Abstract:
As a professional discipline philosophy of education is the product of a liaison between philosophical speculation and educational practice, and, as a consequence, philosophers of education are abandoned offspring, often rejected by both philosophers and educators, and in constant search for a rightful place in academia. To some extent, this problem is shared with certain other philosophies such as philosophy of history and philosophy of science. Yet it would be presumptous to maintain that philosophy of education has nothing to say to educators, in general, or to agricultural educators, in particular. What it says is disputable and often disputed. But at least is some sense philosophy of education influences educational practice and, therefore, is exceedingly relevant. What John Maynard Keynes said about the relationship between economists or political philosophers and the social world could well be said about the relationship between philosophers of education and the educational world:
The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else (1).
In this article, I should like to suggest what the relevance of philosophy of education to agricultural education is by relating two theories of education-essentialism and progressivism-to some of the debate concerning the undergraduate education of agricultural students. In addition, I will say something about the philosophical connections of these two theories of education. Though neither essentialism nor progressivism are represented by powerful organized movements in contemporary American education, influential educational spokesmen are often found to be committed to some of the fundamental postulates of one or the other.
Keywords:
essentialism, progressivism, philosophy of education, agricultural curriculum
 Download Article | [ ] | 349 kB |
