| |
values education is and how it differs from the
traditional “educations” is proving difficult. There is a real need
and considerable scope for philosophers of education to help.
For example, for me, values education is:
| |
an activity which can take place in any
organisation during which people are assisted by others, who may
be older, in authority or more experienced, to make explicit those
values underlying their own behaviour, to assess the effectiveness
of these values and associated behaviour for their own and others'
long-term well-being and to reflect on and acquire other values
and behaviour which they themselves recognise as being more
effective for long-term well-being of self and others. |
You’ll agree that the definition is quite a
mindful. I would like to see values education become a proper school
subject with the usual fifty-minute time slot, three or four times per
week. During this time, the group (teacher and pupils) would reflect
on and discuss in detail particular values such as respect, honesty,
and caring, or values issues such as teenage pregnancy, drug abuse,
sexually transmitted diseases, euthanasia and vandalism. One can see
the need for philosophical input when discussing these topics.
Values education classes would differ considerably from the way many
traditional subjects are taught in at least five ways.
1. The values reflected upon, by the group (teachers and young
people together) are chosen by the group. The teacher (or more
experienced person) may offer options as guidelines but must be
willing to examine an option (even one not originally offered by the
teacher) chosen by the group. Consequently, values education does not
have a content as other subjects do. The content is the process - that
is, the oral expression of individuals' thoughts and views. A wide
range of values issues collected from the content of traditional
subjects taught in the school, from newspapers and television, and
from religious texts, for example, could be the basis for discussion.
However, as yet, there is no body of knowledge. Again, clearly
expressing one’s arguments and thoughts is a philosophical task.
2. Just what "well-being", "responsibleness", and "good human
relationships" mean is decided individually by each person during the
class. At the end of the class or a series of classes, a consensus may
emerge, but the teacher does not force this. In addition, the
consensus view is not forced, explicitly or implicitly, on any young
person, who does not agree. In a values education class pupils are
asked to philosophise.
3. The teacher's views carry no more authority than the young
people's. Any member of the group is entitled to state a view as long
as it is supported by reasoned discussion. Teachers are also required
to be philosophers to do values education effectively.
4. The mode of discussion is one of mutual respect where
pre-agreed rules do not permit, mocking, insulting, shouting and
swearing, and encourage listening and giving reasons for one's views.
5. People are not told how to think or behave in relation to
any values issue. Of course, all participants in the discussion would
be expected to abide by pre-agreed rules for discussion.
Values education involved doing philosophy
In summary, values education involves evaluating the values (and the
potential behaviours that would arise from holding such values) as
expressed by individuals, for their effect on the well-being of all.
There is no code of values to be promoted or inculcated. Values
education classes involve learning by joint exploration with
participants supporting one another. Everyone recognises they are
struggling together to find answers to sensitive, emotive and perhaps
controversial issues. In values education, there is recognition of
equal human worth.
Values education as just described has favourable implications for
philosophy of education. Firstly, the teaching method is one of doing
philosophy. Educators involved in philosophy in schools and philosophy
for children are already to some extent doing values education. Values
education will ultimately encourage children from an early age to
undertake philosophical analysis of what it means to be human - of
existential ontology (philosophical anthropology).
Secondly, as soon as one begins researching in the field of values
education, it becomes evident that the indiscipline of many
researchers in using terminology hinders dialogue. For example, many
colleagues can't, or refuse to, define what they mean by values
education. Similarly, many researchers do not define what they mean by
the many other "educations". Some claim that generally acceptable
definitions are not possible.
Another aspect of the undisciplined use of terminology is that the
same "education" is given two or three different names. For example,
it seems as if multicultural education is also called "intercultural
education", "multiethnic education" and "antiracist education". I say
"seems" because at times authors using these terms do not define them.
In addition, to understanding values education, one has to grapple
again with concepts such as subject, theme, dimension, cross-curricularity
and indoctrination. Surely, making sense of all this is a job for
philosophers of education?
Read e-report No. 4
Can values
education benefit from greater philosophical discipline? It is
available on the CAVE website and goes into detail on how
philosophical method must be improved if we are to gain greater
understanding of concepts such as values education.
Dr Bill would be delighted to talk at your next conference or event
and give more details on the philosophical underpinnings of values education approach.
Contact him on
bill.robb@valueseducation.co.uk
Copyright © 2008 Values Education Ltd
Note to editors. Feel free to use this article as long as the
following details are retained. “A values education article from CAVE
www.valueseducation.co.uk
”
|
|
