Faith in Progressive Education

Here is a copy of the article" Faith in Progressive Education" that appeared in the WIM Business Journal (INSPIRE vol. 45), pp. 54-55. The text below has the full list of references for those who are interested.

Faith in Progressive Education

“…the teacher always is the prophet of the true God and the usherer in of the true kingdom of God.” ?John Dewey

Arguments for so-called progressive reform in society and judgments about its merit and success are at root problems of moral philosophy and ethics. Yet the modern mind largely views arguments over progressive reform in the economy and education in technocratic terms. Empirical measures metrics, technique and above all expertise inform how we define, understand and advance “progress”. If progress is the aim, then it needs to be empirically measured, quantified, and ‘objectively’ assessed. Does such an approach to understanding progressive reforms do justice to the political and moral and historical dimensions of progressive social, economic, and educational reform? Steven Stritt drawing upon the work of Michael Katz reminds us that, ‘decisions on matters of social welfare policy have always been questions of “political and moral philosophy” and thus cannot be determined by “objective” or “empirical means” alone.’(Stritt, 2014, p.100)

Focusing on the educational domain progressive reform manifests most famously under the banner of ‘progressive education’. While some scholars argue that progressive education as a distinct movement has had its best days behind it, others are inclined to view progressivism in education as a still powerful ideology both in America and more broadly as well. Lawrence Cremin who was one of the greatest historians of the American public school views the progressive educational movement as part of the broader liberal reform movement in America seeking to modernize education(Cremin, 1961). Cremin describes progressive education as, ‘the educational phase of American Progressivism writ large’(Cremin, 1961, p.viii).

Whether informed directly by the philosophy of classical progressive educators or informed more indirectly through arguments and ideas that can trace their lineage to the early progressive educators the authority of progressive ideals and ideals in education continues to have a powerful sway in the minds of teachers, education academics and education bureaucracies. Reminding ourselves that judgements about progressive reform rest on quite often implicit traditions of moral and political philosophy requires a deeper look into the wellsprings of progressive thinking broadly and progressive education specifically. What really drives the progressive reform temper? Are the motivations of early progressive educators the same as todays? If questions of moral and political philosophy are critical to understanding advocacy for progressive reform, then what influences are central to these concerns?

What is sometimes less understood and appreciated in our increasingly secularized discourse of education and public policy is the religious roots of progressivism and of progressive education. The moral and philosophical arguments of early progressives were often influenced by religion. Of course, this is not always the case. An oversimplification of the complex causes and influences on progressivism to the single cause, that of religion would be misleading. However, religion is a significant factor. Without religious impetus it is hard to see how progressive social reform in the social, political, and educational domains would have gained the early traction it did. The way to begin to understand the relationship between progressivism and religion is to grasp the historical connection between the reformist vision of the social gospel, a movement in American Christianity which stressed social and economic reform and the early progressive movement. Richard Wightman Fox observes:

‘In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries liberal Protestantism was spread so widely through northern American culture-and it gave such powerful support to the development of new institutions such as universities, professions, and (especially social scientific) disciplines — that it could not avoid being an "influential factor" in society. But it so enthusiastically embraced the "world" — secularity, science, the "natural," and the therapeutic — that it is impossible to distinguish it cleanly from other influential factors. The worlds of liberal Protestantism and progressivism between 1875 and 1925 overlap so completely that it is ultimately futile to attempt to separate them.’(Fox, 1993, pp. 640-641)

The religious influences on the progressive school movement can be seen in the approach and philosophy of the foundational thinkers and practitioners of progressive education. Daniel Tr?hler makes the general point: “The idea of a true community of interests and thus the realization of the kingdom of God on earth was not held exclusively by the Chicago Pragmatists; rather, it shaped a wider Protestant discourse that dominated the field of common schooling at the end of the nineteenth century.”(Tr?hler, 2006, p. 102) J. R. Stallones reminds us that scholars have long recognized the, ‘connections between progressive education and the Social Gospel movement, the Second Great Awakening’.(Stallones, 2015, p.25)

Consider the example of Francis Wayland Parker who developed the Quincy method in progressive education in 1875. Parker who was the founder of the model laboratory school in Chicago was referred to by Dewey as ‘the “Father of modern progressivism.”’(Fliss, 1988, p.21) Parker founded his progressive approach to education drawing on explicitly religious influences. Matthew S. Fliss makes the point that progressivism drew upon an ‘evangelical impulse’ which was critical to the development and inspiration of progressive education. (Fliss, 1988, p.59)

In the popular mind educational progressivism is most often associated with the writings and arguments of John Dewey(Dewey, 1934). John Dewey is arguably the most famous progressive educational thinker of the twentieth century. His thought was also influenced by religious assumptions and concerns. In current times these are largely ignored. Tr?hler writes: ‘Upon this background, it is probably advisable when interpreting My Pedagogic Creed — Dewey’s first work on education to enjoy broad reception — to understand the democratic element of his theory of the school in the context of Dewey’s own summary of his educational belief: ‘‘I believe that in this way the teacher always is the prophet of the true God and the usherer in of the true kingdom of God.”’(Tr?hler, 2006, pp.104-105) In regards to Dewey, Tr?hler writes: ‘religious assumptions lie in the background of his social philosophy which not only affect his definition of democracy but greatly influenced his idea of education, and that these assumptions are receiving scant attention from the so-called “experts”.’(Tr?hler, 2000, p.159)

Tr?hler is right in observing that religious assumptions inform the history of progressive education. He is also right in his observation that the ‘religious assumptions’ of progressive thinkers such as Dewey are often given ‘scant attention’ by many so-called ‘experts’. Perhaps another way of making Tr?hler’s argument is to point out that while scholars of progressive education and historians of the progressive movement understand the moral, political and religious issues which informed the outlook of many progressive educational thinkers, this understanding is not so often found in the way progressive educational ideas are espoused and advanced in contemporary educational theory and public policy.

The way in which progressive educational ideas are articulated in contemporary public policy often appears as a highly secularized, ahistorical, and increasingly technocratic discourse in which the religious and spiritual dimension is absent. Not only has the history of progressive education witnessed a theological shift from a congregationalist and liberal Calvinist ethos found in the approach of Francis Wayland Parker to a more secularized ‘common faith’ approach found in the work of John Dewey(Fliss, 1988, pp.116-117). Today we find progressive nostrums advanced by “educational experts” that are increasingly secular empiricist and technocratic.

What is interesting in regard to the religious roots of progressivism and progressive education in particular may lie in an understanding of how the historical development of both political and pedagogical progressivism manifests as an example of the secularization of originally religiously inspired concerns and arguments. Understanding the historical shifts and development in progressive discourse from its religiously inspired roots to its current secularized language also provides us with an example of how the traditional religious impetus of progressive education is diminished and negated through the process of secularization.

The irony we see today regarding secularized progressivism and progressive education is that it is not only increasingly at odds with its original religious influences but that it is increasingly hostile to them. We fear that the most poignant tragedy of modernity, progressivism and progressive education is summarized by Eric Voegelin when he declared: ‘the death of the spirit is the price of progress’.(Voegelin, 1987, p.131)

References

Cremin, L. (1961). The Transformation of the School: Progressivism in American Education, 1876-1957. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Dewey, J. (1934). A Common Faith. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Fliss, M. S. (1988). The pilgrim's progress: The progressivism of Francis Wayland Parker (1837-1902). (PhD). University of Pennsylvania, UMI: Ann Arbor.

Fox, R. W. (1993). The Culture of Liberal Protestant Progressivism, 1875-1925. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 23(3), 639-639. doi:10.2307/206106

Stallones, J. R. (2015). Felix Adler and Education for Ethical Culture. Journal of Research on Christian Education(24), 25-42. doi:10.1080/10656219.2015.1008081

Stritt, S. (2014). The First Faith-Based Movement: The Religious Roots of Social Progressivism in America (1880-1912) in Historical Perspective. J. Soc. & Soc. Welfare, 41, 77.

Tr?hler, D. (2000). The global community, religion, and education: The modernity of Dewey's social philosophy. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 19(1), 159-186. doi:10.1007/BF02764158

Tr?hler, D. (2006). The "kingdom of god on earth" and early chicago pragmatism. Educational Theory, 56(1), 89-105. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00005.x

Voegelin, E. (1987). The New Science of Politics: An Introduction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

?