Ideological is a descriptive term not necessarily negative

Different ways of valuing education

Economic (revenue generated from workforce), social (providing social
cohesion), individual (lead to greater happiness), intrinsic (worth it in itself)
Implicit values (the way the curriculum, playground, timetable is structured)
and explicit values (saying what a schools ethos is)
The hidden curriculum are made up of the things that propagate the implicit
values
Is it better to have explicit values or implicit values?
Explicit values might seem too aggressive or didactic. But actually they are
healthier than implicit values which go unnoticed but can be dangerously
influential.
Fixed value or market value?
Education has no other values or standards than what it fixes itself.
Relativism.
There is an essential value to education which does not vary.
Absolutism.
Do children ever have a say in valuing their own education?
Evaluating education.
Evaluating the child
Summative vs formative assessment
Evaluating schools and teachers.

Ways: seeing the happiness of children, how many go onto higher education
etc.
Ofsted
Rise to the Top
Evaluating parents.
The deficit model
The ideal parent
More pressure on parent as agent of education, to be judged as faulty or
virtuous in shaping child
Active chooser and consumer of education, decision making powers to shape
their childs educational path.
Evaluating a countrys educational system
International standards pisa do such standards have validity or are they
artificial constructs?

Different cultural perspectives on what the future should be

Moral values and philosophy
Six ways, not necessarily incompatible, of thinking about values in education
and moral/ethical judgements:
Essentialism
Relativism
Pragmatism
Existentialism

Neoliberalism
Care
Not straightforward philosophical systems a lot of overlap between thinkers
ESSENTIALISM
Moral judgements and values may differ from culture to culture and from era
to era but this should not mean that there are no absolute judgements or
values.
Possible consequences:
We can and should privilege some values over others when educating
children, tell them there is one right or wrong
We should look for, clarify and establish what essential values are and which
imperatives they command
We should reject ways of life, beliefs and behaviors that are unethical,
regardless of how many people endorse them.
Relativism
The notion that moral judgments and values differ so wildly from culture to
culture and from era to era that there is no or little philosophical basis for
asserting the validity of actions with reference to any absolute. Values are
relative.
Dont argue for this position in an education essay, seen as negative.
Compete moral relativism is rare.
Possible consequences
Thought we cannot objectively assert the wrongness or rightness of an action,
behavior or value we can and should d decide some over tohers as a society.
We should only limit the possibility for people to act in ways in ways that are
directly harmful towards other people.

Most extreme and rare position: We should not attempt to privilege specific
values over others instead we should accept or tolerate all, including the
most harmful to other people.
Pragmatism:
The notion that any moral judgment must be reserved until the practical
enactment of behaviors, actions , beliefs has been observed and evaluated.
Rational assessmnet of situations can lead to moral imperatives being
pronounced temporarily. Values exist only insofar as they permeate peoples
behaviors.
Key thinker: john dewey.
Possible consequences:
Moral judgmeent and behavior evolves in societies, it should be explored,
explained and studied rationally, but no general conclusion drawn about
absolute principles.
Education should not be a means towards achieving an understanding of
values so as to eventually know how to live ones life. Education is life and
morality in practice.
Dewey: learning about values in theory is like stirring sand and water with a
stick, it feels productive but settles back immediately afrterwards. Childre
nmust learn by doing, and this includes morality.
Repeated interpersonality.
Observing what works best.
Existentialism
There are no values outside of human action. They are created each time
someone makes the authentic decision to act in a certain way. There are no
pre existing values. However, each created value is created for the whole of
humankin and commits it screator. Jean paul sartre.

My choice, my decision, I am fully responsible for it.

Lot of impact on philosophy of education.
Consequences:
Our behavior defines us as agents and links us inextricaly to our actions. No
eschewing responsibility.
We should rnot restrict others in acting authentically as they desire, even
when their behaviour goes against our project.
Our perception of the world becomes routinized (bad faith). in order for our
acitons to be moral (as opposed to amoral very imp distinction) we must
exist outside of everydayness and habit.
Amorality realm of decisions taken out of morality. Decisions taken without
thinking about what they represent in moral terms.
Be careful about the word moral because it doesnt mean the same thing in
all philosophies
Do no grant the child the ability to create values as they do not think the child
has achieved authenticity

Neoliberalism
Label for the ideological fabric of late capitalism. It has economic, political and
also sociocultural and personal implications. The values inherent to
neoliberalism are generally understood as measured against, and dependent
on, the free-market economy and consumer culture of late capitalism.
Neoliberalism values have increasingly permeated British and American
educational systems and policies since the 80s.
Consequences:
Importance of freedom of choice (parental, of the child, of the school decide
which teachers they want to hire, student intake, etc)

Competition, efficiency, productivity and individual responsibility. Focus on

individual as chooser, agent, producer and achiever. Culture of achievement.
Increased visibility of the cost of education at every level, partly as a way of
establishing its value (interdependency of cost and value value of education
justified by cost). Eg. political discourses that talk about numbers, material
gains of education, cost of education, supplanting other aims and outcomes of
education that are not monetary)
Care
An ethics of care posits that empathy is to be cultivated as the most important
disposition in dealing with others. We must teach children to be open to the
specific needs of others and to understand the implications of their actions
when they interact with others. Nonviolence is privileged.
Case by case basis imagine yourself in their shoes, then see how you would
think and behave, what motivates you
Key thinker: Nel Noddings
Consequences:
Importance of imaginative acts, potentially through the use of arts. Children
should be taught to identify or empathise with others and to imagine what they
feel.
Rejection of strict rationalism in the way of assessing moral judgments and
the quality of interactions with others.
Empathy is straightfowardly the highest value and the happiness of the
individual the goal.
How do we inculcate values in schools?
Should we?
Who is we? Parents, policymakers?

Competition from other sources: media, family, friends, etc

Distinguish between indoctrination and inculcation, conditioning and setting up
conditions for. Traditionalist education might be seen as indoctrinational.
Is it more ethical to be explicit or implicit?
Problematising and theorising values in contemporary educational contexts
Tolerance
Efficiency/productivity
Kindness
Solidarity
Agency and autonomy

What kind of ideological system is each tied with, what kind of society is it tied
with, philosophical background? Dont take it for granted
The value of debate
Can anything be debated? Should we encourage debate about:
Abortion, genital mutilation, gay marriage?
It is taken for granted today that children should be made to debate, but
should they? Think critically about these kind of common practices.
Why is debate encouraged? You should be able to defend both sides.
Conviction, persuasion.
But problem you instantly problematize something as an issue to be debated
when you make it a debate topic. Like female genital mutilation is it really an
issue for debate, are we saying there can be a positive side?

Intradisciplinary values:
The concept of discipline as value loaded.
What values are intrinsic to the teaching of:
Literature, Latin, mathematics, critical thinking, economics?
Keep asking yourself what each aspect hides and conceals, the geneology of
the topic.
Education, Being Good
The ring of Gyges
Plato, Republic (3rd century, BC)
How would we act if we were certain we wouldnt be caught?
Glaucon: we would act out of pure self-interest. Justice is a regulatory
construct. Its there to police people, to maintain order. There is no such
absolute as goodness or justice. Wed be like the shepherd if we had no
accountability. Only weak people say they are good or bad.
Socrates: good and justice dwell in another realm, outside of shame and the
fear of punishment. There is such a thing as being good without fear of
punishment.
Question: how do we educate children to be good?
Reasons to be good:
Avoidance of punishment
Seeking reward
Prosocial behavior
Following ethical principles

By product of some other action

Avoidance of worse outcomes
Many people feel being good should be for the sake of being good, but not for
the sake of getting a reward or fulfilling an ulterior motive.
Does the morality of an action depend on the outcome? Eg. child sucking up
to grandmom because he wants the pocket money. Doesnt hurt grandmother,
so is it necessarily a bad action?
Being good, doing good, acting good?
Morality, amorality, immorality
Being good at versus being good full stop.
Can one do good things and not be good?
Can one act like a good person and not be good?
If one was never presented with any opportunities to do bad things, would one
automatically be good?
Parents usually look for a good school not just academically, but also in the
sense of the emotional atmosphere.warmth, friendliness.
Good teacher does that mean an efficient teacher? Or also someone who is
polite and gives enough interpersonal attention.
If schools prevent children from doing bad things, are they teaching children to
be good?
Good child:
Well-behaved, disciplined
Compliant
Innocent

Selectively ignorant
Kind to others
Generous
Good adult:
Autonomous, critical
Agential
Mature
Well-informed
Kind to others
Generous
Historical/religious conceptions
Romantic child
Children are innocent, privileged readers of the world, especially nature. They
are generally unable to do bad actions and adults can learn from them.

Evil child
Children bear the mark of original sin
They are naturally cruel and incapable of moral self-regulation
The role of education is to discipline them into being moral
Puritan visions of childhood.

Education system can represent both visions controlling badness and

preserving innocence and goodness
Good child, bad child
Jean-jacques rousseau 18th
Children are born good, the educators role is to cultivate this goodness until it
is time for the indivual to join and contribute to the community
Emile and the social contract
Thomas hobbes 17th
Humans natural state is one of aggression, appropriation and territorialism.
For society to function, it needs a strong overarching government. Human
beings give up freedom for protection.
Leviathan 1651
Psychology:
Piaget 1930s
Cognitive development is associaed with the development of a moral sense
children go through distinct moral stages. Children by following rules and
fearing punishment. Later, their sense of morality is enriched by a sense of
reciprocity. Finally, they are able to see situations from another persons
perspective. Progression from absolute to relative morality.
Kohlberg 1950s expands on piagets of moral development
Pre-conventional morality 0-9
From following rules as absolutes to understanding that they are not
Conventional morality 0-adulthood
Following rules to maintain social order and out of habit

Post-conventional morality some adults being able to evaluate rules and

break them (eg. resort to civil disobedience). This requires critical thinking and
is thus not achieved by everyone..
How did kohlberg establish this?
Asked children questions and asked them stuff like the trolley problem.
Ages 5-15
Chemist-wife-drug scenario
Problem: children may have been too young to understand the ramifications of
the question (like price of the medicine, loving the wife etc)
Is there any point trying to make children understand the complexities of
morality?
Evaluating individual actions:
Basic opposition:
Consequentialism (utilitarianism)
What matters is the consequences of ones actions, the ends not the means.
Key thinkers: jeremy bentham, john stuart mill
Deontological ethics:
What matters is the agents rational evaluation of his or her duty at the time of
doing the action or the following of a rule or guideline.
Key thinkers: golden rule (most religious traditions do as you would be done
by), immanuel kant
Kants categorical imperative:
An action should only be performed if the agent judges that it could become a
universla law without paradox

In the course of the action, individual humans should not be treated simply as
means, but as ends in themselves
We have a duty to consider, in each action, both ourselves as moral law
makers as means and ends in actions done by others.
Not very child friendly should children be expected to be able to predict the
consequences of their actions? Should they be expected to be able to enlarge
the maxim of their actions to the whole of humanity? To understand the
concept of duty? At what age?
But how can adults be expected to do so?
The distinction between children and adults needs to be considered.
Virtue ethics
Centred on a persons character rather than their actions. Emphasies the
cultivation of virtues and what specific decisions say about the moral
character of an individual. It is therefore less about consequences or moral
principles. The aim is for the decision maker to achieve a good life and
happiness through the development of a virtuous disposition.
Contemporary revival of virtue ethics, specifically regarding moral education
Carr: virtue ethics and moral education 1999
Moral education:
In 1715, isaac watts divine songs show how children had to sing moral songs.
Problem: a teacher is supposed to know the subject, so how can we say
adults can teach children to be good? How do we know they are good
themselves/know morality? Potential for indoctrination
How do you justify teaching children to be good to parents? If it conflicts with
their beliefs.
If being good means having good intentions, critical spirit, respond, does that
always have the same/good outcome?

Eg. teaching children to reach the final stage and then they cause civil
disobedience/disrupt society
Some say education is risk-taking, children being modified as a result of being
taught. So if you teach a child to question/criticise the system and he does
then thats a natural part of education.
Opposite: education owes the population a generation of prosocial, obedient
and peaceful citizens. Even if that means they dont do what they think is good
for society(no disruption)
The role of humanities
Embedded moral thinking, in playground, between adult and child, teacher
and student
Literature and art: cultivation of imaginative faculties, especially empathy eg.
ethical approaches to literature martha nussbaum, wayne booth
Philosophy
History and philosophy of science assessing the use of scientific
discoveries, is this use good, what does it mean to make good use of
something
History and geography contextualising behaviors and stances
The social sciences: escaping essentialism and understanding the limitations
posed on human beings.
Reclaiming ambiguity, contradiction, paradox, nuance as inherent to the
human condition.
Martha nussbaum
Even judges can be immoral or amoral even if they cant practice empathy.
Should look at social justice novels
All literature teaches empathy.

Science: discovery of knowledge, ethics.

Being good cannot be envisaged as a theoretical question.
Can children be taught how to be good?
Can are children able to be good?
Permission? Is it allowed for children to be taught how to be good? Under
which specific conditions can children be taught how to be good?
Can should they be taught such?
Be taught adults? Peers? Teachers? By themselves, and if so how, by
reading books?
Be taught in a formalized setting? Or outside of the teaching setting?
Question the question what does how to be good mean? If children can be
taught how to be good, does that make them good people? Does it matter?
Does being taught how to be good just mean acting like a good person in a
social setting?