Philosophy for Children is implemented in different countries, but there are not many studies which examine P4C in Greek primary schools. This research examines a P4C intervention in a primary school in northern Greece. This study can be used as a guide for educators who are interested in starting implementing P4C, because it describes the structure of the initial P4C session in an untrained classroom and it provides an analysis of easily implemented formative assessment practices. The research questions are similar (...) to the questions that educators could set when they initially implement P4C: Do the students raise philosophical questions? Are the students engaged in the dialogue? Do students provide concrete reasons to support their opinions? Are students willing to listen to the different opinions of their classmates? Do they enjoy participating in the sessions? Does P4C intervention have an impact on the students’ opinion concerning the discussed topic after the intervention? The conducted research used Shel Silverstein’s, The Missing Piece Meets the Big O as an introductory stimulus. The participants were twenty Year 6 students. The research design is experimental with pre-testing and post-testing of the students’ opinion about fulfilment before and after the sessions. The findings cannot be generalized, but they clearly demonstrate that the participating students wonder about philosophical issues and they developed a dialogue on fulfilment. All the students in our sample were engaged in this dialogue and the post-tests showed a modification in the expressed opinion after P4C sessions. (shrink)

Philosophy for Children is a school-based intervention currently implemented in more than 60 countries. This thesis examines the evidence regarding the effectiveness of Philosophy for Children for developing pupils’ cognitive and non-cognitive skills. Three different approaches were used. A systematic literature review was conducted of the evidence published in the last 40 years. A new comparative evaluation study was conducted with Year 5 pupils in 17 primary schools in England. The intervention lasted for an academic year, and a pre-test and (...) a post-test were given at the beginning and end of the school year to evaluate students’ critical thinking and creativity. Secondary data analysis of the National Pupil Database from the Department of Education was used to examine the long-term effect of P4C implementation on attainment. The results of 34 schools which implemented P4C during Key Stage 2 were compared with 14,791 mainstream schools in England which did not, and the same analysis was repeated based only on these pupils in both groups known to be eligible for Free School Meals during the last six years. The review results suggested that P4C generally has a positive impact on reasoning skills. In most studies, P4C also has a positive impact on literacy and some non-cognitive skills. However, the new comparative evaluation study found no evidence that P4C has a positive impact on Year 5 students’ critical thinking or creativity. This comparative study has some limitations in terms of design and inevitable attrition. The more robust secondary data analysis showed that students eligible for Free School Meals develop their reading and writing more after long-term P4C implementation than in non-P4C schools, during Key Stage 2. By combining all of the evidence from the review, comparative evaluation study and secondary data analysis, this study suggests that the implementation of P4C in primary schools is still worthwhile, both in its own terms and for its added benefits in terms of cognitive and perhaps non-cognitive outcomes. The programme is likely to help improve students’ reasoning skills. P4C can improve the literacy of disadvantaged students in the classrooms, relative to their peers, and so contribute towards closing the attainment gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. However, the new evaluation creates a caution about what can be expected from P4C and, if it used, the programme may need adjusting in order to provide opportunities for practicing a wider range of thinking skills. (shrink)

This paper attempts to investigate five and six-year old children’s ability to formulate logical reasoning. More specifically, our interest focuses on the investigation of young children’s ability to use arguments based on logical reasoning. Can pre-school children build arguments based on logical reasoning such as deductive reasoning, or forms of indirect reasoning? Can teaching contribute to the development of you children’s ability to manipulate logical reasoning in the forms previously mentioned? These are the basic questions we attempt to answer in (...) this paper. Thirteen pre-school children participated in the study. The children were involved in organized dialogues in order to investigate their ability to build logical argumentation. Our findings showed that the children had the ability to use arguments with structures, resembling reasoning found in formal logic such as deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, as well as reasoning based on the law of excluded middle. (shrink)