Philosophy of Educational Knowledge: An Introduction to the Foundations of Science of Education, Philosophy of Education and Practical Pedagogics

310 Pages·1992·46.304 MB·English

by  Wolfgang Brezinka (auth.)

PhilosophyofEducationalKnowledge
Philosophy and Education
VOLUME3
SeriesEditors:
C.J.B.Macmillan
CollegeofEducation.TheFloridaStateUniversity.Tallahassee
D.C.Phillips
SchoolofEducation.StanfordUniversity
EditorialBoard:
RichardJ. Bernstein,HaverfordCollege
DavidW. Hamlyn,UniversityofLondon
RichardJ. Shavelson,U.C.LA.
HarveySiegel,UniversityofMiami
PatrickSuppes,StanfordUniversity
Thetitlespublishedinthisseriesarelistedattheendofthisvolume.
Philosophy of
Educational Knowledge
An Introduction to the Foundations of Science of Education,
Philosophy of Education and Practical Pedagogics
by
WOLFGANG BREZINKA
The University of Konstanz, Germany
translated by
JAMES STUART BRICE and RAOUL ESHELMAN
SPRINGER-SCIENCE+BUSINESS MEDIA, B.V.
ISBN 978-94-010-5141-5 ISBN 978-94-011-2586-4 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-94-011-2586-4
Printed on acid-jree paper
Original text published in Gennan under the title
Metatheorie der Erziehung. Eine Einftlhrung in die Grundlagen der Erziehungswissenschaft,
der Philosophie der Erziehung und der Praktischen Piidagogik, 1978
Emst Reinhardt Verlag, Munich, Basel
Ali Rights Reserved
© 1992 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Originally published by Kluwer Academic Publishers in 1992
Softcover reprint ofthe hardcover lst edition 1992
No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or
utilized in any fonn or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording or by any infonnation storage and
retrieval system, without written pennission from the copyright owner.
EDITORS'INTRODUCTION
For two reasons, we are particularly proud to include Wolfgang Brezinka's
Philosophy ofEducationalKnowledge in this series ofbooks on Philosophy ofEducation.
Thefirst isthephilosophicalinterestoftheworkitself-itsremarkablescholarshipandthe
importanceofthephilosophicalpositionswillbeobvioustoallreaders.Thesecondisthat
it brings to the English-speakingworld awonderfulexampleofeducationalphilosophy as
now being practiced in the German-speaking world. All too often philosophers in the
Anglo-American tradition have not seen the sort of perspective on educational thinking
that infuses this work. And since this book has beenwidely read inits originalversion, it
has hada considerableimpactuponphilosophyofeducationalresearch andscience inthe
German-speaking countries. An understanding of this may help in the development of
evenmorecooperativerelationsamongstudentsofeducationinallcountries.
C.1.B. Macmillan
D. C. Phillips
PREFACETOTHEENGLISHEDmON
'1 am not unmindful how little can be done... in a mere
treatiseonLogic, or howvague andunsatisfactoryallprecepts
of Method must necessarily appear, when not practically
exemplified in the establishment of a body of doctrine.
Doubtless, the most effectual mode of showing how the
sciences...maybeconstructed,wouldbetoconstructthem".
JOHNSTUARTMILL(1843)1
Parents have a duty to educate their children, teachers to educate their pupils. For
this reason there is widespread interest in education. Knowledge of education has long
beenofferedundernameslike"pedagogics","pedagogy"or"educationaltheory".Originally
this meant practical knowledge based on common sense. Since the Enlightenment,
however, attempts have been made to acquire scientific knowledge of education.
Superficiallyviewedthisprogramhasbeenquitesucessful.Mostoftheworld'suniversities
have created departments for "education", "scientific pedagogy" or the "science of
education".There arevast numbers ofpublicationswhichpromise scientificknowledge of
education.
In reality, however, the rise of pedagogics to the status of a scientific discipline is
morefictitious thanreal. Itsscientificcharacterisstilldisputedand manydoubtthatithas
any value for educational praxis. As an academic subject pedagogics is mired in a deep
crisis2• More contradictory opinions than knowledge, more wishful thinking than realism,
moreideologyandWeltanschauungthansciencearetobefoundinthediscipline.'Thereis
scarcelyanyotherscienceinwhichunscientificgossip, partisanzealand dogmaticnarrow
mindednesshavebecomesowidespreadasinpedagogics"3.
In order to free pedagogics from this unhappy state, it is necessary to submit
pedagogical knowledge to critical examination. It must be shown in detail what parts of
existingeducational theories are inadequate andwhich mistakes mustbe avoided inorder
that better educational theories can be created. We need epistemological standards.
Which norms should apply to educational theories? This depends on their purpose. To
someextent,the rules applicabletopracticalandphilosophicaltheoriesaredifferentfrom
thoseapplicabletoscientifictheories.However,sincestatementsaboutrealityaremadein
1 MILL(1974:834).
2 Seee.g.BREZINKA(1989).
3 BOLLNOW(1971:708).
viii PREFACE
all educational theories, I will base my critique on maxims which apply to empirical
sciences in general. Accordingly in this book the criterion used to evaluate educational
theories will be the scientific ideal of an empirical-analytical philosophy of knowledge.
Thiswillbeadditionallysupplementedwithmaximsfromphilosophicalpragmatism.
Studies ofthis type do not have educationalphenomena (education) as their object,
butrather theoriesofeducation(educology).Thuswhatwillbepresentedhereisaeritieal
normativetheoryofeducationaltheories -or abbreviated: ametatheoryofedueation4(meta
educologf).
Metatheoretical studies can also have indirect practical significance. The quality of
educational theories depends to a great degree on which epistemological norms are
recognized by educational theoreticians and how they complywith these norms. Through
themediationofeducationaltheorytransmittedbytextsandlecturestheirepistemological
views have aninfluence onthe leveloftrainingprovidedfor careersineducationand thus
alsoonthe qualityofeducationalpractice.
Because of my concern for the improvement of educational praxis, I decided to
undertake a critique of pedagogics and analyze its epistemological principles. The first
stepwas a 1966essayon''TheCrisisofScientificPedagogy"inthe German"Zeitschriftfur
Padagogik"6. It triggered an intensive discussion inCentral and EasternEuropewhich has
become internationally known under the name ''The Positivism Debate in German
Pedagogics"7.
This greatpublicinterest motivated me to write the presentbook,which provides a
thoroughpresentationofmyscientificcritiqueofpedagogics.Itfirst appearedin1971,and
the completely revised fourth edition was released in 1978. Apart from a few small
improvements, the presentEnglish translation corresponds to the fourth German edition
and has beenapproved bythe author. An Italian translationwas published in 1980under
the title "Metateoriadell' educazione" by Armando Editore inRome; a Japanese edition
appeared in 1990 under the title "Kyoikugaku kara Kyouikukagaku e - Kyoiku no
Metariron", publishedbyTamagawaUniversityPressinTokyo.
Twenty-fiveyears ago the epistemological critiqueoftraditional pedagogicswasstill
apioneeringwork. Sincethen,however, epistemologicalstudieshavebecomefashionable,
even in this discipline. Today there is even cause to fear that a secondary matter will
4 From the Greek "meta" = after, coming after. A metatheory ofeducation thus presupposes theories of
educationandfollowsthem.Cf.thetripartiteschemaonpage35ofthistext.
s Cf.CHRISTENSEN(1981).
6 Vol.12(1966:53-88).ReprintedinBREZINKA(1989:80(121).
n
7 Cf.BUTTEMEYERandMOLLER(1979);BREZINKA(1989: ff.).
PREFACE ix
become the primary concern, carried on for its own sake and distracting from the
essentials: constructiveworktowardbettereducationaitheories8•
Thus I have attempted in this book to treat the metatheory of education in such a
way that it can serve its original purpose: it should assist in making existing educational
theories more understandable and in creating better educational theories. Something
which I find to be completely unproductive is a philosophy of educational knowledge
whichdoes notstayclosetorealeducationalproblemsandthewaysinwhichtheycouldbe
solved. Metatheoretical studies are part of the preparation for educational theories, but
they areinnowaysubstitutes.
Konstanz,Germany
21June 1991 WolfgangBrezinka
8 SeeBREZINKA(1989:188ff.).
TABLEOFCONTENTS
Introduction: Pedagogics, Scienceand Metatheory 1
LackofAgreementontheScientificCharacterofPedagogics 2
Critiqueofthe PresentStateofPedagogics2; Doubtsaboutthe Possibility
ofaScientificPedagowcs3;Scientificand PracticalTheoriesofEducation
4; Pedagogics as a Mixed Normative-Descriptive Discipline 5; Pedago~cs
as a Philosophical Discipline 5; Gradual Transition to Ideological
Pedagogics 6, Pedagogics as a Pure Empirical Science 7; Numerous
SchoolsofThought8;ReasonsfortheLackofAgreement9
TheOriginsofPedagogicsinPracticalTheoriesofEducation 10
Educationas anArt 11;EducationalTheoriesas Prescriptionsfor the Art
ofEducating 12;Informingand InspiringEducators 13;Dominance ofthe
Normative Standpoint 14; Elements of Traditional Peda~ogics 14;
Dissatisfaction and Critique 15; The Modem Concept of SCIence as a
Standardfor Pedagogics16
TheDependencyofPedagogicsonValueJudgements,
NormsandWeltanschauung 18
The Indispensability of a Philosophy of Life in Practical Theories of
Education 18; The Misinterpretation of Practical Theory as Scientific
Theory19;IdeologyandPedagogics20;IdeologyandEmpiricalTheory22
ReasonsforDistinguishingbetweenTypesofPedagogicalKnowledge 23
The Deficiencies of Mixed Pedagogics 23; Division of Labor and
Specialization 24; Three Classes of Educational Theories. Educational
Science,PhilosophyofEducation,PracticalPedagogics24;Terminological
Problems 26; Practical Importance of Agreement on Usage 26;
Differentiation of Pedagogical Statement Systems rather than the
Classification of Educationists 27; Truth and Social Utility of Statement
Systems28
ConceptsofScienceandMethodologicalRulesasStipulations 28
Science as a System of Statements and as an Activity 28; The Ideal of
Science29; BasicEpistemolowcalPositions29; Knowledgeas theGoalof
ScientificActivity30;TheEpIstemologyofAnalyticPhilosophy31
TheTasksofaMetatheoryofEducation 33
The Concept ofMetatheory 33; Analysis, Critique and Standardization of
Educational Theories 33; Relationships among Education, Educational
TheoriesandMetatheoryofEducation35
xii CONTENTS
I. ScienceofEducation 37
The ConceptofEducation 38
Social Action 38; Psychic Dispositions 39; Purposes, Aims and Ideals 40;
DefinitionoftheConceptofEducation40
The VarietyofEducationalPhenomena 42
Different Aims of Education 43; Differences among Educands 45;
Differences Among Educators 46; Different Situations 46; Different
FormsofEducation47
TheSubjectMatterofScienceofEducation. 48
Education as Fact 48; Educational Situations, Educational Fields 49;
PrincipalTopics 49; Material Object and Formal Object49; Formulation
of Questions 50; Description and Explanation of Psychic Objectivations
51; Ends-Means Relationships 53; Educational Science as a Teleological
Causal-AnalyticScience53;DifferentNamesfortheSameProblems57
ScienceofEducationasanEmpiricalSocialScience 58
Difficulties in Classifying Sciences 58; Human Sciences 59; Behavioral
Sciences 60; Sciences ofActions61; CulturalSciences 61; SocialSciences
63; Relationships to Psychology and Sociology 63; Practical Grounds for
anAutonomousScienceofEducation63
DemarcatingScienceofEducation
from thePseudo-ScienceofIdeologicalPedagogics 65
Confessional Pedagogics 65; Political Pedagogics 66; Marxist Pedago~cs
66; "Critical" Social Science 67; "Critical" or "Emancipatory PedagOgICS"
67; Misuse ofScience for Propaganda Purposes 68; Value-Neutrality as a
DistinguishingFeature69
RequirementsfortheLanguageofScienceofEducation 69
Descriptive, Prescriptive and Emotive Use of Language 70; Carity 72;
Ambiguity and Vagueness 72; Concepts and Their Clarification 73;
Normative and Emotive Connotations 75; "Socialization" as an Example
76; Theoretical Concepts 77; Hypothetical Constructs 78; Informational
Content 78; Comprehensibility 79; Objective Language and Meta
Language82
TheMeaningandLimitsoftheRequirementofValue-Neutrality 82
Educating and Valuating 82; Value Experience, Valuating, Value Bearer
83; Value 83; ValueJudgements83; Norms85; ValuativeBasisofScience
86; Moral Problems in Disseminating and Applying ScientificKnowledge
88; Valuations and Norms as Subjects of Educational Science 88;
ExplanationoftheNormofValue-Neutrality89