Resumen En este artículo se examina el papel de la enseñanza de la filosofía de la educación en la formación inicial docente, tomando como punto de partida la tensión que es posible notar entre, por un lado, el discurso de la mayoría de las facultades encargadas de preparar profesores, que rescatan la necesidad de formar docentes críticos y reflexivos, y, por otro lado, la praxis de la formación docente que parece tener un acento marcadamente técnico. Ante este escenario, se argumenta (...) para mostrar que la filosofía de la educación sí resulta atingente en el contexto de la formación inicial docente, que lejos de desempeñar una función meramente complementaria en dicha formación, ésta debe cumplir un papel fundamental y, por tanto, articulador de los diversos saberes y competencias propios de un profesor, y que de nada sirve defender el valor fundamental de la filosofía de la educación, si éste no es comprendido como tal por los futuros profesores, por lo que resulta vital pensar cuidadosamente los contenidos, metodologías y momentos adecuados para impartir esta materia.This paper examines the role of the teaching of the philosophy of education in the initial teacher training, taking as a starting point the tension that can be noted between, on the one hand, the discourse of most of the faculties in charge to prepare teachers, who rescue the need to train critical and reflective teachers, and, on the other hand, the praxis of teacher training that seems to have a markedly technical accent. Given this scenario, it is argued to show that the philosophy of education is relevant in the context of initial teacher training, far from playing a purely complementary role in such training, it must play a fundamental role that lets it organize the diverse knowledge and competences of a teacher, and that it is useless to defend the fundamental value of the philosophy of education, if it is not understood as such by prospective teachers, so that it is crucial to think carefully about the contents, methodologies and appropriate moments to impart this subject. (shrink)

. Is R.S. Peters' way of mentioning women in his texts detrimental to philosophy of education? Some considerations and questions. Ethics and Education: Vol. 7, Creating spaces, pp. 291-302. doi: 10.1080/17449642.2013.767002.

Throughout history, philosophers have reflected on educational questions. Some of their ideas emerged in defense of, or opposition to, skepticism about the possibility of formal teaching and learning. These philosophers include Plato, Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, Søren Kierkegaard, Martin Heidegger, and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Together, they comprise a tradition that establishes the impossibility of instruction and the imperative to undertake it. The value of this tradition for contemporary education is that it redirects attention away from performance assessments and learning outcomes to (...) the ethical, aesthetic, and metaphysical dimensions of schooling. I argue that philosophers of education are uniquely responsible for teaching this tradition so that instruction might be undertaken in the right spirit. To this end, my essay is divided into three parts. In the first part, I explain why instructional skepticism has not been prominent in philosophy of education. I follow up, in the second part, by clarifying my choice of the term ‘instruction.’ In the third part, I sketch the instructional philosophies that ‘book-end’ this tradition: those of Plato and Wittgenstein. (shrink)

In their article, Publish yet perish: On the pitfalls of philosophy of education in an age of impact factors, the authors want to bring to our attention the increased use of quantitative metrics to measure scholarly output of academics, that such measurements are not only incomplete, but that they disadvantage philosophy of education scholars in particular, and that an alternative form of evaluation—one that focuses on comparisons of philosophy of education scholars within their own sub-discipline—might be a better option. The (...) case is made by examining journal publishing efforts and evaluation systems in three countries: Netherlands, South Africa, and Norway. The first two countries each represent a different side of the same coin: the complicated nature of isolating impact and value of philosophy of education research given its applicability to multiple disciplines and the lack of an empirically substantiated sub-disciplinary identity, and the recognition that the emphasis .. (shrink)

To date, philosophers of education have shown relatively little interest in analyzing the theoretical basis in which the economics of education is grounded. The main argument of this article is that due to the changing nature of orthodox economic theory’s influence on education, a philosophical examination of its underpinnings is required. It is maintained that as a result of economics imperialism, namely the penetration of economic modes of thinking into new domains, educational philosophers have an essential role to play in (...) examining economic theory. The article briefly discusses this role and provides some examples of how educational philosophers can make a unique contribution to current thinking about the relationship between economics and education. (shrink)

Posing the question ‘How diverse is philosophy of education in the West?’ this paper responds to two recent defences of African philosophy of education which endorse its communitarianism and oppose individualism in Western philosophy of education. After outlining Thaddeus Metz's argument that Western philosophy of education should become more African by being more communitarian, and Yusef Waghid's defence of communitarianism in African philosophy of education, we develop a qualified defence of aspects of individualism in education. Our reservations about some aspects (...) of communitarianism lead us to argue for a role for some forms of individualism in African as well as Western education. Finally, reflecting on what is at stake in this kind of comparative philosophy of education, we argue that an over-emphasis on cultural differences can distract philosophers of education from the attention they should pay to the common dangers posed across continents by the influence of global capitalism on education. (shrink)

This final issue of the Journal for 2013 marks several important watersheds in education. For academics working in Britain, the most conspicuous of these is the.

Participation in the springtime round of international education conferences—principally the Philosophy of Education Societies of the United States and Great Britain and the mass academic mobilisation that is the American Educational Research Association (AERA) annual gathering (this year in beautiful Vancouver)—has afforded plentiful confirmation of the agitation currently churning systems of education all over the world. The most proximate cause of this upheaval lies in the continuing repercussions of the global financial crisis, in many places now depriving education of critical (...) resources, threatening the employment of teachers and lecturers and provoking politicians into a searching reappraisal of all that has been entailed materially and institutionally by the commitment to mass education as a democratic and economic imperative of modern societies. As a host of thinkers and commentators have recently highlighted, these pressures in the global economy have driven many decision-makers (with varying degrees of ideological enthusiasm) from diverse regions of the world to challenge hitherto unquestioned assumptions surrounding the provision and organisation of popular education for their often confused and anxious populations. (shrink)

Purpose The role of entrepreneurship as a major engine for innovation, economic growth and job creation has made policymakers argue for infusing entrepreneurship into all levels of education. It is argued that citizens must develop their entrepreneurial skills in order to cope with our increasingly globalized, fast-paced and uncertain world. Making the leap of faith from entrepreneurship into education is however rife with challenges and failures. Most attempts have resulted in isolated initiatives impacting only a small number of interested students (...) on higher levels of education. Common challenges to wider adoption are lack of definitional clarity around what exactly signifies “entrepreneurial” education, impeding organizational structures, lack of resources, assessment difficulties and fear of capitalism. To address these challenges, the purpose of this thesis is to articulate and qualify a tentatively new educational philosophy grounded in entrepreneurship, allowing teachers to use value creation as a stepping stone between entrepreneurship and education when attempting to infuse entrepreneurship into education. Result An educational philosophy grounded in entrepreneurship has been defined in this thesis as letting students learn through creating value for others, giving teachers prescriptive advice on what, how and why issues in education. This is inherently entrepreneurial in its reliance on a widespread view of entrepreneurship as being about new value creation for others and constituted by a set of teachable entrepreneurial methods. The resulting process is rich with interaction between people and triggers a multitude of emotional learning events, allowing for more engaged students and deeper learning of entrepreneurial as well as subject specific knowledge, skills and attitudes. Method The tentatively new educational philosophy proposed here was developed through an abductive five-year action research process of constant iterations between theory and practice. A total of nine empirical studies on all levels of education were drawn from, involving a few hundred primary, secondary, tertiary and continuing education teachers, around 2000 students and around 100 different educational institutions in three European countries. Two main action research cycles were conducted, each spanning 3-4 years in time. Theory from entrepreneurship and education guided the research, as well as theory from fields such as psychology, philosophy, anthropology, economics and methodology. A number of methodological developments were made in the research process, such as a new “proxy” theory of assessing entrepreneurial education, a mobile app based experience sampling informed interview technique and analytical frameworks for key emotional events and entrepreneurial competencies. Novelty This is the first attempt that has been made to propose an educational philosophy grounded in entrepreneurship. Questions explored in order to qualify it included why educational philosophy is important when infusing entrepreneurship into education and what is new with an educational philosophy grounded in entrepreneurship. Compared to existing educational philosophies such as traditional, progressive and experiential education, it can contribute with a purposeful movement between often unconnected and opposing philosophical positions rather than being yet another flag on the philosophical playing field of education. Whether this makes it an entirely new educational philosophy or merely a novel combination of established ones remains to be determined. Limitations Some important challenges and limitations with the proposed educational philosophy have emerged. It could be viewed as too excluding to view entrepreneurial education as being solely about education that includes value creation attempts. Asking students to focus on knowledge that can be useful for others could also be viewed as an overly utilitarian emphasis. The interdisciplinary challenge of bridging the two very different scholarly fields of education and entrepreneurship was also shown to be significant. It remains to be seen whether value creation as a stepping stone will allow scholars and practitioners to keep their feet dry when attempting to infuse entrepreneurship into education. (shrink)