Professional Writing Servicehttp://StudyHub.vip/AN-EVALUATION-OF-PROGRESSIVISM-IN-THE-C

1. AN EVALUATION OF PROGRESSIVISM IN THE CONTEXT
OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY
A Term Paper
Submitted to Mrs. Rita Atienza
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirement of ED 203
Submitted by:
Geoffrey Miles L. Mercado
MARCH 18, 2013

2. 1
INTRODUCTION
This paper will discuss the educational philosophy of Progressivism and its implications on
Philippine education and in this author’s practice. A discussion of the philosophy’s historical
background, major proponents and implications on educational principles will be made followed by a
portion dedicated to explaining the significant and relevant educational concerns of the philosophy.
After which, a careful enumeration of the implications of the philosophy in Philippine education and
the author’s context will be made. Lastly, the paper will conclude with the author’s insights and
assertion that the philosophy of progressivism is incomplete as a philosophy of education in light of
Catholic Philosophy of Education, and is more applicable as a an approach to teaching rather than
philosophy to adhere to.
Progressivism adheres to Naturalism, Pragmatism, and Liberalism, where students are given
the freedom to develop as a person through a curriculum that reflects the students’ interests facilitated
in a permissive environment (Gutek 1997, 301). They are trained in the scientific method to promote
complete and reflective thinking that is needed in social interactions (Gutek 1997, 302). As a result,
this educational philosophy is most concern about the students’ freedom to inquire and test ideas
because the world is constantly transitioning and has quickly becoming impatient with dogma (Gutek
1997, 302). In light of these, this educational philosophy, in philosophy, is experiential, practical, and
self-liberating.
Progressive education was deeply influenced by Jean Jacques Rosseau, Johann Heinrich
Pestalozzi, and Sigmund Freud’s works (Gutek 1997, 294). Overall, the works of these men point to
an education that is free from coercion and attends to the interests and the holistic (emotions, intellect,
and body) development of the child. This follows the assumption that people are benevolent and that
an excessive adherence to authority during childhood often led to mental traumas (Gutek 1997, 294).
Building on their contributions, an organization called the “Progressive Education
Association” was formed in 1919 (Gutek 1997, 294-295). This organization formalized the major
principles of a progressive education. According to them, a progressive education should focus on

3. 2
granting the child freedom to develop by working together with the teacher, who is a guide to the
student’s learning, to come up with interesting topic/activities. The assessments focus more on the
process of arriving at the product rather than the product itself. Lastly, schools should, in effect,
become laboratories for innovative practices (Gutek 1997, 294-295).
However, John Dewey, considered as the Father of Progressive Education, critiqued the
implementation of progressive education that reduced the philosophy to a mere reaction to the strict,
regimental, and superficial teaching styles taught in traditional schools (Gutek 1997, 295). He pointed
out that a true progressive education should be based on the child’s experience and interest and has in
mind the child’s growth as the goal. However, the child’s interests and needs are not the goals of
learning. Overall, this education should be concerned in cultivating purposeful, reflective patterns of
inquiry by training the educator to effective relate the learner’s internal conditions of experiences with
objective conditions of experience (Gutek 1997, 296).
In consideration of Dewey’s inputs, William Kilpatrick developed a methodology of
instruction reflective of the basic principles that united purpose and activity and tested active
experimentation (Gutek 1997, 297). As a result, he developed the “Project Method” that allowed
students to choose, plan, and execute their work in projects. Through this project method, learning
was task-centered and ideas were tested out. In line with this, the curriculum composed of four (4)
classes of projects namely: 1.) the creative project or an implementation of theoretical plans; 2.) an
appreciation project where students develop aesthetic enjoyment such as reading a novel; 3.) a
problem project where students have to resolve an intellectual problem; 4.) and a specific learning
project, where the students are expected to acquire a skill or body of knowledge (Gutek 1997, 295).
All in all, the projects aim to acquire skills rather than knowledge and expose students to
group work which help them gain attitudes appropriate to a democratic society. It follows, then, that
the end product of this education is the democratic person who has an experimental attitude (Gutek
1997, 299).

4. 3
In summary, this philosophy supports that learning is experiential: children learn by doing.
The emphasis of this philosophy is on progress or otherwise known as:
“[the capacity of human beings] of improving and perfecting their environments by
applying human intelligence and the scientific method to solving social, political and
economic problems” (Gutek 1997, 293)
Thus, in contrast to Formalism and Perennialism, Progressivism concerns itself in ensuring a future
worth working for by dealing with the problems of the present with mere guidance from the past.
EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS
One of the goals of progressive education is to improve citizens’ way of life through
experiencing freedom and democracy in schools (Gerald Gutek 1997, 294). As a way for students to
experience and practice these two concepts, the curriculum is based on their interests, skills, and pace
(Southern Illinois University Edwardsville). Note, however, that freedom in this philosophy does not
permit rude, inappropriate, or unproductive behaviour but creates opportunities for the child to be
creative (Alfie Kohn 2008, 4). Because of these practical goals, the experiences in school should be
closely related to the activities and problems they will encounter in the future (Southern Illinois
University Edwardsville). As a result, books are simply guides rather than authorities (Southern
Illinois University Edwardsville). All in all, the learning is rooted in the questions of learners that are
raised through experiencing the world (Southern Illinois University Edwardsville).
In order to actualize a curriculum designed to prepare them to live in a free and democratic
society, progressive education applies a collaborative approach to learning where students use the
Scientific method in studying the subject matter while exploring other perspectives from other
students (Southern Illinois University Edwardsville). Emphasized in this approach is on the process of
arriving at an understanding rather than the end result itself (Southern Illinois University
Edwardsville). No absolute understanding is ever set and one must always find ways of improving
things.
This kind of curriculum and methodology requires intrinsic motivation on the side of the
students, which, in philosophy, will not be difficult to achieve provided that the students work on the

5. 4
activities that interest them (Kohn 2008, 2). In connection to freedom, the discipline applied in this
philosophy is liberal in nature, allowing the student work collaboratively with others and test one’s
own ideas (Kohn 2008, 2). Thus, the teacher should be able to prepare activities that will encourage
the students to initiate, plan, and execute their respective projects (Kohn 2008, 5).
In applying this philosophy, teachers fundamentally provide opportunities for students to
learn by doing (Kohn 2008, 5). As a result, they are expected to have an interdisciplinary approach in
delivering the expected learning outcomes (Gutek 1997, 301). In effect, they act merely as directors or
guides rather than infallible sources of information (Gutek 1997, 301). Also, these teachers should not
coerce students to finish at a certain pace or a volume of tasks or else it will violate their principle of
freedom. Lastly, the teacher gives more credit to the process of arriving at the final end-product of the
activity (Southern Illinois University Edwardsville).
As a result, the student learns by doing the task (Kohn 2008, 2). This active learning takes
place through social interactions, where they are constantly solving problems (Southern Illinois
University Edwardsville). They create meaning through individual experiences in their physical and
cultural contexts (Southern Illinois University Edwardsville).
EDUCATIONAL ISSUES AND CONCERNS
Based on this author’s experience and observations, one of the inadequacies that this
philosophy tries to fill-in in today’s education is the quality of learning experienced by the students
today. For the longest time, schools have been viewed a sort of bootcamp where students are drilled
until they appear to have knowledgeable with all the trivia they can absorb. However, from a
progressive view point, learning should be more than just reproduction of expected answers. Learning
should be meaningful and interesting.
More and more the world is becoming aware of its diversity. As a result, a one-school-fits-all
mentality is no longer the best option. Although the philosophy has provided very sound and practical
methods of addressing to the needs of students in order to make learning more meaningful, there are

6. 5
also a number of concerns about its philosophy in light of the Philippine context that need to be
highlighted.
One of the challenges encountered by this philosophy is the increased workload of the
teachers. The teacher is less in control and acts as a facilitator of learning rather than a lecturer, and as
a result, must be comfortable with uncertainty (Kohn 2008, 6). This kind of educator is expected to be
an interdisciplinary content expert and must have good knowledge of the different learning pedagogy
in order to facilitate effective learning (Kohn 2008, 6). The focus of this philosophy is learning, not
the teacher’s teaching (Kohn, 2008, 7).
The students are expected to constantly think outside of the box and this mode of thinking
might be disadvantageous to the students who thrive in traditional school settings where there are set
answers to questions (Kohn 2008, 7) such as the setup here in the Philippines. In a progressive school,
creating meaning is more important than recalling facts (Kohn 2008, 6). This philosophy may not
apply to a country that does not adhere closely to the democratic way of living such as the Philippines,
where there is high respect for authority and an urgent prioritization of the family.
Ideally, there should be a high teacher to student ratio in order to give the teachers ample
room to monitor the progress of the students, which is clearly a big challenge in the Philippine
context. Also, schools should provide more classrooms to accommodate more learners and install
better facilities and materials for students to work on. All of these are expenses that many schools are
not yet ready to shoulder. In monetary terms, to adhere to the progressive philosophy, schools
eventually must spend more on teacher training and development, on more and better classrooms, on
more teachers, on designing and installing more learning materials or facilities for the students’
disposal.
Aside from financial limitations, Philippine culture, as observed by the author (at least in
Metro Manila), does not strongly subscribe to a democratic way of living, rather it subscribes to a
familial way of life, where respect for authority is non-negotiable. Thus, the end of goal of

7. 6
progressivism, in this light, is misaligned and may not be as helpful to the schools that adhere to a
different principle.
With the implementation of the “K to 12” program there is not much room for progressivism
as a whole to thrive in Philippine education. The curriculum proposed in the program reflects
essentialist principles of education, focusing on cumulative/spiral, academic, objectives in order
prepare students for immediate employment (Department of Education). This contrasts with the end
result of progressivism of producing democratic people rather than abled employees. In this light, as
a philosophy, progressivism does not (at least not anytime soon) coincide with the philosophies of
Philippine schools that are required to adhere to the revisions. However, in terms of methodology, the
“K to 12” program has similarities to progressive tenets. The revisions brought about by the program
show that lessons are inquiry based and that teachers should be pedagogically knowledgeable and
have a variety of skills that facilitate learning, rather than lecture it (Department of Education). This
coincides with the expectations of a progressive teacher whose role is to facilitate learning rather than
deposit it. Also, in the curriculum, the program aims to veer to a more learner-centered manner of
instruction (Department of Education) which is similar to the child-centred tenets of progressivism.
These revisions being implemented in Philippine education do not appear to adhere to the
progressive curriculum and educational goals but subtly reflect its methodology. In effect, the
progressive approach is more applicable as a teaching strategy rather than a solid Philosophy in the
Philippine context. An example of a school that reflects this scenario is Xavier School, San Juan, an
exclusive, private, Chinese, Catholic and Jesuit school. The school is adapting the Understanding by
Design paradigm along with its Ignatian Pedagogical paradigm which encourages more collaborative
learning opportunities for students.
In order to make learning more meaningful, innovations like the “one-to-one” learning
experiences have been implemented. The concept of this strategy is to help monitor student progress
and development in real time and provide the students with the opportunity for independent learning.
In this learning experience, technology is used to aid learning by going beyond books and exploring

8. 7
other reference materials available in the internet, understanding different perspectives from fellow
classmates through online forums, creating performance tasks that are media-run and are easily
disseminated online, and facilitating learning with current social networking sites. These all attempt to
show that learning can be applied outside the classroom.
As part of the innovations of the schools, the curriculum encourage teachers to design
learning sessions where they act more as facilitators to learning by introducing controversial questions
or cases with which students will discuss among themselves to arrive at a certain understanding. This
runs on the assumption that students learn by doing, a major theme in Progressivism. Thus, the
furniture inside the classrooms are designed to be mobile in order accommodate collaborative learning
experiences. Also, the designs of the assessments have shied away from multiple-choice type tests
that measure recall to multiple-choice items that require higher order thinking skills for the skill-
heavy subjects such as Mathematics and Science. As for the communication subjects like Filipino and
English, test items that elicit short responses are given premium. This goes the same with the Values
Education subject like Christian Life Education and the Social Studies. All these assessments attempt
to measure higher-order thinking skills by using authentic questions based on the students’
experiences.
Admittedly, although the learning approach of the school is progressive in nature, the school
still adheres more to an Essential Philosophy of Education in accordance to the Department of
Education’s requirements and the school’s Chinese Catholic background. There could never be a
purely progressive school but it can be shown in some areas of practice (Kohn 2008, 5). Thus, it is
simply a matter of balance. As a school that has an innovative attitude, there could not be just one
Philosophy of Education at play.
The Catholic Philosophy of Education would not worry itself too much with curriculum or
methodology (McGucken and Sheridan 1997, 42). In effect, a progressive approach to learning is
acceptable for as long as it promotes the Catholics’ Essential objectives. However, what this
philosophy of education disagrees with is Progressivism’s rejection of the supernatural nature of man.

9. 8
For progressivism, it puts premium on worldly objectives like economy and progress and rejects the
dogma of a life after this world’s. Because of this, progressivism is incomplete in the eyes of the
Catholic Philosophy of Education. This explains why the school that the author works in does not
fully subscribe to the progressive philosophy of education.
CONCLUSION
In summary, progressivism concerns itself with a curriculum and methodology that tries to
develop a democratic person equipped with a scientific attitude with apt social skills in order to bring
about progress that improves the state of living of everyone. In contrast to the Philippine context,
progressivism has little room to grow because of the implementation of the “K to 12” program that
adheres more closely to an essential education’s perspective. As shown in the example of Xaiver
School San Juan, the methodology of progressivism is very helpful in propagating the values of the
school. In effect, when compared to the Catholic Educational Philosophy, progressivism falls short of
its understanding of human nature which neglects the supernatural nature.
In conclusion, progressivism is a very practical approach in making learning interesting and
relevant to the students. Through this method, it would be easier for the educator affect change in the
way the student reasons and behaves. However, in agreement with the Catholic educational
philosophy, education should not focus on what is apparent or immediate, but should concern itself
with the inevitable, the life after this world.
In conclusion, no matter the philosophy or the educational philosophy applied, education
should dedicate itself in helping the student achieve. This kind of educational system should always
have at the back of its mind that whatever practices they are adhering to or changing is all for the
benefit of the students in the school. Thus, the quest for a better philosophy, a better way of doing
things continues.

10. 9
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Department of Education Website. “K to 12.” http://www.gov.ph/k-12/. (Accessed March 11, 2013)
Gutek, Gerald. Philosophical and Ideological Perspectives in Education. 2d Ed. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon, 1997.
Kohn, Alfie. “Progressive Education Why It’s Hard to Beat, But Also Hard to Find,” Independent
School (Spring 2008), http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/progressive.htm (Accessed March
2, 2013).
The Foundations of Education Website. “Progressivism.”
http://www.siue.edu/~ptheodo/foundations/progressivism.html, (Accessed March 2, 2013).