about prescription. It is aboutwhat life is worth living and how it should be lived.When the teacher instructs the child on how to talk in thepublic and what manner of dress is fitting for the child,he/she is simply involved in prescription. The teacher’sconstant involvement in education leaves him/her withno choice other than to romance with moral philosophy.This is to say that if the teacher is to instruct rightly,he/she needs philosophy.

Another advantage is that philosophy enables the teacherto be economical in thought and action. It does this byteaching him/her the meaning and forms of argumentsand propositions. For instance, once we know that acertain argument does not instantiate a valid argumentform, we need not bother any further about it, since, it


188

can never, owing to its invalidity, guarantee the truth ofits claims even if all its premises are true (Achilike, 1999).

Teachers who have been tutored in philosophy are not aslikely as those who have not, to become trapped bydogmatism. Such teachers have learnt the value of open-mindedness and seeking solutions to education issueswhich meet the standards of coherence, consistence andrationality. Thus, they are often willing to review andevaluate educational theories, educational curricula andeven teaching methods when such become archaic,obsolete, rather than sticking stubbornly and ignorantlyto old and possibly non-productive ways of doing things.The teacher imbibes the spirit of openness, ready toaccept alternative and viable ways to education. Thisattitude along with the critical abilities, which go in linewith the practice of argumentation, stands the teacher ingood stead when faced with the many problems thateducation readily provides.

Philosophy encourages the teacher to be mindful andeffective in his/her use of language. It does this bydeveloping the teacher’s consciousness of the ambiguousnature of words. Besides, philosophy makes him/herbecome aware of the disparate forms of language, thekinds and problems of definition which bear on one’sability to reason well. All these will enable the teacherto avoid falling into unnecessary and avoidablelanguage-problems, errors and possible traps.

Through exercises in philosophical analysis anddissection, the teacher escapes the world of mere


189

sloganeering - the use of concepts and ideas which as itwere are non-practicable, non-feasible and unrealisable.He will also be in a good stead to educate peers andstudents on such wastages.

Philosophy is a rich and deep education. It enlightensand broadens the teacher’s sensibilities and horizon, andensures his/her exhumation from the cemetery ofignorance. It throws the teacher into a wonderful light ofawareness, of recalibration, of rejuvenation and of re-generation.

Lastly, philosophy helps the teacher to be ever discerningand constantly aware and alive to whom he/she is - ateacher (a model and a repertoire of knowledge). He/shebecomes more alive to his/her duties, roles andresponsibilities.9.4 SummaryA teacher education programme is shaky unless it givesphilosophy its rightful place. This is because philosophyawakens every teacher from intellectual slumbering; itdisposes the teacher to a critical and rigorous mindset. Itsets his/her mind open to disparate realities in life suchthat the teacher is well exposed and richly experienced tocarry his/her students to an advantageous level.Philosophy of education acts as guide to teachers andconnects them with the rationale behind the subjects theyteach in the classroom; it enables the teacher to possessthe ability and propensity to critique educationalideologies; analyse issues in education; clarify concepts


190

used in education; prescribe alternatives to approaches ineducation; and to raise speculations or projections ineducation. These are some of the traits needed by everyteacher education programme which is set up with theintent of producing quality teachers.9.5 Questions for Evaluation1. List any five subject/courses under foundational

studies in teacher education programme.2. Which of the listed subject/courses is considered the

theory of education?3. What branch of philosophy helps the teacher in

being economical in thought and actions?4. What branch of philosophy aids the teacher in

distinguishing values from vices?5. Highlight any four benefits of philosophy of

education to teachers.9.6 Probable Answers1. Five subject/courses under foundational studies in

teacher education programme are:History of education,Psychology of education,Sociology of education,Management of education,Philosophy of education, etc.

2. Amongst the subject listed above the Philosophy ofeducation is considered the theory of education.

3. The branch of philosophy that helps the teacher inbeing economical in thought and actions is Logic.


191

4. The branch of philosophy helps the teacher indistinguishing values from vices is Ethics/Moralphilosophy.

5. Four benefits of philosophy of education to teachersare:- Philosophy of education awakens the teacher

from intellectual slumbering.- It disposes the teacher to a critical and rigorous

mindset.- It connects the teacher with the rationale behind

the subjects they teach in the classroom.- It equips the teacher with the ability to critique

educational ideologies; to analyse educationalissues; to clarify educational concepts; toprescribe alternatives to approaches ineducation; and to raise projections in education.


192

ReferencesAkinpelu, J.A. (2005). Themes in philosophy of education

for teachers. Ibadan: Tafak Publications.Akinsanya, P.O. (2009). Educational philosophy and

teacher education in Nigeria: A concern.Development and Policy Issues in Africa, 2 (1), 80-88.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2013). Philosophy as education. Ijebu-Ode:Patt Publications.

Akinyemi, J.A. (1972). Teachers’ education. in A.Adaralegbe (ed.) A philosophy for Nigerianeducation. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational BooksNig. Ltd.

Fafunwa, A.B. (1972). The purpose of teacher education.in A. Adaralegbe (ed.) A philosophy for Nigerianeducation. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational BooksNig. Ltd.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National policy oneducation. 6th ed. Lagos: NERDC Publications.

Achilike, J.C. ed (1999). Fundamentals of logic. Ibadan:Ben-Elbooks.

Making Philosophy more Relevant…

193

Chapter TenMAKING PHILOSOPHY MORE RELEVANT INTODAY’S EDUCATION10.1 IntroductionThis chapter reflects on the challenges bedevilingphilosophy and its teaching in the contemporary world.The challenges discussed range from the nature of thecourse, handlers of the course, to its curriculum andtexts. These challenges have incidentally madephilosophy appear dull, boring, abstract and a ‘no-go-area’. So, it has become a course to be endured ratherthan being enjoyed; a guest to be tolerated rather thanbeing august and celebrated. The chapter tries to reclaim,through Deweyan reconstructionism, the originalfunction and glory of philosophy which enjoys aremarkable record of disparate inventions, innovationsand creativities in education.10.2 The Crisis of Contemporary PhilosophyThe lament raised by Lucas (1969) four decades ago onthe state of crisis which philosophy was enmeshed intoremains the pathetic and tragic song today. This lamentmade Hook (1969) to pose a number of questions in hiswonderful article: “Does Philosophy have a Future?” Itequally made Feuer (1969) to announce the obituary ofphilosophy in his work: “American Philosophy is Dead”given the way academic philosophers have handled


194

philosophy. The same disaster which scholars, beginningfrom the period of Bethrand Russell, threw philosophyinto, making it a ‘dull, dry and austere study’, devoted tosemantic purgation with not much practical benefit tohumanity, is evidently everywhere. These days, oneencounters philosophy teachers with sadistic looks,amply glorified and satisfied with high-soundinglexicons and ceremonious display of clichés in theclassroom. When you open their texts, you encounterseveral pages devoted to explanations on what they arenot going to discuss in the text, and the remaining pagesare inks spilled on boredomness and dullness. In thesame texts are needless arguments on the definition ofphilosophy and its preoccupations; arguments that arenever resolved and may never be resolved. Some evencontend to say that philosophy is essentially an activityin argument, as if philosophers are supposed to merelyargue for argument sake.

In philosophy of education, similar problems as aboveare encountered on regular basis. Specifically, there arethree major challenges with philosophy of education andits teaching, especially in Nigerian classroom. First,philosophy of education being an applied branch ofphilosophy, one naturally expects philosophy scholars tobe involved in educational issues following the examplesof Dewey, Peters, Kilpatrick, Fitgibbon, Dearden, Hirst,etc, and following the practice in advanced Universitiesin the world. But on the contrary, today’s philosophyscholars (in Nigeria) choose to hide in their sheds withlittle or no desire to apply their scholarship. They arebasically contented with holding each other’s throats on


195

metaphysical, epistemological, axiological and logicalquestions as if such have no applicable import.

Relatedly, those infinitesimally few scholars who makebold to come out of their self-imposed enclaves, majorlythrough books and journal articles, undertake an artificialapproach to education. With little or no much immersioninto real issues of education, they pontificate oneducational matters with an aura of infallibility andimpeccability. While some follow the lead of Price (1955)by simply lifting the implications of metaphysics,epistemology and axiology to education, like a cut-and-paste-arrangement, and insisting that philosophy ofeducation cannot do otherwise, there are some otherswho follow the footsteps of Broudy (1955) in derivingphilosophy of education singly from philosophicpositions, that is, schools of thought, which may implymuch or little for education. There are some others,common in most of our departments, who opine thatonce you pick a respectable philosopher and you begin tointerprete what he said and infer what he did not sayabout education, and thereafter relate the foregoing toeducation around you, you are simply working in theterritory called philosophy of education, and it may notgo beyond that. These three major concerns have beenraised in chapter two under approaches to philosophy ofeducation. It appears to me as it did appear to Hook(1956) that the above are attempts towards “garrulousabsurdities”. They are simply artificial. To makephilosophy of education real and practical, thephilosopher, in the company of his tools and training,


196

should go into education and philosophise with no pre-meditated or ready-made (a prior) theories or positions.As he does his work, however, it could then be obviousto onlookers which school of thought the scholar is tiltingtowards and how connected his works are to thecompartments (branches) of philosophy, and again, howmuch of a notable philosopher’s ideas he has taken a leaffrom.

The third problem involves some educators whoaccidentally become philosophers. Such people switch allof a sudden, and because they are not deep-rooted inphilosophy, they turn philosophical discourses toexercises in narration and description. The problem ofroot was what made Broudy (1955) to say in categoricalterms that the genuine philosophy of education scholarmust be found with about equal frequency in thedepartment of philosophy and department of education,which will confer professional training in bothphilosophy and education. He concluded that one cannotdo little or no philosophy and still calls oneself aphilosopher of education – (self-contradiction).

This is where we are! But philosophy (of education)cannot continue this way. Philosophy as rightly pointedout by Feuer (1969), is too important to be left in thehands of the above categories of scholars, who havechosen to make philosophy appear artificial andincapable of solving practical problems. This is not thephilosophy bequeathed to us by Socrates, Plato, Aristotle,Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel, Dewey and a host ofothers. Education and the entirety of life had practical


197

benefits from their philosophical engagements. Theypositively affected life. Philosophy in today’s world musttake a u-turn from the Russellian tradition. Philosophymust be reconstructed. This was the project embarkedupon by Dewey some years back.10.3 Reconstructing PhilosophyIn one of my works titled: Towards Reviving Philosophyfrom Hegemonic Redundancy Complex, published in 2012, Iexamined the works of the most famous Americanpragmatic philosopher, John Dewey, who was utterlydissatisfied with the notion and mode of philosophisingfrom the ancient period down to his period. He classifiedthis form of philosophy, traditional, as it standsantithetical to a new kind of philosophy he was trying tointroduce alongside other pragmatists. To justify andsubstantiate the difference, Dewey got involved inphilosophising about philosophy itself – metaphilosophy.One could paraphrase him posing such questions as:What does it really mean to philosophise?; what makesphilosophy a philosophy? How do philosophersphilosophise? What should be the ideal concern ofphilosophy?; et cetera. These questions, bordering onmetaphilosophy, became necessary given the influencesand orientation from Darwinism and pragmatism asintroduced by Pierce and Williams. Dewey observed thatphilosophy had assumed an utter detachment from theworld around. This detachment is traceable to thedualism deeply entrenched in the writings of somescholars. Beginning with Plato, one finds a bifurcation oftwo separate worlds which have nothing in common.


198

The first world is the spatio-temporal world which isreplete with frivolities and decay. The second is a non-spatio-temporal world, technically tagged the ‘world ofideas,’ which is populated by abstract entities called‘forms’. These forms are comprehended only by reasonwhich bequeaths true knowledge on a thinker through atotal withdrawal from the world of physical existence.This kind of dualism was reincarnated in Aristotle’s Formand Matter; Augustine’s City of God and City of Man;Descartes’ Mind and Body Distinction; Kant’sNoumena andPhenomena; and others. These scholars were involved intheorising around one form of dualism or the other.

These efforts, however, resulted in several problems thatwere not solved and remain unsolved. Basic among theproblem was how to foster a connection between thedualisms created. These seeming problems, as it were,are not problems in the first instance. The desire to createproblems where there are no problems, have been thereason for the perceived redundancy of philosophy bypeople. Another problem associated with this philosophyof dualism is its tendency to get philosophers detachedfrom the physical world. If the ‘world of forms’ or the‘city of God’ is the eternal, ideal, unchanging and perfectworld, while the physical world is the world of shadows,mundane and temporal, then it makes sense to getdetached from the later, in order to focus on the former.Thus, philosophy became a form of detached thinkingfrom the physical realm, with utmost focus on themetaphysical realm. In doing this, it arrogates itselfabove all other disciplines, for the reason that while thelatter concerns itself with realities of the physical world,


199

philosophy studies a ‘higher’ kind of reality which bytheir very nature, are superior to the supposed reality inthe spatio-temporal world.

Dewey opined that philosophy had arrogated to itself theoffice of demonstrating the existence of a transcendent,absolute or inner reality and of revealing to man thenature and features of this higher reality. It had thereforeclaimed that it was in possession of a higher organ ofknowledge than was employed by positive science andordinary practical experience, and that it was marked bya superior dignity. He states that;

Philosophical doctrines which disagreed aboutvirtually everything else were at one in theassumption that their distinctive concern asphilosophy was to search for the immutable andultimate, that which is, without respect to thetemporal or spatial (Dewey, 1920).

From these conceptions, philosophy earned the name:‘mother of all disciplines’. As the mother, philosophy isthus expected to monitor the preoccupations of all otherdisciplines. But here comes the irony. How canphilosophy pose as the mother when her preoccupationsare totally divergent to the preoccupations of otherdisciplines? Where and how does the monitoring comeinto place? To put it in a more relevant religious manner– How can the man whose interest is nowhere butheavens, legislate over what is being done on earth?There is certainly no convergence. The former willremain ignorant and irrelevant to the happenings in the


200

latter, and vice-versa. Perhaps, this explains the seemingirrelevance attached to philosophy in some quarters.Talisse (2000) captures this submission when he writesthat because philosophers have traditionally takenthemselves to be concerned with ultimate truths of thesort that could be found only in a transcendent,changeless realm, they have withdrawn from the world;fixing their attention upon a supposedly superior realm,they have abandoned ordinary life, rendering philosophyirrelevant, and so, convinced that they alone have beenpursuing truth, philosophers have come to comprise ofan elite intellectual class of thinkers who work on exoticand unusual problems, more correctly, they are puzzles,in isolation from every other intellectual endeavour.

The attitude described above dates to antiquity andremains endemic among philosophers. Deweycharacterises the attitude in the following words;

The creeds that have prevailed have been foundedupon the supposed necessity of escape from theconfusion and uncertainties of experience. Life hasbeen thought to be evil and hopeless unless it could beshown to bear within itself the assured promise of ahigher reality. Philosophies of escape have also beenphilosophies of compensation for the ills andsufferings of the experienced world (Dewey, 1930).

If this is what philosophy is all about, it then becomeshard to resist, in line with Talisse (2000), the conclusionand the chorus that philosophy is a means of escape fromthe physical world in which we live. But shouldphilosophy be an escape route from the world around?


201

This is the puzzle Dewey finds too tempting to avoid. Forhim, philosophy cannot remain aloof of the happening ofthe physical world. He seems to say that if theknowledge of the metaphysical world is possible, thensuch knowledge should proceed from the knowledge ofthe things we see around – {from known to unknown;from familiar to unfamiliar}. Philosophy must be maderelevant to the world. It must make a u-turn or aparadigm shift from relegation to irrelevance. Philosophymust recover itself by ceasing to be a device for dealingwith the problems of philosophers and become a method,cultivated by philosophers, for dealing with the problemsof men. One remembers the famous quote of that ancientRoman philosopher, Epictetus; he said – “in vain are thewords of the philosopher that do not heal some humanwound” (Epictetus in Akinpelu, 2005). Philosophers,according to Dewey, must henceforth turn their back toproblems which are not problems in the first instance,and turn their attention to problems facing the society.This u-turn will, thus, make philosophy relevant to us;our environment; our world; and education.

Drawing from Dewey’s reconstructionism, therefore,philosophy (of education) must be urgently reworked toresolve the teething problems emanating from the usualpractice. Major among the problems of philosophy ofeducation is the lack of interest, understanding andappreciation of the subject by teachers-in-training, andone of the basic causes of this is the handling of thesubject by teachers who have little or no training inphilosophy. Such teachers end up making the subject


202

appear uninteresting and irrelevant to the student. Theconsequence is a passive abandonment or avoidance ofthe course by students.

Given the above situation, the system would naturallychurn out poorly trained teachers who do not possess thecapacity for a rigorous critique of educational ideas orthe ability to make insightful contributions to educationalprocesses and practices. Such are better described aseducational dummies, fuddy-duddies or robots.Automatically, when the system produces teachers whoare not philosophically oriented, there would be a dearthof educational ideas and theories. Philosophy, as it is,goads one into adumbration of ideas, innovation andcreativity. The absence of it is detrimental to the system.The dearth of interest in philosophy of education wouldeventually affect the quality of input in policyformulation and reformulation in the system ofeducation. I have demonstrated somewhere else the placeof philosophy in the formulation of education policies(Akinsanya, 2009). Unfortunately for us, the policies thathave emerged in the recent times, have suffered qualityphilosophical inputs expected of their magnitude. Theoutcome has been a series of mismatches in goals andstrategies for implementation.10.4 Some RecommendationsThe issues discussed, of course, raise some concerns. Aconcern for philosophy (of education); a concern for thequality of teachers; a concern for teacher educationprogramme; and indeed a concern for Nigerianeducation system. However, there are remedies:


203

1. Unqualified teachers in philosophy of educationshould no longer be allowed to teach the course inthe Colleges, Institutes, Faculties and other levelswhere the subject is required. Only teachers whohave been certified as indicated earlier should bepermitted to teach the course. The implication ofthis is that the system would have to encouragepeople to pick philosophy/philosophy of educationas a desired course of study. This could begin byensuring that there are departments or units ofphilosophy of education in all Colleges, Institutesand Faculties of Education.

2. The present curriculum of philosophy of educationshould be reviewed and redesigned to involve morepractical and relevant issues, other than abstractand remote.

3. Philosophy scholars in tertiary institutions shouldbe motivated from being satisfied with dwelling in‘philosophical cubicles’ into engaging their trainingin practical issues of life. This will naturally ease thelittle or no-training in the field out of the system.

4. Educators who are interested in philosophy ofeducation as their area of specialisation should bemade to undertake courses in both departments ofphilosophy and education. This will make themwell-equipped in the course.10.5 Summary

This chapter takes its departure from the crisis faced byphilosophy in the contemporary world. This mood gainscredence from the activities of philosophers who seem


204

contended in hiding themselves in their philosophicaltabernacles as they are detached from issues of practicalconcern. Following the lead of Dewey, this chapternegotiates a paradigm shift from the status quo. Itemphasises the need to hijack philosophy fromredundancy back to the realm of functionality where itactually belongs to. The chapter concludes with Krash(1969) that philosophy of education must adopt thenotion that philosophising ought to make, and shouldindeed make, a substantial difference in educationalscene.10.5 Questions for Evaluation1. “In vain are the words of the philosopher that do

not heal some human wound”. Who made thisquotation?

2. To make a genuine scholarship in philosophy ofeducation, the scholar should pick courses in whichdepartments?

3. Identify the four ways in which philosophers haveattempted to philosophise about education asdiscussed in this chapter.

4. In just one sentence, define the term –metaphilosophy.

5. Which of the following scholars attempted toreconstruct philosophy?- Pestalozzi- Froebel- Andronicus- Dewey- Montessori


205

10.6 Possible Answers1. Epictetus2. Philosophy and Education3. - drawing the implications of metaphysics,

epistemology and axiology to education;- deriving philosophy of education from

philosophic positions, that is, schools of thought;- picking respectable philosophers and

interpreting what they said and inferring whatthey did not say about education, and thereafterrelating the foregoing to present practice ofeducation;

- the philosopher goes into education with histools and begin to philosophise with no ready-made theories or positions.

4. Metaphilosophy could be defined as philosophizingabout philosophy.

5. Dewey


206

ReferencesAkinpelu, J.A. (2005). Essays in philosophy and education.

Ibadan: Stirling-Horden Publishers Ltd.Akinsanya, P.O. (2009). Educational philosophy and teacher

education in Nigeria: A concern. Development andpolicy issues in Africa, 2(1), 80-88.


Akinsanya, P.O. (2012). The reconstructionistic tendenciesin Dewey: Towards reviving philosophy fromhegemonic redundancy complex. InternationalJournal of Academic Research in Business and SocialSciences, 2(6), 109-116.

Broudy, H.S. (1955). How philosophical can philosophy ofeducation be? The Journal of Philosophy, 52, 612 – 622.

Dewey, J. (1930). Individualism: Old and New. Minton: Balch.Dewey, J. (1920). Reconstruction in philosophy. New York:

Holt.Feuer, L.S. (1969). American philosophy is dead in C.J.

Lucas. What is philosophy of education? London:Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

Hook, S. (1969). Does philosophy have a future? In C.J.Lucas. What is philosophy of education? London:Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

Hook, S. (1956). The scope of philosophy of education.Harvard Educational Review, 26, 145 – 148.

Krash, O. (1955). How do philosophers know what they aredoing? Educational theory, 5, 167 – 171.

Price, K. (1955). Is a philosophy of education necessary? TheJournal of Philosophy, 52, 622 – 633.

Talisse, R.B. (2000). On Dewey. USA: WadsworthPhilosophers Series.

Bibliography

207

BIBLIOGRAPHYAchilike, J.C. ed (1999). Fundamentals of logic. Ibadan:

Ben-ElbooksAdaralegbe, A. (ed.). (1972). A philosophy for Nigerian

education. “Report of the National CurriculumConference”, Sept 8-12, 1969. Ibadan: HeinmannEducational Books, Nig Ltd.

Adunfe, W. & Akinsanya, P.O. (eds.)(2010). Introductionto sociological and philosophical foundations ofeducation. Ijebu-Ode: Home of Grace Publications.

Aghenta, J. A. (2000). Organization and management of UBEin Nigeria. Benin City: Academy Press

Akinkugbe, O.O. (1994). Nigeria and education: Thechallenges ahead. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd

Akinkuotu, Y.A. (2007). Historical and philosophicalconsiderations and educational reform. NigerianJournal of Educational Philosophy, 20 (3), 58-62

Akinpelu, J.A. (2005). Essays in philosophy and education.Ibadan: Stirling-Horden Publishers.

Akinpelu, J.A. (2005). Themes in philosophy of educationfor teachers. Ibadan: Tafak Publications

Akinsanya, P.O. (2007). Moral education, curriculum andcrime rate in contemporary Nigerian society.Journal of Educational Research and Policies, 2(3), 47-52

Akinsanya, P.O. (2008). A repertoire of philosophical quotesin education. Ijebu-Ode: Kumalim Press.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2008). Eclecticism in the national policyon education: Towards a philosophy for Nigerianeducational system. At the 28th Annual


208

Conference of the Philosophy of EducationAssociation of Nigeria (PEAN), held at OlabisiOnabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, October.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2008). Issues in Nigerian education system.Ijebu-Ode: Patt Publications.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2008) Maximization of democracy inAfrica. African Journal of Development and PolicyIssues, September Issue, 115 - 126

Akinsanya, P.O. (2009). Educational philosophy andteacher education in Nigeria: A concern.Development and Policy Issues in Africa, 2 (1), 80-88.

Akinsanya, P.O. (2010). The relevance of educationalphilosophy in policy formulation. Nigerian Journalof Educational Philosophy, 1 (1), 48-53


Akinsanya, P.O. (2012). Does Nigeria have a philosophyof education worthy of the name?. Prime Researchon Education, 2(5), 269 – 274. Available online athttp://primejournal.org/PRE/contents/2012/june.htm(http://primejournal.org/PRE/abstracts/2012/june/Patrick.htm)

Akinsanya, P.O. (2012). The reconstructionistictendencies in Dewey: Towards revivingphilosophy from hegemonic redundancycomplex. International Journal of Academic Researchin Business and Social Sciences, 2(6), 109-116

Akinsanya, P.O. (2013). Philosophy as education. 3rd ed.Ijebu-Ode: Patt Publications

Akinyemi, J.A. (1972). Teachers’ education. in A.Adaralegbe (ed.) A philosophy for Nigerian

Bibliography

209

education. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational BooksNig. Ltd

Aladejana, T.I. (2009). Philosophical foundations ofeducation. Ile-Ife: Yomite Printers.

Amaele, S. (2005). Understanding the philosophy ofeducation. 2nd ed. Ibadan: Bounty Press Ltd.

Axtelle, G.E. (1956). Philosophy in American education.Harvard Educational Review, 26, Spring.

Babarinde, K. (2007). Philosophical foundations ofreforms in higher education. Nigerian Journal ofEducational Philosophy, 20 (3).

Bamisaiye, R. (1989). A practical approach to philosophy ofeducation. Ibadan: AMD Publishers.

University Press.Barrow, R.A. (1980). Moral philosophy in education. Ibadan:

Oxford University Press.Black, M. (1956). A note on philosophy of education.

Harvard Educational Review, Vol 26, Spring.Brameld, T. (1969). “The education philosopher as

“Liason Officer” in C. J. Lucas. What is philosophyof education? London: Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

Brooke N. Moore and Bruder, K. (2002). Philosophy: Thepower of ideas. (5th ed.), Mc GrawHill.

Broudy, H.S. (1955). How philosophical can philosophyof education be?. The Journal of Philosophy, 52, 612– 622.

Brown, S.C. ed. (1979). Philosophers discuss education. NY:Macmillan Press Ltd.

Brubacher, I. S. (1962). Modern philosophies of education.New York: Mc GrawHill.


210

Butter, J.D. (1966). Idealism in education. New York:Harper and Row Publisher.

Butts, R.F. (1969). “Teacher education andmodernization” in G. Bereday (ed). Essays onworld education: the crisis of supply and demand.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cahn, S.M. ed. (1970). The philosophical foundations ofeducation. London: Harper and Row Concepts.

Crittenden, B. (1973). Education and social ideals: A study inphilosophy of education. Canada: Longman Ltd.

Curtis, S.J. & Boultwood, M.E.A. eds (1975). A shorthistory of educational ideas. 4th ed. Britain:University Tutorial Press.

Dalfovo, A.T. (2002). “The rise and fall of development: achallenge to culture” in C. Sumner & S.W.Yohanness. Perspectives in African philosophy: ananthology of problems of an African philosophy:twenty years after (1976-1996). Addis-Ababa:Addis-Ababa University Press.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Harrap.Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. File://E:/7.htm

retrieved on Aug 21, 2007.Dewey, J. (1900). The school and society. Chicago: Chicago

University Press.Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan.Dewey, J. (1920). Reconstruction in philosophy. New York:

Holt.Dewey, J. (1930). Individualism: Old and New. Minton:

Balch.Dewey, J. (1969). The collected works of John Dewey (MW)

by Jo Ann Boyston Carbondale and Edwardsville.Southern Illinois University Press.

Bibliography

211

Durosaro, A.I. and Durosaro, D.O. (1985). Philosophicalfoundations of education. Ibadan: Toesco Books.

Fadahunsi, A. (2008). A conspectus of education andleadership in Nigeria. A lead paper presented atthe 26th Annual Conference of PEAN at OlabisiOnabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye. October.

Fafunwa, A.B. (1972). The purpose of teacher education.in A. Adaralegbe (ed.) A philosophy for Nigerianeducation. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational BooksNig. Ltd.

Fayemi, A.K. (2008). Philosophy of education and theNigerian educational system. A paper presentedat the 26th Annual Conference of the Philosophyof Education Association of Nigeria (PEAN), heldat Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye.October.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2011). 1999 Constitution of theFederal Republic of Nigeria with amendments 2011.NERDC.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National policy oneducation. 6th ed. Lagos: NERDC Publications.

Garrison, J. (1999). John Dewey. Encyclopedia ofPhilosophy of Education.

Gettier, E.L. (1967). “Is Justified True BeliefKnowledge?” in Griffiths, A.P(ed.). Knowledgeand belief. London: Oxford University Press.

Hirst, P.H. (1963). Philosophy and educational theory.British Journal of Educational Studies, 12 (51).

Hook, S. (1956). The scope of philosophy of education.Harvard Educational Review, 26, 145 – 148


212

Kneller, G.F. (1966). Existentialism and education. NewYork: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Kneller, G. F. (1971). Introduction to philosophy of education.2nd ed. New York: John Wiley &

Knight, G.R. (1980). Philosophy and education. Michigan:Andrews University.

Krash, O. (1955). How do philosophers know what theyare doing?. Educational theory, 5, 167 – 171.

Lucas, C.J. (1969).What is philosophy of education?. London:Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

Martin, W.O. (1969). Realism in education. New York:Harper & Row Publishers.

Mish, G. (1950). The dawn of philosophy. London:Longman Group.

5th ed. McGrawHill.Morris, V.C. (1966). Existentialism in education. New York:

Harper & Row.Morris, V.C. ed. (1969). Modern movements in educational

philosophy. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company.Nduka, O. (2006). The roots of African underdevelopment

and other essays. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd.Nwabuisi, E.M. (1992). Philosophy of Nigerian education in

modern times. Onitsha: Eluokwu.Nwafor, N.H.A. (2007). The fulcrum of philosophy of

education. Port-Harcourt: Horizon Concepts.O’Connor, D.J. (1980). An introduction to philosophy of

education. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Ocho, L.O. (1988). The philosophy of education for Nigeria.

Enugu: Harris Printing and Publishing CompanyLtd.

Bibliography

213

Okafor, F.C. (1984). Philosophy of education and third worldperspectives. 2nd ed. Enugu: Star PublishingCompany

Okeke, C.C. ed. (1989). Philosophy of education: Concepts,analysis and applications. Owerri:Totan Publishers Ltd.

Okoh, J.D. (2003). Philosophy of education. Port-Harcourt:Pearl Publishers.

Oladipo, O. & Akinsanya, P. O. (eds) (2006). Philosophyand logic: an introduction. Ibadan HopePublications Ltd.

Oladipo, O. (2008). Thinking about philosophy. Ibadan:Hope Publications.

Oliver, L. (1998).. London and New York: Routledge.Olusanya, K.J., Akinsanya, P.O. & Osiyemi E.S. (2010).

Understanding logic: A guide. Ijebu-Ode: StPatrick’s Home of Grace Publications.

Omoregbe, J. (1993). Ethics. Lagos: Joja Publishers Ltd.Onyeocha, I.M. (1996). Introfil. U.S.A.: Washington D.C.Oroka, O. (1990). The philosophy of education: An

introduction. Warri: Warri InternationalPublishers.

Osokoya, I.O. (2010). History and policy of Nigerianeducation in world perspective. Ibadan: AMDPublishers.

Ottaway, AKC. (1962). Education and society: Anintroduction to sociology of education. London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Peters, R.S. ed. (1967). The concept of education. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Press Company.


214

Peters, R.S. (1973). The Philosophy of education. London:Oxford University Press.

Presbey, Gail M. The philosophical quest: a cross-culturalreader. 2nd ed. USA: McGraw Hill.

Price, K. (1955). Is a philosophy of education necessary?.The Journal of Philosophy, 52, 622 – 633.

Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. NewJersey: Princeton University Press.

Schofeild, H. (1972). The philosophy of education: Anintroduction. New York: Barnes and Noble Books.

Singh, Y.K. (2007). Philosophical foundation of education.New Delhi: APH Publishing Corporation.

Sulaiman, F.R. (2004). Religious and moral instruction forschools. Ibadan: McGeorge Publishing Company.

Talisse, R.B. (2000). On Dewey. USA: WadsworthPhilosophers Series.

Taneja, V.R. (2001). Educational thought and practice. India:Sterling Publishers Private Ltd.

Uchendu, P.K. (1993). Pragmatism in Nigerian education.Enugu: Fourth Dimension.

Udefi, C.A. (1994). Philosophy as a foundationaldiscipline” in R.D. Abubakre, M.A. Akanji & R.A.Akanmidu. eds. Reading in General Studies inNigeria. Ilorin: University of Ilorin Library &Publications Committee.

William, A. Wallace (1977). Elements of philosophy. NewYork: Alba House.

Wolf, A. (2002). Does education matter? England: PenguinBooks.

Documents

PHILOSOPHISING ABOUT EDUCATION (A PROLEGOMENON)