What Is Educational About Education? The Distinctiveness of Education

• In Event: Education's Autonomy

Abstract

1. Purposes
The aim of this paper is to explore the autonomy of education by asking two questions: Is education a unique and distinct discipline? Is education anything other than the achievement of non-educational aims or objectives?

2. Perspectives
This paper draws on literature in educational theory that examines autonomy of education. In particular, the paper uses Biesta’s work on thinking educationally and the claim that if we are looking to understand education better, and seeking to reach those concerned with education—practitioners or philosophers—then it is better to think educationally rather than applying philosophy (or any other discipline) to education.
The theoretical frameworks used is of instrumentalization of education, that is, demands that education serve non-educational objectives, and of educationalization of social problems, demands placed on education coming from outside of education that may restrict what education can be and restrict what we can come to know about education.

3. Modes of Inquiry
The paper uses multiple strategies to open a way to questioning the distinctiveness of education. One strategy is analyzing case studies of assignments given in first-year undergraduate “Foundations of Education” course around the question what makes faculties of education the appropriate site for educational training; perhaps business faculties, psychology departments, and faculties of Information Science are better positioned than faculties of education to offer teacher education programs and degrees leading towards teacher certification? Another strategy is analyzing literature on philosophy and educational theory on the distinctiveness of education. A third strategy is analyzing conception of politics and the relationship between education and politics, in order to examine the kinds of demands being asked of education as a practical activity—including political demands.

4. Materials
The paper uses assignments given in first-year undergraduate “Foundations of Education” course, and literature in philosophy and education’s theory. Among others, the paper uses Heidegger’s account of instrumentalism, Aristotle’s Politics, and Arendt’s account of politics.

5. Conclusions and arguments
We can think of education as a ‘remainder’, what is left over when we remove all the other ‘of’ (sociology of education, philosophy of education, etc.). When we take away those external social, political, cultural, economic objectives that are imposed on education, which education is demanded to serve, the ‘remainder’ is education, what is left behind when we remove what others ask of it.
We as philosophers of education are well positioned to cast light on the value and meaning of education itself. Philosophy of education can help protect the autonomy of education and promote educational thinking

6. Scholarly significance
The paper’s significance stems from addressing the question ‘What is educational about education’ by examining what makes education distinct in ways that do not, inadvertently, obscure that distinctness. It does so by offering different perspectives on the question and on what distinguishes education from other disciplines, and by addressing both theoretical and practical matters. Proposing to see education as a ‘remainder’ provides a new way of thinking about education that goes beyond a simple response to instrumentalization of education.

Author

• Trevor Paul Norris, Brock University