Philosophy of Education

By Louis Mazzullo

Our current educational initiatives, NCLB and "Race to the Top", are competitive models that reward victory and punish defeat. In order to win the "Race to the Top" we have to hope or plan that our fellow students and teachers as well as our neighboring states and schools, will fail. "Race to the Top" therefore insures that we will be a nation of losers and that we will be pitted against our fellow citizens.

We must engender a more cooperative spirit, one that does not endorse an 'us vs. them' mentality in which it is believed that the 'them' are taking away from the 'us'.

We need to reframe our educational philosophy into a model that values each student for his or her individuality and uniqueness, that prepares the student with confidence and pride for the worlds of social and civic work, and for the personal and professional relationships they will enter upon graduation. We need to value the whole child and address key issues that influence our ability to find happiness in accordance with the essence of what it means to be human: satisfying interpersonal relationships, satisfaction in work commensurate with our interests and skills, and satisfying participation in our civic and political spheres, in other words, to achieve the highest standards of intellectual, social, emotional, physical and spiritual health.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse
• Release date: Sep 5, 2012
• ISBN: 9781477262856

Louis Mazzullo

The author has more than 30 years of experience in education (M.A., Special Education, Teachers College, Columbia University) coupled with an eclectic background in the classics (Regis High School, NYC), literature and philosophy (B.A. Philosophy, University of California, Berkeley) and psychotherapy (graduate, Washington Square Institute, NYC). His most recent position in education was district-wide education evaluator and Test Coordinator in a special education setting. He is certified in New York State to teach mathematics (grades 7-12), elementary education (K-6) and special education, to serve as school administrator and supervisor, and to practice psychotherapy. Mr. Mazzullo is married, with three children; two of whom, as well as his wife, are teachers. He lives in Yonkers NY, and has a beach house in North Carolina where he does a lot of his writing.

Book preview

PHILOSOPHY

OF

Education

LOUIS MAZZULLO

ah1.jpg

AuthorHouse™

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403

www.authorhouse.com

Phone: [phone]

© 2012 by Louis Mazzullo. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

Published by AuthorHouse 08/29/2012

ISBN: 978-1-4772-6286-3 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-4772-6284-9 (hc)

ISBN: 978-1-4772-6285-6 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012915567

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Contents

Resume

Preface

Introduction

Chapter One Our Philosophical Nature

Chapter Two Our Psychological Nature

Chapter Three Our Scientific Nature

Chapter Four Return to Philosophy

Chapter Five Social Studies

Chapter Six Language

Chapter Seven Mathematics

Chapter Eight Art

Chapter Nine Return to the Beginning

Notes and References

Resume

Educational History

St John’s School, Kingsbridge, Bronx NY (1954-1963)

Regis High School, New York, NY (1963-1967)

University of California, Berkeley, California (1967-1971)

A.B., Philosophy

Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY

(1977-1983)

M.A., Special Education

Washington Square Institute, New York, NY (1985-1990)

Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy

Work History

30 years Special Education:

          Teacher: Resource Room, self-contained, Ease of Entry, remedial reading, remedial math;

          Education Evaluator

          Test Coordinator

10 years psychothesrapy: individual, couples, and men’s groups

New York State Licensure

Teaching: Kindergarten-6, Mathematics 7-12, Special Education

Educational Administration: School Administrator and Supervisor

Psychotherapy: Psychoanalyst

Preface

When I was studying philosophy, people were constantly asking,

‘But what are you going to do with it?’

Twenty-five years later, I realized the answer:

‘What are you going to do without it?’ (1)

This book is about education and it is about philosophy. I have begun with my resume so that readers will have an idea of my background and what has shaped my thinking, especially the confluent influences of philosophy and psychology. My teaching experience, mainly with inner city and special education students, has doubtless given me a certain perspective.

I read a great deal when I was young and I think that my love of literature, and its influence on me, are evident throughout these pages. My books nourished me with hope and companionship through the dark days of my youth as I lived through others while the cries within me had yet to find their own voice.

As far as I can remember, I have had a passion for learning. I realized this in grammar school, and wished to become a teacher so that my career could center on my education and my learning.

I want to apologize at the onset to all those whom I am unable to credit properly for their ideas. Much of what I have learned and written, I have gotten from someone else; when possible I cite these influences. Please know that the references given are not meant to be comprehensive in scope or depth of subject matter; they are cited, rather, because of their influence on me, or because they are the source of my ideas, or because they are my recommendations on a given topic. Oftentimes, I have forgotten whence I have learned and thus am unable to credit the proper sources. Many of the ideas, which I have adapted to my own philosophy, originate from a variety of sources. While I cannot take credit therefore for many of the ideas’ originality, the synthesis of this body of knowledge, as presented in the following pages, is unique to me.

My criticisms of schools tend to be general, and I know that this is not fair to many excellent schools. Also, I am aware that many of the ideas and suggestions presented here are already part of a sound educational philosophy in many schools. I am fortunate to have worked in places where dedicated teachers do extraordinary and amazing work, educating students with pride and with excellence, and for this I am grateful.

Please know that the class activities suggested in the ensuing chapters are intended to be useful with students of all grade levels and academic aptitude. They are presented as general ideas, to be adapted and modified as teachers see best, depending on students’ knowledge, grade level and emotional maturity, and on the particular framework of each teacher’s approach to curriculum.

I wish now to thank you, my fellow teachers, whose ideas have evolved in me and whose education and teaching have borne fruit in this writing.

And to all teachers,

who sow

but do not see the reaping

of what you have sown

this book is dedicated.

9 May 2012

Introduction

‘And this gray spirit yearning in desire

To follow knowledge like a sinking star,

Beyond the utmost bound of human thought.’

-Ulysses, Alfred, Lord Tennyson

I want to explain why I am writing this book. The first reason is that I have always had a very intense desire to learn new things. This has been an enduring passion. For years, I have had a longing to write, and to synthesize my thoughts on education, but the time never appeared, until now, to be right. This book has been, by nature (2), a learning experience for me and therefore a pleasing one, as I have been required to express myself with as much precision as possible, a process necessitating a frequent review in my mind of exactly what I have wanted to say, and a task requiring me to learn more carefully in subjects about which my thoughts were somewhat imprecise.

The second reason is my love of philosophy; this was my first intellectual love, although when I started thinking deeply at a very early age, I did not know of course, that I was ‘pursuing philosophy’. I just gave space for my mind to follow its thoughts, especially as it continued to ask ‘Why?’ As I grew, I began to be especially interested in the uniqueness of my consciousness. I tried to see outside of myself, from the viewpoint of a world beyond, whose nature appeared omnipotent and unknowable. I questioned whether I actually had free will, or whether my actions were controlled and determined by a superior being. I struggled with what I was taught—the inherent sinfulness of human nature—and therefore was greatly troubled to live with my desires and longings. I began to question everything. I became comfortable with the unknowing and the unknown and I sought my place in their worlds. While in high school one summer night a friend gave me Thus Spake Zarathustra, by Friedrich Nietzsche. As I began to read, the idea of a superman, who embraced and fulfilled human nature, a man motivated not by fear but by courage and strength in his own being, about which he felt pride and not shame, greatly frightened yet excited me, and transformed me and my thinking. This night and this transformation have never left me and they are honored in this writing.

I feel also that in some way, I have a duty to write, not so much because of the value of what I believe in, though certainly this is a part of it, but because it seems fitting to return something, after all that I have learned through others’ writing.

Calling me to write, finally, is dismay at so much of what I have experienced and of what I see and read about education in the United States today, its failure to teach fundamental knowledge and its failure to prepare students to be productive workers and citizens. As Americans we are very ignorant of basic science and social studies concepts and facts. We lack understanding of the workings of government. The following are just a few examples:

•   An educated woman (Master’s Degree), in her 50’s could offer no reasons for the association of the moon with femininity.

•   A college student on scholarship had never heard of the irrational number phi or the corresponding Golden Mean.

•   Polls (3) indicate: a) Widespread displeasure with the Affordable Care Act, with upwards of 40% believing the law should be repealed. Yet 60% of those polled ‘say they don’t have enough information to know how the law will impact them.’ b) Widespread ignorance of basic US History: of 1,000 U.S. citizens taking America’s official citizenship test, 29% couldn’t name the vice president, 73% couldn’t correctly say why we fought the Cold War, 44% were unable to define the Bill of Rights and 6% were unable to circle Independence Day on a calendar. c) Widespread ignorance of the national budget: 71% of voters want smaller government yet vast majorities oppose cuts to Medicare (81%), Social Security (78%), and Medicaid (70%).

•   A large number of our high school dropouts are unemployed and unskilled, and therefore for a great many jobs requiring skilled tradespersons one must find an immigrant worker.

•   Dr. Jon D. Miller of Northwestern University Medical School, in pointing out the lack of scientific literacy current among most Americans, says that ‘people’s inability to understand basic scientific concepts undermines their ability to take part in the democratic process’. (4)

•   Despite our supposed effort to prepare students for participation in a democratic society, an astonishing number of our citizens, including young adults, do not regularly vote in our political elections.

•   In an informal survey of selected students 95% revealed ignorance as to the meaning of the word ‘citizen’.

Our educational system is a competitive one which honors and rewards those at the top of the intellectual chain, students with high academic aptitude and high academic achievement. Race to the Top, the structural model that is our national educational initiative by nature insures that most of us will be losers. Races reward the very few who win. Winning is associated with the currently popular indicators of social stature: success, wealth and fame, and those of us who work to the best of our ability, however losing the race, are denied not only the spoils of victory (success, wealth and fame) but are actually punished and denied the resources theoretically required to help us ‘compete’. This disapproval and rejection by the federal government of the majority of states in the Race to the Top reflects the competitive nature of the educational establishment, and the punitive nature of its administration. Race to the Top is a national program whose value structure is replicated and systematized in educational districts throughout the country. Its hallmarks are to value competition, to reward victory and to penalize defeat.

In Race to the Top, the number of designated winners is pre-determined, just as Harvard knows it will have 800 incoming freshmen. Our educational system is designed to provide Harvard with a ranking list to assist them in choosing the ‘highest’ students. From this ranking it is easy to select particular groups, for instance, the ‘top’ or the ‘bottom’. Our entire system of grades and assessments is designed so that all of our data fit neatly into a bell curve, with about 70% in the middle and 15% each splitting the upper and lower ends. Therefore, to have a goal for instance, that 100% of students successfully name and locate our 50 states, is ill advised for our ranking system and national testing program, because if we are successful, we will then be unable to distinguish the top from the bottom. Our system for determining grades, ranking and success is designed to allow only those assessments which can be graphed onto a bell curve. A test is not considered useful or appropriate if 90% of students get A’s or if 90% get F’s. A test is only considered useful if we can categorize results among the top, the middle and the bottom. The very definition of IQ is based on this bell curve. Everyone wants to know: into what percentile rank do my numbers fall? We all want high numbers, but since it is institutionalized that there are only so many high numbers to go around (bell curve), students have to do better than their peers and classmates in order to be successful and reach the top. In other words, in order to reach the top, we have to hope that other students will reach the bottom. In order to win the Race to the Top, we have to hope that other states will lose. We are taught therefore on a national level, with a model that is replicated throughout the educational establishment, that winning—triumphing over others—is a necessary step on the way to a satisfying and successful life.

I believe that a worthier goal is not only possible, but in fact